Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
Yes, trisquel 6 is supported until 2017 so I guess then I will have to compile the packages myself if it isn't a very laborious effort or switch to another libre distribution.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
Unfortunately it isn't. I have an older laptop that I can't install trisquel 7 because of screen resolution problems. I think I'm not the only one in this situation. So, I Would like a newer version of abrowser (not necessarily 44). I am eager to help but don't know where to start. I mentioned version 44 since it's already availabe for trisquel 7, so I thought that it's easier to start with this.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
But 44 is still outdated. Abrowser is not receiving security updates in any version of Trisquel.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
The Abrowser in Trisquel 7 isn't up-to-date either. And Trisquel 6 should still be receiving security updates *for now*.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
What are the steps required to update abrowser 44 in order to be available from apt-get as an update for Trisquel 6?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
,I would love install FF9 again ;D https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
I found an old computer with Firefox 9. Back when Firefox was less of a monster.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
I use Abrowser 36 ...XD
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
This is a regrettable situation indeed; however, I recommend running abrowser in a jail (using firejail), which will hopefully mitigate at least some of the potential issues.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
This really needs some attention ASAP.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
Yes it is a big deal. Trisquel 6 is supported so security updates are expected.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
But that´s not a big deal. If you want to upgrade it, do it. & yes, Tisquel 6 LTS is supported until 2017 https://trisquel.info/en/trisquel-60-lts-toutatis-has-arrived https://trisquel.info/en/trisquel-gnulinux-601-lts-upgrade-release
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser version on Trisquel 6
Looks like abrowser 41 has no less than 16 critical vulnerabilities when compared with the current firefox 45. And then there are the high, moderate and low impact vulnerabilities... (probably not all of them on GNU/Linux though) https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox/ This is pretty disappointing, after all many of us use the browser all day every day. If the maintenance is too much work, perhaps Trisquel should be tracking Firefox ESR instead.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 15:14 +0800, Red Baptist wrote: On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 22:53 +0100, andrew.rof...@student.qut.edu.au wrote: Just as a late update to this thread, I just got offered an Abrowser 16 update through apt-get today. After updating I'm unable to open my Abrowser. I think it has something to do with one of my addons because my daughter's log in on the same laptop opens with no problem. Anyone know how to open Abrowser without any addons? To answer my own question, I was able to open my Abrowser after a few minutes. It notified me that there was a problem and I can open the safe version with all the addons turned off. Found the addon problem: Tor Button. I've followed the instructions as per the thread in this forum and is now running Abrowser again. -- Sent from Trisquel GNU/Linux
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Just as a late update to this thread, I just got offered an Abrowser 16 update through apt-get today.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 22:53 +0100, andrew.rof...@student.qut.edu.au wrote: Just as a late update to this thread, I just got offered an Abrowser 16 update through apt-get today. After updating I'm unable to open my Abrowser. I think it has something to do with one of my addons because my daughter's log in on the same laptop opens with no problem. Anyone know how to open Abrowser without any addons? -- Sent from Trisquel Gnu/Linux https://trisquel.info Red Baptist Blog: http://redbaptist.parlementum.net Microblog: https://parlementum.net/redbaptist XMPP: redbaptist [at] riseup [dot] net
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
I can use some parameters in the URL but I don't know how to integrate them in the search bar. Type about:config (without ) in the address bar and change the value of keyword.URL; then, type your searches in the address bar instead of the search one ;-)
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Don't even know if this bug affects my 16.0 version of IceWeasel...
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
It most certainly does.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Yeah ! (not...) I had the little hope that it had been solved... silly me xD
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Yeah ! (not...) I had the little hope that it had been solved... silly me xD
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
It's the version that has been released :D Thanks for the information !
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
What I would love to do is release a distribution based on Ubuntu LTS. Spend a year or so focused on getting it just right. Then let someone else worry about maintaining a few key packages. We need a backports repository for abrowser, linux-libre, and hplip. It shouldn't be too terribly difficult to do either. Such a distribution would give you the best of both worlds. That is long term support plus good hardware compatibility over the course of a three year period. There actually is a repository for the linux-libre kernel which is managed 'just right': http://jxself.org/linux-libre/
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Yeah, I have been thinking that too. But why you want it to be based on Ubuntu? I am interested to know why. In my opinion Debian is a better choise because it does not have that much trademark and branding things like Ubuntu and when it gets good supplement repos the fact that there is not two annual distribution releases per year can release resources to keep the supplement repos in good condition. On the other hand Ubuntu is a little bit more polished for average user and that average user can get more software installed out of repos (users must be able to do what they want to do). The polishing issue though should be solved by forking a polished version of Debian, and the software out of repos should be solved by good supplement repos.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Firefox 16 Pulled To Address Security Vulnerability
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Heh, the joy of the latest and greatest.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
I'm assuming Debian does not have in its backports the packages which define Trisquel (abrowser, linux-libre, etc). The reason for using Ubuntu is that it is a bit more polished. I was thinking (or Debian) in my head. Chose not to write that though.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Did I or someone say or imply it was trivial? It's not like any of this is going to get done by a less than technical user.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
One said he could patch FF, but that he haven't patched anything before. The offer is appreciated but it implies that patching would be trivial. It is not unless you get the patch from somewhere. If you have to make the patch, then it is not trivial.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
I definitely didn't think it would be a trivial task. I'm not going to overstate my abilities, because I've not done any serious programming (e.g. hacking Gecko). But I have written some small programs in C (and I know some other languages better). I will at least check out what Ruben's done with the sources on my summer holidays and see what I can learn.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Ok, that's a great attitude and I think you can do it.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Well said Chris
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
t3g pls go
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Startpage/Ixquick.com provides anonymous image search but they don't have custom image search. If unhappy with DuckDuckGo, hack it http://duckduckhack.com/
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
As expected, Firefox 16 was pushed to the Ubuntu repos for you Trisquel 5.5 users: http://packages.ubuntu.com/oneiric/firefox Makes you wonder if Ruben skips 15 and goes right to 16. If he goes right from 14 to 15, then there's the risk of always being one version behind. Yikes.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Depending on what it is that changed it may not matter. abrowser isn't the only project which is 'behind' the official release. Until recently Canonical wasn't keeping up with the newer versions either. They stuck to a stable older supported (for the majority of the time it was included in Ubuntu) release and patched it as needed. When mozilla discontinued support Canonical continued to patch it. The point of all this is stop putting people down when you obviously have no understanding of the issues. There are other projects like Tor which also don't keep the browser in sync or up to date. There simply isn't a need. This a is a project which is ultra concerned about security and privacy. The point is there are reasons these projects are not always up to date and that is OK! Each project has different goals and needs. If you absolutely must have an 'up to date' version because of some psychological defect go download it or switch to a distribution that is focused on such things.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
My understanding is pretty much that only the latest release is supported by Mozilla. Version 10 is apparently still supported, though, for some reason. Honestly, Firefox's scheme it started with version 5 is like a parody... hey, let's constantly upgrade Firefox and inflate the number, no plain old security fixes or minor versions like every other program, we'll just constantly throw a new version out every 6 months! Seriously, they might as well have just ditched the version number. It's not like they actually use it properly. Seriously, who is going to tell the difference between Firefox 16 and Firefox 8 just by looking at them? It's all security fixes and performance enhancements. Remember that Mozilla doesn't have to support version 14 of Firefox for forks like Abrowser and IceCat to be supported at version 14. I wouldn't worry too much about it.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
I'm going to back up a moment just to clarify something for users. What mozilla does and with support for Firefox and what the GNU/Linux distributions do are different. You can have a completely patched version of 14 when 16 is the only version supported by mozilla. 2nd. mozilla went back to having a rapid release where only the most recent version is getting security updates and a stable version where security updates are back ported. This version is for businesses, governments, etc to standardize on which can't/don't want to change. I'm actually surprised Ubuntu is not sticking to version 10. It's probably for the better though as many web sites will nag you about having an insecure/out of date version of firefox and unsupported (false, but they propigate the myth anyway).
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Debian sticks with ESR releases (Wheezy will have Iceweasel 10) but I'd assume Ubuntu doesn't because they like having bleeding-edge software. As for Abrowser/IceCat versions, I don't really worry too much because I run with JavaScript disabled. Looking at Mozilla's Security Advisories, it seems that *most* Mozilla security bugs are related to JavaScript. In fact, Mozilla even notes this: Note: In general these flaws cannot be exploited through email in the Thunderbird and SeaMonkey products because scripting is disabled, but are potentially a risk in browser or browser-like contexts in those products. https://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/ For users that do have JavaScript enabled, compiling IceCat or similar shouldn't be too difficult.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
I'm not up to date on what each project is actually doing. I'm just stating that each project is not necessarily dependent on mozilla for a patched version of firefox. Distributions and projects can apply patches to older versions. This was done with Ubuntu 10.04 with firefox after mozilla discontinued support (for a while).
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Agreed - Mozilla discontinuing support shouldn't affect what Ubuntu or Trisquel do, if backporting is (or can be) done. Does anyone know if Abrowser backports security patches? I'm not sure myself. Another thought would be that perhaps people other than Ruben could build Abrowser, or at least test to see if the patches work on later versions. On my summer holidays (southern hemisphere) I might look at compiling Abrowser for myself, and test out to see how difficult merging patches is. I've compiled IceCat, but I haven't patched anything before.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
I'm taking a wild educated guess here although most likely some one in the chain is lagging behind. The browser in Trisquel is not straight up Firefox. It's a modified version so there has to be someone doing the modification even if this is just a script that runs or a patch that is applied as well as someone doing the packaging. If any of these people fall behind... :)
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Is there a special way I could ask for something to change in Abrowser ? I'm asking this because I don't understand why they use DuckDuckGo Lite. DuckDuckGo itself is a very good search engine, but the lite version is very limited and almost only great for mobile :S... Because of this people normally use Google instead.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Yes, you can. Feel free to click on the bar and click on Manage Search Engines and click on Get More Search Engines and then choose from the available options in Mycroft. Personally I'm using Startpage.com for privacy and since it shows exactly what you'd get if you were on Google (Check Scroogle out as well if you like). Suggest you try out the omnibar addon as well for better effect.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
The Lite version is probably used because the full version requires non-free javascript.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
That Mycroft sounds good. DuckDuckGo is kinda meh, and good for simple searches only. Many times I have to do my searching with Google after trying first DuckDuckGo.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
DuckDuckGo is just fine. I like to support them because Gabriel (the founder) donates money to FS projects from his company's revenue besides partnering with them. But their reliance of cookies to customize are annoying as I browse in private mode. Yeah I can use some parameters in the URL but I don't know how to integrate them in the search bar. But what do people here think of Blekko or Seeks?
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Hum.. I didn't see this that way.. But then why there is Google Search on aBrowser and not on Iceweasel for example ?
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Hmm, alright, it is worth to start searching with DuckDuckGo first then. Thanks of the info.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
I will be honest. As a normal user, DuckDuckGo is very frustrating since it doesn't have all of the algorithms used by Google in order to almost know exactly what you are searching for. And worse then that, there is no native way to found images like with Google. But as a developer an a Wikipedia lover it is so damn good to just type some technical words and having DuckDuckGo to show the exact technical output I was looking for without having to open any link :D (and this is why I wanted to ask to change from the lite version to the normal version. Since the lite version doesn't offer this option). It is like the I Feel Lucky option when you try to search something using the url bar (Chrome habits)... If you search 1 word you will almost not find what you search, but if you search 2 or more words with spaces (without using the + symbol then), you will have a nice and beautiful error message.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Ubuntu should have 16 in their repos in the next day or so. I'm disappointed in Ruben for slacking in one of the more important Trisquel projects. Or maybe I'm not considering it is taking him forever to release 6 when the version he is basing it on was released 6 months ago! You do have to hand it to Canonical for being consistent with their releases and support. Trisquel is a one man fly by night operation with no guarantee that he will even release new versions. What's stopping him from disappearing off the face of the eath tomorrow and this project dying as a result. Nothing.
Re: [Trisquel-users] abrowser version
Given your lack of contribution to this project, constant criticism, ungratefulness, dislike of the distribution, and dislike of the only thing which makes it unique why do you continue to hang out here? Just leave already. AND that is putting it nicely.
