Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 21st Mar 2007 21:36 UTC
Mozilla & Gecko clones Mozilla on March 20 released new security and stability updates for both versions of its Firefox browser and for its Internet application suite, SeaMonkey. The new updates eradicate a minor FTP PASV port-scanning vulnerability.
Order by: Score:
hmmmm
by raver31 (4.04) on Wed 21st Mar 2007 22:35 UTC
raver31
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 13

Firefox updated on my Windows machine, however, it did not on my Linux machine.

What can we conclude from that ?

RE: hmmmm
by flanque (4.32) on Wed 21st Mar 2007 22:44 UTC in reply to "hmmmm"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15
Fans: 3

Not sure what we can conclude from that apparent fact, but we can conclude from your comment that you're trying to troll.

RE[2]: hmmmm
by raver31 (4.04) on Wed 21st Mar 2007 22:59 UTC in reply to "RE: hmmmm"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 13

Why would I be trying to troll when any fool can see from my last post, that I use both Windows and Linux. Muppet.

RE[3]: hmmmm
by flanque (4.32) on Wed 21st Mar 2007 23:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: hmmmm"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15
Fans: 3

A lot of pro-Linux folks use Windows as a matter of necessity for various reasons. Doesn't mean you aren't trolling.

RE: hmmmm
by leos (5.2) on Wed 21st Mar 2007 22:56 UTC in reply to "hmmmm"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21
Fans: 5

What can we conclude from that ?

Most likely that you are using firefox packages built by your distribution, which often disable the automatic updates. I run Debian, and the automatic updates don't happen, but the updated package will appear in the package manager at about the same time as the update is distributed normally.

I assume this is to keep updates consolidated, and keep the package manager in the loop about what versions of programs are installed. If programs suddenly all start updating themselves in different ways the central system becomes useless or error-prone.

Windows doesn't have a central system, so every application needs to roll their own autoupdater, which is a huge pain in the behind, both for users and for developers.

RE[2]: hmmmm
by raver31 (4.04) on Wed 21st Mar 2007 23:02 UTC in reply to "RE: hmmmm"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 13

Yes, I have Ubuntu installed and it runs Update Manager. However, Ubuntu have still not made the Firefox update available.

RE[3]: hmmmm
by gpierce (2.76) on Wed 21st Mar 2007 23:09 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: hmmmm"
gpierce Member since:
2005-07-07
Fans: 0

It's just a matter of time--usually a couple days.

Greg

RE[3]: hmmmm
by systyrant (3.04) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 18:35 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: hmmmm"
systyrant Member since:
2007-01-18
Fans: 2

Then I would assume that you could conclude that Ubuntu is the reason Firefox hasn't been updated on your Linux box.

RE[4]: hmmmm
by raver31 (4.04) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 22:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: hmmmm"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 13

Yes, yes it is.
Sometimes I am a little slow.

RE[3]: hmmmm
by tspears (1.36) on Fri 23rd Mar 2007 13:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: hmmmm"
tspears Member since:
2006-05-22
Fans: 0

I've found that the software updater app takes a while to refresh, often if I do an apt-get update or an aptitude update I'll have several updates not listed in the update manager...

RE: hmmmm
by smitty (3.48) on Wed 21st Mar 2007 23:01 UTC in reply to "hmmmm"
smitty Member since:
2005-10-13
Fans: 0

Firefox updated on my Windows machine, however, it did not on my Linux machine.

What can we conclude from that ?


That your distro disabled the automatic updates so that they control updates on your machine rather than Mozilla? I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this.

RE[2]: hmmmm
by vikramsharma (1.28) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 05:14 UTC in reply to "RE: hmmmm"
vikramsharma Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0

You are absolutely right, many distros do disable the automatic update feature, so they can have more control. FOr example Ubuntu, you can update without any hitches on a fedora box, you might need to login or open the browser as root user though.

RE: hmmmm
by shiny (4.4) on Wed 21st Mar 2007 23:01 UTC in reply to "hmmmm"
shiny Member since:
2005-08-09
Fans: 0

Firefox updated on my Windows machine, however, it did not on my Linux machine.
What can we conclude from that ?


That it is already up to date? ;)

RE: hmmmm
by mark_in_rdjbrasil (1.4) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 01:03 UTC in reply to "hmmmm"
mark_in_rdjbrasil Member since:
2005-11-30
Fans: 0

i can conclude one thing not mentioned, you don't have a mac...

RE[2]: hmmmm
by raver31 (4.04) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 09:08 UTC in reply to "RE: hmmmm"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 13

Sorry, your conclusion is incorrect. I do have a Mac, I use Safari as the browser on there. I do not use Firefox on my Mac.



Edit.... I need to remember to spell browser like this; BROWSER and not like this BROSWER.

Edited 2007-03-22 09:10

v RE[3]: hmmmm
by B12 Simon (1.2) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: hmmmm"
RE[3]: hmmmm
by mark_in_rdjbrasil (1.4) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 11:15 UTC in reply to "RE: hmmmm"
mark_in_rdjbrasil Member since:
2005-11-30
Fans: 0

ok, it helps all of us to make good and wise decisions when we have all the facts. but you did not mention the mac fact in your previous post.

v RE: hmmmm
by SirYes (1.8) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 12:42 UTC in reply to "hmmmm"
v Trolls
by edwardyawn (-3.16) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 04:26 UTC
a trolling we will go...
by kpig (1.86) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 05:18 UTC
kpig
Member since:
2006-12-15
Fans: 0

firefox updated on win xp and 2000, not on osx, linspire or ubuntu...lol

Not quite...
by DanM (0.83) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 05:51 UTC
DanM
Member since:
2006-04-15
Fans: 0

Linux i686 statically-compiled Binaries are available at ftp.mozilla.org -- Fully internationalized. Now I don't know if they self-update (hope so) but they are there the same time the Windows ones are. Won't even mess with your distro's packaging system.

/Just Sayin'

RE
by Kroc (5.36) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 13:04 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10
Fans: 14

Damn, I've just realised I'm still on 2.0.0.1, why wasn't I even notified last time, and why does it still say no updates when I check within the app manually. I suspect it's because I'm using an en-GB build and Mozilla still haven't pushed that update out :|

Huh?
by Bobmeister (3) on Thu 22nd Mar 2007 13:41 UTC
Bobmeister
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0

Huh? This conversation is ridiculous....as if nobody has anything better to do? The linux, Mac, Windows fixes are released equally and at the same time. Distributions, as it has been said before...update them when they get to it and push there modified versions out when they are ready, of course, it will take a little time.

I use the vanilla versions of Firefox in all of my computers and the updates come through just fine...and how that is handled depends on how it's installed and how you have your preferences set.

Mozilla isn't to be faulted for anything...they come out with the code and put it on the FTP's...that's it.

In my case...I install the binaries in the /usr/local and it's owned by root...so naturally...a regular user won't be able to update it. So...big deal...you start it up as root now and then and do the update. WOW...tough.

This update fixed some regressionary bugs that cropped up with the 2.0.0.2 security fix. See? They fixed it.

I'm not a troll and give credit to anyone that fixes code. None of it is perfect. MS deserver credit when they fix code. Why do so many people complain?

People, if they are running software, should at least understand what method they used, and what versions they are running, especially for us Linux geeks. Grandma might not know...but crap...don't we all maintain Grandma's computer?

Firefox is a fine browser, and I'm glad that they support it the way they do with frequent fixed and updates.