Leaderboard

... Is it this one ? https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/UXP/commit/76c9a8a09fa5eb6d0a7567adefeb57a4dbdf2964

One of the features of r3dfox I like the most is the fact it allows for the installation of UNSIGNED Firefox extensions, despite itself being derived from the "Release Branch" of upstream Mozilla Firefox; in "stable" (and "beta") Firefox, the pref "xpinstall.signatures.required" defaults to "true" but even when toggled, it doesn't produce the desired effect: UNSIGNED extensions remain incompatible and won't install (Mozilla's decision to protect the "masses" - this term is now used loosely, considering the declining Firefox userbase - from shooting themselves in the foot ) ... The way r3dfox achieves this is via two buildconfig flags (issued at build time): --with-unsigned-addon-scopes=app,system --allow-addon-sideload ; additionally, in the resulting binaries, "xpinstall.signatures.required" defaults to "false" ... As in the case of ESR Firefox/r3dfox builds, the add-ons manager (AOM, about:addons) will let you know of installed unsigned extensions, if any, by displaying a coloured "warning" bar underneath each unsigned extension (taken from 128.12.0esr): Personally, I regard these "warning" bars as (slight) irritants, polluting my AOM's view, so, starting with r3dfox-115.13.0esr onwards, I have been systematically hiding them via custom userContent.css code: /* Remove "Recommendations" from AOM, https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/184nqq0/how_to_remove_recommendations_page_in_firefox/ */ @-moz-document url-prefix(about:addons) { .category[name="discover"] { display: none !important; } .addon-card-message[type="warning"] { display: none !important; } } Above code was working flawlessly up-to-and-including r3dfox-139.0.4-2 (Greek, "el", locale shown below): Enter r3dfox-140.0.4 , to which I updated yesterday; imagine my surprise+disappointment when the AOM was loaded: Make no mistake; I did go through 140's Release Notes as hosted on GitHub, prior to installing, and, as another MSFN member noted, they stated: IMHO though, any r3dfox-specific change likely to interfere with user customisation, however small, IS worth mentioning in Release Notes... Luckily for me, I found my way to 140's source code in GitHub and immediately noticed what looked to be the culprit commit: https://github.com/Eclipse-Community/r3dfox/commit/c69c8d07e9e421ef8b3f3ea6b730f8b3a4443fa8 With respect to the browser author , changing the "aboutAddons.ftl" file, part of the embedded en-US locale, isn't a smart thing to do, unless: 1) you restrict users exclusively to the embedded en-US locale, 2) you have the resources to produce yourself (i.e. translate from English-US) the rest of the locales; e.g., once one installs the Mozilla-provided 140.0.4_en-GB locale, the author changes are being reverted to what the Mozilla wording is: FWIW, the change in the "aboutaddons.js" file is what BROKE my custom CSS code above; sanity returned when the code was amended accordingly : /* Remove "Recommendations" from AOM, https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/184nqq0/how_to_remove_recommendations_page_in_firefox/ */ @-moz-document url-prefix(about:addons) { .category[name="discover"] { display: none !important; } /* https://github.com/Eclipse-Community/r3dfox/commit/c69c8d07e9e421ef8b3f3ea6b730f8b3a4443fa8#diff-602c847d11b48c077836e06c7ee9e9e8450ad6a90d39211ba75530743c44fbb7 */ .addon-card-message[type="info"] { display: none !important; } }

sure, thanks, sample eml is retrieved. and with my fix in https://msfn.org/board/topic/185966-my-browser-builds-part-5/page/148/#findComment-1281466 applied, opening your sample doesn't crash. so killed two birds with one stone. upstream doesn't fully test their changes, and unfortunately so do I. as a result, your inputs worth a lot. and of course please wait for next build which should fix these problems.

I tried sending a message here but got an error "roytam1 cannot receive messages", so I sent it to your email instead.

The original, verified account of the developer, in whom we had no doubts, was wiped out from the forum. People who tracked down those fakes @D.Draker, @Darth Agnon, @Dixel are no longer present on the forum, it's very unfortunate. Some members are still here, but not interested in Windows 7.

Sounds a bit racist, why would you not? I'm French, but I have en-GB locale, in this new modern World one's gotta be more open. It's not like I suggested something you wouldn't want or don't understand. Besides, it will give you the proper date format, apart from proper spelling.

You can also safely delete the odd locales. All except en-GB, French, Dutch, Danish and German. Norwegian? Not sure if we have Norwegians on the forum... If for some reason, mostly by mistake, your PC is set to US locale, just change it to GB.

Oh, and Zero problems with brightness, I mean Zero, yay! Absolutely marvellous font rendering on Vista and even 7 (without SP), not sure about your severely outdated 1607, I don't use it. I only tried version 136, what is the point of using outdated, when we have the new one? By the time Supermium "fixes" the bugs, what year it will be? 3056?

I never had any problems when updating virus definitions via VPN.

In the EU, there are clear laws regarding data protection and security. And this is also monitored. In dictatorships and other non-democratically run countries, there is no data protection and security. Software, especially antimalware programmes, from such countries cannot provide security for the user. They only protect their own interests.

No. Maybe that's what you want. But that has nothing to do with reality. One can only suggest something that exists. No. Kaspersky is spyware. Nothing is good there. This can be read in their own documents. That's it. Dr Web is simply trash. Never read any good about it. Not true. Very risky.

The McAfee Anti-Malware Engine 5800 is from August of 2015. Are you really sure that the most recent dat files for updating definitions are still compatible with this old engine? Did you try updating using the most recent dat file? BTW, the McAfee Anti-Malware Engine 5900 from February of 2017 seems to be the last compatible with Windows XP as far as I could read. All this with special consideration that the latest engine is 6710 which is of course no longer compatible with Windows XP.