Query about parasitic firefox file

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
61 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Colin Watson
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 06:10:47PM +0100, Liam Proven wrote:

> Er. You noted that Bret's disk layout goes:
>
> Dell
> Windows
> Windows
> Extended:
>   Linux
>   Linux
>   Linux
>   Linux
>   Linux
>   Windows
>   Linux
>   Linux
>   Linux
>
> In other words, they are intermixed. I do not think Windows would take
> well to that, do you?

Doesn't matter.  It would take to it exactly as well if it went:

  Dell
  Windows
  Windows
  Extended:
    PV
    PV
    PV
    PV
    PV
    Windows
    PV
    PV
    PV

... or variants on that.

> Windows can, with the addition of suitable freeware drivers and tools,
> read Linux partitions. This is useful. It will not work if you use
> LVM.

This is true (though notice that I mentioned "shared data partitions" as
something to keep outside LVM, so I did acknowledge that even if not
very clearly).

> I would most definitely _never_ recommend it to any person who:
> * was dual-booting multiple non-Linux OSes
> * already had a complex setup to deal with
> * not a skilled practitioner in Linux server storage
>
> So, not wishing to argue for the sake of it, but no, I think this is
> very much *not* a good use case for LVM and I must strongly disagree
> with your recommendation of it as a solution.

Fair enough.  Apologies for pitching too high.

> > then it's probably going to be better to do step 0, destructively
> > repartition the system, and restore from backups.
>
> We do not know that he has any.

That was step 0.  This is a good thing to fix no matter what, before
*any* fiddling around with partition layout.

> > Or just make a mental note to use LVM for the next new system one
> > installs ...
>
> Not for those without a high level of technical skill, no.

I disagree with this part of your message: if you ask the Ubuntu
installer to do full-disk encryption, you'll get LVM as a consequence of
that, and that's an option packaged and presented in the desktop
installer which I don't think requires a high level of technical skill.
(I suspect that many people who have selected that option haven't even
noticed that LVM is involved.)

--
Colin Watson                                       [[hidden email]]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Ralf Mardorf-5
In reply to this post by Colin Law-2
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 17:15:11 +0000, Colin Law wrote:
>Start by disabling all the extensions and see if it still does it.

From command line run:

   firefox --safe-mode


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Liam Proven
In reply to this post by Colin Watson
On 8 March 2018 at 18:56, Colin Watson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Doesn't matter.  It would take to it exactly as well if it went:

OK.

> This is true (though notice that I mentioned "shared data partitions" as
> something to keep outside LVM, so I did acknowledge that even if not
> very clearly).

Fair point.

> Fair enough.  Apologies for pitching too high.

Well said. Thanks, BTW, not only for your grace, but for the way that
you often take me down a peg when I need it. ;-)

> That was step 0.  This is a good thing to fix no matter what, before
> *any* fiddling around with partition layout.

OK. Good point and very true.

> I disagree with this part of your message: if you ask the Ubuntu
> installer to do full-disk encryption, you'll get LVM as a consequence of
> that, and that's an option packaged and presented in the desktop
> installer which I don't think requires a high level of technical skill.
> (I suspect that many people who have selected that option haven't even
> noticed that LVM is involved.)

All right, fair call.

Fedora defaults to it. (I personally think that's insane, but then,
Fedora expressly does not support dual-booting with other Linuxes or
non-Linux OSes, only a single copy of Windows. This is one of the
things I complained about that got me fired from Dead Rat.)

I've only tried full-disk encryption on Fedora. (It was a company requirement.)

It was a total nightmare and took me about 3-4 reformats to get right
and working. That is as sole OS.

Then I found GNOME 3 unusable and had to do it again to switch to
Xfce. It's not as pretty, but it works.

I did not enjoy my Fedora experience. I am not keen to repeat any
element of it on Ubuntu. *Or* on openSUSE. ;-)

--
Liam Proven • Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] • Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven • Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 • ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Bret Busby-2
In reply to this post by Bret Busby-2
On 09/03/2018, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 08/03/2018, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Mar 2018, Liam Proven wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 21:42:54
>>> From: Liam Proven <[hidden email]>
>>> Reply-To: "Ubuntu user technical support, not for general discussions"
>>>     <[hidden email]>
>>> To: "Ubuntu user technical support, not for general discussions"
>>>     <[hidden email]>
>>> Subject: Re: Query about parasitic firefox file
>>>
>>> On 7 March 2018 at 13:00, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I had removed an earlier OS - Debian 6, including reformatting the
>>>> partition, but, now, can not write to it, so, apart from a HDD
>>>> restructure, I do not have much free space left - about (now) 1.7GB.
>>>
>>> That's not enough for a safe, usable system these days.
>>>
>>> Boot off a live medium, run GParted, remove the old Debian partition,
>>> and extend your /home partition (or / if you don't have a separate
>>> /home) into the free space.
>>>
>>> For more detailed guidance, post the output of
>>>
>>> sudo sfdisk -l
>>>
>>> here.
>>>
>>
>> Whilst it was not requested, here is this;
>>
>> "
>> :~$ df -h
>> Filesystem      Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
>> udev            7.8G     0  7.8G   0% /dev
>> tmpfs           1.6G  9.5M  1.6G   1% /run
>> /dev/sda5        24G   11G   12G  48% /
>> tmpfs           7.8G   97M  7.7G   2% /dev/shm
>> tmpfs           5.0M  4.0K  5.0M   1% /run/lock
>> tmpfs           7.8G     0  7.8G   0% /sys/fs/cgroup
>> /dev/sda13       55G   51G  1.2G  98% /home
>> cgmfs           100K     0  100K   0% /run/cgmanager/fs
>> tmpfs           1.6G   56K  1.6G   1% /run/user/1000
>> /dev/sr1        884K  884K     0 100% /media/bret/HP Launcher
>> /dev/sdb1       466G   14G  452G   3% /media/bret/hp hard drive1
>> /dev/sda9        77G   73G  884K 100% /media/bret/Data01
>> /dev/sda10       77G   73G  4.5M 100% /media/bret/Data02
>> /dev/sda12       37G   35G  7.2M 100% /media/bret/Data03
>> /dev/sda14       68G   64G  6.1M 100% /media/bret/Data04
>> /dev/sda6       9.5G   23M  9.0G   1% /media/bret/Data05-10GB
>> /dev/sda8        77G   73G  348K 100%
>> /media/bret/a3074725-349d-4647-8b07-3a5526f7ee55
>> /dev/sda11       40G   40G  8.6M 100% /media/bret/41B78C85772DD3E4
>> "
>>
>> Note, that is after the particular file was deleted, which freed up
>> about 1.7GB of the home partition, and, after subsequent downloads.
>>
>
>
> And, in the time that has passed since I posted that message, firefox
> has struck again and again expanded the parasite file, to take up all
> of the available free space.
>
> Free space - 0 bytes
>
> places.sqlite-wal  - 1.4GB
>
> It seems to be like a hydatids cyst.
>


And now, having deleted the file, and, "emptied the Rubbish Bin",
where the file was shown as being, after it was "deleted", half an
hour later,  the 1.4GB is still not freed, so, Free space is still 0
bytes, rendering the system unusable.

I will leave it for a few hours, amnd see whether the 1.4GB, wherever
it is hiding, evaporates, and, if it hasn't, then I suppose that I
will have to assume that firefox v58 has corrupted the system to the
extent that the system needs to be rebuilt.

--

Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia

..............

"So once you do know what the question actually is,
 you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
 Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
 "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
 A Trilogy In Four Parts",
 written by Douglas Adams,
 published by Pan Books, 1992

....................................................

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Colin Law-2
On 8 March 2018 at 20:13, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:

> ...
> And now, having deleted the file, and, "emptied the Rubbish Bin",
> where the file was shown as being, after it was "deleted", half an
> hour later,  the 1.4GB is still not freed, so, Free space is still 0
> bytes, rendering the system unusable.
>
> I will leave it for a few hours, amnd see whether the 1.4GB, wherever
> it is hiding, evaporates, and, if it hasn't, then I suppose that I
> will have to assume that firefox v58 has corrupted the system to the
> extent that the system needs to be rebuilt.
>

No it won't have corrupted the system. It probably means something has
the file open.  Try a reboot.

However you might be better to sort out the partitions so you don't
keep getting into the situation while you sort out what the problem
is.

Colin

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Liam Proven
On 8 March 2018 at 21:39, Colin Law <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> No it won't have corrupted the system. It probably means something has
> the file open.  Try a reboot.
>
> However you might be better to sort out the partitions so you don't
> keep getting into the situation while you sort out what the problem
> is.

Strongly agreed.

--
Liam Proven • Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: [hidden email] • Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: [hidden email]
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven • Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 • ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Ralf Mardorf-5
In reply to this post by Colin Law-2
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 20:39:49 +0000, Colin Law wrote:
>On 8 March 2018 at 20:13, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> then I suppose that I will have to assume that firefox v58 has
>> corrupted the system to the extent that the system needs to be
>> rebuilt.

Hi,

no, Firefox cannot corrupt the system to this extent.

>No it won't have corrupted the system. It probably means something has
>the file open.  Try a reboot.

The path contains "firefox" [1], so don't reboot, instead run

  killall -9 firefox && lsof|head -n1;lsof|grep firefox

to check if something has got the file opened.

Regards,
Ralf

[1] "/home/me/.mozilla/firefox/<mixedstring>.default-<numericstring>/"


--
pacman -Q linux{,-rt{,-securityink,-pussytoes,-cornflower}}|cut -d\  -f2
4.15.7-1
4.14.24_rt19-1
4.14.20_rt17-1
4.14.8_rt9-2
4.11.12_rt16-1


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Ralf Mardorf-5
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 06:33:40 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

>On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 20:39:49 +0000, Colin Law wrote:
>>On 8 March 2018 at 20:13, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:  
>>> then I suppose that I will have to assume that firefox v58 has
>>> corrupted the system to the extent that the system needs to be
>>> rebuilt.  
>
>Hi,
>
>no, Firefox cannot corrupt the system to this extent.
>
>>No it won't have corrupted the system. It probably means something has
>>the file open.  Try a reboot.  
>
>The path contains "firefox" [1], so don't reboot, instead run
>
>  killall -9 firefox && lsof|head -n1;lsof|grep firefox
>
>to check if something has got the file opened.
>
>Regards,
>Ralf
>
>[1] "/home/me/.mozilla/firefox/<mixedstring>.default-<numericstring>/"

Don't forget to (re)move the path, if nothing should have opened it and
after that run

  firefox --safe-mode

to see, if the path/file(s) turn up again with all extensions disabled.

--
pacman -Q linux{,-rt{,-securityink,-pussytoes,-cornflower}}|cut -d\  -f2
4.15.7-1
4.14.24_rt19-1
4.14.20_rt17-1
4.14.8_rt9-2
4.11.12_rt16-1


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Colin Law-2
In reply to this post by Ralf Mardorf-5
On 9 March 2018 at 05:33, Ralf Mardorf <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 20:39:49 +0000, Colin Law wrote:
>>On 8 March 2018 at 20:13, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> then I suppose that I will have to assume that firefox v58 has
>>> corrupted the system to the extent that the system needs to be
>>> rebuilt.
>
> Hi,
>
> no, Firefox cannot corrupt the system to this extent.
>
>>No it won't have corrupted the system. It probably means something has
>>the file open.  Try a reboot.
>
> The path contains "firefox" [1], so don't reboot, instead run
>
>   killall -9 firefox && lsof|head -n1;lsof|grep firefox

Easier to reboot, don't run a command unless you understand it and for
most it would be quicker to reboot than work out exactly what that
command does to ensure it will work and that there is no danger of
unexpected side effects.

>
> to check if something has got the file opened.

and if something does still have the file open there is yet more to
do. As I said, it is probably easier just to reboot.

Colin

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Bret Busby-2
On 09/03/2018, Colin Law <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 9 March 2018 at 05:33, Ralf Mardorf <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 20:39:49 +0000, Colin Law wrote:
>>>On 8 March 2018 at 20:13, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> then I suppose that I will have to assume that firefox v58 has
>>>> corrupted the system to the extent that the system needs to be
>>>> rebuilt.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> no, Firefox cannot corrupt the system to this extent.
>>
>>>No it won't have corrupted the system. It probably means something has
>>>the file open.  Try a reboot.
>>
>> The path contains "firefox" [1], so don't reboot, instead run
>>
>>   killall -9 firefox && lsof|head -n1;lsof|grep firefox
>
> Easier to reboot, don't run a command unless you understand it and for
> most it would be quicker to reboot than work out exactly what that
> command does to ensure it will work and that there is no danger of
> unexpected side effects.
>
>>
>> to check if something has got the file opened.
>
> and if something does still have the file open there is yet more to
> do. As I said, it is probably easier just to reboot.
>
> Colin
>

I shutdown firefox (using the File -> Quit option), and after its
usual crash during the shutting down of firefox, the free space that
was not free, was freed.

Now, for the present time, I am instead running Seamonkey 2.29 (on
that computer), which appears to be much more stable than firefox 57
and 58.

And, the free space is still free.

--

Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia

..............

"So once you do know what the question actually is,
 you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
 Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
 "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
 A Trilogy In Four Parts",
 written by Douglas Adams,
 published by Pan Books, 1992

....................................................

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Bret Busby-2
The problem appears to be solved.

After having had firefox cause problems yet again, using the
javascript.enabled = true, then it eating all the free space, and then
me deleting the *.wal file in /home/me/.firefox/<sessionid ?>/*.wal,
leading to a firefox crash when I shutdown firefox, and it crashing
another application, with all of that freeing up the free space that
was eaten by the firefox pacman component, and then, as mentioned in
the thread relating to unwritable partitions, I moved some data out of
the partition, and, freed up more space, at present having about 5.6GB
of free space, I tried the solution to the firefox pacman problem,
that my wife had suggested, and, the way that I implemented it,
appears to work.

At present, on this computer, I am only using firefox to access web
sites where I need to have javascript enabled (as the mozilla
developers/saboteurs decided that firefox should no  longer be as
functional as it was, it is now only useful for accessing a single web
site at a time).

So, I open a New Private Window, then, go to about.config, within that
browser window, toggle the javascript.enabled value to true, then open
a new tab within that window, for the web site that requires
javascript to be enabled, do what I need to do at that web site, then,
close that tab, then toggle the javascript.enabled value back to
false, then close that window.

Then, in checking the .wal file, it shows as being about 460kB in
size, rather than the previous > 1GB in size.

My wife;s suggestion involved the reasoning that, as the use of a
Private Window involves deleting the history data when the Private
Window is closed, or, otherwise not saving the history data, it will
not leave anything in the .wal file, from the javascript session.

As I have said, it appears to work.

Some time, when I have upgraded this OS installation to UbuntuMATE
18.04, I will try to install an earlier version of 16.04, that I have
on a DVD, on the HDD, so that I do not have two installations of the
same OS version, and, so that I will have the version of firefox that
is on the DVD, so I can have a functional version of firefox, instead
of this IE3 kind of version of firefox, that is firefox v >56.

--
Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia
..............

"So once you do know what the question actually is,
 you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
 Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
 "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
 A Trilogy In Four Parts",
 written by Douglas Adams,
 published by Pan Books, 1992

....................................................

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Ralf Mardorf-5
On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 17:49:39 +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
>so that I will have the version of firefox that is on the DVD, so I
>can have a functional version of firefox

It's a pity, if software that fitted perfectly to a user's needs,
breaks the user's work-flow and/or becomes somehow a bit fishy by an
update. However, we several time explained that it is hardcore stupid
to stay with an outdated browser release. Refraining to update some
other kind of software could be a good workaround, especially when
using a release model distro's LTS release, actually there unlikely
will be an update available at all. That software like Firefox even for
a release model distro's LTS release is that often updated, as for a
rolling release, is done for very good reasons.

--
$ pacman -Q linux{,-rt-cornflower,-rt{,-securityink,-pussytoes}} \
  | cut -d\  -f2
4.15.11-1
4.14.28_rt23-1
4.14.24_rt19-1
4.14.20_rt17-1
4.14.8_rt9-2


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Bret Busby-2
On 23/03/2018, Ralf Mardorf <[hidden email]> wrote:

<snip>

>That software like Firefox even for
> a release model distro's LTS release is that often updated, as for a
> rolling release, is done for very good reasons.
>

A significant difference exists, between security updates, and the
sabotage that was done to firefox in the change from v56 to v57.

If Opera had not been sold to the chinese government, I would have
switched back to that, with what was done to firefox with the change
from v56 to v57.

At present, NetSurf appears more functional and reliable than firefox.

The changes imposed in firefox, in going from v56 to v57, were not
updates or improvements - they were like taking the wheels off a car.
It can still be driven, kind of, but not very well.

--

Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia

..............

"So once you do know what the question actually is,
 you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
 Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
 "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
 A Trilogy In Four Parts",
 written by Douglas Adams,
 published by Pan Books, 1992

....................................................

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Ralf Mardorf-5
I wont comment on your claims.

Just a few recommendations.

1. How about the quasi successor of Opera?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vivaldi_(web_browser)

2. Firefox alike web browsers

Did you already test the sucessor of QupZilla?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkon

I'm using Falkon on a regular basis, mirgating the config from QupZilla
to Falkon works.

I've got Vivaldi installed, but I didn't use it very often.

I'm also using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_IceCat on a regular
basis, but it does cause isues with a lot of websites.

I also have got https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Moon_(web_browser)
instelled, which I'm using from time to time. It seems to cause no
issues.

--
$ pacman -Q linux{,-rt-cornflower,-rt{,-securityink,-pussytoes}} \
  | cut -d\  -f2
4.15.12-1
4.14.28_rt23-1
4.14.24_rt19-1
4.14.20_rt17-1
4.14.8_rt9-2


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Colin Watson
In reply to this post by Bret Busby-2
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:36:23PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
> A significant difference exists, between security updates, and the
> sabotage that was done to firefox in the change from v56 to v57.

Look, we all get that you don't like it - that's of course your right.
But this "sabotage" remark which you've repeated several times is well
out of order.  Please stop it.

  Be respectful

  Disagreement is no excuse for poor manners.  We work together to
  resolve conflict, assume good intentions and do our best to act in an
  empathic fashion.  We don't allow frustration to turn into a personal
  attack.  A community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is
  not a productive one.

   -- https://www.ubuntu.com/community/code-of-conduct

Thank you,

--
Colin Watson                                       [[hidden email]]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Tom H
In reply to this post by Bret Busby-2
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 5:49 AM, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> At present, on this computer, I am only using firefox to access web
> sites where I need to have javascript enabled (as the mozilla
> developers/saboteurs decided that firefox should no longer be as
> functional as it was, it is now only useful for accessing a single web
> site at a time).

I can access multiple websites simultaneously via Firefox so your
setup's screwed up or your setup's hit a bug.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Karl Auer
In reply to this post by Colin Watson
On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 09:20 +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> But this "sabotage" remark which you've repeated several times is
> well out of order.  Please stop it.

Hear hear.

Posted two years ago, still apposite:

   http://biplane.com.au/blog/?p=375

Regards, K.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Karl Auer ([hidden email])
http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
http://twitter.com/kauer389

GPG fingerprint: A0CD 28F0 10BE FC21 C57C 67C1 19A6 83A4 9B0B 1D75
Old fingerprint: A52E F6B9 708B 51C4 85E6 1634 0571 ADF9 3C1C 6A3A



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Tom H
In reply to this post by Bret Busby-2
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 1:36 AM, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> A significant difference exists, between security updates, and the
> sabotage that was done to firefox in the change from v56 to v57.

For browsers, all updates are security updates...

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Colin Law-2
On 23 March 2018 at 09:38, Tom H <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 1:36 AM, Bret Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> A significant difference exists, between security updates, and the
> sabotage that was done to firefox in the change from v56 to v57.

For browsers, all updates are security updates...

Possibly all updates *include* security updates, but they may also include feature changes which some users may like, others may hate.

Colin
 

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Query about parasitic firefox file

Gene Heskett-2
In reply to this post by Colin Watson
On Friday 23 March 2018 05:20:01 Colin Watson wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 01:36:23PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
> > A significant difference exists, between security updates, and the
> > sabotage that was done to firefox in the change from v56 to v57.
>
> Look, we all get that you don't like it - that's of course your right.
> But this "sabotage" remark which you've repeated several times is well
> out of order.  Please stop it.

I won't use the word sabotage, but for me, firefox took a running swan
dive into the deep end of the pool at the 51-52 transition and forgot
how to swim, no longer playing the MSM's news videos with any regularity
for me.
>
>   Be respectful
>
I am trying to be, but I'm not PC enough to ignore whats taken place in
the firefox releases for Linux of late. firefox I understand has new
parents, and apparently seem to be concentrating on the windows users.
If they break firefox for OSS, it seems to be a shrug to them. If they
cared, it would get fixed. The net result is that I now use palemoon as
my default browser.

>   Disagreement is no excuse for poor manners.  We work together to
>   resolve conflict, assume good intentions and do our best to act in
> an empathic fashion.  We don't allow frustration to turn into a
> personal attack.  A community where people feel uncomfortable or
> threatened is not a productive one.
>
Thats for sure.

>    -- https://www.ubuntu.com/community/code-of-conduct
>
> Thank you,
>
> --
> Colin Watson                                      
> [[hidden email]]



--
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
1234