Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 
  • Country


About qjcf

Profile Information

  • OS
    Windows 7 x64

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

qjcf's Achievements



  1. Are x86 and x64 profiles interchangeable for Basilisk 52 and 55? I.e. if I have .\profile folder of Basilisk 52 of x86 version can I copy it to Basilisk 52 x64\profile and expect everything working in the same way, plus better performance due to x64? Or, e.g. if I have .\profile folder generated by Basilisk55 x64, can I copy it to Basilisk55 x86\profile and expect everything working? To clarify, I don't plan to use Basilisk52 profile with Basilisk55 and vice versa.
  2. Thanks @RainyShadow! That worked for one extension that had manifest.json in its .xpi. Is there a way to do the same for those that have install.rdf in .xpi instead? Also, what would you say re: my questions above about maintaining .xpi compatibility?
  3. Hi the solution is in this post... VistaLover Hi. As I understood maintainers of upstream projects which Basilisk 52 and 55 is derived from are going to drop .XPI extension format compatibility eventually? Can @roytam1 discard those changes to his builds from upstream projects and maintain XPI compatibility in his builds of Basilisk 52 and 55? If so, is he planning to? Unfortunately, the solution proposed, i.e. Moon Tester Tool, moon-tester-tool-2.0.1.xpi didn't install either in Basilisk 52 and 55, gave compatibility error. Can something in install.rdf inside that xpi be edited to allow its installation?
  4. I have a couple of issues when installing extensions in Basilisk 52: "Remove HTML Elements" extension triggers an error message: "This add-on could not be installed because it appears to be corrupt." Same .xpi installs in Firefox 52.9.0 successfully. Another extension gives an error "(extension name) could not be installed because it is not compatible with Serpent 52.9.0" I had the same issue with Firefox 52.9.0, which was fixed by installing "Disable Add-on Compatibility Checks" extension which deals with some of extensions.checkCompatibility preferences. "Disable Add-on Compatibility Checks" extension had no visible effect on Basilisk 52.9.0. Any thoughts on how to fix "corrupt extension" and compatibility issues?
  5. @roytam1 Could you clarify please whether Serpent 52 or 55 has an advantage in terms of general compatibility with websites?
  6. Thank you for detailed answer. I assume in terms of features and HTML, JS, CSS etc technologies supported: Serpent 52 has nothing from FF53 or later? Serpent 55 has nothing from FF56 or later?
  7. Hi, as basilisk52****.zip builds are based on FF52 code, are basilisk55****.zip builds based on Firefox 55 code?
  • Create New...