Mozilla Firefox 1.02 Released

akadruid writes "Mozilla has begun rolling the Firefox 1.02 security update. It has appeared with the little fanfare and without the staggered rollout of 1.01 - have Mozilla sorted their distribution worries?"

How they solved distribution worries

[by Anonymous Coward]

Let's just say the bandwidth of vulnerable IE users is being put to good use.

0.04% Faster

[by Anonymous Coward]

Anyone else notice the speed increase?

Cool

[by Anonymous Coward]

Now if only they'd get going on Sunbird. I need a good calendar app.

Re:Cool

[Ki Master George (768244)]

I'm waiting for their long-awaited IM program to come out. It would be very nice to have a Mozilla-based IM program.

Re:Cool

[PolyDwarf (156355)]

I always have to wonder, when I see comments like this, why? I'm being serious for a minute, not sarcastic.

Why would it be "very nice" to have a Mozilla-based IM client? What would a Mozilla-based IM client offer over any one of the other third-party IM clients (gaim, trillian, etc)?

Last I looked, I use Mozilla for web browsing, not chatting with friends. I looked at their email client, but found myself saying "ho hum, another email client" and then going back to Outlook. Yes, sue me, I'm a windows user for my desktop.

I take my car to the mechanic, but I sure as hell wouldn't take my heart attack to him. As old Rosie put it, a place for everything, and everything in its place. Maybe Mozilla should concentrate on finding and patching more holes... They obviously have a few.

PS - Before I invoke the wrath of Slashdot, I do, in fact, use Firefox for web browsing, not IE.

Re:Cool

[mrchaotica (681592)]

Maybe I want one based on XUL, as part of a XUL-based desktop?

Re:Cool

[Oopsz (127422)]

There is no desktop-- only XUL!

Re:Cool

[xigxag (167441)]

What would a Mozilla-based IM client offer over any one of the other third-party IM clients (gaim, trillian, etc)?

If you're trying to convince your organization to switch to open-source offerings, it's easier to bring up an integrated solution such as, "We can switch to the Mozilla Suite" than to have to sell three or four different projects like, "We can switch to K-Meleon for browsing, Trillian for IM, Thunderbird for email," etc.

Re:Cool

[chrispyman (710460)]

And this is exactly one of the big reasons many dislike the discontinuation of the Mozilla Suite. Until Firefox, Thunderbird, and the rest start integrating better (act more like a single app with optional components), there really isn't any other apps out there that make up a nice "Internet Suite."

Re:Cool

[aaronl (43811)]

I was thinking they should spend more time making the browser not crash all the time, take less than 10 seconds to start on a 2.6GHz machine w/ 512MB RAM, perhaps not screw up horribly and stay resident after exiting the GUI.

After that, work can get done to fix the installer, and then make the installation customizable so that you can have corporate rollouts and silent installs. Maybe they can learn to use the standard installation formats that some OS' offer (like MSI on Windows).

Then work can start on making the GUI not ass slow, and perhaps the occassional native UI element. After that they can look into how to stop independantly themeing the app, and use the OS built in theme functionality.

And just in case anyone insists it's just me and this is the best piece of software ever: This is very common. Most people have this problem. Everyone I've met that uses Firefox has these problems.

Re:Cool

[John_Booty (149925)]

Gaim, however requires the use of gtk, and gtk doesn't work all that nicely with Windows, even with the gtk-wimp theme.

I disagree. GTK apps on Windows doen't quite feel like a native Windows application (non Windows-standard file dialogs, etc) I wouldn't say GTK "doesn't work all that nicely with Windows". It's still very nice and usable and I use GAIM all the time on WindowsXP. It's excellent.

The only real GAIM/Windows gripe I have is a window positioning issue with my three-monitor setup. But this is a pretty nonstandard config so I'm not complaining. (I don't know if it's a GAIM or a GTK issue. I suspect GTK but I'm not sure)

1.2..

[Turn-X Alphonse (789240)]

But does it stop the bloody pop ups I've had to turn off Javascript to cure?

Re:1.2..

[darthpenguin (206566)]

If you want to block the javascript popups, just use the Adblock extension [mozdev.org]. Not only can it block images, but also scripts and flash and just about everything else. Combined with wildcards, you can block out everything from most major web advertising places, including most of those nasty js popup scripts.

Adblock definitions site...

[Golgafrinchan (777313)]

Speaking of which...

At this site [geocities.com], you can find updated Adblock definitions that you can easily import. Just scroll down to the most recent update, download, and install.

Ever since I installed these, I've had to manually block something only a couple of times. They work great!

Re:Adblock definitions site...

[0100010001010011 (652467)]

Geocities never lasts long...

Here is a mirror to the latest updates 2005-03-20a.txt [purdue.edu]

Filterset.G instructions - important!

[Mitchell Mebane (594797)]

Don't forget the proper settings you need to get the most out of Filterset.G:

Recommended Adblock settings for Filterset.G

[To modify: Tools > Adblock > Preferences]

Hide Ads x Remove Ads

Ablock Options:
Obj-Tabs
x Collapse Blocked Elements
x Check Parent Links
x Site Blocking
x Keep List Sorted

Re:1.2..

[jcupitt65 (68879)]

bugzilla explains how to fix it ... see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17607 9

- go to about:config
- right-click and select New/Integer preference
- make a pref called "privacy.popups.disable_from_plugins"
- set the value 2

now plugins are not allowed to make popups. This hasn't been made a public preference, since it is a bit crude and may break some sites. It does fix the flash-popups though.

Re:1.2..

[Tarqwak (599548)]

Perfect config for me, works on 1.8b suite at least:

browser.link.open_external 3
1: Open in current window (default)
2: Open in new window
3: Open in new tab

browser.link.open_newwindow 1
1: Open in current window
2: Open in new window (default)
3: Open in new tab

browser.link.open_newwindow.restriction 2
0: Divert everything (default)
1: Divert target="_blank" etc. but not window.open
2: Divert everything expect window.open with three parameters

privacy.popups.disable_from_plugins 2
0: open allowed (default)
1: limits their number to dom.popup_maximum (even with popup blocker disabled)
2: the window is a popup, block it
3: blocks them even on whitelisted sites

dom.disable_open_during_load true
True (default): Block popup windows created while the page is loading
False: Allow popup windows

Best way to upgrade?

[jfruhlinger (470035)]

Can anyone explain to me the best way to upgrade Firefox? Updating from 1.0 to 1.0.1 seemed to leave two instances of Mozilla on my desktop. Should I uninstall the old before installing the new? I don't want to lose all my settings/bookmarks/etc.

jf

Re:Best way to upgrade?

[joeljkp (254783)]

Uninstalling the old before you install the new won't get rid of your settings. Those are saved in your home dir (on Win2000/XP).

You're asking for trouble if you update without installing. I ended up with both 1.0 and 1.0.1 in my Add/Remove Programs (win98), and removing the former broke the latter (and broke its uninstall function). The only way to get rid of 1.0.1 was to reinstall it to restore the uninstaller, then try again.

Dealing with the two add / remove entries

[Jeff85 (710722)]

A quick Google search revealed that you can also remove an entry from the registry manually with details found at here [about.com]. I did this myself, installed the 1.02 version, and all seems to be running smoothly.

Re:Best way to upgrade?

[The-Perl-CD-Bookshel (631252)]

Click the Orange or Blue orb next to the flower in the top right part of your window. I just did it and it auto-updates Firefox to 1.02.

It's Easy

[repetty (260322)]

Download the new version and OS X then mount it as a disk image.

Drag the Firefox icon from the image folder to your Applications folder and click the OK button to approve the overwrite.

Then, you are done!

Easy.

Re:Best way to upgrade?

[carpe_noctem (457178)]

I think the parent is looking to update to the CURRENT latest version, not last year's latest version...

Auto-update success

[Owndapan (789196)]

I got my auto-update notification in FireFox, ran the "wizard" to update, and am now posting from 1.0.2. Update completed before the /. story was posted! (/. is my normal update notifier) Nice work Mozilla!

Re:Auto-update success

[PurpleBob (63566)]

You lose the scrollbar if you've installed a funky theme that doesn't work with OS X. (It doesn't matter if you're using the theme, unfortunately, just that it's installed.) So try uninstalling your themes.

No need to panic...

[mistersooreams (811324)]

As the version number suggests, this is a pretty minor update. That's not to say that these security fixes aren't important; they are, and they proove once again that open source software can react far faster to new threats than any closed source development model. Nevertheless, it means that the Mozilla Foundation aren't expecting a major download rush. Of course, with Slashdot's intervention, maybe we can take them by surprise.

Now, how long to the first "Firefox 1.02 ate my boot sector" post?

Re:No need to panic...

[Pyro226 (715818)]

Firefox didn't eat my boot sector, but after upgrading from 1.0.1 to 1.0.2 firefox crashed with an error telling me to restart the computer every time I started it (it being firefox). I uninstalled and reinstalled and, and not only did it work fine, but I still had all of my extensions and bookmarks.

Re:No need to panic...

[bogie (31020)]

Considering how long it was till 1.01 came out and how long 1.0 was out there with plently of know security holes I wouldn't exactly point to Firefox as the pinnacle for OSS security response.

And as much as a fanboy as I am for OSS I don't possibly see how you can say that OSS "can react faster to new threats than any closed source development model". OSS does indeed usually act faster than commercial software expecially when you bring something like IE into the picture. But whether something is open or closed has absolutely nothing to do with how fast the owner of the code responds to a security threat. That's on them and has zero to due with whether its open or closed. A commercial provider could have reacted just as quickly.

Again I'm all for pro-OSS statements, but let's keep it to the facts.

Disappointed

[gnarled (411192)]

I was really hoping this patch fixed those pop-unders I started getting lately.

Solution

[Adam9 (93947)]

Go this address: about:config
Right click anywhere
Select new, integer
Name: privacy.popups.disable_from_plugins
Value: 2

-- Taken from another /. user

Re:Disappointed

[momerath2003 (606823)]

Use adblock, and block all of the admedia/adwhoever javascript includes; most pop-anythings will go away because the commands to activate them aren't there.

Re:Disappointed

[by Anonymous Coward]

Why do people expect feature changes from a security update? The point of these updates is that they ONLY fix the critical problems. They don't screw with anything else to minimize the chance of breaking something.

If you're looking for new features or enhancements, you'll get that with 1.1. Or you can try the nightly builds. But don't expect any noticable changes in a security/stability update (unless you are suffering from stability problems).

As for your pop-ups, the latest trend is supposedly to generate them from a Flash embed. You can either not install Flash, or use the Flashblock extension (recommended), or try adblock, or try the hidden preference that is supposed to prevent plugin-generated pop-ups. In the past, a major cause of failure for the pop-up blocker has been the Tabbrowser Extensions (TBE) extension. I don't know whether it still suffers from this problem.

Mozilla 1.7.6 out, too

[invisik (227250)]

Don't forget the suite is updated as well...

-m

Update?

[Transcendent (204992)]

How it is an update when it acts as a total re-install?

I love how firefox/thunderbird keep filling up my Add/Remove Programs list in XP everytime there is an "update".

Not trying to flame, but shouldn't there be a better way?

Re:Update?

[Bauguss (62171)]

to all those saying how to change your registry or those saying uninstall first.

This is moronic. We are talking about a program that is getting a lot of attention from a lot of people. Hell, my grandparents even use it.

That said, my grandparents SHOULD NOT have to uninstall and then reinstall. It won't make sense to them because it is retarded. An update function should be just that. It shouldn't ask all the same questions it did back when you first installed it. It shouldn't ask if you want firefox as your home page. Those things have already been done. I think when you click update it should just do it. It should download, install, and then pop up a window saying it needs to restart the browser. It should then close the browser, and reopen it. (preferably back to the same url you were at when you got the update message)

Now that I've said that, thanks for the registry edit info. I needed to know that. (the update for Google's Picasa did the same thing)

then why bother with autoupdate at all ?

[by Anonymous Coward]

You should be uninstalling the old version before you install the new one.

which bit of autoupdate don't they get ?

i shouldnt be doing anything other than clicking an update icon,everything should be taken care of
does Microsoft say "to install SP2 you must uninstall SP1" ? so why do i have to in mozilla ?

never mind me having to disappear into advanced settings to check updates manually when in IE its on the tools menu, easy to get at if i want to check

at the moment the word to describe their update process is rubbish

Just in time...

[ShineyMcShine (799387)]

Firefox was crashing when the address bar received focus. After the upgrade, problem resolved...

Easiest way to update

[woobieman29 (593880)]

On my Wintel laptop was to go to Tools>Options>Advanced>SoftwareUpdate and press the 'Check Now' button. It automatically d/l's the patch and starts the install.

Hopefully there is a Debian build when I get home so that I can update my MEPIS/Debian box. (Or is that GNU/MEPIS/DEBIAN/Linux?? :-) )

what would be very cool ...

[bizitch (546406)]

If Firefox incorporated a bittorrent agent inside the browser for updates. Simple click and launch a bittorrent download - then install followed by some minimal upload time - say 5 minutes of bandwidth

that would be cool ... heh heh

Ugh, no zip builds

[thegrommit (13025)]

It seems there are no official zip builds for formal releases. Asa's blog [mozillazine.org] explains why and suggests that those looking for them "look at the build ID in the final release, and get the same nightly build from the same branch".

Only problem? The release notes don't specify the build ID, so you have to run the installer first. When you do that, you discover the build ID is 20050317. Only there don't (currently) appear to be any 1.02 zip builds in any of the aviary directories for 20050317.

Am I missing something?

Autodebug

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

With Bugzilla and the community, their backend that addresses security bugs is pretty tight. But why is the desktop end limited by the archaic announcement/download/install scenario? I'd prefer to accept subscription to the security bugfix channel, RSS polled every few hours or hundred pages. If it authenticated the patches, I'd get a nonmodal notification message, with "More Info" and "Always Autoapply" buttons in the window. That would make their rapid responses worthwhile. If they could upgrade in the background without slowing down my surfing, with on-demand rollbacks, I'd probably just autoupdate, looking for upgrade notices in my email.

Memory leak

[Wolfier (94144)]

Have they fixed the memory leaks in 1.0 yet?
Having an idle browser leaking 300 MB of memory per day is like a self-inflicted DOS attack.

Big bucks, no whammies, no Slashdot bias.. Beeowww

[Proc6 (518858)]

Let's see those true colors...

"When ever I access my mail account at https://mail.yahoo.com, [with Firefox 1.0x] the browser crashes when I log out."
Score: 0 Offtopic

"I hate those smilie popups which seems to be unblockable, please make them go away. [which is to say Firefox still isn't blocking all popups]
Score: 0 Offtopic

"I hope this fixes the problems with this document contains no data."
Score: 0 Troll

"Open source software can react far faster to new threats than any closed source development model."
Score: +5 Informative

Mmmm gotta love that pure Slashdot fanboi machine. Work in a plug for Linux or Open Source, instant +5. Mention a valid and existing bug with the open source software the post is about, you're an offtopic troll, probably a NAMBLA member or Nazi too. Die!

Re:Big bucks, no whammies, no Slashdot bias.. Beeo

[lachlan76 (770870)]

"Open source software can react far faster to new threats than any closed source development model."

Well the story IS about an update.

Those other comments you show that were modded offtopic are *bug reports*. This isn't where you go to file bug reports.

Re:Uninstall first please

[tajmorton (806296)]

Really? Mine worked fine with just installing right over 1.0.1 with Windows XP. Under Linux...no go (of course).
However, Autopackage [autopackage.org] works great (if you've have FF installed from Autopackage): http://www.wildgardenseed.com/Taj/autopackage/fire fox-1.0.2.x86.package [wildgardenseed.com]
(BTW, if you do try this Autopackage, we'd love some feedback on how it works--taj at wildgardenseed dot com).

Re:Mirrors

[gl4ss (559668)]

automatic update worked for me.

options->advanced->software update->check now.

Re:Mirrors

[hey (83763)]

I did that in Windows but then in the Add/Remove Programs in the Control Panel I got entries for Mozila Fire for 1.0, Mozilla Firefox 1.0.1, Mozilla Firefox 1.0.2. So if you install Firefox on top of a previous install it doesn't remove the old one. It should warn you about this or remove the old guy.

Re:Mirrors

[psi42 (747491)]

And if you're not running firefox with root/administrator privileges, how is that thing supposed to work?

Re:Mirrors

[wdd1040 (640641)]

Although the ebuild has propagated to the rsync rotation, the distfile won't go out until a server does its sync once every 2 hours.

So.... chill.