MozillaZine

The future of Seamonkey?

Discussion of general topics about Seamonkey
Peter Creasey

User avatar
 
Posts: 585
Joined: October 26th, 2007, 2:32 pm
Location: Texas

Post Posted November 27th, 2018, 8:10 am

I thought it was advised that basic users (like me) don't go past SM 2.49.4. Is this the case? Or is 2.53 okay?
. . . . . . . . . . Pete

therube

User avatar
 
Posts: 20046
Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
Location: Maryland USA

Post Posted November 27th, 2018, 11:57 am

If you're happy with 2.49, then stick with it.

If you want to explore 2.53, then back up what you have & give it a try.
2.53 should be stable so shouldn't be any issues in that respect.

(2.57 is an entirely different matter.)
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

rdtom
 
Posts: 18
Joined: February 26th, 2016, 3:48 pm

Post Posted November 27th, 2018, 3:37 pm

Try 2.53 with a new profile.
Don't go back and forth between 2.53 and 2.49.
Places.sqlite will become corrupt.

Frank Lion

User avatar
 
Posts: 20472
Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom

Post Posted November 27th, 2018, 3:52 pm

Peter Creasey wrote:I thought it was advised that basic users (like me) don't go past SM 2.49.4. Is this the case? Or is 2.53 okay?

This stuff is quite simple. Unless you are feeling adventurous then stick to official builds - https://www.seamonkey-project.org/
Metal Lion latest SeaMonkey & Thunderbird Themes - Sea Monkey and Silver Sea Monkey
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)

Peter Creasey

User avatar
 
Posts: 585
Joined: October 26th, 2007, 2:32 pm
Location: Texas

Post Posted November 28th, 2018, 8:28 am

Frank Lion wrote:
Peter Creasey wrote:I thought it was advised that basic users (like me) don't go past SM 2.49.4. Is this the case? Or is 2.53 okay?

This stuff is quite simple. Unless you are feeling adventurous then stick to official builds - https://www.seamonkey-project.org/


Frank, good point. I should have been clearer.

Here is what I should have asked...

When SM 2.53 becomes an official build, should I avoid advancing to it and stay with 2.49.4? Or should I (a very basic user happy with 2.49.4) do the update to the official build of 2.53?
. . . . . . . . . . Pete

Frank Lion

User avatar
 
Posts: 20472
Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom

Post Posted November 28th, 2018, 10:46 am

Peter Creasey wrote:When SM 2.53 becomes an official build, should I avoid advancing to it and stay with 2.49.4? Or should I (a very basic user happy with 2.49.4) do the update to the official build of 2.53?

I do something between the two. I wait until the official release and then give it a month before I update to it.

The reason is that it is impossible for a developer to betatest every combination of variables prior to release, so the first real test a build gets on real world conditions is immediately after release. So, I let any bugs appear, get fixed and then update to it.
Metal Lion latest SeaMonkey & Thunderbird Themes - Sea Monkey and Silver Sea Monkey
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)

tonymec

User avatar
 
Posts: 731
Joined: October 15th, 2004, 2:58 am
Location: Ixelles (Brussels Capital Region, Belgium)

Post Posted November 28th, 2018, 1:33 pm

Peter Creasey wrote:When SM 2.53 becomes an official build, should I avoid advancing to it and stay with 2.49.4? Or should I (a very basic user happy with 2.49.4) do the update to the official build of 2.53?


If and when 2.53 becomes official, I see no reason why one should not update to it, though I've been told that downgrading from it might damage your places.sqlite (i.e. bookmarks, etc.).

Builds later than 2.53 are a different problem, mainly because a lot of the backend code important to us has been teared down at that point by Firefox developers, and e.g. the Toolkit backend code needed by classical extensions was removed in Toolkit 57.0, corresponding to SeaMonkey 2.54.
Best regards,
Tony

Mouse4
 
Posts: 653
Joined: December 27th, 2017, 4:03 am
Location: Australia

Post Posted November 28th, 2018, 2:43 pm

prolly easier to get 2.53 rather than Having to change ya UA string eventually so a website(s) will be OK with the browser as websites will eventually say NO to old coded browser like 2.49

Peter Creasey

User avatar
 
Posts: 585
Joined: October 26th, 2007, 2:32 pm
Location: Texas

Post Posted November 29th, 2018, 8:04 am

Mouse4 wrote:prolly easier to get 2.53 rather than Having to change ya UA string eventually so a website(s) will be OK with the browser as websites will eventually say NO to old coded browser like 2.49


Yes, this has worried me as I don't know how to change the UA string for website compatibility.
. . . . . . . . . . Pete

tonymec

User avatar
 
Posts: 731
Joined: October 15th, 2004, 2:58 am
Location: Ixelles (Brussels Capital Region, Belgium)

Post Posted November 29th, 2018, 4:16 pm

Peter Creasey wrote:
Mouse4 wrote:prolly easier to get 2.53 rather than Having to change ya UA string eventually so a website(s) will be OK with the browser as websites will eventually say NO to old coded browser like 2.49


Yes, this has worried me as I don't know how to change the UA string for website compatibility.

With SeaMonkey 2.53 or lower you can use the User Agent Switcher extension. (In 2.54 or later the backends needed by classical extensions have been removed by the Firefox developers.) Or, on any version, you can set general.useragent.override to the desired UA string in about:config.

However, knowing which UA to use on which site may be a trial-and-error problem. In worst-case scenarios, you might have to find out which Firefox UA is accepted by the website and masquerade as that.
Best regards,
Tony

frg
 
Posts: 803
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted November 30th, 2018, 12:11 am

> (In 2.54 or later the backends needed by classical extensions have been removed by the Firefox developers.)

Not true. They did some damage to the source by removing apis but classic extensions can mostly made to work. Only after 60 Gecko turned into complete junk.

frg
 
Posts: 803
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted November 30th, 2018, 12:13 am

Btw. 2.53 would need l10n changes for an official relase so it will probably not arrive. As I said mostly my pet project on the way to 2.57 to test changes in a stable environment. We might do a 2.53 beta later.

tonymec

User avatar
 
Posts: 731
Joined: October 15th, 2004, 2:58 am
Location: Ixelles (Brussels Capital Region, Belgium)

Post Posted November 30th, 2018, 12:32 am

frg wrote:
tonymec wrote:(In 2.54 or later the backends needed by classical extensions have been removed by the Firefox developers.)

Not true. They did some damage to the source by removing apis but classic extensions can mostly made to work. Only after 60 Gecko turned into complete junk.

Ah? Thanks for correcting me. I thought Toolkit 57 (Fx57, Sm2.54) had already teared away the whole classical extensions stuff.
Best regards,
Tony

LuvKomputrs

User avatar
 
Posts: 636
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 8:15 am

Post Posted November 30th, 2018, 11:33 am

Am quite content with using 2.49.4 of SeaMonkey for now until the next stable release comes out. :)
Haven't had any issues with any other sites that I use other than Yahoo for my email.
Just used this method by setting the general.useragent.override.* to the desired UA string in about:config
Am thinking when 2.57 is released we'll be seeing this in the UA string Firefox/60. SeaMonkey/2.57 :-k
Am glad to see that SeaMonkey is still going. It's one of the best browsers out there. :D

Mouse4
 
Posts: 653
Joined: December 27th, 2017, 4:03 am
Location: Australia

Post Posted November 30th, 2018, 3:43 pm

bare in Mind Mozilla have Deleted all Old Extensions from there DataBase https://www.ghacks.net/2018/11/29/it-ap ... x-add-ons/

Return to SeaMonkey General


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest