X
Tocca qui per la versione per piattaforma mobile del sito.

Forum di supporto

Questa discussione è archiviata. Inserire una nuova richiesta se occorre aiuto.

how do i see what beta ver i'm at - deeper than Help | About Firefox - registry .. ?

Inserita

i am enrolled in the beta channel but because the notification popups are so quick i someties do not see that a new beta ver is available. i consult filehippo regularly to see what updates are out there but i want to have a way i can find what beta i'm at - Help|About Firefox doesn't get it - how can i find that? looked in registry but haven't found what i want

any idees?

ciao saw

i am enrolled in the beta channel but because the notification popups are so quick i someties do not see that a new beta ver is available. i consult filehippo regularly to see what updates are out there but i want to have a way i can find what beta i'm at - Help|About Firefox doesn't get it - how can i find that? looked in registry but haven't found what i want any idees? ciao saw

Soluzione scelta

The beta version, just like other development versions, is supposed to act like a valid release to avoid issues with user agent (browser) sniffing and having a user agent that has a specific beta version appended would brake this.

  • Bug 728831 - Don't expose the Firefox patch level (13.X.Y) in the UA string, only show the major version (13.X)

(please do not comment in bug reports: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html)

Leggere questa risposta nel contesto 0

Dettagli aggiuntivi sul sistema

Plugin installati

  • The QuickTime Plugin allows you to view a wide variety of multimedia content in Web pages. For more information, visit the QuickTime Web site.
  • npsitesafety
  • Shockwave Flash 11.5 r502
  • Google Talk Plugin Video Accelerator version:0.1.44.23
  • Version 3.10.2.10212
  • Google Update
  • RealJukebox Netscape Plugin
  • RealNetworks(tm) RealPlayer Chrome Background Extension Plug-In
  • RealPlayer(tm) HTML5VideoShim Plug-In
  • RealPlayer(tm) LiveConnect-Enabled Plug-In
  • RealPlayer Download Plugin
  • 4.1.10329.0
  • NPRuntime Script Plug-in Library for Java(TM) Deploy
  • GEPlugin
  • Adobe Shockwave for Director Netscape plug-in, version 11.6.1.629
  • Adobe PDF Plug-In For Firefox and Netscape 10.0.1
  • Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) plug-in for Mozilla browsers
  • DRM Netscape Network Object
  • Npdsplay dll
  • DRM Store Netscape Plugin

Applicazione

  • User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:18.0) Gecko/18.0 Firefox/18.0

Ulteriori informazioni

TheOldFox 86 soluzioni 620 risposte

Help > About Firefox only shows the major version number. That was changed many versions ago to not show the "b#".

In Firefox, do one of the following to display which Beta version you have installed:

  • click Help > Troubleshooting Information > click about:buildconfig > click the link to the right of "Built from"
  • in a new tab, in the URL/Location bar type about:buildconfig followed by the Enter key, click the link to the right of "Built from"

Latest release Beta full installer downloads are available here - https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all-beta.html (hover mouse over the language/OS download button to see the version)

You can sign-up for Mozilla e-mail notifications (includes new releases) for Release/Beta/Aurora versions at the bottom left of this page - http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/beta/


Other - You should check your Plugins and update them as needed.

  1. Check your Plugins - https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/plugincheck/
  2. Adobe Shockwave for Director Netscape plug-in, version 11.6.1.629 (not the same as Adobe Flash Player/Shockwave Flash)
  3. Adobe PDF Plug-In For Firefox and Netscape 10.0.1
Help > About Firefox only shows the major version number. That was changed many versions ago to not show the "b#". In Firefox, do one of the following to display which Beta version you have installed: *click ''Help > Troubleshooting Information > click '''''about:buildconfig''''' > click the link to the right of "Built from" *in a new tab, in the URL/Location bar type '''''about:buildconfig''''' followed by the Enter key, click the link to the right of "Built from" Latest release Beta full installer downloads are available here - https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all-beta.html (hover mouse over the language/OS download button to see the version) You can sign-up for Mozilla e-mail notifications (includes new releases) for Release/Beta/Aurora versions at the bottom left of this page - http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/beta/ ---------------------------- Other - You should check your Plugins and update them as needed. #Check your Plugins - https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/plugincheck/ #'''''Adobe Shockwave for Director Netscape plug-in, version 11.6.1.629''''' (not the same as Adobe Flash Player/Shockwave Flash) #*http://kb.mozillazine.org/Shockwave #*Download, save, close all browsers, run installer that you just downloaded - http://get.adobe.com/shockwave/ #'''''Adobe PDF Plug-In For Firefox and Netscape 10.0.1''''' #*https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/use-adobe-reader-plugin-view-or-download-pdf-files

Modificato da TheOldFox il

rats 1 soluzioni 16 risposte

Risposta utile

@TheOldFox: Firefox displays only the major version number, but not the beta version.

21 instead of 21b3.

Why was that change made? It makes it unnecessarily complicated for the user to learn what version is installed.

I don't understand what Mozilla was thinking. Please elaborate. Changes for the worse?

@TheOldFox: Firefox displays only the major version number, but not the beta version. 21 instead of 21b3. Why was that change made? It makes it unnecessarily complicated for the user to learn what version is installed. I don't understand what Mozilla was thinking. Please elaborate. Changes for the worse?
the-edmeister
  • Top 25 Contributor
  • Moderator
5411 soluzioni 40299 risposte

If finding out the "Built from" information is too complicated, maybe you aren't 'qualified' to do Beta testing to begin with?

Nothing better to do than question changes which were made over two years ago?

If finding out the "Built from" information is too complicated, maybe you aren't 'qualified' to do Beta testing to begin with? Nothing better to do than question changes which were made over two years ago?
rats 1 soluzioni 16 risposte

Risposta utile

the-edmeister: thanks for replying. despite typing something, you miss to name a single argument, why hiding the beta info is smart.

Again, my question is: why was that change made? You think it's good to "hide" that info from the user? You think they'll be confused by versioning like 21b3? I don't get it. But for being a moderator instead of arguing on a factual level you question my ability to do beta testing and also question my good intent in investing time to question a questionable policy.

Talking about managing an open source project and creating a nice atmosphere, not Mr. Edmeister.

S
the-edmeister: thanks for replying. despite typing something, you miss to name a single argument, why hiding the beta info is smart. Again, my question is: why was that change made? You think it's good to "hide" that info from the user? You think they'll be confused by versioning like 21b3? I don't get it. But for being a moderator instead of arguing on a factual level you question my ability to do beta testing and also question my good intent in investing time to question a questionable policy. Talking about managing an open source project and creating a nice atmosphere, not Mr. Edmeister. :S
the-edmeister
  • Top 25 Contributor
  • Moderator
5411 soluzioni 40299 risposte

1. Sorry for my harsh response, but you don't "call out" other posters, especially about a posting they made over 5 months ago. You reap what you sow.

2. Evidently you didn't fully read and follow what TheOldFox posted about
click Help > Troubleshooting Information > click about:buildconfig > click the link to the right of "Built from"
It ain't all that hard to find the Beta version number.


As far a "managing" an open source project. I am a Firefox user just like you. I am a volunteer who has been helping out here longer than any other volunteer, other than cor-el. The few Mozilla employees who help out in this forum haven't even been around long enough to be a "party" to this particular change with version numbering.

1. Sorry for my harsh response, but you don't "call out" other posters, especially about a posting they made over 5 months ago. You reap what you sow. 2. Evidently you didn't fully read and follow what TheOldFox posted about <br />click Help > Troubleshooting Information > click about:buildconfig > click the link to the right of "Built from" <br /> It ain't all that hard to find the Beta version number. As far a "managing" an open source project. I am a Firefox '''user''' just like you. I am a volunteer who has been helping out here longer than any other volunteer, other than ''cor-el''. The few Mozilla employees who help out in this forum haven't even been around long enough to be a "party" to this particular change with version numbering.
rats 1 soluzioni 16 risposte

I'm not trying to discredit your work. But I did actually read the workaround and it is valid. That is true. But still that's not an answer to my question nor an explanation for that design choice. It's a workaround for a software not displaying the exact version.

So why not jump in this thread if it exists? Why create a new thread with the same question? Also to apply your logic, why didn't anybody tell the user to use the stable version if he's incapable of figuring out the obvious?

I'm not trying to discredit your work. But I did actually read the workaround and it is valid. That is true. But still that's not an answer to my question nor an explanation for that design choice. It's a workaround for a software not displaying the exact version. So why not jump in this thread if it exists? Why create a new thread with the same question? Also to apply your logic, why didn't anybody tell the user to use the stable version if he's incapable of figuring out the obvious?
cor-el
  • Top 10 Contributor
  • Moderator
17571 soluzioni 158915 risposte

Soluzione scelta

The beta version, just like other development versions, is supposed to act like a valid release to avoid issues with user agent (browser) sniffing and having a user agent that has a specific beta version appended would brake this.

  • Bug 728831 - Don't expose the Firefox patch level (13.X.Y) in the UA string, only show the major version (13.X)

(please do not comment in bug reports: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html)

The beta version, just like other development versions, is supposed to act like a valid release to avoid issues with user agent (browser) sniffing and having a user agent that has a specific beta version appended would brake this. *Bug 728831 - Don't expose the Firefox patch level (13.X.Y) in the UA string, only show the major version (13.X) <i>(please do not comment in bug reports: [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html])</i>
John99 971 soluzioni 13138 risposte

34876532

Sorry if you are unhappy.

This forum is currently optimised to handle one question from one poster per thread. It is suggested in the guidelines that posters start their own questions.

As for the Beta version there is a bit of a balancing act. The more users that test the Beta version the more likely that we pick up a problem, but we are trying to provide a simple trouble free Release, and realise Beta testing is not suitable for the majority of users.

The beta version is best suited to the more capable users like yourself because they may

  • take precautions like backing up profiles and bookmarks, and be capable of reverting to the Release if there is a problem. (Firefox tried to introduce a UI option for that, but that itself was backed out as too problematic)
  • be more likely to find and report problems

You may incidentally note there is a major problem, completly breaking Firefox 20, affecting many thousands of corporate users. Pity some of them had not routinely tested the Beta or earlier versions. (Or used the unaffected corporate version of Firefox). Nearly every recent Release version of Firefox has had to have another minor release made to fix problems.

34876532 Sorry if you are unhappy. This forum is currently optimised to handle one question from one poster per thread. It is suggested in the [[Forum rules and guidelines |guidelines]] that posters start their own questions. As for the Beta version there is a bit of a balancing act. The more users that test the Beta version the more likely that we pick up a problem, but we are trying to provide a simple trouble free Release, and realise Beta testing is not suitable for the majority of users. The beta version is best suited to the more capable users like yourself because they may *take precautions like backing up profiles and bookmarks, and be capable of reverting to the Release if there is a problem. (Firefox tried to introduce a UI option for that, but that itself was backed out as too problematic) *be more likely to find and report problems You may incidentally note there is a major problem, completly breaking Firefox 20, affecting many thousands of corporate users. Pity some of them had not routinely tested the Beta or earlier versions. (Or used the unaffected corporate version of Firefox). Nearly every recent Release version of Firefox has had to have another minor release made to fix problems.
rats 1 soluzioni 16 risposte

Thanks guys. Reading https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=728831 actually shows some useful information as to why this change was made.

Thanks for chiming in.

Can this be set to "solved"?

Thanks guys. Reading https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=728831 actually shows some useful information as to why this change was made. Thanks for chiming in. Can this be set to "solved"?

Modificato da rats il

John99 971 soluzioni 13138 risposte

OK I will mark it solved.

Normally we leave that to the Original Poster but as it is now well explained and solved, I will mark cor-el'sanswer as the solution.

OK I will mark it solved. Normally we leave that to the Original Poster but as it is now well explained and solved, I will mark ''cor-el's''answer as the solution.