MozillaZine

Can I somehow get old addons signed? (AMO refuses two)

Talk about add-ons and extension development.
AlexVallat
 
Posts: 66
Joined: September 30th, 2006, 8:53 am

Post Posted September 3rd, 2017, 4:31 am

I haven't tried this again recently, but if you're still looking for a solution for signing for private use it's worth a go:

https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/commen ... on_signed/

Brummelchen
 
Posts: 2609
Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am

Post Posted September 3rd, 2017, 5:35 am

same ID, another version - works - did myself some days ago.

morat
 
Posts: 2450
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 6:29 pm

Post Posted October 5th, 2017, 5:13 pm

@AlexVallat
@Brummelchen

I'm curious if I can install a legacy extension in Fx Beta 57 without hacking the omni.ja file.

What happens when you try the manifest.json hack in Fx Beta 57?

Do you get a message in the about:addons page like so?

This add-on could not be installed because it has not been verified.

Custom Buttons could not be installed because it is not compatible with Firefox 57.0.

Firefox Portable Beta
http://portableapps.com/apps/internet/f ... table/test

@avada

The mozilla.cfg hack fails in Fx Beta 57 because the developers disabled eval.

Code: Select all
alert(typeof Components.utils.import("...", {}).eval); // undefined, not function

AlexVallat
 
Posts: 66
Joined: September 30th, 2006, 8:53 am

Post Posted October 6th, 2017, 12:09 am

The method I posted is just for signing, doesn't do anything to make 57 load legacy extensions. You could use the developer edition, though, that still honours the extensions.legacy.enabled pref.

Brummelchen
 
Posts: 2609
Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am

Post Posted October 6th, 2017, 1:24 am

the beta is not allowed to use legacy extension. and i am not sure if current state can use legacy extension properly - because v56 also has several issues with legacy extensions - i wont count on that and for real it makes no sense to use legacy extension on newer firefox, not only because the xul/xpcom api is vanishing bit by bit.

my current state for legacy is frozen, i only insert webxtensions (for my own purpose) and i am able to sign those.

avada
 
Posts: 1742
Joined: February 10th, 2008, 6:30 am
Location: Hungary

Post Posted October 6th, 2017, 3:15 am

morat wrote:The mozilla.cfg hack fails in Fx Beta 57 because the developers disabled eval.

Lucky I decided to stay on FF56 then. :) With the removed APIs I'm quite sure a lot (maybe most) of my addons would break anyway. The UI would definitely be inferior without CTR and TMP.

Maybe one of the FF forks/custom-builds will somehow retain XUL addons support with the necessary APIs. Or patches new (useful) stuff from later FF versions creating sort of a hybrid. Otherwise I won't be seeing anything of FF57+ for the foreseeable future.

Brummelchen
 
Posts: 2609
Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am

Post Posted October 6th, 2017, 3:52 am

no hybrid, dream on :p
go palemoon if you need hybrid. but you exchange one problem with another. destination unknown

morat
 
Posts: 2450
Joined: February 3rd, 2009, 6:29 pm

Post Posted October 6th, 2017, 4:47 am

@Brummelchen

Infocatcher got Custom Buttons and DOM Inspector working in Fx Nightly 57.

http://custombuttons.sourceforge.net/fo ... 423#p70423
http://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/user/Infocatcher/

I got these extensions working in Fx Beta 57 by hacking the omni.ja file.

http://custombuttons.sourceforge.net/fo ... 701#p71701

I'm curious if I can install these extensions in Fx Beta 57 without hacking the omni.ja file.

AFAIK, I can't override a resource file. (e.g. AddonSettings.jsm)

I can't redefine a non-configurable property. (e.g. AddonSettings.ALLOW_LEGACY_EXTENSIONS)

Chrome Registration override
http://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs ... n#override
http://mike.kaply.com/2013/05/06/dont-u ... ent-253796

Reference
http://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-beta/sou ... ttings.jsm
http://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-beta/sea ... .%5BA-Z%5D

@avada

Personally, I want to keep using the DOM Inspector extension as long as possible.

P.S.

I won't use browsers like Pale Moon.

Hacker News user wrote:If someone ever cared enough to target Pale Moon users they would have an absolute field day with all the known Firefox vulnerabilities they could use.

Hacker News
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13393332
Last edited by morat on October 11th, 2017, 11:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

Brummelchen
 
Posts: 2609
Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am

Post Posted October 6th, 2017, 5:38 am

sorry, i dont care about legacy extension in firefox 57++
as written the legacy api will vanish bit by bit.

avada
 
Posts: 1742
Joined: February 10th, 2008, 6:30 am
Location: Hungary

Post Posted October 6th, 2017, 7:42 am

morat wrote:@avada

Personally, I want to keep using the DOM Inspector extension as long as possible.

P.S.

I won't use browsers like Pale Moon.

Hacker News user wrote:
If someone ever cared enough to target Pale Moon users they would have an absolute field day with all the known Firefox vulnerabilities they could use.


Hacker News
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13393332


Your choice. To me obscure edge cases that no-one ever encountered in real life is not a deal breaker.
(Though at this point I'm more curious about waterfox.)

Return to Extension Development


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest