Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Steve Dunn]

	There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that work in 
2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been posting here. 
I can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers have to try to 
maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension system while grafting 
in components from a browser that moved to a modern extension system a 
few years ago, but since extensions are important, it's kind of a 
problem if the stop working.


	Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite extensions will 
work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for the best, and be 
prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and restore your backup?


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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Ant]

On 3/6/2020 2:37 PM, Steve Dunn wrote:
 There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that work 
in 2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been posting 
here. I can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers have to try 
to maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension system while 
grafting in components from a browser that moved to a modern extension 
system a few years ago, but since extensions are important, it's kind of 
a problem if the stop working.


 Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite extensions 
will work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for the best, and 
be prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and restore your backup?


You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you. Here's mine:

Last updated: Fri Mar 06 2020 15:08:50 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) 
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.1


Extensions (enabled: 6)
* ColorfulTabs 31.1.9 (http://www.addongenie.com/colorfultabs)
* DOM Inspector 2.0.17.2 (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/)
* Expire history by days [converted] 1.2.0
* Open With 6.8.6 (https://github.com/darktrojan/openwith)
* PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
* uBlock Origin 1.16.4.19 
(https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy)

--
"Don't be no Ant-Man. An Ant-Man has very low horizons." --Forrest Gump
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see 
this signature correctly.

   /\___/\ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.ma.cx /
  / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
 | |o   o| |   Axe ANT from its address if shown & e-mailing privately.
\ _ /   Please kindly use Ant nickname & URL/link if crediting.
 ( )
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[🐴 Mr . Ed 🐴 via support-seamonkey]

  
  
On 3/6/2020 6:09 PM, Ant wrote:

On
  3/6/2020 2:37 PM, Steve Dunn wrote:
  
   There seems to be a fair bit of
potential for extensions that work in 2.49.x to break in 2.53.1,
based on what people have been posting here. I can't say I'm
surprised, given that the developers have to try to maintain
compatibility with an obsolete extension system while grafting
in components from a browser that moved to a modern extension
system a few years ago, but since extensions are important, it's
kind of a problem if the stop working.


 Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite
extensions will work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope
for the best, and be prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall
2.49.5, and restore your backup?

  
  
  You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you.
  Here's mine:
  
  
  Last updated: Fri Mar 06 2020 15:08:50 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard
  Time)
  
  User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:60.0)
  Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.1
  
  
  Extensions (enabled: 6)
  
  * ColorfulTabs 31.1.9 (http://www.addongenie.com/colorfultabs)
  
  * DOM Inspector 2.0.17.2
  (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/)
  
  * Expire history by days [converted] 1.2.0
  
  * Open With 6.8.6 (https://github.com/darktrojan/openwith)
  
  * PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
  
  * uBlock Origin 1.16.4.19
  (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy)
  


And mine:

  User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64;
x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.2
Extensions (enabled: 8)
* English United States Dictionary 60.1webext
* Enigmail 2.0.9 (https://www.enigmail.net/)
* Mail Redirect 0.10.7 (https://mailredirect.sourceforge.io/)
* NetVideoHunter [converted] 1.20 (http://www.netvideohunter.com) (disabled)
* Password Exporter Converted 1.3.4 (http://passwordexporter.fligtar.com)
* PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
* Quote Colors 0.3.1-let-fixed (http://quotecolors.mozdev.org/)
* Reply to All as Cc [converted] 1.5.1 (http://www.clear-code.com/)
* Saved Password Editor 2.9.6 (https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/saved-password-editor/)


-- 
"This is America!  You can't make a horse
 testify against himself!"  -Mister Ed
  

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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Ant]

On 3/6/2020 6:22 PM, 🐴 Mr. Ed 🐴 wrote:

On 3/6/2020 6:09 PM, Ant wrote:

On 3/6/2020 2:37 PM, Steve Dunn wrote:
 There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that work in 
2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been posting here. I 
can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers have to try to maintain 
compatibility with an obsolete extension system while grafting in components 
from a browser that moved to a modern extension system a few years ago, but 
since extensions are important, it's kind of a problem if the stop working.


 Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite extensions will 
work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for the best, and be 
prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and restore your backup?


You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you. Here's mine:

Last updated: Fri Mar 06 2020 15:08:50 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 
Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.1


Extensions (enabled: 6)
* ColorfulTabs 31.1.9 (http://www.addongenie.com/colorfultabs)
* DOM Inspector 2.0.17.2 (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/)
* Expire history by days [converted] 1.2.0
* Open With 6.8.6 (https://github.com/darktrojan/openwith)
* PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
* uBlock Origin 1.16.4.19 (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy)


And mine:

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.2

Extensions (enabled: 8)
* English United States Dictionary 60.1webext
* Enigmail 2.0.9 (https://www.enigmail.net/)
* Mail Redirect 0.10.7 (https://mailredirect.sourceforge.io/)
* NetVideoHunter [converted] 1.20 (http://www.netvideohunter.com) (disabled)
* Password Exporter Converted 1.3.4 (http://passwordexporter.fligtar.com)
* PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
* Quote Colors 0.3.1-let-fixed (http://quotecolors.mozdev.org/)
* Reply to All as Cc [converted] 1.5.1 (http://www.clear-code.com/)
* Saved Password Editor 2.9.6 
(https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/saved-password-editor/)


No ad blocker, horsey? :/
--
"Are you slower than an ant?" --Sai Yuk from The Legend of Fong Sai Yuk 
movie (English subtitles)
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see 
this signature correctly.

   /\___/\ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.ma.cx /
  / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
 | |o   o| |   Axe ANT from its address if shown & e-mailing privately.
\ _ /   Please kindly use Ant nickname & URL/link if crediting.
 ( )
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[🐴 Mr . Ed 🐴 via support-seamonkey]

  
  
On 3/7/2020 12:21 AM, Ant wrote:

On
  3/6/2020 6:22 PM, 🐴 Mr. Ed 🐴 wrote:
  
  On 3/6/2020 6:09 PM, Ant wrote:

On 3/6/2020 2:37 PM, Steve Dunn wrote:
  
   There seems to be a fair bit of
potential for extensions that work in 2.49.x to break in
2.53.1, based on what people have been posting here. I can't
say I'm surprised, given that the developers have to try to
maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension system
while grafting in components from a browser that moved to a
modern extension system a few years ago, but since
extensions are important, it's kind of a problem if the stop
working.


 Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite
extensions will work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up,
hope for the best, and be prepared to uninstall 2.53.1,
reinstall 2.49.5, and restore your backup?

  
  
  You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you.
  Here's mine:
  
  
  Last updated: Fri Mar 06 2020 15:08:50 GMT-0800 (Pacific
  Standard Time)
  
  User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:60.0)
  Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.1
  
  
  Extensions (enabled: 6)
  
  * ColorfulTabs 31.1.9 (http://www.addongenie.com/colorfultabs)
  
  * DOM Inspector 2.0.17.2
  (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/)
  
  * Expire history by days [converted] 1.2.0
  
  * Open With 6.8.6 (https://github.com/darktrojan/openwith)
  
  * PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
  
  * uBlock Origin 1.16.4.19
  (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy)
  


And mine:


User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:60.0)
Gecko/20100101

Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.2


Extensions (enabled: 8)

* English United States Dictionary 60.1webext

* Enigmail 2.0.9 (https://www.enigmail.net/)

* Mail Redirect 0.10.7 (https://mailredirect.sourceforge.io/)

* NetVideoHunter [converted] 1.20
(http://www.netvideohunter.com) (disabled)

* Password Exporter Converted 1.3.4
(http://passwordexporter.fligtar.com)

* PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)

* Quote Colors 0.3.1-let-fixed (http://quotecolors.mozdev.org/)

* Reply to All as Cc [converted] 1.5.1
(http://www.clear-code.com/)

* Saved Password Editor 2.9.6
(https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/saved-password-editor/)

  
  
  No ad blocker, horsey? :/
  


Yeh, done by the usage of the Windows 'hosts' file:
http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/


-- 
"This is America!  You can't make a horse
 testify against himself!"  -Mister Ed
  

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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Jonathan N. Little]

🐴 Mr. Ed 🐴 wrote:
> On 3/6/2020 6:09 PM, Ant wrote:
>> On 3/6/2020 2:37 PM, Steve Dunn wrote:
>>>  There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that
>>> work in 2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been
>>> posting here. I can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers
>>> have to try to maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension
>>> system while grafting in components from a browser that moved to a
>>> modern extension system a few years ago, but since extensions are
>>> important, it's kind of a problem if the stop working.
>>>
>>>  Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite
>>> extensions will work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for
>>> the best, and be prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and
>>> restore your backup?
>>
>> You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you. Here's
>> mine:
>>
>> Last updated: Fri Mar 06 2020 15:08:50 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
>> User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:60.0)
>> Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.1
>>
>> Extensions (enabled: 6)
>> * ColorfulTabs 31.1.9 (http://www.addongenie.com/colorfultabs)
>> * DOM Inspector 2.0.17.2 (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/)
>> * Expire history by days [converted] 1.2.0
>> * Open With 6.8.6 (https://github.com/darktrojan/openwith)
>> * PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
>> * uBlock Origin 1.16.4.19
>> (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy)
> 
> And mine:
> 
> User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:60.0)
> Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.2
> 
> Extensions (enabled: 8)
> * English United States Dictionary 60.1webext
> * Enigmail 2.0.9 (https://www.enigmail.net/)
> * Mail Redirect 0.10.7 (https://mailredirect.sourceforge.io/)
> * NetVideoHunter [converted] 1.20 (http://www.netvideohunter.com) (disabled)
> * Password Exporter Converted 1.3.4 (http://passwordexporter.fligtar.com)
> * PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
> * Quote Colors 0.3.1-let-fixed (http://quotecolors.mozdev.org/)
> * Reply to All as Cc [converted] 1.5.1 (http://www.clear-code.com/)
> * Saved Password Editor 2.9.6 
> (https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/saved-password-editor/)
> 

And mine

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.1

* Adblock Plus  2.9.1
* ChatZilla 0.9.94
* Classic Password Editor   1.0.3
* DOM Inspector 2.0.17.2
* Enigmail  2.0.9
* Font Information  0.1
* JavaScript Debugger   0.9.89.1-signed.1-signed
* Lightning 5.8.1
* Mnenhy0.8.6.1.2-stanio
* PDF Viewer2.2.255
* ReminderFox   2.1.6.3
* SeaTab X 20.3.3
* Toggle JavaScript Button  1.1.1
* True Full Screen in SeaMonkey 1.1.5
* Web Developer 1.2.13

Extensions were not a issue, it was *plugins* where the real winnowing
occurred. I had to add "PDF Viewer" to replace my lost Nitro PDF viewer
plugin.

-- 
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: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Jonathan N. Little]

Jonathan N. Little wrote:
> Extensions were not a issue, it was *plugins* where the real winnowing
> occurred. I had to add "PDF Viewer" to replace my lost Nitro PDF viewer
> plugin.

Oh and now Netflix does not work now, (Silverlight plugin maybe?),
except this is ONLY on my Windows 10 desktop. It works just fine on
Linux with SeaMonkey v2.53.1 for some strange reason.

-- 
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: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Steve Dunn]

On 2020-03-06 18:09, Ant wrote:

You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you. Here's mine:


The most important ones for me are:

* JunQuilla 1.0.4
* Adblock Plus 2.9.1 (which the 2.53.1 release notes say is problematic, 
but someone else in this thread is also using)

* HTTPS Everywhere 5.2.20

	I stopped using SeaMonkey for most browsing a couple of years ago - 
Firefox is so much faster, has fewer sites that refuse to work with it, 
gets security updates much more promptly, and doesn't have to rely on 
obsolete extensions.  I mostly use SeaMonkey for email and newsgroups, 
and if some of my other extensions break, I can deal with it.


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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[EE]

Steve Dunn wrote:
 There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that work 
in 2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been posting 
here. I can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers have to try 
to maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension system while 
grafting in components from a browser that moved to a modern extension 
system a few years ago, but since extensions are important, it's kind of 
a problem if the stop working.


 Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite extensions 
will work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for the best, and 
be prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and restore your backup?


-Steve


Back up the profile first before you upgrade.  You can then restore it 
before going back to the older version.


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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[EE]

Ant wrote:

On 3/6/2020 2:37 PM, Steve Dunn wrote:
 There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that 
work in 2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been 
posting here. I can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers 
have to try to maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension 
system while grafting in components from a browser that moved to a 
modern extension system a few years ago, but since extensions are 
important, it's kind of a problem if the stop working.


 Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite 
extensions will work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for 
the best, and be prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and 
restore your backup?


You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you. Here's mine:

Last updated: Fri Mar 06 2020 15:08:50 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) 
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.1


Extensions (enabled: 6)
* ColorfulTabs 31.1.9 (http://www.addongenie.com/colorfultabs)
* DOM Inspector 2.0.17.2 (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/)
* Expire history by days [converted] 1.2.0
* Open With 6.8.6 (https://github.com/darktrojan/openwith)
* PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
* uBlock Origin 1.16.4.19 
(https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy)


I found that Restart App Button, Add-ons Button, and Cookie Monster no 
longer work after I updated to 2.53.
Chromedit Plus gives you a restart button, and CookieFast works.  I was 
unable to find another add-on button that works.


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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Ant]

On 3/7/2020 7:49 AM, Steve Dunn wrote:

On 2020-03-06 18:09, Ant wrote:
You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you. Here's 
mine:


 The most important ones for me are:

* JunQuilla 1.0.4
* Adblock Plus 2.9.1 (which the 2.53.1 release notes say is problematic, 
but someone else in this thread is also using)

* HTTPS Everywhere 5.2.20

 I stopped using SeaMonkey for most browsing a couple of years ago - 
Firefox is so much faster, has fewer sites that refuse to work with it, 
gets security updates much more promptly, and doesn't have to rely on 
obsolete extensions.  I mostly use SeaMonkey for email and newsgroups, 
and if some of my other extensions break, I can deal with it.


I still use SM mostly, but once in a while I have to use the 
(lat/new)est Firefox. :(

--
"If I find one beer can in that car, it's over!" --Red; "And no donuts 
either! Ants!" --Kitty from That '70s Show pilot
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see 
this signature correctly.

   /\___/\ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.ma.cx /
  / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
 | |o   o| |   Axe ANT from its address if shown & e-mailing privately.
\ _ /   Please kindly use Ant nickname & URL/link if crediting.
 ( )
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Ant]

On 3/7/2020 11:47 AM, EE wrote:

Steve Dunn wrote:
 There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that 
work in 2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been 
posting here. I can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers 
have to try to maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension 
system while grafting in components from a browser that moved to a 
modern extension system a few years ago, but since extensions are 
important, it's kind of a problem if the stop working.


 Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite 
extensions will work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for 
the best, and be prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and 
restore your backup?


-Steve


Back up the profile first before you upgrade.  You can then restore it 
before going back to the older version.


Or make a new SM installation and profile?
--
"If I find one beer can in that car, it's over!" --Red; "And no donuts 
either! Ants!" --Kitty from That '70s Show pilot
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see 
this signature correctly.

   /\___/\ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.ma.cx /
  / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
 | |o   o| |   Axe ANT from its address if shown & e-mailing privately.
\ _ /   Please kindly use Ant nickname & URL/link if crediting.
 ( )
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Daniel]

Steve Dunn wrote on 8/03/2020 2:49 AM:

On 2020-03-06 18:09, Ant wrote:
You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you. Here's 
mine:


 The most important ones for me are:

* JunQuilla 1.0.4
* Adblock Plus 2.9.1 (which the 2.53.1 release notes say is problematic, 
but someone else in this thread is also using)

* HTTPS Everywhere 5.2.20

 I stopped using SeaMonkey for most browsing a couple of years ago - 
Firefox is so much faster, has fewer sites that refuse to work with it, 
gets security updates much more promptly, and doesn't have to rely on 
obsolete extensions.  I mostly use SeaMonkey for email and newsgroups, 
and if some of my other extensions break, I can deal with it.


-Steve


If "I mostly use SeaMonkey for email and newsgroups" why not use 
Thunderbird in place of SeaMonkey?? That would save using resources on 
the unused Browser portion of SM!


--
Daniel

Win7 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) 
Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.49.5 Build identifier: 20190609032134


Linux User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) 
Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171015235623

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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Steve Dunn]

On 2020-03-08 04:43, Daniel wrote:
If "I mostly use SeaMonkey for email and newsgroups" why not use 
Thunderbird in place of SeaMonkey?? That would save using resources on 
the unused Browser portion of SM!


	Eventually that will probably be necessary, but as long as SeaMonkey 
works, there's not much of a reason to bother migrating, especially as 
my computer is not short on resources.


-Steve

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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Daniel]

Steve Dunn wrote on 9/03/2020 1:39 AM:

On 2020-03-08 04:43, Daniel wrote:
If "I mostly use SeaMonkey for email and newsgroups" why not use 
Thunderbird in place of SeaMonkey?? That would save using resources on 
the unused Browser portion of SM!


 Eventually that will probably be necessary, but as long as 
SeaMonkey works, there's not much of a reason to bother migrating, 
especially as my computer is not short on resources.


-Steve


P.K.!

--
Daniel

Win7 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) 
Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.49.5 Build identifier: 20190609032134


Linux User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) 
Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171015235623

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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[NFN Smith]

Ant wrote:

On 3/6/2020 2:37 PM, Steve Dunn wrote:
 There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that 
work in 2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been 
posting here. I can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers 
have to try to maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension 
system while grafting in components from a browser that moved to a 
modern extension system a few years ago, but since extensions are 
important, it's kind of a problem if the stop working.


 Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite 
extensions will work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for 
the best, and be prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and 
restore your backup?


You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you. Here's mine:

Last updated: Fri Mar 06 2020 15:08:50 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) 
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.1


Extensions (enabled: 6)
* ColorfulTabs 31.1.9 (http://www.addongenie.com/colorfultabs)
* DOM Inspector 2.0.17.2 (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/)
* Expire history by days [converted] 1.2.0
* Open With 6.8.6 (https://github.com/darktrojan/openwith)
* PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
* uBlock Origin 1.16.4.19 
(https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy)


I have a virtual machine (Win 10 Pro) that's running a beta of 2.53.2, 
and that has most of the extensions that I use frequently.  I haven't 
tested extensively, but as far as I'm aware, all of these work without 
difficulty:


* Add-ons Manager - Version Number 1.5
* Cookies Exterminator 2.9.4
* Copy Plain text 2 1.6
* Display Mail User Agent 1.8.2
* Duplicate This Tab 1.3.1
* FlashGot 1.5.6.14
* Mail Redirect 0.10.7
* NoScript 5.1.9
* PrefBar 7.1.1
* Session Manager 0.8.1.13
* Slim Add-ons Manager 14.1
* UBlock Origin 1.16.4.11
* World IP 3.0.9.1

I also have the Classic Addons Archive installed, just in case.  I agree 
that it's preferable to get extensions from original developers 
(especially stuff that's newer than what was hosted at 
addoms.mozilla.org, or got dropped from there), but there's at least a 
couple of things I have (and I don't remember which) that I've been able 
to get from there.


If you haven't seen the Classic Addons Archive, it's a huge .XPI file 
that you can install (with nearly everything in it), and allows you to 
browse locally, in the same way you would at AMO.


As for PrefBar, it got removed from AMO before the archive was created, 
and so you can't get that there. But as others have noted, it's still 
available from the developer directly.


The only problem that I've had with newer versions of extensions has 
been with Display Mail User Agent.  I've been running 1.7.0 that in 
Seamonkey 2.49.3, and recently updated to 1.8.2. After doing that, I had 
problems in the mail client, especially with using the space bar as a 
trigger for scrolling text in mail windows (but not web pages). When I 
downgraded back to 1.7.0 and that problem went away.


I just checked my 2.53.2 installation (I haven't yet upgraded my main 
machine from 2.49.5 yet), and with that running Display Mail User Agent 
1.8.2, I am seeing the same issues with it disrupting scrolling with the 
space bar.


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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Daniel]

Daniel wrote on 9/03/2020 4:01 PM:

Steve Dunn wrote on 9/03/2020 1:39 AM:

On 2020-03-08 04:43, Daniel wrote:
If "I mostly use SeaMonkey for email and newsgroups" why not use 
Thunderbird in place of SeaMonkey?? That would save using resources 
on the unused Browser portion of SM!


 Eventually that will probably be necessary, but as long as 
SeaMonkey works, there's not much of a reason to bother migrating, 
especially as my computer is not short on resources.


-Steve


P.K.!


Opps!! Can't even get my 'O.K.''s correct!!

--
Daniel

Win7 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) 
Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.49.5 Build identifier: 20190609032134


Linux User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) 
Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171015235623

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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Richmond]

NFN Smith wrote:

> * NoScript 5.1.9

I am curious to know why it is necessary to use 5.1.9 and not the latest
version, given what it says on the noscript website "You can still
download NoScript "Classic" (5.1.9) (SHA256) for Palemoon, Seamonkey,
Waterfox and possibly other "vintage" (pre-Gecko 57) Firefox forks here:
we'll do our best to provide security fixes as long as supporting
browser still guarantee their own security updates. "

So SM is based on FF 60, that is not pre-gecko 57 is it? unless the
versions of ff and gecko are not the same.

Perhaps it is just validation in the addon installation process which
needs changing?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Ant]

So SM is based on FF 60, that is not pre-gecko 57 is it? unless the
versions of ff and gecko are not the same.


I was told SM v2.53.1 was based on FF v57. 60 is just an UA string.
--
"Not to engage in the pursuit of ideas is to live like ants instead of 
men." --Mortimer J. Adler
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see 
this signature correctly.

   /\___/\ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.ma.cx /
  / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
 | |o   o| |   Axe ANT from its address if shown & e-mailing privately.
\ _ /   Please kindly use Ant nickname & URL/link if crediting.
 ( )
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[NFN Smith]

Richmond wrote:

NFN Smith wrote:


* NoScript 5.1.9


I am curious to know why it is necessary to use 5.1.9 and not the latest
version, given what it says on the noscript website "You can still
download NoScript "Classic" (5.1.9) (SHA256) for Palemoon, Seamonkey,
Waterfox and possibly other "vintage" (pre-Gecko 57) Firefox forks here:
we'll do our best to provide security fixes as long as supporting
browser still guarantee their own security updates. "

So SM is based on FF 60, that is not pre-gecko 57 is it? unless the
versions of ff and gecko are not the same.

Perhaps it is just validation in the addon installation process which
needs changing?



Probably not.  I *think* I can explain this correctly, and hopefully, I 
don't need FRG to step in and correct me.


What's going on is the the structuring for how extensions are handled. 
Up to Firefox 57, that was all XUL.  At FF 57, XUL was dropped, and for 
later versions, it's all WebExtensions, a completely different API and 
coding structure. This is one of the reasons that some number of 
extensions have died, because there are some number of functions that 
XUL supported that WebExtensions do not.


With NoScript, 5.1.9 was the last XUL-based version.  It will not run on 
Firefox 57 or later.  Newer versions of NoScript are WebExtension and 
will not run on browsers that don't support WebExtensions. 
Predominantly, those would be the various Firefox forks, including 
Seamonkey, Palemoon and Waterfox.


With Seamonkey, I believe that 2.53.1 is based on Firefox 56 (rather 
than 50.9esr) . For 2.57, I believe that it's based on Firefox 60esr, 
and my understanding is that 2.57 will support both WebExtensions and 
XUL, in the way that Thunderbird does, I know that with Thunderbird, 
when TB 60 was released, XUL extensions had to be adjusted to allow for 
explicit support of 60 or higher, and extensions that were not adjusted 
were no longer usable.  My impression is that for some, it was simply a 
matter of adjusting the .XPI to allow TB 60, but for others, I'm aware 
that there were more substantial coding revisions that were required.


As noted previously, I have a virtual machine that has a beta of 2.53.2 
installed, and I've been tracking 2.53 installs to watch for near-future 
changes, including handling of extensions. I don't know how many more 
2.53 releases that we'll see before 2.57 is released, but it sounds like 
that it may be worth starting to do more serious tracking on 2.57, 
before too long.


Reference sources:

1) Notes from Seamonkey devs Status Meetings, at 
https://wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey/StatusMeetings . They typically meet 
twice a month, and meetings are announced in the 
mozilla.dev.apps.seamonkey newsgroup.  I've found these notes to be 
useful for knowing where things stand with development.


2) Downloads for developmental copies of Seamonkey:

- 2.53.x: http://www.wg9s.com/comm-253/
- 2.57: http://www.wg9s.com/comm-257/

I don't run these against my primary working profile (and in fact, as I 
write this, I'm still running 2.49.5, but plan to upgrade today), and 
it's nice to have the luxury of virtual machines for testing.  But it 
does definitely help me to be able to see what's coming, and what the 
current status is.


Smith





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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[David E. Ross]

On 3/6/2020 2:37 PM, Steve Dunn wrote:
>   There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that work in 
> 2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been posting here. 
> I can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers have to try to 
> maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension system while grafting 
> in components from a browser that moved to a modern extension system a 
> few years ago, but since extensions are important, it's kind of a 
> problem if the stop working.
> 
>   Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite extensions will 
> work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for the best, and be 
> prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and restore your backup?
> 
> -Steve
> 

I know the following do NOT work with 2.53.1:

* Theme Font & Size Changer (no expire) 53.0
[my own version at

that eliminated automatic expiration]
* Toolbar Buttons 1.1.1-signed

-- 
David E. Ross


Beyond Meat and other such vegetarian meat substitutes
represent the ultimate in ultra-processed foods.  Real
meat is natural.  Beyond Meat is definitely not.  No,
I do NOT own a cattle ranch, a butcher shop, or any
other business doing commerce in meat.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[EE]

NFN Smith wrote:

Ant wrote:

On 3/6/2020 2:37 PM, Steve Dunn wrote:
 There seems to be a fair bit of potential for extensions that 
work in 2.49.x to break in 2.53.1, based on what people have been 
posting here. I can't say I'm surprised, given that the developers 
have to try to maintain compatibility with an obsolete extension 
system while grafting in components from a browser that moved to a 
modern extension system a few years ago, but since extensions are 
important, it's kind of a problem if the stop working.


 Is there a way to know for sure which of your favourite 
extensions will work in 2.53.1, or is it a case of back up, hope for 
the best, and be prepared to uninstall 2.53.1, reinstall 2.49.5, and 
restore your backup?


You could share what extensions you have and we can tell you. Here's 
mine:


Last updated: Fri Mar 06 2020 15:08:50 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) 
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.1


Extensions (enabled: 6)
* ColorfulTabs 31.1.9 (http://www.addongenie.com/colorfultabs)
* DOM Inspector 2.0.17.2 (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/)
* Expire history by days [converted] 1.2.0
* Open With 6.8.6 (https://github.com/darktrojan/openwith)
* PrefBar 7.1.1 (http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/)
* uBlock Origin 1.16.4.19 
(https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy)


I have a virtual machine (Win 10 Pro) that's running a beta of 2.53.2, 
and that has most of the extensions that I use frequently.  I haven't 
tested extensively, but as far as I'm aware, all of these work without 
difficulty:


* Add-ons Manager - Version Number 1.5
* Cookies Exterminator 2.9.4
* Copy Plain text 2 1.6
* Display Mail User Agent 1.8.2
* Duplicate This Tab 1.3.1
* FlashGot 1.5.6.14
* Mail Redirect 0.10.7
* NoScript 5.1.9
* PrefBar 7.1.1
* Session Manager 0.8.1.13
* Slim Add-ons Manager 14.1
* UBlock Origin 1.16.4.11
* World IP 3.0.9.1

I also have the Classic Addons Archive installed, just in case.  I agree 
that it's preferable to get extensions from original developers 
(especially stuff that's newer than what was hosted at 
addoms.mozilla.org, or got dropped from there), but there's at least a 
couple of things I have (and I don't remember which) that I've been able 
to get from there.


If you haven't seen the Classic Addons Archive, it's a huge .XPI file 
that you can install (with nearly everything in it), and allows you to 
browse locally, in the same way you would at AMO.


As for PrefBar, it got removed from AMO before the archive was created, 
and so you can't get that there. But as others have noted, it's still 
available from the developer directly.


The only problem that I've had with newer versions of extensions has 
been with Display Mail User Agent.  I've been running 1.7.0 that in 
Seamonkey 2.49.3, and recently updated to 1.8.2. After doing that, I had 
problems in the mail client, especially with using the space bar as a 
trigger for scrolling text in mail windows (but not web pages). When I 
downgraded back to 1.7.0 and that problem went away.


I just checked my 2.53.2 installation (I haven't yet upgraded my main 
machine from 2.49.5 yet), and with that running Display Mail User Agent 
1.8.2, I am seeing the same issues with it disrupting scrolling with the 
space bar.


Smith


Your version of uBlock Origin is out of date.  The current legacy 
version is 1.16.4.19.  There is a new site just for the legacy versions now.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy/releases
How do you manage to scroll with the spacebar?  Why not use arrow keys?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Hartmut Figge]

EE:

>Your version of uBlock Origin is out of date.  The current legacy 
>version is 1.16.4.19.  There is a new site just for the legacy versions now.
>https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy/releases

Thanks. I have now updated from 4.11 to 4.19 and saved the link.

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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[NFN Smith]

NFN Smith wrote:
I have a virtual machine (Win 10 Pro) that's running a beta of 2.53.2, 
and that has most of the extensions that I use frequently.  I haven't 
tested extensively, but as far as I'm aware, all of these work without 
difficulty:



* Session Manager 0.8.1.13 


One follow-up...

I just finally upgraded my primary working machine to 2.53.1, and there 
I make a lot of use of this version of Session Manager.


A review of the Release Notes indicates that there's a glitch in one of 
the .js files, and I confirm that I had that issue, as well, causing the 
extension's icon to not display in the proper toolbar.


I followed the instructions to adjust the necessary .JS file (to do 
that, I used the 7-Zip file manager to locate the file, and then 
selected "edit" to apply the necessary fix -- it's not necessary to 
extract the file, and then re-insert into the .XPI file), and when I 
reinstalled the extension with this fix, Session Manager is working as I 
expect.


Smith


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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[NFN Smith]

EE wrote:


Your version of uBlock Origin is out of date.  The current legacy 
version is 1.16.4.19.  There is a new site just for the legacy versions 
now.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy/releases


I hadn't seen that update number.  Although I'm inclined to blame my VM 
installation for having an older version, I found that my primary copy 
is also running .16, so I'll make sure that both get updated. That's one 
of the challenges of tracking that particular extension is that, as far 
as I'm aware, manual download and install is the only way of getting 
that updated, and that it doesn't update through "check for updates"



How do you manage to scroll with the spacebar?  Why not use arrow keys?


Spacebar for one screen at a time (and SHIFT spacebar for a full up 
screen). Mostly a personal pref, but to me, it's easier than the arrow 
keys, and on many laptops, much easier to get to than using the PageDown 
key, including being able to use with both thumbs.


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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Ant]

On 3/10/2020 3:45 PM, NFN Smith wrote:

EE wrote:


Your version of uBlock Origin is out of date.  The current legacy 
version is 1.16.4.19.  There is a new site just for the legacy 
versions now.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy/releases


I hadn't seen that update number.  Although I'm inclined to blame my VM 
installation for having an older version, I found that my primary copy 
is also running .16, so I'll make sure that both get updated. That's one 
of the challenges of tracking that particular extension is that, as far 
as I'm aware, manual download and install is the only way of getting 
that updated, and that it doesn't update through "check for updates"


Yeah, it's a pain. Newer UO ext. will not need to do that manual method 
anymore.




How do you manage to scroll with the spacebar?  Why not use arrow keys?


Spacebar for one screen at a time (and SHIFT spacebar for a full up 
screen). Mostly a personal pref, but to me, it's easier than the arrow 
keys, and on many laptops, much easier to get to than using the PageDown 
key, including being able to use with both thumbs.


It's like page up and page down keys. I'm also a keyboard user. :D
--
o/` All the little ants are marching, red and black antennae waving... 
they all do it the same... they all do it the same... way... o/` --Ants 
Marching song by Dave Matthews Band
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see 
this signature correctly.

   /\___/\ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.ma.cx /
  / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
 | |o   o| |   Axe ANT from its address if shown & e-mailing privately.
\ _ /   Please kindly use Ant nickname & URL/link if crediting.
 ( )
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Frank-Rainer Grahl]

Richmond wrote:

Thanks!

I tried to install the latest version of noscript anyway by installing
from a file. It successfully installed, but it didn't seem to work. No
icons appeared. Maybe there is a simple fix like you indicate for
session manager. I think not though as it did not seem to stop any
scripts by default.



It will not work. You need 5.1.9 as indicated in the release notes. Why do you 
think we explicity wrote this when the latest would work too? The same for 
uBlock. web extensions is a mess and will only made to work in 2.57 (or no 
2.57). It does currently not work there.


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

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Richmond]

Thanks!

I tried to install the latest version of noscript anyway by installing
from a file. It successfully installed, but it didn't seem to work. No
icons appeared. Maybe there is a simple fix like you indicate for
session manager. I think not though as it did not seem to stop any
scripts by default.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?

[Richmond]

Frank-Rainer Grahl  writes:

>
> It will not work. You need 5.1.9 as indicated in the release notes. Why do you
> think we explicity wrote this when the latest would work too?

Because I am such a fool, and I forget half of what I have read. :(
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

UO v1.16... (was Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?)

[Ant]

On 3/10/2020 12:51 PM, EE wrote:
...
Your version of uBlock Origin is out of date.  The current legacy 
version is 1.16.4.19.  There is a new site just for the legacy versions 
now.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy/releases
How do you manage to scroll with the spacebar?  Why not use arrow keys?


Ditto. Also, I think they added an internal updater now according to 
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for-firefox-legacy/releases/tag/firefox-legacy-1.16.4.17:


"Make uBlock for firefox-legacy auto-update using GitHub

This makes uBlock Origin Updater obsolete"

:D
--
"Ants follow fat." --unknown
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see 
this signature correctly.

   /\___/\ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.ma.cx /
  / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
 | |o   o| |   Axe ANT from its address if shown & e-mailing privately.
\ _ /   Please kindly use Ant nickname & URL/link if crediting.
 ( )
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Blocking bad stuff (was Re: Is there a way to know which extensions may break when upgrading?)

[Ant]

On 3/7/2020 4:17 AM, 🐴 Mr. Ed 🐴 wrote:
...

No ad blocker, horsey? :/


Yeh, done by the usage of the Windows 'hosts' file:
http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/


Ah. Does using hosts mostly work? I have to use all! Hosts, web 
browsers' ad blockers, etc.

--
"If I find one beer can in that car, it's over!" --Red; "And no donuts 
either! Ants!" --Kitty from That '70s Show pilot
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see 
this signature correctly.

   /\___/\ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.ma.cx /
  / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
 | |o   o| |   Axe ANT from its address if shown & e-mailing privately.
\ _ /   Please kindly use Ant nickname & URL/link if crediting.
 ( )
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey