Don Spam's Reckless Son wrote: > Edmund Wong wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> I hope all is well with everyone. >> >> I've been spending a lot of time working on the update system. When I >> started this project some time ago, I had just wanted to use the >> old system and update (pun not intended)it. Gave up that idea and went >> for something else. >> >> Now fast forward a few years to 2020 after working on this on-and-off. >> With the release process still being half-manually generated (though >> the process has gotten a bit faster), I figured I'd tackle this update >> issue once and for all. >> >> I had the intention of setting up the new system such that all versions >> (2.0 to 2.53.5.1 etc) can update properly. After getting a simple >> working prototype running, I realized that it's no longer possible to >> even update anything <= 2.23. >> >> Our update site uses TLSv1.1 or 1.2 (and a better set of cyphers) which >> these versions don't support and it's no longer possible to patch these >> versions to support TLSv1.1 or TLSv1.2. >> >> It is also not likely that we'd set the update system to use >> SSLv3 or TLSv1 (thanks to Heartbleed, Poodle, and whatever >> else) and set to a lower cypher set. >> >> Errors: >> Version 2.1 to 2.23 gets a 'ssl_error_no_cypher_overlap' error. >> >> Version 2.0x gets a "Data transfer interupted" error. >> >> I haven't tested version 1.x. or the Mozilla Suite. >> >> >> So, I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't seem possible to >> update 2.0 to the latest and greatest. >> >> Here's a list of versions and their supported status: >> >> Versions >> >> o Mozilla Suite, 1.x, 2.0x, <= 2.23 : Not supported. >> [Related gecko versions: 1.8, 1.8.1, 1.9.1, <= 26 >> >> o versions >= 2.24: Supported >> [related gecko versions: >= 27] >> >> This is only considering versions as they are; Not the underlying >> operating system support. >> >> That's my update on the updates. [Probably going to be an update to >> this update that updates on the update...etc... ad nauseum] >> We're nearly there. I just need to make sure that the update process >> won't update systems that *shouldn't* be updated. i.e Updating 2.49.5 >> to 2.53 on a Winxp system or, in the case of Linux distros own compiled >> versions, they also won't be updated. [Though I have been told >> that Linux distros-own compiled versions won't query the update >> server.] >> >> >> Edmund >> > > Just one question to that: I have an ancient profile which I found on an > unused machine and where I'd like to at least have access to the emails > there. > Would a modern Seamonkey be able to understand them; are the profile > incompatibilities in the email handling, the browser side or in common > parts such as password handling? "ancient" certainly means < 2.24 and > it may even mean < 2.0. >
There will definitely be incompatabilities which could cause either SeaMonkey to crash or the profile getting corrupted. This would definitely apply to anything < 2.0. As for the differences, unfortunately, I don't know the inner workings of the profile code to tell which part would work and which part won't. What I do know is that there was never an automatic upgrade path from < 2.0 to 2.0. It was always manual. I think the best way is to backup the profile, and upgrade SeaMonkey manually from < 2.0 to 2.0, then 2.0 to 2.1..etc up until 2.24 (while backing up the profile as you go). Again, I apologize for not being too specific or helpful. Edmund _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
