2.53.1 beta 1 progress

[frg]

The master password only protects your saved passwords. Browsing history, bookmarks, locale email folders are by nature unprotected.
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/us ... red-logins

The encryption is weak. Not sure if this is being addressed now or in the future but I would not use it for sensitive stuff. I am using https://keepass.info/ to store them. Yes not integrated but I for sure won't use a third party utility which uploads stuff to the cloud and promises me the moon to protect it.

TPR75: The patch is about subresources loaded from the main site. They seem not to get the overridden UA without it. Would need some checking if the http traffic now inherits the new ua. I know it breaks nothing but probably slows down connections a bit. We as in remaining devs are not really core devs so I would like to see someone more knowedgeable to look into this

FRG

[Peter Creasey]

The master password only protects your saved passwords.

f, If the master password has never been used by the user (me), what should the user do when transitioning to 2.53.1.

Thanks.

[frg]

> f, If the master password has never been used by the user (me), what should the user do when transitioning to 2.53.1.

Do a full backup of your profile in case you want to go back for whatever reason or in the unlikely even that something goes wrong. Some add-ons might no longer work too. There were some changes in the backend code between 52 and 56 and we added up further with backports. Usually it should be a smooth ride. If you use Adblock Plus switch to uBlock origin before. I had problems with ABP 2.91 and 2.53.1.

Latest classic version is 1.6.4.12
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases

For NoScript 5.1.9:
https://noscript.net/getit

FRG

[Peter Creasey]

> f, If the master password has never been used by the user (me), what should the user do when transitioning to 2.53.1.

Usually it should be a smooth ride.

f, thanks for replying. I'm assuming you are saying that the master password issue should not be a problem.

Thanks.

[frg]

> f, thanks for replying. I'm assuming you are saying that the master password issue should not be a problem.

If you don't use one it is not a problem. The dbs will be silently upgraded and you should delte the old version afterwards. I did the NSS backports but didn't want to put explicit removal code in. There are always the people not reading the release notes and complaining later.

FRG

[Peter Creasey]

> f, I'm assuming you are saying that the master password issue should not be a problem.

If you don't use one it is not a problem. The dbs will be silently upgraded and you should delte the old version afterwards.

f, thanks for the welcome confirmation. I've never knowingly used a master password.

I googled but couldn't learn -- What is "dbs"? And what exactly needs to be deleted?

Thanks.

[RDaneel]

He is referring to the "superseded" - after the migration to the new order of things - DB files cert8.db and key3.db.

In this case, "dbs" was just plural for "DB" or "db" (both refer to a "database").

And if the replacements - cert9.db and key4.db - exist, then the older ones can be safely deleted... do NOT delete cert8.db and/or key3.db yourself until the newer ones are there!

[Peter Creasey]

R, thanks, but how am I (and others) going to remember that?!?

Hopefully, someone at the time will post some advisory for those of us less informed.

[Frank Lion]

R, thanks, but how am I (and others) going to remember that?!?

Well, it's pretty easy - 'You don't need to do anything'.

How hard is that to remember?



The older files are just left alone. This isn't a matter of opinion, don't forget we've been through all this with Firefox 57 ages back in the KB (Knowledge Base)

[Peter Creasey]

Frank, I didn't check but I guess I figured the files were large enough to be of consequence. You seem to imply different, which is is welcome news.

Thanks.

[frg]

Just a short update: The 2.53.1 beta 1 builds are done. We asked ewong to upload them and doing the release notes and website in parallel.

If you want to get the source https://gitlab.com/seamonkey-project is not yet public but this will be done together with or before the release. Source tarballs will be released as usual too.

If no serious errors are reported the regular release will follow soon.

Have fun
FRG

[frg]

The following projects are now public:
https://gitlab.com/seamonkey-project/se ... -2.53-l10n
https://gitlab.com/seamonkey-project/se ... -2.53-comm
https://gitlab.com/seamonkey-project/se ... 53-mozilla

The 2_53_beta_01 branch contains the source used for building ... yes 2.53.1 beta 1

The master branches are at the latest 56 level. Please do not use them for building. We still need them unmodified for future development and will not update them.

[4td8s]

thanks frg.
when will the official 2.53.1 beta 1 builds be posted on the Mozilla web site?

[frg]

> when will the official 2.53.1 beta 1 builds be posted on the Mozilla web site?

ewong is on to it. I can't tell but hope any day. The builds are done. Release notes might need some more tinkering but these can follow fast.

[ElTxolo]

• .... And in reference to this comment:
  

  Download Manager:
  The old downloads api was decommissioned so we needed to switch to the jsdownloads api Firefox used since version 2x (I think26).
  Overall the download manager looks the same but also has some limitations not present before: no search, some options gone, time
  not persisted or not availabe for some downloads (mostly mail attachement and stuff from the cache like txt files) and and and.

  I think, you should say that the whole download list will be lost, without remedy, when upgrading to SeaMonkey 2.53.1

I'm using SeaMonkey 2.53.2 (WG9's - 2.53.2 beta 1 pre - build ID: 20200112130005).
And I want to comment, that how the new 'Download Manager' works is quite erratic, with several significant issues.

If you start SeaMonkey Private Browsing, and check the download panel. You can't see the download list, because
it just looks blank/empty with no visible titles:





If you use right click (same window), to check the properties of each download you see this ridiculous image:












Cheers!!