SuSE's Online Update has the 1.04 update. It's still better to wait for SuSE to release the update and grab it that way, than using the built-in Firefox updater. If there's any differences in the way SuSE builds firefox, you'll get the 'correct' version through the YaST Online Update. Likewise, if you use the Firefox method, you do risk breaking something.
Just my 2 cents.
Rich
On 5/28/05, Jason Clinton me@jasonclinton.com wrote:
On Friday 27 May 2005 10:31, Gary Hildebrand wrote:
I've recently upgraded (if you can call it that) to SuSE 9.3 Pro, and it came with Firefox 1.0 as the default browser.
you DO want to upgrade that baby to the current release (1.04) ASAP. Tools->options->advanced->check for updates now will do it for you.
-- David L Nicol Twinkies and Wonderbread are mainstream Americana _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
On 5/29/05, rcedelman@comcast.net rcedelman@comcast.net wrote:
SuSE's Online Update has the 1.04 update. It's still better to wait for SuSE to release the update and grab it that way, than using the built-in Firefox updater. If there's any differences in the way SuSE builds firefox, you'll get the 'correct' version through the YaST Online Update. Likewise, if you use the Firefox method, you do risk breaking something.
Just my 2 cents.
Rich
Interesting. Yes, it is possible that the binary linux distributions from firefox do not use the same library version. A good self-updating feature would know about library versions. Does firefox? it doesn't seem to have library versions listed in its downloadable binary versions.
In case something were to break from accepting the firefox binary, you could still back it out and reinstal from YaST as I understand things. I don't know for sure though.
I think these questions are the reason why the firefox distributed by Fedora/RedHat have the update feature disabled.
On Sun, 29 May 2005, David Nicol wrote:
On 5/29/05, rcedelman@comcast.net rcedelman@comcast.net wrote:
SuSE's Online Update has the 1.04 update. It's still better to wait for SuSE to release the update and grab it that way, than using the built-in Firefox updater. If there's any differences in the way SuSE builds firefox, you'll get the 'correct' version through the YaST Online Update. Likewise, if you use the Firefox method, you do risk breaking something.
Just my 2 cents.
Rich
Interesting. Yes, it is possible that the binary linux distributions from firefox do not use the same library version. A good self-updating feature would know about library versions. Does firefox? it doesn't seem to have library versions listed in its downloadable binary versions.
In case something were to break from accepting the firefox binary, you could still back it out and reinstal from YaST as I understand things. I don't know for sure though. _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
//========================================================\ || D. Hageman dhageman@dracken.com || \========================================================//
On Sunday 29 May 2005 08:15 pm, D. Hageman wrote:
I think these questions are the reason why the firefox distributed by Fedora/RedHat have the update feature disabled.
Mandrake has it disabled too.
The good news is that distributors such as RedHat often find and fix the vulnerabilities before they distribute their packages, so that even if the aparant version number is not the same as the one patched by the developer, the package has in fact been patched.
There have been some grumblings in the Linux press that Mozilla should get it's act together when it comes to Linux releases. Their installers no longer represent acceptable practices when it comes to modern distributions.
Mozilla has a long tradition of resistance to user feedback though - it's all about new features!
-
D. Hageman -
David Nicol -
Jonathan Hutchins -
rcedelman＠comcast.net