Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Michael Ströder]

Miles Fidelman wrote:
> For what it's worth - I HATE rapid update cycles. 

Well, I also hate that there are so many security issues causing rapid update
cycles. But at the end I appreciate if those security issues get fixed quickly.

> Wherever I can, I run 2-4 years behind the current release (both desktop
> and server side) - makes for a much more stable environment.

For whatever definition of "stable":
Maybe you're just providing a perfectly stable system for attackers running
trojans on your systems. ;-)

Ciao, Michael.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: "We plan to release SeaMonkey 2.35 asap in July."

[Yamo']

Hi,

WaltS48 a écrit le 06/07/2015 15:49 :
> Try 2.39a1 at the bottom of this page. [Index of 
> /pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/latest-comm-central-trunk](http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/latest-comm-central-trunk/)


I didn't found Lightlink version for 2.39 :


May I can  try 2.38a1?

-- 

Sorry for possible mistakes in English!
http://pasdenom.info/
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Danny Kile]

Paul Bergsagel wrote:

Edmund Wong wrote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM.  Also, haven't seen an update in a while.  So, I'm
beginning to feel that I'm nearing the point where I cannot any longer
stick with SM.

Kind of sad since I've been with it since Netscape back in, about, 1995.
  I don't have any aversion to "an end of an era" but it would be nice
to get some definitive info on what the few remaining SM devs are doing
or have in mind.

Thoughts?



I've been dedicating most of my time working on getting builds on Win32
running.  I know it isn't much and there are a lot of other stuff I was
hoping to do (particularly Sync).

I do apologize for the lack of updates; but, as it is, we're really
down in the resource department (particularly time and people).

I am, as I've posted, getting trunk and (hopefully) aurora nightlies
done consistently.  Then I'm doing the l10n repacks (nightly).
Once that can be consistently done, I'm going to do the release
when I have the necessary information.

I realize it's not the kind of update you're looking for, but those
are the steps that I need to do in order to get updates to release.

Thank you for everyone's patience.

Edmund

Edmund,

Thank you for all your hard work updating SeaMonkey. All your hard work
(and all the other devs) is very much appreciated. I am willing to wait
for SeaMonkey to be updated. Many thanks for all the hard work.

Maybe the time has come to reconsider how often SeaMonkey needs to be
updated. Does SeaMonkey benefit, in the long run, with such a rapid
update schedule?  If SeaMonkey adopted a less frequent update schedule
would the net benefits be greater than if SeaMonkey continued with the
current rapid update schedule?


I agree with Paul there does not need to be a rapid update to SeaMonkey. 
The say that a lot of the updates are security updates, come on security 
should come with the user using common sense. I have been using 
computers since before the internet back when I built my first one 
myself in 1980, it was a HeathKit. I have on anti-virus running on my PC 
and I have never had a virus or been hacked.


We have to remember that the developer at SeaMonkey have a real life 
also. My two cents worth, OK only worth a penny. Thank you for your hard 
work, it is very much appreciated.


Danny,


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Contributed or real version - definitions? --was [Re: "We plan to release SeaMonkey 2.35 asap in July."]

[Daniel]

On 8/07/2015 5:39 AM, John Duncan wrote:

Daniel wrote:

On 6/07/2015 9:41 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:

Daniel wrote:

On 6/07/2015 5:36 PM, Yamo' wrote:

Yamo' a écrit le 06/07/2015 09:19 :


I didn't found any 2.35b1-candidates on :




Or alpha?


As SM 2.35 is going to be a Contributed Version (I think) rather
than a real version, I very much doubt there will be any Alpha's
or Beta's.



Definition of "Contributed Version" and "real version"?
TIA


Richard, as I understand things, the SeaMonkey Councils build machines
are broken so cannot produce "real" builds, so one or more of the
Council are producing builds on their private computers and letting
others use these contributed builds.

It's the same people doing the work, just QA, etc, may not be as
thorough!


I thought it was only the windows build machine that went down?


I think the Win 32bit machine has been down for yonks, but some problem 
has caused all buildbots to die about a month/six weeks ago.


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.32 Build identifier: 20141218225909

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.33 Build identifier: 20150215202114

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Daniel]

On 8/07/2015 1:54 PM, »Q« wrote:

In ,
Paul Bergsagel  wrote:


Does SeaMonkey benefit, in the long run, with such a rapid
update schedule?  If SeaMonkey adopted a less frequent update
schedule would the net benefits be greater than if SeaMonkey
continued with the current rapid update schedule?


Since the last SeaMonkey release, there have been over 40 MFSAs, many
of them critical.  IMO (and it's only that) if SM decided out of policy
*not* to issue security updates in a timely manner, that would mark
the death of the project.


Hear, Hear!! If I've got a safe, secure Suite, would I care if I only 
got a "Bells and Whistles" update every six months or so?? Not a 
problem. My SM looks and feels much the same as NC 4.7, or earlier.


(This being cross-posted reminds me I still waiting on the "Mark 
Cross-posts as Read" bugzilla to be fixed, Bug 43278. Worked in NC up 
till about 4.7 but then not.)


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.32 Build identifier: 20141218225909

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.33 Build identifier: 20150215202114

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Again SeaMonkey is fully unknown

[Daniel]

On 8/07/2015 6:09 AM, John Duncan wrote:

EE wrote:

Daniel wrote:

and, Jonathan and others, just FYI, it's my belief that if the sniffers
sniffed for the term "Gecko" rather than the actual name then they would
accept Firefox, SeaMonkey and Opera (and probably others), at a minimum


Opera uses Webkit, so why would a sniffer accept it by looking for
"Gecko"?


Probably because opera/chromium user-agents usually include the keywords
``Mozilla'' and/or ``KHTML, like Gecko'' somewhere in them.


Is that right, John?? Good, I was just about to reply to EE stating 
that, "at first, I couldn't think of the third Browser so was going to 
put "and some other browsers" in my reply, but then Opera popped into my 
mind, so I stuck it in."


Yeah for me!!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.32 Build identifier: 20141218225909

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.33 Build identifier: 20150215202114

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Again SeaMonkey is fully unknown

[Daniel]

On 8/07/2015 5:55 AM, John Duncan wrote:





  To fix this,
couldn't we try always reporting the Firefox/x.x bit at the end of the
UA string to deal with invalid sniffing? or is that not the issue in
this circumstance?


Yes, you could, John, but then no-one will ever know about SM!! So you 
might as well just use FF!


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.32 Build identifier: 20141218225909

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.33 Build identifier: 20150215202114

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[WaltS48]

On 07/08/2015 09:01 AM, Daniel wrote:

On 8/07/2015 1:54 PM, »Q« wrote:

In ,
Paul Bergsagel  wrote:


Does SeaMonkey benefit, in the long run, with such a rapid
update schedule?  If SeaMonkey adopted a less frequent update
schedule would the net benefits be greater than if SeaMonkey
continued with the current rapid update schedule?


Since the last SeaMonkey release, there have been over 40 MFSAs, many
of them critical.  IMO (and it's only that) if SM decided out of policy
*not* to issue security updates in a timely manner, that would mark
the death of the project.


Hear, Hear!! If I've got a safe, secure Suite, would I care if I only
got a "Bells and Whistles" update every six months or so?? Not a
problem. My SM looks and feels much the same as NC 4.7, or earlier.

(This being cross-posted reminds me I still waiting on the "Mark
Cross-posts as Read" bugzilla to be fixed, Bug 43278. Worked in NC up
till about 4.7 but then not.)




I don't recall cross-posts ever being marked as read, but I may not have 
been using NC back in 2000.


That would be nice to have.

--
Kubuntu 14.10 | KDE 4.14.1 | Thunderbird 42.0a1(Daily) Go Bucs!
[Coexist · Understanding Across Divides](https://www.coexist.org/)
[Visit Pittsburgh](http://www.visitpittsburgh.com)
[Anthrocon 2015: Viking Invasion! | "Fur, Fun, And So Much 
More!"](http://www.anthrocon.org/)July 9-12, 2015

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Ed Mullen]

Edmund Wong wrote on 7/7/2015 8:32 PM:

Ed Mullen wrote:

I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM.  Also, haven't seen an update in a while.  So, I'm
beginning to feel that I'm nearing the point where I cannot any longer
stick with SM.

Kind of sad since I've been with it since Netscape back in, about, 1995.
  I don't have any aversion to "an end of an era" but it would be nice
to get some definitive info on what the few remaining SM devs are doing
or have in mind.

Thoughts?



I've been dedicating most of my time working on getting builds on Win32
running.  I know it isn't much and there are a lot of other stuff I was
hoping to do (particularly Sync).

I do apologize for the lack of updates; but, as it is, we're really
down in the resource department (particularly time and people).

I am, as I've posted, getting trunk and (hopefully) aurora nightlies
done consistently.  Then I'm doing the l10n repacks (nightly).
Once that can be consistently done, I'm going to do the release
when I have the necessary information.

I realize it's not the kind of update you're looking for, but those
are the steps that I need to do in order to get updates to release.

Thank you for everyone's patience.

Edmund


Thanks, Edmund.  Good to know that you're still working on it.


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Why do we buy hot dogs in packages of ten and buns in packages of eight?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Ed Mullen]

Rainer Bielefeld wrote on 7/8/2015 2:22 AM:

Hi Ed,

you find some thoughts here


Best regards

Rainer Bielefeld


Thanks, Rainer.  Good to know.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Can you buy anything specific at a general store?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Ed Mullen]

Philip Chee wrote on 7/8/2015 2:35 AM:

On 07/07/2015 14:43, Ed Mullen wrote:

I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM.  Also, haven't seen an update in a while.  So, I'm
beginning to feel that I'm nearing the point where I cannot any longer
stick with SM.

Kind of sad since I've been with it since Netscape back in, about, 1995.
   I don't have any aversion to "an end of an era" but it would be nice
to get some definitive info on what the few remaining SM devs are doing
or have in mind.

Thoughts?


Bug 1177041 - (SM2.35-Uplift) Bugs / Patches to be uplifted to
comm-release for SeaMonkey 2.35
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1177041

https://wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey/StatusMeetings/2015-07-07#Roundtable_-_Personal_Status_Updates
https://wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey/StatusMeetings/2015-07-07#Ratty

Phil



Thanks, Phil.


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Error: Keyboard not attached. Press F1 to continue ...
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: SM 2.36 will not start without libmozalloc.dylib

[Adrian Kalla]

W dniu 07/07/2015 o 10:53 PM, EE pisze:
> I decided to try SeaMonkey 2.36 on my Mac from Tinderbox builds on the
> Moz FTP site, and it would not start.  I compared the contents of the
> app package of 2.36 with 2.35 and found that in the MacOS folder,
> libmozalloc.dylib is missing in SM 2.36.  When I copied that file from
> SM 2.35 to 2.36, it would start.  Why is that file missing from a build
> which is available from a download site?  Why include a build that will
> not start up because something is missing?

See: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1176599

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[NFN Smith]

Danny Kile wrote:

I would agree!  Why does everyone think that a new version should come
out every month or two?


Overall, I'm quite content with less frequent updates.

However, knowing that Seamonkey follows development of Gecko, Firefox 
and Thunderbird, and that those are on a 6-week release cycle, and that 
nearly all the scheduled releases include security fixes, there is a 
measure of frustration that there are known holes out there, that have 
been fixed in Firefox and Thunderbird, but are still waiting for 
corresponding fixes to be applied to Seamonkey.


Smith
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Miles Fidelman]

On 8/07/2015 1:54 PM, »Q« wrote:

In ,
Paul Bergsagel  wrote:


Does SeaMonkey benefit, in the long run, with such a rapid
update schedule?  If SeaMonkey adopted a less frequent update
schedule would the net benefits be greater than if SeaMonkey
continued with the current rapid update schedule?


Since the last SeaMonkey release, there have been over 40 MFSAs, many
of them critical.  IMO (and it's only that) if SM decided out of policy
*not* to issue security updates in a timely manner, that would mark
the death of the project.




Then again, there's a good argument to be made that:
- rapid development and release cycles open as many new security holes 
as they close
- perhaps it's a better use of scarce resources to focus on hardening 
code in ways that reduce the number of future holes


Miles Fidelman



--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.    Yogi Berra

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: "We plan to release SeaMonkey 2.35 asap in July."

[John Duncan]

Yamo' wrote:

Hi,

WaltS48 a écrit le 06/07/2015 15:49 :

Try 2.39a1 at the bottom of this page. [Index of
/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/latest-comm-central-trunk](http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/latest-comm-central-trunk/)



I didn't found Lightlink version for 2.39 :


May I can  try 2.38a1?

Try out Lightning version 4.4-nightly from the [latest comm-central 
release](http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/calendar/lightning/nightly/latest-comm-central/). 
I am using the most recent 2.39 comm-central build (from July 6th I 
believe) and have that version of Lightning installed. Works fine!

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Again SeaMonkey is fully unknown

[John Duncan]

Daniel wrote:

On 8/07/2015 6:09 AM, John Duncan wrote:

EE wrote:

Daniel wrote:

and, Jonathan and others, just FYI, it's my belief that if the sniffers
sniffed for the term "Gecko" rather than the actual name then they
would
accept Firefox, SeaMonkey and Opera (and probably others), at a minimum


Opera uses Webkit, so why would a sniffer accept it by looking for
"Gecko"?


Probably because opera/chromium user-agents usually include the keywords
``Mozilla'' and/or ``KHTML, like Gecko'' somewhere in them.


Is that right, John?? Good, I was just about to reply to EE stating
that, "at first, I couldn't think of the third Browser so was going to
put "and some other browsers" in my reply, but then Opera popped into my
mind, so I stuck it in."

Yeah for me!!

Yes, I believe so. Although I have not used anything that's not based on 
Mozilla for awhile, it seems as if all modern versions of Opera 
advertise Mozilla/Gecko-compatibility in their UA simply for historical 
purposes (http://user-agents.me/search?q=32.0.1910.0). I know the older 
version either advertised the presto layout engine or Mozilla/Gecko. It 
also seems as if all versions of Google's chrome browser advertise 
``Mozilla/5.0'' and ``KHTML, like Gecko'' strings in its UA 
(http://user-agents.me/search?q=45.0.2438.3).

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Again SeaMonkey is fully unknown

[John Duncan]

Daniel wrote:

On 8/07/2015 5:55 AM, John Duncan wrote:





To fix this,
couldn't we try always reporting the Firefox/x.x bit at the end of the
UA string to deal with invalid sniffing? or is that not the issue in
this circumstance?


Yes, you could, John, but then no-one will ever know about SM!! So you
might as well just use FF!

Ha, that is a good point! This doesn't really seem like a big issue 
anyway. I have yet to come across a website that denies me access based 
on the fact that I'm advertising SeaMonkey instead of Firefox. The 
``chrome-optimised'' websites on the other hand... *shudders*

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Create filter

[MRoss]

Re: Create filter

F Murtz wrote:

How would you create a filter for a poster that continually changes
the email address like this poster,if you want to see examples look at
uk.legal
Col.edmund J.bourke  hisburkens...@usa.com


The 2 address changes I made were within an hour I think, & are 
finished, so it is not continual. However, ...


Neither "From" nor "Sender" addresses should be used nor needed for 
filters on a list like this, under most all circumstances.


Receiving filters should use the "To" & "Cc" entry to catch this list 
address (). Ignore "From" & 
"Sender" entries - under most all circumstances.


Everybody should post to this list with the "To" & "Reply-To" entry 
set to this list address  under 
most all circumstances!


That should simplify everybodies life here!

--
The Best To You & Yours,
M.Ross All Rights Reserved
---end-of-message---
sm

-

ONLY AT VFEmail! - Use our Metadata Mitigator to keep your email out of the 
NSA's hands!
$24.95 ONETIME Lifetime accounts with Privacy Features!  
15GB disk! No bandwidth quotas!
Commercial and Bulk Mail Options!  
___

support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

SeaMonky Suite

[S Slicer]

I stated with Netscape years and years ago, and when it ended switched 
to SeaMonkey.  I have tried other browsers and e-mail programs, but 
SeaMonkey remains my all-time favorite.


A BIG thank you to all who currently and previously have worked on the 
SeaMonkey Project!

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: SM 2.36 will not start without libmozalloc.dylib

[EE]

Adrian Kalla wrote:

W dniu 07/07/2015 o 10:53 PM, EE pisze:

I decided to try SeaMonkey 2.36 on my Mac from Tinderbox builds on the
Moz FTP site, and it would not start.  I compared the contents of the
app package of 2.36 with 2.35 and found that in the MacOS folder,
libmozalloc.dylib is missing in SM 2.36.  When I copied that file from
SM 2.35 to 2.36, it would start.  Why is that file missing from a build
which is available from a download site?  Why include a build that will
not start up because something is missing?


See: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1176599

Why could the builders not just add libmozalloc.dylib into the app 
package for the Mac version?


The normal SeaMonkey build 2.33.1 does not have any file with the name 
IA2Marshal.  Is 2.36 supposed to have that as a new addition?


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Ray_Net]

Paul in Houston, TX wrote on 08/07/2015 01:08:

Ed Mullen wrote:
I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of 
development of SM.  Also,
haven't seen an update in a while.  So, I'm beginning to feel that 
I'm nearing the point

where I cannot any longer stick with SM.

(snip)

Thoughts?


Why bother updating?
Just change your UA:
User-Agent: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; WOW128; rv:99.0) 
Gecko/20200101 Firefox/99.0



How can I change my UA string
from: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0 
SeaMonkey/2.32

to: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0
?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Jonathan N. Little]

Ray_Net wrote:

Paul in Houston, TX wrote on 08/07/2015 01:08:

Ed Mullen wrote:

I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM.  Also,
haven't seen an update in a while.  So, I'm beginning to feel that
I'm nearing the point
where I cannot any longer stick with SM.

(snip)

Thoughts?


Why bother updating?
Just change your UA:
User-Agent: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; WOW128; rv:99.0)
Gecko/20200101 Firefox/99.0


How can I change my UA string
from: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0
SeaMonkey/2.32
to: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0
?


You can either install an extension, there are several or in

about:config

edit or create string key if not present:

general.useragent.override


--
Take care,

Jonathan
---
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[John Duncan]

Ray_Net wrote:

Paul in Houston, TX wrote on 08/07/2015 01:08:

Ed Mullen wrote:

I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM.  Also,
haven't seen an update in a while.  So, I'm beginning to feel that
I'm nearing the point
where I cannot any longer stick with SM.

(snip)

Thoughts?


Why bother updating?
Just change your UA:
User-Agent: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; WOW128; rv:99.0)
Gecko/20200101 Firefox/99.0


How can I change my UA string
from: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0
SeaMonkey/2.32
to: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0
?
user_pref("general.useragent.override", "Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; 
rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0"); line in your user.js file should 
work. You can also add this in about:config with New->String and enter 
it there. This is the method that the add-on ``User-agent Switcher'' 
uses I believe.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Ray_Net]

Jonathan N. Little wrote on 08/07/2015 23:32:

Ray_Net wrote:

Paul in Houston, TX wrote on 08/07/2015 01:08:

Ed Mullen wrote:

I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM.  Also,
haven't seen an update in a while.  So, I'm beginning to feel that
I'm nearing the point
where I cannot any longer stick with SM.

(snip)

Thoughts?


Why bother updating?
Just change your UA:
User-Agent: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; WOW128; rv:99.0)
Gecko/20200101 Firefox/99.0


How can I change my UA string
from: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0
SeaMonkey/2.32
to: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0
?


You can either install an extension, there are several or in

about:config

edit or create string key if not present:

general.useragent.override



Thanks - Done.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Again SeaMonkey is fully unknown

[Ray_Net]

Ray_Net wrote on 07/07/2015 09:55:

WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 23:40:

On 07/06/2015 05:22 PM, Ray_Net wrote:

WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 15:53:

On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:

A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr

Where in cannot find SeaMonkey 



Which site directs you there?

http://www.skynet.be/fr



I see a couple of messages with an "X" to close each one. The first 
is Cookie policy, and the second is Browser info.


If I click both X's the site still works, even though clicking some 
links brings them up again.




Anyway SeaMonkey IS a non-existant browser by 99% of webmasters.

I just use about:config adding this:
New string: general.useragent.override - user set - string - Mozilla/9.0 
(Windows NT 10.1; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0

NOW
http://www.skynet.be/fr did not redirect me to: 
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Paul B. Gallagher]

Jonathan N. Little wrote:


Ray_Net wrote:


How can I change my UA string
from: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0
SeaMonkey/2.32
to: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0
?


You can either install an extension, there are several or in

about:config

edit or create string key if not present:

general.useragent.override


I'm curious -- I was browsing around looking at keys containing the 
string "useragent" and came to one named


general.useragent.site_specific_overrides

Does that mean there's a way to lie to specific dysfunctional sites 
while retaining the normal user agent string elsewhere?


--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[John Duncan]

Paul B. Gallagher wrote:

Jonathan N. Little wrote:


Ray_Net wrote:


How can I change my UA string
from: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0
SeaMonkey/2.32
to: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0
?


You can either install an extension, there are several or in

about:config

edit or create string key if not present:

general.useragent.override


I'm curious -- I was browsing around looking at keys containing the
string "useragent" and came to one named

general.useragent.site_specific_overrides

Does that mean there's a way to lie to specific dysfunctional sites
while retaining the normal user agent string elsewhere?


Yes, from http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=2647781:

``Unfortunately some pages I must use are set to cooperate with 
"firefox" and IE only. I've managed with this:
1) by setting "general.useragent.site_specific_overrides" to TRUE (AFAIR 
it was default),
2) and adding "general.useragent.override.[site_address]" with value 
"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:18.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/18.0 
SeaMonkey/2.15.1".''

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[John Duncan]

Edmund Wong wrote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of
development of SM.  Also, haven't seen an update in a while.  So, I'm
beginning to feel that I'm nearing the point where I cannot any longer
stick with SM.

Kind of sad since I've been with it since Netscape back in, about, 1995.
  I don't have any aversion to "an end of an era" but it would be nice
to get some definitive info on what the few remaining SM devs are doing
or have in mind.

Thoughts?



I've been dedicating most of my time working on getting builds on Win32
running.  I know it isn't much and there are a lot of other stuff I was
hoping to do (particularly Sync).

I do apologize for the lack of updates; but, as it is, we're really
down in the resource department (particularly time and people).

I am, as I've posted, getting trunk and (hopefully) aurora nightlies
done consistently.  Then I'm doing the l10n repacks (nightly).
Once that can be consistently done, I'm going to do the release
when I have the necessary information.

I realize it's not the kind of update you're looking for, but those
are the steps that I need to do in order to get updates to release.

Thank you for everyone's patience.

Edmund
Thanks for all of your time and support Mr. Wong. It is truly 
appreciated by everyone in the SeaMonkey community. I have some down 
time this summer while I work for my College's computer science 
department, so I am hoping to contribute to the project if at all possible.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: SeaMonky Suite

[HilsB]

S Slicer wrote:

I stated with Netscape years and years ago, and when it ended switched to 
SeaMonkey.  I have tried
other browsers and e-mail programs, but SeaMonkey remains my all-time favorite.

A BIG thank you to all who currently and previously have worked on the 
SeaMonkey Project!



Hear hear - HilsB
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Paul B. Gallagher]

John Duncan wrote:


Paul B. Gallagher wrote:


I'm curious -- I was browsing around looking at keys containing the
string "useragent" and came to one named

general.useragent.site_specific_overrides

Does that mean there's a way to lie to specific dysfunctional sites
while retaining the normal user agent string elsewhere?


Yes, from http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=2647781:

``Unfortunately some pages I must use are set to cooperate with
"firefox" and IE only. I've managed with this:
1) by setting "general.useragent.site_specific_overrides" to TRUE (AFAIR
it was default),
2) and adding "general.useragent.override.[site_address]" with value
"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:18.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/18.0
SeaMonkey/2.15.1".''


OK, thanks.

--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Paul in Houston, TX]

Ray_Net wrote:

Paul in Houston, TX wrote on 08/07/2015 01:08:

Ed Mullen wrote:

I've seen several sort of oblique mentions here of the lack of development of 
SM.  Also,
haven't seen an update in a while.  So, I'm beginning to feel that I'm nearing 
the point
where I cannot any longer stick with SM.

(snip)

Thoughts?


Why bother updating?
Just change your UA:
User-Agent: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; WOW128; rv:99.0) Gecko/20200101 
Firefox/99.0


How can I change my UA string
from: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0 
SeaMonkey/2.32
to: Mozilla/9.0 (Windows NT 10.1; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0
?


Be aware that changing your UA to something odd:
1. will make your browser unique and more trackable.
2. an odd UA probably won't work well with some/most sites.
3. a good sniffer will see right through it if JS is enabled.

If you change it then make it something real in order to better
work with the website that is giving you problems.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: SeaMonky Suite

[Ed Mullen]

S Slicer wrote on 7/8/2015 3:54 PM:

I stated with Netscape years and years ago, and when it ended switched
to SeaMonkey.  I have tried other browsers and e-mail programs, but
SeaMonkey remains my all-time favorite.

A BIG thank you to all who currently and previously have worked on the
SeaMonkey Project!


+1

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
A closed mouth gathers no feet.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: SeaMonky Suite

[WaltS48]

On 07/08/2015 08:27 PM, Ed Mullen wrote:

S Slicer wrote on 7/8/2015 3:54 PM:

I stated with Netscape years and years ago, and when it ended switched
to SeaMonkey.  I have tried other browsers and e-mail programs, but
SeaMonkey remains my all-time favorite.

A BIG thank you to all who currently and previously have worked on the
SeaMonkey Project!


+1




A big thank you to all the big thankers for your donations.

[SeaMonkey: Donate](http://www.seamonkey-project.org/donate/)

--
Kubuntu 14.10 | KDE 4.14.1 | Thunderbird 42.0a1(Daily) Go Bucs!
[Coexist · Understanding Across Divides](https://www.coexist.org/)
[Visit Pittsburgh](http://www.visitpittsburgh.com)
[Anthrocon 2015: Viking Invasion! | "Fur, Fun, And So Much 
More!"](http://www.anthrocon.org/)July 9-12, 2015

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Chris Ilias]

On 2015-07-08 1:34 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:

On 8/07/2015 1:54 PM, »Q« wrote:


Since the last SeaMonkey release, there have been over 40 MFSAs, many
of them critical.  IMO (and it's only that) if SM decided out of policy
*not* to issue security updates in a timely manner, that would mark
the death of the project.


Then again, there's a good argument to be made that:
- rapid development and release cycles open as many new security holes
as they close


I don't know where you're getting that info, but I haven't seen any 
evidence to suggest that. When I go through the advisories at 
, 
the CVE links often say "in Mozilla Firefox before 39.0", suggesting 
that all prior versions are vulnerable.


In addition, those are vulnerabilities that have been publicized, 
whereas the ones you assume are being created are not going to be public 
until they are fixed. Whenever there one is critical or public, an 
emergency update is created, taking priority of the release schedule.


Given all of the above, I don't think the rapid release schedule has 
much affect on how many security vulnerabilities are introduced. The 
fact that Firefox publicizes them certainly affects SeaMonkey users.


--
Chris Ilias 
Newsgroup moderator
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: How dead is SeaMonkey?

[Daniel]

On 8/07/2015 11:37 PM, WaltS48 wrote:

On 07/08/2015 09:01 AM, Daniel wrote:

On 8/07/2015 1:54 PM, »Q« wrote:

In ,
Paul Bergsagel  wrote:


Does SeaMonkey benefit, in the long run, with such a rapid
update schedule?  If SeaMonkey adopted a less frequent update
schedule would the net benefits be greater than if SeaMonkey
continued with the current rapid update schedule?


Since the last SeaMonkey release, there have been over 40 MFSAs, many
of them critical.  IMO (and it's only that) if SM decided out of policy
*not* to issue security updates in a timely manner, that would mark
the death of the project.


Hear, Hear!! If I've got a safe, secure Suite, would I care if I only
got a "Bells and Whistles" update every six months or so?? Not a
problem. My SM looks and feels much the same as NC 4.7, or earlier.

(This being cross-posted reminds me I still waiting on the "Mark
Cross-posts as Read" bugzilla to be fixed, Bug 43278. Worked in NC up
till about 4.7 but then not.)




I don't recall cross-posts ever being marked as read, but I may not have
been using NC back in 2000.

That would be nice to have.

I certainly do recall it, Walt!! At one stage, I used to wonder how come 
messages that I had read in one group were being marked as read in other 
groups, until someone in the secnews.netscape.com groups explained about 
that pref.


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.32 Build identifier: 20141218225909

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.33 Build identifier: 20150215202114

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Again SeaMonkey is fully unknown

[Daniel]

On 9/07/2015 7:43 AM, Ray_Net wrote:

Ray_Net wrote on 07/07/2015 09:55:

WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 23:40:

On 07/06/2015 05:22 PM, Ray_Net wrote:

WaltS48 wrote on 06/07/2015 15:53:

On 07/06/2015 02:26 AM, Ray_Net wrote:

A site, telling me that my browser is not up-to-date direct me here:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr

Where in cannot find SeaMonkey 



Which site directs you there?

http://www.skynet.be/fr



I see a couple of messages with an "X" to close each one. The first
is Cookie policy, and the second is Browser info.

If I click both X's the site still works, even though clicking some
links brings them up again.



Anyway SeaMonkey IS a non-existant browser by 99% of webmasters.

I just use about:config adding this:
New string: general.useragent.override - user set - string - Mozilla/9.0
(Windows NT 10.1; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0
NOW
http://www.skynet.be/fr did not redirect me to:
http://browsehappy.com/?locale=fr


Ray. now that you can get to the required site (skynet!! Are you working 
on Terminator or something??  ;-P ) , can you tell the Site Manager, or 
whomever, to start sniffing for Gecko, rather than for Firefox, and 
direct them to ..


http://geckoisgecko.org/

Hmmm, ten different browsers!!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.32 Build identifier: 20141218225909

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.33 Build identifier: 20150215202114

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Again SeaMonkey is fully unknown

[Daniel]

On 9/07/2015 4:34 AM, John Duncan wrote:

Daniel wrote:

On 8/07/2015 5:55 AM, John Duncan wrote:





To fix this,
couldn't we try always reporting the Firefox/x.x bit at the end of the
UA string to deal with invalid sniffing? or is that not the issue in
this circumstance?


Yes, you could, John, but then no-one will ever know about SM!! So you
might as well just use FF!


Ha, that is a good point! This doesn't really seem like a big issue
anyway. I have yet to come across a website that denies me access based
on the fact that I'm advertising SeaMonkey instead of Firefox. The
``chrome-optimised'' websites on the other hand... *shudders*


John, that could be because your User Agent, Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; 
Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 
SeaMonkey/2.39a1, is advertising Firefox as well as SM!!


Have you got Edit->Preferences->Advanced->HTTP Networking set to 
Advertise FF compatibility??


And did I read elsewhere that you were offering your programming skills 
up to the Consortium during a work slowdown?? If so, well done.


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.32 Build identifier: 20141218225909

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.33 Build identifier: 20150215202114

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Create filter

[Daniel]

On 9/07/2015 3:35 AM, MRoss wrote:

Re: Create filter

F Murtz wrote:

How would you create a filter for a poster that continually changes
the email address like this poster,if you want to see examples look at
uk.legal
Col.edmund J.bourke  hisburkens...@usa.com


The 2 address changes I made were within an hour I think, & are
finished, so it is not continual. However, ...

Neither "From" nor "Sender" addresses should be used nor needed for
filters on a list like this, under most all circumstances.

Receiving filters should use the "To" & "Cc" entry to catch this list
address (). Ignore "From" &
"Sender" entries - under most all circumstances.

Everybody should post to this list with the "To" & "Reply-To" entry set
to this list address  under most
all circumstances!

That should simplify everybodies life here!

Sorry, MRoss, but are you suggesting that the OP should filter 
out/ignore everybody that posts here using the lists?? Seems a bit harsh 
to me!!


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.32 Build identifier: 20141218225909

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.33 Build identifier: 20150215202114

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey