MozillaZine

2.53.1 beta 1 progress

Discussion about Seamonkey builds
frg
 
Posts: 950
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted December 26th, 2019, 2:41 pm

Just wanted to let you know that we are making good progress on Beta 1.

The builders are configured and test builds in all languages done. The Windows and macOS ones work fine. The Linux ones too but they currently need a too new version of libstdc++.6 (3.4.22). We compiled with clang 8 but need to switch compilers to support older distributions. For x64 builds alternatives are tested but the x86 support for the i686 version is still a problem. So give us a few more days before unpacking the pitchforks and demanding a new release.

If you are already the unofficial 2.53.1 builds you will be underwhelmed anyway :)

Release notes and websites updates are in progress too:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1602735

FRG

RDaneel
 
Posts: 480
Joined: January 19th, 2004, 2:43 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Post Posted December 26th, 2019, 5:11 pm

Hi, since you (frg) acknowledge both the existence and use of the "unofficial builds" - which I assume means the ones from Bill - I wanted to mention something that may be relevant here:

I started using the "2.53.1" builds from Bill when they showed up, I had heard nothing regarding updates of key<N> and/or cert<N> DB files - it was just made clear somehow that this was a one-way trip for your profile (fine).

In light of the more extensive posts on the upcoming "official" 2.53.1 and specifically on these two DB files, I will say that in my profile directory, I have [now] both a cert8 and cert9, but only a key4 - both the cert9 and key4 files have a create date of November 20, so that is likely when I installed a version of 2.53.1 that triggered this migration.

I am fine with removing the now-outdated cert8 - the key3 was apparently taken care of for me? - but I have to say I saw NO weirdness due to my master password's existence.

Have I misunderstood something, or did [possibly] some special migration code resolve the problem for me?

Thanks for all the amazing work, and BTW, no pitchforks will be forthcoming from me. ;)

frg
 
Posts: 950
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 1:16 am

You can safely remove them 2.53.1 uses the current 3.47.1 NSS and the database format changed. The release notes will cover this.

A master password will also need to be removed before updating to 2.53.1. Afterwards you can set it again.

This is one of the reasons you should absolutly backup your profile before updating.

FRG

RDaneel
 
Posts: 480
Joined: January 19th, 2004, 2:43 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 11:29 am

Umm, cool - I think - and thanks for responding. :)

I think I failed in asking my real question: how might the unofficial "2.53.1" builds from Bill relate to the "real" 2.53.1 build that is upcoming?

Clearly at least the some of the migration has happened for me already(?) - given that I already have the newer cert9 and key4 files.

But there will still be some official "migration" if/when I ever use an official 2.53.1? And this is when the master password issue comes up?

Yup, looking forward to the release notes. 8-)

ElTxolo

User avatar
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: July 30th, 2007, 9:35 am
Location: Localhost

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 12:07 pm

frg wrote:.... A master password will also need to be removed before updating to 2.53.1. Afterwards you can set it again.

    First of all, thanks for all your hard work, and information about SeaMonkey 2.53.1 :wink:



    Image I think it's better to use the other option, change 'Master Password' and when changing it, leave it blank
    (this way none of the saved passwords will be deleted).

    If you directly reset/remove the master password you will lose all passwords previously saved in SeaMonkey 2.49.5 #-o

    Image




    And in reference to this comment:

    frg - comment9 wrote: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
    .


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










    Cheers!! Image

How to Ask Questions The Smart Way - How to Report Bugs Effectively ;)
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20200628 SeaMonkey/2.53.3
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20200810 SeaMonkey/2.53.5

-Px-

User avatar
 
Posts: 437
Joined: April 20th, 2011, 1:56 am

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 12:58 pm

Thanks for the information and the build :)

Peter Creasey

User avatar
 
Posts: 725
Joined: October 26th, 2007, 2:32 pm
Location: Texas

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 1:54 pm

ElTxolo wrote: I think it's better to use the other option, change 'Master Password' and when changing it, leave it blank
(this way none of the saved passwords will be deleted).


I am a very longtime user of Mozilla and SeaMonkey and this is the first reference I can ever recall to "Master Password".

Can someone help me understand what Master Password is, how it is used, how to reference it, etc., etc.? Is this something a low-level SeaMonkey user needs to be aware of when upgrading to SM 2.53.1?

All thoughts appreciated.

Thanks.
Last edited by Peter Creasey on December 27th, 2019, 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
. . . . . . . . . . Pete

RDaneel
 
Posts: 480
Joined: January 19th, 2004, 2:43 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 2:00 pm

Well, whenever I start SeaMonkey, I am prompted for my "Master Password"... just sayin'. ;)

Past this, and without exploring the implications inherent in the "master" part of the term, I can't offer much.
Last edited by RDaneel on December 27th, 2019, 6:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Peter Creasey

User avatar
 
Posts: 725
Joined: October 26th, 2007, 2:32 pm
Location: Texas

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 5:05 pm

[deleted]
. . . . . . . . . . Pete

frg
 
Posts: 950
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 5:28 pm

> I think I failed in asking my real question: how might the unofficial "2.53.1" builds from Bill relate to the "real" 2.53.1 build that is upcoming?

Not much. If you look at the patches anything with PPPPPPP- or WIP- in front will not be in the official build. Mostly some stable work in progress fixes like the new throbbers are missing and a few default options (showing grippies again as default).

http://www.wg9s.com/comm-253/patches/se ... e/patches/
http://www.wg9s.com/comm-253/patches/se ... e/patches/

Bug 1572290 is the only one which might affect operation. Asked for feedback and didn't get a peep so we won't put it in right now.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1572290


> But there will still be some official "migration" if/when I ever use an official 2.53.1? And this is when the master password issue comes up?
If you are on 2.53.1 it is fine now. You won't even notice it probably then.

> f you directly reset/remove the master password you will lose all passwords previously saved in SeaMonkey 2.49.5
Sorry. I am not using it so yes. The wording needs to be adjusted.

> I think, you should say that the whole download list will be lost, without remedy, when upgrading to SeaMonkey 2.53.1
The Mozilla migration code will preserve entries which are in progress. In 99% of all cases none and you are right.

> I am a very longtime user of Mozilla and SeaMonkey and this is the first reference I can ever recall to "Master Password".

It encrypts you passwords. It is unsafe. Don't rely on it for serious ones. Better use keepass or another utility which truely encrypt its db.

Build problems are solved. We will use gcc 6 for Linux i686 and x64 builds. Planned to use clang 8 but so we are able to keep compatibility with older distributions for a while longer. Anything release 2015 or higher should be ok. CentOS 7 Ubuntu 14.04 tested. Debian 8 openSuse 13.1 and Fedora 19 should work too.

FRG

Peter Creasey

User avatar
 
Posts: 725
Joined: October 26th, 2007, 2:32 pm
Location: Texas

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 6:27 pm

frg wrote:> I am a very longtime user of Mozilla and SeaMonkey and this is the first reference I can ever recall to "Master Password".

It encrypts you passwords. It is unsafe. Don't rely on it for serious ones. Better use keepass or another utility which truely encrypt its db.


f, Thanks for responding but I'm still not sure I understand.

I run SM without any extensions or extra apps (that I can recall). If I don't have some kind of encryption app/utility, then am I okay with the transition to 2.53.1?
. . . . . . . . . . Pete

RDaneel
 
Posts: 480
Joined: January 19th, 2004, 2:43 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 6:36 pm

OK, so I looked a bit more into the issue of "passwords" and SeaMonkey... note that the passwords referred to here include ALL passwords that you may have the browser remembering for you on Web sites (for instance).

Just open the Privacy & Security > Passwords prefs page, and tell it you want to "Manage Stored Passwords"... this might give an idea of just how many we are talking about here.

The idea of the Master Password is that it is protecting (read: "encrypting") ALL of the "sensitive" / private portions of your profile - which includes all of these [lesser non-Master] passwords.

Does this help?

Peter Creasey

User avatar
 
Posts: 725
Joined: October 26th, 2007, 2:32 pm
Location: Texas

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 7:18 pm

Sorry to be so clueless.

I've never installed or referenced "Master Password". When I look at <Manage Password> <Passwords>, I don't see any reference to "Master Password".

Do I have any exposure to Master Password? Will it be an issue for me upon transitioning to 2.53.1?

Thanks.
. . . . . . . . . . Pete

RDaneel
 
Posts: 480
Joined: January 19th, 2004, 2:43 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Post Posted December 27th, 2019, 7:38 pm

Right, but back out at the Privacy & Security tree level, just below the "Passwords" tab selector is (for me) another choice: "Master Passwords".

And while I don't know that I "ever" (this profile goes back almost 20 years, more if we count the original Netscape Communicator one that it was imported from) explicitly asked for a "Master" password, this is what I certainly have now... it may just be that that is the standard terminology used in the app to distinguish between the individual ones that go with things like Web sites and the big one that is used to lock/unlock everything else.

Perhaps you would like to think of the "Master Password" being used when you do a login to SeaMonkey as getting past the gatekeeper that then decrypts the rest of your passwords and makes them available for use during the session(?).

TPR75
 
Posts: 973
Joined: July 25th, 2011, 8:11 am
Location: Poland

Post Posted December 28th, 2019, 2:40 am

frg wrote:Bug 1572290 is the only one which might affect operation. Asked for feedback and didn't get a peep so we won't put it in right now.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1572290


Where/How to test it? All known to me (googled) sites with UA check always showed correct UA:
https://www.whatsmyip.org/more-info-about-you/
https://www.whatismybrowser.com/detect/ ... user-agent
https://www.whatsmyua.info/
https://www.whoishostingthis.com/tools/user-agent/
http://whatsmyuseragent.org/

Original UA:
Code: Select all
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.53.1

Override UA:
Code: Select all
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:71.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/71.0


Like I described it there:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=3027215
... bug was fixed and now user don't need to enable "Advertise Firefox compatibility" to correctly display bank's website because site specific override works correct (even with Fx 60 string).

What and where can we test it with GET function? First URL above claims they're using "REQUEST_METHOD: GET" but like I wrote it was working before patch in unofficial 2.53.

I don't know more websites that make problems with UA site specific override.

Return to SeaMonkey Builds


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests