MozillaZine

The future of Seamonkey?

Discussion of general topics about Seamonkey
Diamanti
 
Posts: 710
Joined: June 12th, 2008, 9:02 am

Post Posted July 30th, 2019, 11:55 am

I have personal addons that perform countless functions, using xul and api no longer supported by the new Firefox.
I can use native encryption libraries.
I can use dlls to manage passwords.
An uncommon use, but it finds an excellent correspondence in Seamonkey 4.9x and not later.
If I had to change I would opt directly for Chrome or Firefox then.

therube

User avatar
 
Posts: 20551
Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
Location: Maryland USA

Post Posted July 30th, 2019, 12:56 pm

Should all remain compatible in SeaMonkey 2.53.
You can always test, using 2.53 with a separate Profile.

In any case, nothing wrong with 2.49.5 (when it's out, or with WG9s builds, now).

2.49 & 2.53 are mostly alike.
Few small changes in 2.53, like option for tabs to always open to the right (which I happen to like).
But then 2.53 also brings about, for me, re-ordering of (SeaMonkey) (Windows) Taskbar Icons (when starting from Session Restore) - which you may or may not run into, or which may or may not bother you (it does me). (And of course, 2.53 will not work in XP.)


Now, anything later then 2.53, that is an entirely different story, but we're a long, long way from that.
Fire 750, bring back 250.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript

4td8s
 
Posts: 705
Joined: June 24th, 2009, 1:07 pm

Post Posted July 30th, 2019, 6:12 pm

therube wrote: (And of course, 2.53 will not work in XP.)



more accurately SM 2.53 will not run on XP AND Vista (have u forgotten about vista, therube?) and requires at least Win7 SP1

even though I won't be using 2.49.5 on a majority of my machines except for one (since they have either 2.53 or 2.57), it should contain a bunch of recent security & non-security bug fixes and since it has been a year since the 2.49.4 release back in late July 2018, 2.49.5 is far from being "pointless" (I strongly disagree with Mouse4's comment about that); at least XP & Vista users get to try out 2.49.5 (either official or unofficial from wg9s)

Diamanti
 
Posts: 710
Joined: June 12th, 2008, 9:02 am

Post Posted July 30th, 2019, 8:49 pm

even though I was skeptical I proved that my environment still works in 2.53.
Is missing NSSBase64_DecodeBuffer PK11SDR_Decrypt functions in nss3.dll, but I can use old in standalone.
I only have a nuisance when development I always have to delete the files in startupCache: scriptCache.bin, scriptCache-child.bin, startupCache.8.little.
is it possible to disable them temporarily?
Do it have a document for 2.53 new functions?
Last edited by Diamanti on July 30th, 2019, 11:31 pm, edited 3 times in total.

d4rkn1ght

User avatar
 
Posts: 16
Joined: June 30th, 2013, 3:10 pm

Post Posted July 30th, 2019, 9:34 pm

4td8s wrote:
therube wrote: (And of course, 2.53 will not work in XP.)


more accurately SM 2.53 will not run on XP AND Vista (have u forgotten about vista, therube?) and requires at least Win7 SP1


Just wondering how far back, SM 2.53 support will go to MacOS and Linux?

James
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 27719
Joined: June 18th, 2003, 3:07 pm
Location: Made in Canada

Post Posted July 31st, 2019, 12:39 am

d4rkn1ght wrote:Just wondering how far back, SM 2.53 support will go to MacOS and Linux?

I'm guessing you mean what will be the minimum requirements.

Depending on what Gecko it is based on it could be 56.0 or 60.0 and the minimum requirements may be much the same as for Firefox.
https://www.mozilla.org/firefox/56.0/system-requirements/
https://www.mozilla.org/firefox/60.0/system-requirements/

And before anybody like 4td8s tries to correct me in saying it with be on 60.0 see https://wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey/StatusMeetings/2019-05-26

frg
 
Posts: 982
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted July 31st, 2019, 3:59 am

> I'm guessing you mean what will be the minimum requirements.

2.53 is based on Gecko 56 but has so far derived from it that it is halfway on the way to 60 and beyond.

For Windows and macOS requirements are the same as Fx 60 and up. I am not sure about future macOS versions. They become more proprietary and locked down with every version but at least 10.15 should still be ok. Personally I would like to end Linux x86 support. Most distros are now x64 only and it is 2019 not 1999. So far compiling the i386 version still works but if something breaks this might go. I suspect most Linux uses won't even notice because the x64 is installed anyway (now official and translated with 2.49.5 too).

frg
 
Posts: 982
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted July 31st, 2019, 4:09 am

> 2.49.5 is a Pointless Release IMO, would have been better just to focus on the 2.53 release instead

It was planned to be released a year ago. Two years ago I even thought it would be best as the base for a long term release but the Gecko source was heavily modified and enhanced afterwards. Degraded after 56 and only after 60 it became a complete mess. Not all was good but overall 2.53 / 56 is the better base and allows to backport sec and other fixes more easily.

But you don't change horses anytime you want and we also wanted a stable release to end the 2.49 line. 2.49.5 will be it. And I am also still using XP with some special hardware I don't inted to replace ($$$ involved) so I fully agree with what therube wrote.

FRG

therube

User avatar
 
Posts: 20551
Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
Location: Maryland USA

Post Posted July 31st, 2019, 6:33 am

(have u forgotten about vista, therube?)

My book runs, XP -> Win7 -> (the end).
If there was anything in between, yes could very well apply there too (I'm just not familiar enough).
Fire 750, bring back 250.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript

Peter Creasey

User avatar
 
Posts: 755
Joined: October 26th, 2007, 2:32 pm
Location: Texas

Post Posted July 31st, 2019, 7:04 am

I don't understand what you mean when you say there are too many sacrifices if you leave 2.49.
. . . . . . . . . . Pete

alexyu
 
Posts: 15
Joined: October 31st, 2007, 10:07 am

Post Posted July 31st, 2019, 7:18 am

[quote="frg"]> I am also still using XP with some special hardware I don't inted to replace ($$$ involved) [/quote]

That's also the reason I have a dual-boot XP/W7.

Is there some specific feature(s) of XP without which SM 2.53 wouldn't work, or is it just preventative (akin to UA-sniffing)? If the latter, could the missing feature(s) be installed into XP as a patch, or something like that?

frg
 
Posts: 982
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted August 6th, 2019, 5:07 am

> Is there some specific feature(s) of XP without which SM 2.53 wouldn't work,

The code support has been take out of Gecko and I ripped it out from SeaMonkey too. In theory we could put it back in but given the fact that the latest compilers no longer support it and that the supporting libraries like icu also discontinued support this would not be feasible. One of the few times I actually agree with mozilla. Just let it rest. Maybe when ReactOS is more mature and supports more apis this can be made to work there.

alexyu
 
Posts: 15
Joined: October 31st, 2007, 10:07 am

Post Posted August 6th, 2019, 7:38 am

Thanks, frg!

I understand the reason; my interest is that I am "still using XP with some special hardware I don't intend to replace" in a dual-boot, so would like to keep the exact same version of SM there and in the W7 partition. I guess I'll have to keep SM 2.49.5 on XP, and 2.53 on W7, then (after both these releases are official and known-stable).

Thanks for keeping this perspective still open for all SM users!

frg
 
Posts: 982
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted August 6th, 2019, 9:25 am

> I understand the reason; my interest is that I am "still using XP with some special hardware I don't intend to replace" in a dual-boot,

Been there doing it. My SM mail is in a vm but on a differen pc. The XP one is more or less my backup pc with Linux on.

> I guess I'll have to keep SM 2.49.5 on XP, and 2.53 on W7, then (after both these releases are official and known-stable).

If unofficial or official 2.49.5 won't get any better or mature. I use 2.53 for everything now. Faster, leaner and better web compatibility. An official beta will probably follow after 2.49.5 but this is more or less a rolling release right now until 2.57 matures. And 2.57 will only get better if I/we find some time to do it. Most development and testing right now is done on 2.53.

FRG

FRG

alexyu
 
Posts: 15
Joined: October 31st, 2007, 10:07 am

Post Posted August 6th, 2019, 10:22 am

frg wrote: If unofficial or official 2.49.5 won't get any better or mature. I use 2.53 for everything now. Faster, leaner and better web compatibility. An official beta will probably follow after 2.49.5 but this is more or less a rolling release right now until 2.57 matures. And 2.57 will only get better if I/we find some time to do it. Most development and testing right now is done on 2.53.


So, I should install the 2.49.5 from , and when the 'official' release comes out, there won't be any problem installing it 'over' that one?

I can't start using 2.53 because, until the 'change of emphasis' I'm now doing (it's not a migration, since I do have partitions with XP and W7 already -- but, currently, my 'everyday' one is the XP one, and I'm making revisions to change that, so W7 will be the everyday, but until then I won't be able to use 2.53, as it's only W7-compatible. I do hope 2.53 will be "faster, leaner and [with] better web compatibility".

As I understand it, 2.57 will not work with several legacy SM extensions, so I imagine I won't be using it in the foreseeable future, as many of these extensions are too firmly entrenched in my daily routines to justify losing them...

Return to SeaMonkey General


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests