Mozilla Firefox 1.02 Released
akadruid writes "Mozilla has begun rolling the Firefox 1.02 security update. It has appeared with the little fanfare and without the staggered rollout of 1.01 - have Mozilla sorted their distribution worries?"
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Now if only they'd get going on Sunbird. I need a good calendar app.
How it is an update when it acts as a total re-install?
I love how firefox/thunderbird keep filling up my Add/Remove Programs list in XP everytime there is an "update".
Not trying to flame, but shouldn't there be a better way?
With Bugzilla and the community, their backend that addresses security bugs is pretty tight. But why is the desktop end limited by the archaic announcement/download/install scenario? I'd prefer to accept subscription to the security bugfix channel, RSS polled every few hours or hundred pages. If it authenticated the patches, I'd get a nonmodal notification message, with "More Info" and "Always Autoapply" buttons in the window. That would make their rapid responses worthwhile. If they could upgrade in the background without slowing down my surfing, with on-demand rollbacks, I'd probably just autoupdate, looking for upgrade notices in my email.
--
make install -not war
You should be uninstalling the old version before you install the new one.
which bit of autoupdate don't they get ?
i shouldnt be doing anything other than clicking an update icon,everything should be taken care of
does Microsoft say "to install SP2 you must uninstall SP1" ? so why do i have to in mozilla ?
never mind me having to disappear into advanced settings to check updates manually when in IE its on the tools menu, easy to get at if i want to check
at the moment the word to describe their update process is rubbish
Considering how long it was till 1.01 came out and how long 1.0 was out there with plently of know security holes I wouldn't exactly point to Firefox as the pinnacle for OSS security response.
And as much as a fanboy as I am for OSS I don't possibly see how you can say that OSS "can react faster to new threats than any closed source development model". OSS does indeed usually act faster than commercial software expecially when you bring something like IE into the picture. But whether something is open or closed has absolutely nothing to do with how fast the owner of the code responds to a security threat. That's on them and has zero to due with whether its open or closed. A commercial provider could have reacted just as quickly.
Again I'm all for pro-OSS statements, but let's keep it to the facts.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
Have they fixed the memory leaks in 1.0 yet?
Having an idle browser leaking 300 MB of memory per day is like a self-inflicted DOS attack.
And if you're not running firefox with root/administrator privileges, how is that thing supposed to work?
Defenestrate Windows...
"Open source software can react far faster to new threats than any closed source development model."
Well the story IS about an update.
Those other comments you show that were modded offtopic are *bug reports*. This isn't where you go to file bug reports.
This is /. If you say anything which may in anyway be taken as a negitive commentary (true or not) about FF, Linux, or any F/OSS then you are a troll.
;-)
Sorry, thats just the way it is. If you don't like it, go find another community where open free discussion of all ideas is encouraged. We don't do that here!
Two types of posts will be accepted here. 1) Flowing praise for any/all F/OSS projects or 2) Spewing hatred toward MS$. Any other ideas or discussions are strictly prohibited!
"reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert