Does anyone know what FF 52.9.1 is exactly?
Under https://download-origin.cdn.mozilla.net ... r52-win32/ there is a whole slew of 52.9.1 versions with:
https://download-origin.cdn.mozilla.net ... taller.exe
...being the latest dated 6th September 2018 (52.9.0 was 25th June 2018)
Ben.
FF 52.9.1 in tinderbox builds
- Benjamin Markson
- Posts: 397
- Joined: November 19th, 2011, 3:57 am
- Location: en-GB
FF 52.9.1 in tinderbox builds
XUL is dead. Long live the Google Chrome Clones.
-
- Posts: 4480
- Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am
Re: FF 52.9.1 in tinderbox builds
tinderbox is dead as v52, dont care...
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Tinderbox
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Tinderbox
- Benjamin Markson
- Posts: 397
- Joined: November 19th, 2011, 3:57 am
- Location: en-GB
Re: FF 52.9.1 in tinderbox builds
As always, Brummelchen, thank you for your invaluable input. Along with your indication that you don't care which is always useful to know.
Meanwhile, does anyone know how 52.9.1 differs from 52.9.0?
Ben.
Meanwhile, does anyone know how 52.9.1 differs from 52.9.0?
Ben.
XUL is dead. Long live the Google Chrome Clones.
- therube
- Posts: 21714
- Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
- Location: Maryland USA
Re: FF 52.9.1 in tinderbox builds
The 52.9.1.*.txt file in a particular directory points to something like:
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla ... 94d0bc70ae
&
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla ... 1c9d5723d0
Are they the changes from 1 build to another?
Or an you do a changeset compare between 52.9.0esr & this last 52.9.1?
I'd suspect these were automated builds that simply picked up on some ancillary changes if any occurred that may have happened to the 52 branch?
Would I use one over 52.9.0esr - no.
At least unless I knew there was some specific fix for an issue I was actually running into.
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla ... 94d0bc70ae
&
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla ... 1c9d5723d0
Are they the changes from 1 build to another?
Or an you do a changeset compare between 52.9.0esr & this last 52.9.1?
I'd suspect these were automated builds that simply picked up on some ancillary changes if any occurred that may have happened to the 52 branch?
Would I use one over 52.9.0esr - no.
At least unless I knew there was some specific fix for an issue I was actually running into.
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
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
- Benjamin Markson
- Posts: 397
- Joined: November 19th, 2011, 3:57 am
- Location: en-GB
Re: FF 52.9.1 in tinderbox builds
I agree, I'm not going to use it either without some indication that it carries something 'extra' that is worthwhile. In any event I suspect that any difference is going to be marginal.
I'm sure it must be possible to do some kind of direct comparison but I don't know how to do that.
I've looked for release notes but haven't found any. The only reference to 52.9.1. I can find is with respect to Thunderbird but all its changes seem to relate to email type things.
Ben.
I'm sure it must be possible to do some kind of direct comparison but I don't know how to do that.
I've looked for release notes but haven't found any. The only reference to 52.9.1. I can find is with respect to Thunderbird but all its changes seem to relate to email type things.
Ben.
XUL is dead. Long live the Google Chrome Clones.