52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Discussion of bugs in Mozilla Thunderbird
Post Reply
meteorjadd
Posts: 6
Joined: May 24th, 2017, 10:01 am

52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Post by meteorjadd »

My copy of Thunderbird just auto-updated to 52.1.1 this morning, and already I'm seeing two frustrating issues:

1. My preferred default font, although still installed on my computer, is now listed as (not installed) in Thunderbird. I even re-installed it on my computer to be sure, but it's still not showing up as an option for writing emails. Is there a fix?

2. My signature files are now missing all the associated images (company logo, social thumbnails, etc.) every time I go to compose a new email. What is the process for telling Thunderbird to simply use my signatures as it has been for years??

Really irritating and stupid that a new and supposedly improved update to this program would screw up things that were working perfectly in the last version.

Is there a way to revert to the previous version of Thunderbird? Should I just do that?
User avatar
smsmith
Moderator
Posts: 19979
Joined: December 7th, 2004, 8:51 pm
Location: Indiana

Re: 52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Post by smsmith »

See the release notes to see if it helps with your image in your signature problem.
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbi ... easenotes/

If you want to go back to a previous version, make sure Thunderbird is completely closed, make a backup of your profile folder, uninstall the current version, and then reinstall the old version, which you should be able to find here:
https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/

Make sure to turn off auto updates, too.

Profile backup:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Profile_backup
Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime.
I like poetry, long walks on the beach and poking dead things with a stick.
Please do not PM me for personal support. Keep posts here in the Forums instead and we all learn.
meteorjadd
Posts: 6
Joined: May 24th, 2017, 10:01 am

Re: 52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Post by meteorjadd »

Thank you for the reply.

Based on my issues, would you suggest I go back to a previous version? Or are these items that can be fixed?
User avatar
smsmith
Moderator
Posts: 19979
Joined: December 7th, 2004, 8:51 pm
Location: Indiana

Re: 52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Post by smsmith »

As I do not know how you are attaching the images in your signature file, I can't say for sure.

If the images are stored on a server, Thunderbird now does not include those images by default, but there should be a setting to go back to the old behavior. See the release notes I linked above to change the setting.

The font issue is a weird one. You might try uninstalling the font and reinstalling the font, then reboot the computer and see if Thunderbird sees it.

You may also want to see if the problems continue in safe mode.
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Safe_Mode
Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime.
I like poetry, long walks on the beach and poking dead things with a stick.
Please do not PM me for personal support. Keep posts here in the Forums instead and we all learn.
meteorjadd
Posts: 6
Joined: May 24th, 2017, 10:01 am

Re: 52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Post by meteorjadd »

My signatures were created according to the protocol that Mozilla describes in an article I found years ago - I created a new email, put in the text I wanted for my signature, added the desired image(s), then saved the email as an html file. Then in my account settings for each of several different accounts, for the signature, I chose "Attach the signature from a file instead" and chose the html file I created. This would result in my signature populating, images included, each time I would compose a new mail or reply to one... until today. Today it began stripping the images out of my signatures.

I checked the release notes and found this: "The way images are included in a compose window has changed. Images are now included as data URIs and not as references to parts of other messages or operating system files. This allows better interoperability with office packages such as MS Office or LibreOffice. Images linked from locations on the internet will no longer be downloaded and attached to the message automatically. This can be changed for each image individually via the Image Properties dialog or globally by setting the preference mail.compose.attach_http_images."

Where exactly do I go to try to set this global preference? Will that solve my issue?
User avatar
smsmith
Moderator
Posts: 19979
Joined: December 7th, 2004, 8:51 pm
Location: Indiana

Re: 52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Post by smsmith »

Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime.
I like poetry, long walks on the beach and poking dead things with a stick.
Please do not PM me for personal support. Keep posts here in the Forums instead and we all learn.
meteorjadd
Posts: 6
Joined: May 24th, 2017, 10:01 am

Re: 52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Post by meteorjadd »

Thanks. But I changed this preference and it didn't solve the issue. Images in signature file still not populating in new and reply emails.

I don't understand why a new and updated version of the program would undo or create problems with things that worked fine previously...
meteorjadd
Posts: 6
Joined: May 24th, 2017, 10:01 am

Re: 52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Post by meteorjadd »

Is there any other way to enable my signature to simply pull in my images in my signature the same way it has always done? I changed this preference "mail.compose.attach_http_images" but it isn't making a difference.
meteorjadd
Posts: 6
Joined: May 24th, 2017, 10:01 am

Re: 52.1.1 Bugs!! Possible to Revert?

Post by meteorjadd »

I found this post which helped:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1158319

So basically just had to re-create the signature file from scratch. Now it seems to work after following the adjustment of that preference.

Still no idea how to fix the font problem, but at least this one is addressed.
Post Reply