Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet Security

Mozilla Firefox 1.02 Released 453

Posted by samzenpus from the get-your-update dept.
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?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla Firefox 1.02 Released More

Mozilla Firefox 1.02 Released

Comments Filter:

  • How they solved distribution worries (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:20PM (#12032002)
    Let's just say the bandwidth of vulnerable IE users is being put to good use.

    • RTFA (Score:3, Informative)

      by geekee ( 591277 )
      This is a patch for a major security flaw in Firefox. I hope Firefox users are putting the bandwidth to good use or they will face the same problems as IE users.

  • 0.04% Faster (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:21PM (#12032006)
    Anyone else notice the speed increase?

  • Cool (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:21PM (#12032014)
    Now if only they'd get going on Sunbird. I need a good calendar app.

    • Re:Cool (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Ki Master George ( 768244 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:46PM (#12032226)
      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 (Score:3, Informative)

        by darthpenguin ( 206566 )

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

        IIRC, versions 6/7 of netscape included a built in AOL client (at least for the linux version). Of course, it was fairly unusable when compared to something such as gaim [sf.net], but it was there. I'm unaware as to whether the new firefox-based version of netscape includes it, though.

      • Re:Cool (Score:5, Insightful)

        by PolyDwarf ( 156355 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:32PM (#12032493)
        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 (Score:5, Insightful)

          by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:50PM (#12032614)
          Maybe I want one based on XUL, as part of a XUL-based desktop?

        • Re:Cool (Score:5, Insightful)

          by xigxag ( 167441 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:59PM (#12032672)
          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 (Score:5, Insightful)

            by chrispyman ( 710460 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @12:52AM (#12032935)
            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 (Score:3, Interesting)

              by jp10558 ( 748604 )
              IDK, I think Opera makes up a nice Internet Suite. Heck, that's reason #2 it get's bashed by most FF Fans.

              I recently tried Thunderbird when I was having an IMAP issue with Eudora 5.2, but I realised how much I liked having eudora keep everything in one window, kind of like tabbed browsing. Thunderbird, at least by default, started popping up new windows to compose mails. Then Eudora started working again for some reason, so there went thunderbird.

            • Re:Cool (Score:3, Informative)

              by bunratty ( 545641 )

              And this is exactly one of the big reasons many dislike the discontinuation of the Mozilla Suite.

              It hasn't been discontinued. In the interview with Mitchell Baker [slashdot.org] she mentioned that the Mozilla Foundation will provide Mozilla 1.7.x maintenance and security releases for the next two years, and possibly longer depending on how many users it has then. The Mozilla Foundation handed off the task of testing and building releases beyond Mozilla 1.7.x to the Seamonkey group [mozilla.org].

          • Re:Cool (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Dolda2000 ( 759023 )

            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.

            In the same way that Microsoft would (in a more ideal world ;-) ) try to convince Linux desktop users to "switch to Internet Explorer for browsing, Windows Messenger for IM, Outlook for e

          • Re:Cool (Score:3, Informative)

            by JPelorat ( 5320 ) *
            Your organization doesn't have to know that unrelated programs X, Y, and Z aren't part of a unified package. Call it the Open Source Suite and set up a single-point installer for everything.

        • Re:Cool (Score:3, Informative)

          by tangent3 ( 449222 )
          Cross platform compatibility and consistency.

          Most of the 3rd party multi-protocol IM clients are cross-platform, the only exception I can think of is gaim. Gaim, however requires the use of gtk, and gtk doesn't work all that nicely with Windows, even with the gtk-wimp theme.

          A Mozilla-based IM client would solve the these problem, and I would really look forward to one.

          • Re:Cool (Score:4, Insightful)

            by John_Booty ( 149925 ) <johnbooty@noSpAm.bootyproject.org> on Thursday March 24, 2005 @03:09AM (#12033594) Homepage
            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)

        • Re:Cool (Score:3, Informative)

          by starwed ( 735423 )
          For what it's worth, I managed to implement a very barebones jabber client as a 10k firefox extension... and I don't even really know what I'm doing. :) I wouldn't suggest anyone else use it, but by installing it onto portable firefox I could use AIM/MSN/Yahoo in any of the campus labs. I've found even this crappiest IM client is very nice in terms of convenience.

          And although my little extension isn't really useable by anyone else, there are people working on a jabber client in XUL called jabberzilla.

        • Re:Cool (Score:4, Interesting)

          by aaronl ( 43811 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @09:02AM (#12034891) Homepage
          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.
  • While officially released, I'm still not seeing it any of the mirrors portage is trying to connect to.

    • Re:Mirrors (Score:5, Informative)

      by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:47PM (#12032236) Homepage Journal
      automatic update worked for me.

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

      • Re:Mirrors (Score:3, Insightful)

        by karstux ( 681641 )
        The Firefox update process really sucks from an ease-of-use point of view. Since it's a complete new install, I wouldn't even call it an "update"...

        For a proper update procedure, it seems you have to download the new version, uninstall the old one, and then re-install the new one - hoping that all plugins survive the procedure.

        That's not user friendly, and will drive people away from Firefox, perhaps back to IE, which is definitely easier to keep up to date. I do hope that Firefox will get a true "patch"

      • Re:Mirrors (Score:4, Informative)

        by hey ( 83763 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @06:40AM (#12034231) Journal
        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 (Score:5, Informative)

      by wdd1040 ( 640641 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:05PM (#12032337)
      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.

  • 1.2.. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Turn-X Alphonse ( 789240 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:22PM (#12032018) Journal
    But does it stop the bloody pop ups I've had to turn off Javascript to cure?

    • Re:1.2.. (Score:5, Informative)

      by darthpenguin ( 206566 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:27PM (#12032072) Homepage
      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.

    • Re:1.2.. (Score:5, Informative)

      by jcupitt65 ( 68879 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @06:43AM (#12034240)
      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.. (Score:3, Informative)

      by Spoing ( 152917 )
      1. But does it stop the bloody pop ups I've had to turn off Javascript to cure?

      By default, popups aren't disabled for plugins (like Flash). Here's how to disable them for plugins;

      1. Open a new browser window.

      2. Type about:config for the URL and press enter.

      3. You should see a long list of settings. Ignore them.

      4. Right click on the background and select "New...integer".

      5. Enter in the following;

      privacy.popups.disable_from_plugins (press OK)

      2 (press OK)

      For reference, here's are the settings fo

  • Best way to upgrade? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jfruhlinger ( 470035 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:23PM (#12032027) Homepage
    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
    • In my experience I have been able to uninstall from Win2K and reinstall a new version without wiping the user profile (bookmarks, settings etc.) I don't know about nightly builds etc, but the major releases seem fine.

      DISCLAIMER: Use at your own risk. It is always best to backup the profile directory if you can not afford to lose it!

    • Re:Best way to upgrade? (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      It's easy! Uninstall Firefox 1.0. Restart your computer. Install 1.0.1. Restart your computer. Launch Firefox to find that all the extensions you've installed don't work anymore. Install the few that have been updated to work with the new Firefox one at a time restarting Firefox after each. Reimport your bookmarks--you did back them up didn't you?--and open up Options to reset everything manually. Don't forget to restart Firefox after each setting change! Quick and easy! Me personally, I've pencil
    • apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade

    • Re:Best way to upgrade? (Score:5, Informative)

      by joeljkp ( 254783 ) <joeljkparker@noSpAM.gmail.com> on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:30PM (#12032098)
      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.

    • Re:Best way to upgrade? (Score:5, Informative)

      by The-Perl-CD-Bookshel ( 631252 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:32PM (#12032114) Homepage Journal
      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 (Score:4, Informative)

      by repetty ( 260322 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:38PM (#12032154) Homepage
      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.
    • The Support Forum advises uninstalling earlier versions before installing 1.0.2. (Although I can't now find the post. It was there 10 minutes ago.)

      FWIW I had problems with the auto-update and did have to uninstall and reinstall and reconfigure my firewall.

  • Auto-update success (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Owndapan ( 789196 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:23PM (#12032029)
    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!
    • Auto-update doesn't work on Mac though unfortunately. I love firefox, but the bugs on firefox take some getting used to. It still pisses me off to no end that there is no scrollbar so you can't see what percentage of the page you are viewing.

  • No need to panic... (Score:5, Informative)

    by mistersooreams ( 811324 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:25PM (#12032043) Homepage

    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... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Pyro226 ( 715818 ) <Pyro226 @ h o t m ail.com> on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:55PM (#12032285) Journal
      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... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by bogie ( 31020 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:30PM (#12032472) Journal
      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.
    • Now, this post it too late to get modded up or noticed.

      However!

      There is a bug that's very annoying to me in Mozilla Firefox. If I click the middle mouse button on a link to make a new tab, until it has actually loaded the page, the adress for the page will not show up in the adress bar. In fact, if the page doesn't load properly (this happens often due to my connection) I will get told the document contains no data, and the adress will never appear. If it did appear, I could just go and hit 'enter' to rel

  • Disappointed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gnarled ( 411192 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:25PM (#12032044) Homepage
    I was really hoping this patch fixed those pop-unders I started getting lately.

    • Solution (Score:5, Informative)

      by Adam9 ( 93947 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:45PM (#12032223) Journal
      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 (Score:4, Informative)

      by momerath2003 ( 606823 ) * on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:58PM (#12032306) Journal
      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 (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:29PM (#12032460)
      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 (Score:5, Informative)

    by invisik ( 227250 ) * on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:25PM (#12032046)
    Don't forget the suite is updated as well...

    -m

  • Update? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Transcendent ( 204992 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:27PM (#12032067)
    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?
    • If they kept the same application ID between the versions, the Add/Remove Programs list should sort itself out automatically. That is, if I remember enough about Windoze programming - it's been quite a while since I did any! =)

    • Re:Update? (Score:3, Informative)

      by SeaFox ( 739806 )
      You should be uninstalling the old version before you install the new one.

      All you bookmarks and extensions will still be there after you install the new version. Those are saved in your profile directory, which is not deleted when you uninstall the old Firefox.

      • then why bother with autoupdate at all ? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:15PM (#12032386)

        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

      • Re:Update? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by ip_vjl ( 410654 )

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

        Wasn't that the mantra when it was in its pre-1.0 days. I remember people complaining then, but the response was "it's not yet 1.0, what do you expect".

        Now that it is an official release, I don't think expecting users to uninstall before installing an 'update' is the best way to go.

        BTW. It does seem to operate without doing an uninstall first. I went from 1.0 to 1.0.1, then to 1.0.2 without uninstalling first. Though the entire

    • Re:Update? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Ogerman ( 136333 )
      Firefox/Thunderbird auto-update is currently worth crap. Just download the new version and use the silent install option: ie.) Firefox_Setup_1.0.2.exe -ms

      The same thing works for Thunderbird. Usually I think it deletes the old Add/Remove options. (or at least one of them..) This is the most convenient quick-and-dirty way to update a bunch of machines in a small Windows domain.. put that command in everyone's login script the night before.

    • Re:Update? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Bauguss ( 62171 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:46PM (#12032590)
      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)

  • Just in time... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ShineyMcShine ( 799387 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:29PM (#12032083) Journal
    Firefox was crashing when the address bar received focus. After the upgrade, problem resolved...

  • Proactive release (Score:3, Informative)

    by rminsk ( 831757 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:33PM (#12032120)
    This release is to fix a buffer overflow bug in the GIF handling code. The flaw was discovered by Internet Security Systems and patched before the public learned of the issue. When was the last time you heard of other browsers fixing problems proactively instead of reactively?

  • Easiest way to update (Score:5, Funny)

    by woobieman29 ( 593880 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:35PM (#12032128)
    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 ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bizitch ( 546406 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:39PM (#12032166) Homepage
    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

  • When are they gonna fix this? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pherthyl ( 445706 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:42PM (#12032194)
    Ever going fix this? [mushroomstamp.ca]

    Its not so bad on my work comp, but downright embarrasing on my girlfriend's laptop when there's 5 Firefox entries in the Add/Remove Programs dialog.

  • Ugh, no zip builds (Score:5, Interesting)

    by thegrommit ( 13025 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:45PM (#12032217)
    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 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @10:49PM (#12032244) Homepage Journal
    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 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Wolfier ( 94144 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:39PM (#12032547)
    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.

    • Fixed in 1.1 (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I can't find the Bugzilla entry at the moment, but this bug HAS BEEN FIXED in the trunk. It will be incorporated into the next branch, Firefox 1.1, which comes out in two to three months.

  • Big bucks, no whammies, no Slashdot bias.. Beeowww (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Proc6 ( 518858 ) on Wednesday March 23, 2005 @11:56PM (#12032651)
    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!

  • Firefox update feature fails (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Frank T. Lofaro Jr. ( 142215 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @02:05AM (#12033340) Homepage
    Firefox didn't let me know about the new version, I had to read it on Slashdot or I wouldn't even know.

    I told it to "Check now" for updates, and got this error:

    "Firefox was not able to find any available updates"

    Umm, there is an available update, a whole new version.

    Maybe the Firefox team should have Firefox check the Slashdot RSS feed to see if it needs updates.

    Sigh.

  • Bad auto-update in Firefox (Score:3, Interesting)

    by storem ( 117912 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @02:11AM (#12033375) Homepage
    When do they start pushing this security updates to me? Or manage to inform me when I first open my browser, not when I browse to the /. website??

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close