Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 504 posts

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#451

Post by Dylan16807 »

Mindless2112 wrote: post #202
the8472 wrote: post #161

At the minimum they should add a testsuite that runs at least a month into the future to catch these kinds of things. There was a similar issue[0] a few years ago that was only caught a month in advance. Even better would be to set things up to only do a verify on install instead on every startup. [0] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1267318

> Even better would be to set things up to only do a verify on install instead on every startup. That would defeat the purpose of verification: "Add-on signing in Firefox helps protect against browser hijackers and other malware by making it harder for them to be installed." [1] And it's not just malware that was doing that. Microsoft force-installed the ".NET Framework Assistant" into Firefox on Windows, and you had…

> And it's not just malware that was doing that. Microsoft force-installed the ".NET Framework Assistant" into Firefox on Windows, and you had to edit the registry to remove it.

If it's not a malicious extension, verifying the signature doesen't prevent a forced install.

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#452

Post by Dylan16807 »

_0ffh wrote: post #115
dralley wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can set app.normandy.first_run to true and then restart Firefox.

I've seen the same tip elsewhere and tried, but didn't work for me. What did (seem to) help was setting app.normandy.run_interval_seconds to a small value (21). At least just a couple of seconds after I did, all my addons came back. Edit: plugins -> addons

Remember to put it back to normal after!

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#453

Post by Dylan16807 »

meruru wrote: post #370
pleasecalllater wrote: post #256

This one will be emotional as this destroyed some of my today's work. F you Mozilla. I lost all my tabs opened in other containers. The containers don't work too, so I cannot reopen them. This bug has been known for 3 years, and you did nothing to fix it. You get so much money, and what you do is basically provide a pathetic software (thunderbird) and a nice browser (which you just stopped from working) and you show…

Firefox keeps session backups in the profile folder. You might be able to recover your open tabs with it. I've been in a similar situation with tab groups and managed to recover all of them, though I don't remember exactly how.

previous.jsonlz4 and upgrade.jsonlz4-datenumbers

They will almost certainly work to get tabs back when copied over the profile's sessionstore.jsonlz4

If something has gone really wrong then the tab URLs can be extracted.

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#454

Post by DannyBee »

pcwalton wrote: post #304
DannyBee wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The normal practice would be to have someone operating as an incident communication manager who would be taking care of status/things like this. Saying "we were too busy fixing to communicate" is actually a really bad sign, because it's not just about what you are communicating to the outside world, but also, for example, about making sure people that need to be brought in are getting consistent information.

This is an incredibly uncharitable misreading of what I said. We do have incident communication managers who were working around the clock, of course, communicating through the official channels. The question is about why someone didn't set the priority setting in the internal Bugzilla sooner. There are a couple of reasons for this. First, that's not really what priority is for: priority is so that engineers on major…

"This is an incredibly uncharitable misreading of what I said"

I'm sorry if i offended you. Really. I don't really think it's that uncharitable, but hey, offending you wasn't my intent, and if you were, that is what matters.

For what it is worth: your response to the parent took them to task for even attempting to state something: "Because people were staying up until the wee hours of the morning working on fixing it instead of toggling priorities in Bugzilla. This was treated as a five-alarm fire."

This is a pretty rude response (which should never be happening regardless of what they wrote), and if you intended to convey that you had incident managers handling it and they didn't get around to it yet, you did not.

"Unlike that of Mozilla, your issue tracker at Google for outages is private and internal-only. "

I'm really unsure why you decided to add a completely irrelevant and unnecessary attack like this.

Honestly, it just makes me think less of you and makes me sad. You are usually a very sane and even keeled person. I'm sure you were not having a good time, but i still don't think this was okay.

" One of the many reasons it is private is so that people who don't know the organization's operational processes don't come in and start making incorrect assumptions based on what they find there."

Which is incredibly ironic, since it is not in fact as private as you seem to believe . Your own assumption here is completely and totally incorrect.

Maybe before you decide to add completely irrelevant and unnecessary attacks, at least verify they are correct?

" I think it's laudable that Mozilla works in the open so much, but comments like this one are some of the downsides of doing so."

You seem to have taken my comment incredibly personally, and your response seems very far out of proportion.

If you want to have a discussion, you're gonna have to tone this down a few notches.

FWIW: Right now most of your comments in this story read incredibly defensive (and i'm not just talking about this one)

I would stop and give it a rest. It is not projecting a good image.

Of course, that's just my perspective.

Really hope tomorrow is a better day for you.

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#455

Post by Dylan16807 »

lugg wrote: post #114
dingo_bat wrote: post #25

I asked this in the other thread but I guess there's too many comments there: Is there a project for Firefox that is analogous to Chromium for Chrome? I need a Firefox build with all the Mozilla shit ripped out. I don't trust the org that decided their certificate expiration was more important than giving users the choice to run what they want.

Upvoting because this is a really good question, why the hell can't I get a warning and click a button to enable the thing anyway?

Is Firefox Developer Edition so bad?

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#456

Post by isoskeles »

dang wrote: post #448
isoskeles wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Many commenters have spent their Saturday morning pushing a narrative that appeals to emotion.” “Toxicity.” Goes both ways.

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?

> It is too late to listen to reason. Many commenters have spent their Saturday morning pushing a narrative that appeals to emotion.

Your comment, my comment, that comment, none of them are substantive. Why isn't that comment removed yet?

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#457

Post by henriquemaia »

eternalban wrote: post #425
overgard wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I love my tinfoil hat, I can't see any upside for mozilla in this? If it's to get people to opt in to "studies", they already have most people sending them telemetry, apparently, so this would just be to get stragglers? Seems like a really expensive way to do it.

You need to adjust the angle of your tinfoil hat. Oriented properly, you can find other candidates for "actor" besides "Mozilla".

If you have the right hat, with the right amount of tin, you can even start playing with words that rhyme with fuselage. A good exercise, especially if you like practicing corporate fiction.

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#458

Post by dang »

isoskeles wrote: post #456
dang wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?

> It is too late to listen to reason. Many commenters have spent their Saturday morning pushing a narrative that appeals to emotion. Your comment, my comment, that comment, none of them are substantive. Why isn't that comment removed yet?

It's a matter of degree. Your comments went an order of magnitude further over the line.

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#459

Post by Xylakant »

toyg wrote: post #424
Xylakant wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> meaning bad news for web developers wanting to take advantage of newer features. I think you spelled “mass compromise of unsuspecting users due to unpatched security holes” wrong. Like it or not, browsers as the primary networked application that people use are the prime target to exploit users. They connect to unknown endpoints of questionable trustworthiness (unlike most other networked apps) and execute code loa…

> Quick auto updates are crucial for that. Expert users might dislike them I don't think anyone is really against quick security-related fixes being delivered with a degree of automation. What most power users dislike is mixing these updates with other ones (typically for commercial reasons).

What you want assumes having patches for every version that was ever released in the extreme case. How do you propose not doing so when you have limited resources? Firefox offers an ESR release, you can use that if you want.

Re: Update Regarding Add-Ons in Firefox

#460

Post by isoskeles »

dang wrote: post #458
isoskeles wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is too late to listen to reason. Many commenters have spent their Saturday morning pushing a narrative that appeals to emotion. Your comment, my comment, that comment, none of them are substantive. Why isn't that comment removed yet?

It's a matter of degree. Your comments went an order of magnitude further over the line.

I am positive my first comment on this thread was not an order of magnitude over the line, if we can quantifiably measure such a thing, and it got censored anyway. "I just switched my browser. Bye bye Firefox."

I mean if you want me to be reflective it's really not going to work if we're refusing to admit that either both of these comments should have been censored or the one above should not have been censored. But I get it, life's not fair and the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Firefox zealots get to railroad commenters on HN, noted, I certainly won't engage in these discussions again.

Post reply on HN