Slashdot Mirror
Firefox Updated to 1.0.4
Exstatica writes "Firefox has been updated to 1.0.4 and they have fixed a few critical security holes, all javascript vulnerabilities. The Mozilla Foundation announced these vulnerabilities May 7th. 'There are currently no known active exploits of these vulnerabilities although a proof of concept has been reported." You don't have to upgrade, but it's recommended.'" We've reported on these vulnerabilities previously.
yes, I know the arguments behind it...but it would be relly nice if update didn't involve simply downloading installer (on mine 128kbps it's so so...and on slower?)
One that hath name thou can not otter
These issues were announced on Monday, and now a security release is available. This shows how professional the Mozilla Foundation has become and how serious they take security issues. Good work! Security problems will inevitably appear from time to time in all kinds of software, how these issues are handled is to me just as important as the software itself. Good job!
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
Posting from 1.0.4 right now. Funny thing, after I upgraded and restarted the browser, I still had the "updates available" little red arrow on the top right corner of the browser. After checking for upgrades (and finding none), it's disappeared. Bug? Leftover registry entry or config file from 1.0.3?
---- Take the Space Quiz!
This guy at work noticed I was using firefox (he's an IE user), and said, slyly, "You know, there's a couple of really bad security holes." Good think FF fixes their holes faster than MS.
Next time I try to help a friend out I'm not suggesting firefox. I'm suggesting Netscape! Wwwait.
Do many eyes make bugs shallow - FireFox seems to have had quite a few bugs ?
Firefox 1.0.4 was posted sometime between 11 and 11:30PM last night EST. I got it about 11:40 :D (Yes, geek alert)
That aside, with all of these newfound vulnerabilities popping up so often, could Firefox become (later down the line) the new Internet Explorer? May seem highly unlikely now.. but as the New York Lottery says...
"Hey, you never know."
It should be noted that the Mozilla Suite has also relased an update, 1.7.8.
This is one of the reasons that i use firefox, they fix the problems right a way. Not many browsers fixes bugs and other security issues this fast.
Bits of News Giving you the latest bits.
I don't have an upgrade arrow yet :P
With my hardware firewall, and ActiveX disabled I am not afraid to use IE. It's faster and smaller, and renders sites better than Firefox. I do, however, love the WebDeveloper extension for FF.
Mozilla.org will probably get hammered!! Here's a google cache of the Firefox Mirror List
And while you're at it don't forget those extensions:
FoxyTunes: http:www.iosart.com/foxytunes/firefox/
AdBlock: http://adblock.mozdev.org/
Or you can just go get more at: update.mozilla.org
Happy Browsing!
One word: ActiveX
Unfortunately there's no British English version of 1.0.4 yet.
It'll appear in the list of locales here when it's ready, but it looks like we limeys are stuck with 1.0.3 (or speaking American English) until then.
v4sw6HPU$hw5ln6pr5$ck4ma8u7LMO$w2m6l7DL$i2e3t4MWb9AHKMRTen5a29s0r1p-5.88/-8.36g5CST
While I don't care for the update process, I am exceedingly impressed that Mozilla makes fixes so quickly, and doesn't try to hide them (like another browser company has done in the past). Professionalism...very nice to see this from Mozilla. Kudos!
I'm not a troll, but I play one on Slashdot.
I copy the exe installer into a folder on a windows share, explorer crashes when I access the folder from certain clients. Same happened with 1.0.2 but not with 1.0.3
I wildly guess it's a race condition or something arising from reading the embedded icon resourse as that doesn't show? No I don't really have a clue what causes it.
All machines are fully patched W2K, thank buddha for memory sticks!
Why can't we have extensions that don't die just because they changed the release number?
Extension authors can't keep up.
Mozilla Update is slow to update itself.
and Users like me are left looking to google for help.
Silly me thought Mozilla Update there to centralized things.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
Damn. Can't upgrade to 1.0.4 since the English (British) version is not available yet :(
Can't be installing the American version ;)
"Why take life seriously, you're not coming out of it alive anyway."
Bullshit. Microsoft fixes a lot of problems quickly but the monthly release schedule that they have moved to means that you'll only get those patches every four weeks unless it's critical.
Just because the problem was only announced on security sites a week ago, does not mean it had not existed for years in the Mozilla codebase, plain for all to see. Microsoft on the other hand quietly releases fixes, then discloses what they fix. Practice has taught them one thing about vunerabilities, and that is that the sooner you release the fix the sooner the wolves will start chasing down the stragglers. In cases where a flaw is announced before a patch is out, the lag time for Microsoft isn't too shabby.
Until Firefox has an upgrade mechanism that doesn't feel like extracting teeth, the Microsoft approach, regrettably is going to win out.
-Steve
So why isn't my "update" icon lit?
As a system admin for our company, every new Firefox release means that I will have to go around to 150 workstations and manually reinstall the browser again to keep it up to date. I wish there was some sort of way to remotely update the browser on all machines or a way to patch vulnerabilities without a full reinstall.
What does it matter if they fix it and we don't have it? I don't care whether it's fixed for them, I want it fixed for me.
Does middle clicking on a link open a new tab for OS X yet? The last I heard you had to patch FF to enable this feature. Middle clicking works fine on Safari, it's one feature I really miss when using FF on OS X.
--- if y cn rd ths y cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgmmng!
My wife pointed out an article on Google News (that I had already seen earlier) showing that Firefox had some security vulnerabilities. She winced because I had just converter her to Firefox. I told her not to worry. I said, "Mark my words, there will be a security fix within a week." Well, today the fix was released and she was impressed. Not only has the Firefox development team improved the product, but they have made my wife happy! Life is good!
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
We appreciate it.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
You can check for updates from Tools>Options>Advanced>Software Updates. If you use some themes, e.g. Littlefox, there is a button next to the Firefox home page 'circle' that you can click to check for updates.
As for your observation regarding the red flag, I believe The Mozilla Foundation had disabled that feature on the website because of one of the critical flaws now fixed.
-clueless
(I need to create a login here, or did I do it previously?)
It is embarrassing to encourage people to use Firefox and then when a security problem is announced they just let it fester like an open sore. Microsoft would have had something like this fixed in a matter of months. Or better yet they wouldn't have told anyone about the problems at all so therefore nobody could have exploited them. So rock on, you cancerous communists!
Will some one please post a .torrent? Highly apreciated thanks.
Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
That sounds awful ominous and near impossible... perhaps instead the line should be 'all known javascript vulnerabilities'?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Not very easily accessible, but at least its there :)
I just upgraded to FF 1.03. FF is strarting to feel like IE with all these security updates.
Although I've been an enthusiastic mozilla/firefox user & supporter since the late 90s (yes I was browsing with a 'naked' gecko control, HA! :P) I was surprised to find I'd lost track of development to the extent that I didn't realise the trunk builds have a much more up-to-date gecko engine. The gecko in the 1.0.x series (inc. 1.0.4) are a year old! Those users who prefer livin' on the edge might prefer to get a faster, smaller, much less memory-leaky build from:
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nigh tly/latest-trunk/
Talk about karma whoring...
Seriously, what's the point in banging together a link to the 2 most popular extensions, etc?
...FireFox downloads double to 100 Million!
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
... as soon as the first proof of concept evolves into a worm, they will experience what it means to be deployed on millions of internet-connected pc's of clueless users.
Rule #1: doesn't matter how fast you output a security update, if it's not being installed.
Unfortunately it's not enough for an update to _exist_.
Back in the day when I first downloaded FireFox, one of my favorite parts of using it was how fast it would load up the first window when opened. It was almost instantaneous.
The more I use it, the longer this actions takes. It doesn't matter if I clear cache and cookies, un-install plugins, or just plain uninstall and reinstall the browser.
Is it simply the newer versions that cause it to load so slowly? My roommate has the same problem. Is anyone else experiencing this and is there an answer?
Responses greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Not a troll, im serious.
:)
Search google, this is an error which never gets fixed.
(PS the config.whatever.thingy = 16000 thing doesn't work for me)
If you have a different solution, thanks in advance
Actually crashes even when viewed from memory sticks (which I remember working last time) or accessed over SMB by DOS. Must be something to do with 7zip executables.
Can anybody reproduce?
Now if only when IE fixes are announced they could be accompanied by suc a straight forward post on /. instead of the usual alarm/hype/fud.
Bullshit. Microsoft fixes a lot of problems quickly but the monthly release schedule that they have moved to means that you'll only get those patches every four weeks unless it's critical.
Oh yeah, well Firefox fixes problems BEFORE THEY EVEN HAPPEN. Of course, due to their policy of not violating the flow of space time they are forced to wait a few days to release the fixes.
See how convincing that arguement sounds?
Finkployd
Disclaimer: I like firefox. I use firefox.
Why is this news? Does this mean that every time firefox decides to update, it should be front page news? Can't you (slashdot) create a seperate field where the latest versions of popular products are announced? Like:
product | version | last update
firefox | 1.0.4 | today
i think all are middle click on the mac. I dont like the mac mouse, its designed to be simple..i know, but its too simple and its no good for browsing!
http://files.photojerk.com/alan/ffox104setup.exe
It deleted my hard drive! I opened my computar case and it was gone! Very mysterious!
While I have had crashes, when I browse to the samba shared folder with the FireFox or Thunderbird installers, Explorer will show the default program icon (the empty window) and lock the folder window up for a while before showing the actuall installer icon (the box and CD) and becoming interactive again. Tis anoying. It also takes an unusual amount of time to get the first window of the installer after I double click the icon.
#include <signature.h>
Upgrade to 1.0.4 still doesn't fix JavaScript issues. My biggest frustration with FF is how some links that reference JS popups do not work. Anyone know why? I wouldn't think it would have to do with the JS code, but maybe so? For example, clicking on any of these thumbnails is supposed to open a larger image but it just opens a blank window.
i on=Catalog.PerfectSeason
http://www.anders-bookstore.com/index.cfm?Fuseact
Someone correct me if necessary, but I believe it has something to do with AV scanning. Simply opening an explorer window with the setup exe produces a noticeable delay, and it doesn't matter if the file is on a remote drive or removeable media ... probably choking on the 7zip as explorer tries to extract resources from the file.
The same Dawn Kawamoto who wrote about the vulernabilities on CNET on the 9th has now written about the new release.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
Absolutely. This point can not be stressed enough. M$FT is not innovative, M$FT is not responsive to its users, M$FT is not cooperative with anyone, and M$FT is not not your (or anyone else's) friend. It is lazy where there is nothing to prod it into action. It is aggressive beyond the limits of the law where it believes some else is cutting in on it's 'action'. It is arrogant, belligerent, and conceited. I for one don't trust it. Neither should you.
I have norton internet security installed on my computer and when I installed the new update for firefox I can no longer access the internet with firefox (using IE right now, something which I would like to stop as soon as possible). When I disable norton's firewall firefox works. Anyone have this problem as well and maybe know how to fix it?
I can't run the executable "firefox.exe" at work because it "has been disabled by the administrator." Solution? Rename to firefox2.exe.
The only pain comes when firefox is updated... it leaves the firefox2.exe executable from the previous installation, and adds the new firefox.exe to the install folder. It then becomes a dumb little task to update all the icons and shortcuts scattered about my system.
Wish there was some way to specify, during install, the resulting executable name. Of course, I have to be one of the maybe twenty people in the world who needs this, so maybe it's not worth the miniscule bloat.
IWARS.
People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
Browsed nested at +4 and not 1 negative comment about firefox. So let me spell it out for you boys: Firefox is shit. It's a program designed on the principle that more shit features is better than security and reliability. Who cares about feature when 1.0 means:
* It's the only remote security hole on my linux laptop.
* By default, middle-clicking on a void space sends whatever is stuck in the clipboard over to google. That's fucking smart. You miss middle-clicking that link, you miss that middle-click paste, you end up wherever google throws you. You were on a secure SSL webpage, tough luck. By default, shitty features override security.
* Memory usage go up and up and up. Does anybody realize that means that firefox 1.0 stability was worst than Windows 95. I could make it unusable in less then two hours of intensive internet on dial-up!
* Keyboard shortcuts works only 95% of the time on linux. See when changing tabs, sometimes the focus of the keyboard remains on a hidden tab. But hey, who uses the keyboard. Is it fixed?
Firefox is one thing: The other shitty browser. I don't see why people recommend it against IE (i don't have that choice, I use linux). Security is not there. That was firefox only potential selling point: Secured browser, there will be updates later, to correct glitches, add some capability, or whatever.
Instead it's some shit-ridden garbage: Look you can have tabs. And there is some inferior intelligence autocomplete that mainly gives you the last URL you typed (how fucking useful). And if you middle-click somewhere, google will throw you god-knows-where (given that quite a few people are unable to use the right-click, that's quite useful). And you can install extensions (hopefully not the stealth one, crafted by some virus/worm writer). But most of all you will have to keep an eye on security warnings and updates.
That's quite a sell for Mom and Pop.
leaves several vulnerabilities at LEAST as serious as the Firefox ones open UNTIL NEXT MONTH!
Who said something about "time to patch" favoring MS?
Firefox: vulnerabilities announced Monday.
Patched by Thursday morning.
Microsoft: vulnerabilities announced months ago.
Patched - "Next month - maybe".
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
None of the locale-specific stuff should have changed. Works for me.
thinking back when I was using Windows XP SP2 (the service pack being the only patch because I really didn't like the idea of autoupdating) I recall having maware problems maybe once or twice, during that half-a-year time, I had only one virus. (I have one virus on my Gentoo box now too, but I cant get it to work...).
Anyway, I haven't quite understood how bad hte security holes are, but I'll emerge the update "just in case".
The fact that popular browsers are being searched inside out for security holes is inevitable -- I'm just glad the existence of the breach was announced and fixed so quickly.
As far as I could tell Mozilla had a fix before the exploits where made public. I downloaded the nightly trunk version of FF a couple of days before the exploits went public and found that the issue was allready resolved =)
No, what they should do is offer a Free iPod! (tm) for those patching their systems.
In a law school class, the professor was praising Firefox (for it's ability to do tabbed browsing, as well as it's right to left language support)..a student mentioned a news report that earlier the week new vulnerabilities had been found...everyone cynically laughs--Firefox, just like IE...
kinda sad how inured people have become to bugs--they expect them.
I'm getting really tired of this cycle:
n sions
1) Update Firefox (reinstall)
2) Run updated version of Firefox happily!
3) Close Firefox
4) Reopen Firefox - wait! It's hung apparently in the middle of loading extensions!
5) Delete all extensions from %APPDATA%\Mozilla\Profiles\gibberish.default\exte
6) Reopen Firefox - yay! it works!
7) Reinstall all extensions from [currently swamped and apparently insecure] update.mozilla.org
8) Wait a few months for next update; rinse; repeat.
I'm sure it has to do with a broken extension, but I'll be buggered if I can figure out which. Oh well! It beats the competition!
We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
Firefox made claims that their browser was secure and had security built in from the start. It is right and proper that such a claim, used to convince the public to choose it as a browser be held up to scrutiny.
s p
Now the Firefox partisans will claim that this incident reveals that the response time of the Firefox developers supports their claim.
I would say that the jury is still out. Security problems existed and the Firefox marketing was bullish to suggest you were safe. Now we may know that target is unachievable, but it was a core part of the marketing. Firefox directly attacked its competitors on safety, so it needs to prove itself safer
See this article for how people are reacting:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1775806,00.a
The lack of background updates is a real issue. Before Windows Updater the biggest problem MS faced was unpatched machines. Those unpatched Firefox machines are a real issue.
So the jury is out on the Firefox teams security claims.
Of course Firefox may have otehr good features, but they need to be held accountable for their claims.
My ubuntu automatically updated itself yesterday.
Here's a nickel kid. Go buy yourself a real OS.
the only time 've ever had an issue is when the user agent extension buggered up.
Check the mozilla forums.
Actually, had you really followed the story that bug had been discovered less than a week before being disclosed by a third party.
The bug was discovered and filled in Bugzilla by the discoverer
It was kept hidden while the Foundation was working on a fix (quite common for grave security issues)
a few days later (5? i think?) a third party (not the discoverer, not the foundation) fully disclosed the bug to the public
And the Foundation now releases the fix.
The bug has NOT "sit" for months in BZ, and the discoverer, being a member of the Full Disclosure list, wouldn't have allowed it anyway.
"The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
It should be noted that 1.0.4 also features a JS bugfix which hastes said JS execution by around 20%.
...) is pure Javascript.
May sound like it suck... if you don't know that the whole XUL thing (basically everything in firefox but the Gecko engine itself: interface, extensions, userscripts,
"The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
I don't mind the freqent updates.
I don't even mind having to download the entire application again from scratch.
What really gets me is the checkbox at the end of the install process "Use Firefox as my default homepage". What if I actually *like* the homepage I've already set up?!
Perhaps I've fallen into the "Next > Next > Next > Finish" trap, but I'd like to see this checkbox turned off by default, especially if I need to reinstall the software every few weeks.
And therin lies the double-edged sword. Just about everyone on /. complains about Microsoft's auto-update feature saying that it's intrusive, and they don't want some company to have control of what is installed on their PC's.
/.ers tend to be libertarian-minded and tech-savvy, the combination makes Windows Update annoying and offensive to this audience--indeed it is annoying to all but casual and beginning users. Plus, Win Update is not nearly transparent enough--it gives little to no indication of what data it is sending to or receiving from your PC, nor does it indicate when it checks for updates. The default settings are for it to do everything without intervention, confirmation or notification--OK for home users but a nightmare for sysadmins (which is why corporate standard install images often turn off auto-install of updates).
I have no problem with the concept up auto update--I like having the latest stuff on my workstation. The problem is the IMPLEMENTATION of auto-update.
Mozilla's doesn't bring enough attention to it (however, contrary to some other posters arguments I have found it is NOT hard at all--my retired-farmer parents who are decidedly not experts picked it up immediately once they knew what the icon was).
Microsoft's auto-update is TOO intrusive. Given most
Here is what I would suggest for auto-update:
1. Make more of it driven by applications rather than the OS--more "distributed"--and contain the OS auto-update solely to kernel, system binaries/libraries, basic shared components.
2. Allow the process to be automatic, but make it more TRANSPARENT. Check for updates at predictable intervals (on login, maybe at midnight,etc) and have an unobtrusive but clearly labelled status box indicating what is happening (like when your buddy logs into your IM but in plain language says "retrieving list of updates" etc).
3. Allow for more granularity in settings for expert users or operation tailored to corporate deployments, and put in the control panel an easy-to-find "turn it all off" button. Windows has this "system restore" crap which comes in really useful when you want to re-install those worms and trojans accidentally, and the option to turn it off is buried in the most illogical place on Me, and it isn't much better under XP.
4. How about being more responsive with bugfixes Microsoft? Mozilla is non-profit and manages to fix critical issues within a week, and the process is quite transparent. Microsoft makes you wait at least a month 'till the next regular update cycle, and the process of making and testing fixes is pretty much unknown outside of Microsoft.
Just a few suggestions--there are more, but my point is that MS pretty much as long a way to go as Mozilla in this dept. A lot of MS's challenges have to do with the basic architecture of Windows being flawed (it is too monolithic, so bugs can have wide-ranging effects as can the patches).
As I am not a regular Mac OSX user, I am curious on how that platform handles updates. Could MS and F/OSS people learn something here?
If Slashdot wasn't so eager to sniff Firefox's hind leg this post would, and should, have mentioned Mozilla 1.7.8 as being released too.
Anyone else notice Gmail acting up ever since upgrading? Everytime I send/reply, etc., it drops me back to a compose screen after hitting [Send] (although the message does go out). If I go to the Inbox from that screen, it asks if I want to discard.
Paul Revere was a tattle-tale.
I usually find that Bush-bashing gets a +1 Insightful.
Disclaimer: I voted for neither Bush nor Gore nor Kerry. I voted Libertarian.
No, but I can see how it has absolutely no relevance to the point I made.
I thought my statement was clear enough even for someone as obtuse as you appear to be, but let me break it down further.
The parent poster made the comment that Microsoft had not released a patch so quickly since the blaster worm. My response was that this has more to do with Microsoft's arbitrary second-Tuesday-of-the-month release schedule than with their competence at releasing patches in a timely manner. Even if they have a fix for a hole the same day it is announced, we probably won't get it until the next monthly release. See, not that difficult to understand. Note that this is not meant to be a defense of those times when Microsoft has suppressed announcements of known vulnerabilities or taken a long time to actually fix a problem.
Do you really mean to tell me that you read the line "all javascript vulnerabilities" and thought that they had fixed even the vulnerabilities they didn't know about? Do you really think ANYONE would come to that conclusion?
It's not possible to fix unknown problems (except maybe by accident), so adding "known" to that expression is pointless.
Sean
I agree, but that's a different argument than the one that I understood the parent poster to be making. If you'll remember, Microsoft used to release patches constantly before they switched to their current monthly schedule. I guess they decided that it was better for their reputation.
Obtuse, well you sir are a festisio. See I can make up words too :P
My point is that it from a user's perspective, it is completely irrelevent when microsoft claims to have fixed the problem, all that matters is when they release the fix. They can claim they fixed it quickly and had to wait for the arbitrary release date, or they can claim they fixed it a year ago. None of that matters one bit. For whatever reason, their history of timly releases simply sucks. They can excuse it however they want.
Finkployd
Yep. 1.0.4 still says 1.0.2 if you install
over an old 1.0.2.
Great QA.
Amen!!!
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Had exactly the same - a colleague copied FF onto his desktop (a redirected folder, actually located on a server share), and then whenever he clicked or right-clicked on it, the PC locked completely. Weird.
"If he were a plant, people would roll him up and smoke him."
Any news on whether 1.1 is also supposed to fix the non-standard text input windows that makes Firefox just about the only mainstream app that doesn't work properly in XP tablet edition?
(Most of the time, XP can't detect the text input box because it doesn't comply with the standard, meaning you need to use a keyboard rather than the pen, and on a tablet, you don't always have a keyboard...)
I've been running 1.8 with the newer Gecko engine to be deployed in FF 1.1, and see no sign of a new release for it. Is 1.8b not vulnerable, is it being ignored, or is its patch just really slow in being released?
Yeah, it's real hard to click next.
/. article. I know the basics of a web browser, and look through the menu for the options, other than that I didn't care to investigate further.
I think a lot of people are like me. They installed Firefox and maybe an extension or two. I didn't read anything, and didn't notice the arrow until the last
The Mozilla Foundation has moved quickly to patch three critical issues in its browsers that were discovered just last weekend. FireFox 1.0.4 and Mozilla 1.7.8 were released today to patch vulnerabilities that could have allowed malicious users to execute arbitrary code. The development has caught some attention in the blogosphere thanks to a post about the security issue from a blogger for Microsoft, itself no stranger to security problems and patches. In a recent post, Dean Hachamovitch, Internet Explorer's IE Product Unit Manager, wrote that browser security is an industry problem, in a bid to adjust the script usually that casts the issue as Microsoft vs. Mozilla, or us versus them.
3 504661
"The only us versus them distinction I want to make around security is to put responsible software developers, security researchers, and customers together as 'us' and malicious (whether it's intentionally or not) software developers, security researchers, and their customers together as 'them.'"
Credit: http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/
----- Open Source = More Secure (mmmmkay)
Sigh.
Even the lamest most amateur shareware/freeware I've used can get the taskbar/windows icon showing properly.
But it's "not a priority".
Pathetic.
I have attempted numerious times to DL it only to get a partial dl when firefox says its done....
So I then tried using wget only to have it not give me the linux version but instead insist on giving me the windows version.... and it persist in dling the wndows version even after exiting the shell...
during all of this I have noticed more and more language versions come online...
Maybe they need to slow up and get it right...
I really don't need nor can I use windows version on Linux... And yes, I did in fact tell wget to get the linux version...
Ive been a faithful Firefox user for a while, however, with all these pathches, i am starting to become disheartened. Arent all the things we complain about IE patchable? The whole point is if it was done well, it would not NEED all these patches. Perhaps I am off base, but after a few more patches, I might have to start looking around. Derek
Installer not only loads whole installer, but still leave garbage in Add/Remove Program. I hope that some ff dev read this: you're fucking idiots.
What modern Obelix would say today? Of course, "Those crazy Americans!".
Looks like MOOX has released his versions of Firefox 1.0.4. At the moment, there English and quite a few localized builds popping up on his website. YOu can find out more here: http://moox.ws/