Yonke imikhiqizo Community Forum

That is the first line in the Hippocratic Oath. All doctors have to swear to it. All software developers should too.

I made the mistake of letting Firefox on KUbuntu update. It obliterated all my tabs and all my history. There's nothing left. I had a lot of tabs open with intent to use them to update some astronomy instructional activities. I don't know if I'll be able to find them again.

I don't really have a question except to ask: What fresh hell is this? Is it really that hard to just leave things the hell alone? I'm afraid to ever update Firefox again. If everything else wasn't based on Chromium, I'd be out of here.

Also, it looks like something out of Windows 7.

It's all gone. It's a wonder you didn't delete all my bookmarks while you were at it.

Debian 12 Linux on Dell laptop. Current "updated version" Firefox ESR 128.4.0esr (64bit) I received an update notice for Firefox ESR this morning. After running the Update, I lost the status bar. How can I get it back?

I have a new chromebook (Lenova Duet 3) I can install and use Firefox. I have had Dashlane (password keeper) working fine with Firefox for years. The Dashlane extensions work with Chrome, but I can't seem to get them to work with Frefox. The Chrome search engines choices are limited; ones that I never use with Firefox. Is there something in the Chromebook environment that limits firefox capabilities? (Am I looking for something that just is not possible?) Is there a work around? (Any Linux tricks?) I also have asked the same question of Dashlane, but have not heard back yet. My imperfect solution is use Chrome when it is a known website, and the password is recorded with Dashlane, and to use Firefox for new searches, where the choice of search engines is better.

Has anyone developed a search engine where there are no "sponsored" results. I understand that it would probably not be free.

For a long time I've used Firefox on Linux with multiple instances each with their own profile folder. Today when I try to run these instances with separate profile folders I get the following error:

> Firefox is already running, but is not responding. To use Firefox, you must first close the existing Firefox process, restart your device, or use a different profile.

Profiles are created like this:

firefox --new-instance --createprofile "PROFILENAME ~/.firefox-PROFILENAME"

They are run like this:

firefox --new-instance --profile "~/.firefox-PROFILENAME"

It seems something has broken with the instance isolation as this is now throwing an error. Additionally I run "createprofile" it doesn't seem to actually create the folder.

I have a System 76 laptop running Ubuntu 14.04 LTS. The LTS (Long Term Support) ended years ago with Firefox 66. All of that works fine still. My problem is: 1. The world is telling me to upgrade my browser. 2. Mozilla tells me "Note: If you use your Linux distribution's packaged version of Firefox, you will need to wait for an updated package to be released to its package repository. This article only applies if you installed Firefox manually (without using your distribution's package manager)." 3. There will never be an updated package because LTS has ended. 4. IS THERE A WAY TO MANUALLY INSTALL A NEWER BROWSER LIKE FIREFOX 123?

Hello Ladies and Gentlemen!

Please read my post completely before answering! Thank you!

I'm using

• Firefox DevEd (manually installed) as my primary driver and
• the standard Firefox (installed from the package manager) for leisure/hobby related browsing

each with its own Mozilla account and profile, on Manjaro KDE. Sadly, either Firefox sees all the profiles. They have usually different versions. If I mistakenly start one of the Foxes in the other Fox's profile, the newer version of Firefox (usually Firefox DevEd) autostarts migrating that profile. Which it renders the profile "corrupted" for its intended Firefox.

I'd like to have Firefox DevEd unable to see profiles (or anything else) intended for the standard Firefox and vice versa. Or at least unable to botch profiles. I do not want to disable migration or use no. Given that Firefox configuration location is hard-coded, I'm not having high hopes for my wish.

I'm wondering if there is a way to keep two Firefox installations completely isolated, other than running them in containers.

Thank you for your time!

I'm trying to migrate to the newest version of Firefox on an old installation of Fedora. I've downloaded and unpacked the installation files but can't identify the installer. All I probably need is the name, as I know how to make it executable and run it once I know what file it is.

Hello, please is there any chance to add Firefox download for Linux and aarch64 platform to the download list? The attached image shows that you currently offer a binary package for the aarch64 platform only for Windows. Thank you.

I am using a Samsung Chromebook Pro V2, running Debian, and installed Firefox using the Flatpak command "flatpak install flathub org.mozilla.firefox". The Firefox icon appears in the Linux apps group and I have opened Firefox using that icon.

How do I get links in my Linux apps to open Firefox and take me to the URL?

Thank you and Happy New Year, Abe

I've just moved to Fedora 39. First tried installing the official fedora Thunderbird through discover and Thunderbird found my profile, created menu links to calendar, chat, address book, tasks, but they go no where. Uninstalled, tried the flatpak. Initially my .thunderbird file was not found and I had to manually relocate it into the new flatpak Thunderbird folder. Thunderbird then found my profile but calendar, chat, address book, tasks are STILL missing even though their menu links exist.

I've searched for solutions and in every one of them I have some important missing part i.e. lightning listed in addons(to remove and then re-add, its not listed there so I can't), find the "extensions.installedDistroAddon.{e2fda1a4-762b-4020-b5ad-a41df1933103}" in my advanced settings - remove (no remove setting, only true or false, a sub menu where I can set its type, and a trash).

Any advice?

Hi there!

I'm attempting to migrate my Firefox (106.0.3) profile from the Linux Mint V20.3 on one SSD to a new installation of Linux Mint V21 on a separate SSD. I'm using the information supplied on this page:

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/back-and-restore-information-firefox-profiles

Step 4, under Backing up your profile says: Right-click on your profile folder (e.g. xxxxxxxx.default), and select Copy.

This folder, qspfoqtl.default, contains 1 file, named times.json, the contents of which are:

{ "created": 1618792039414, "firstUse": null }

Clearly, not my Firefox profile.

There is, however, a folder named nnob5aww.default-release that contains a bunch of directories and files (505.4MB) with names like bookmarkbackups, browser-extension-data... storage, weave.

Is this documentation incorrect as of this release of Firefox? And, should I be using the nnob5aww.default-release folder as the profile? I'm a little confused. (Most often, I'm a lot confused.) Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance,

- Ralph

Hello.

Lately i found strange bug in FF 119.0 (ppa - deb, not snap version), ubuntu 23.10 I can't download any file to mounted ntfs volume. Firefox instead creates thousands of empty files. Once it was 10001 or 10003 other time it was 20000 of files. I tried private-window, no change. I have removed all add-ons - no change.

For example i was trying to download https://fedorapeople.org/groups/virt/virtio-win/direct-downloads/stable-virtio/virtio-win.iso and i ended with (only few last lines):

-rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9989.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-998.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9990.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9991.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9992.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9993.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9994.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9995.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9996.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9997.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9998.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9999.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-999.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-99.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest-9.exe -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2023-10-27 22:23 spice-guest-tools-latest.exe

I can download the same source files to the same location with other browsers without problems. Thank You for Your help!

Hello, trying to verify the integrity of firefox-118.0.1.tar.bz2 I realized the GPG key has changed.

The following blog post details the change and shows the new key: https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2023/05/11/updated-gpg-key-for-signing-firefox-releases/

But when I download the key using the link provided (which points to keys.openpgp.org) the key I get is different from the key posted on the Mozilla blog page.

What is even more strange, is that the key from keys.openpgp.org declares in the comment that 14F2 6682 D091 6CDD 81E3 7B6D 61B7 B526 D98F 0353 is the fingerprint of the key (the same that is posted on the Mozilla blog) but it can't be because the key different.

So my questions: 1) Why Mozilla is posting a link to a key that is different? 2) Why keys.openpgp.org shows the correct fingerprint with a different key?

And, in the end, which key should I trust and why.

Thanks.

I recently installed the Flatpak version of Thunderbird Version 115.0.1.

I can no longer start Thunderbird from the command line. It is supposed to run by using the command flatpak run org.mozilla.Thunderbird. When I issue this command nothing happens.

I can however start Thunderbird by using rofi. When I use rofi to start Flatpak Thunderbird, it runs perfectly.

I do not have any problems with any of the other Flatpak applications that I have on my system. Prior to updating Thunderbird, I did not have any problems with the Flatpak version of Thunderbird that I had installed. It is just this new version of Flatpak Thunderbird that is giving me problems.

I am running Debian Linux version 12.