the xt guy Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 I know that development of Firefox 2x officially stopped with 2.0.0.20 in Dec. of 2008. I also know that I can use Firefox 3x with Kernel XP (but I have two Firefox extensions that will not work with 3x and I don't want to give up those extensions.)Mozilla offers in its nightly builds of Firefox 2.0.0.21 and 2.0.0.22pre. Apparently some releases of Thunderbird and (?) Seamonkey are still using the 2x versions of Firefox, so they are still being updated for Critical/etc. bugfixes. There have been numerous critical/moderate/etc. fixes applied to the .21 and .22pre versions of FF 2 that are not in 2.0.0.20.I have downloaded and installed 2.0.0.22pre on both my Windows 98 and Win 2K computers, with no noticeable problems in the last couple of days. Has anyone else tried, or is currently using these versions of FF? (BTW, these development versions are labeled 'Bon Echo' when they are nightly builds, not FF.)
BenoitRen Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Apparently some releases of Thunderbird and (?) Seamonkey are still using the 2x versions of FirefoxNo, they are all using the same version of Gecko, their core.
Analada Posted March 31, 2009 Posted March 31, 2009 I know that development of Firefox 2x officially stopped with 2.0.0.20 in Dec. of 2008. I also know that I can use Firefox 3x with Kernel XP (but I have two Firefox extensions that will not work with 3x and I don't want to give up those extensions.)Mozilla offers in its nightly builds of Firefox 2.0.0.21 and 2.0.0.22pre. Apparently some releases of Thunderbird and (?) Seamonkey are still using the 2x versions of Firefox, so they are still being updated for Critical/etc. bugfixes. There have been numerous critical/moderate/etc. fixes applied to the .21 and .22pre versions of FF 2 that are not in 2.0.0.20.I have downloaded and installed 2.0.0.22pre on both my Windows 98 and Win 2K computers, with no noticeable problems in the last couple of days. Has anyone else tried, or is currently using these versions of FF? (BTW, these development versions are labeled 'Bon Echo' when they are nightly builds, not FF.)Thought i'd give it a try. Seems ok so far on my win98SE system. It's called "Bon Echo" for some reason...The 'What's New' link doesn't give any info though.
rainyd Posted March 31, 2009 Posted March 31, 2009 This is interesting - I've thought that Mozilla stopped releasing Firefox versions from 2.x family.Thank you for the info - I'll check 2.0.0.22 pre soon. Btw, BenoitRen is correct - SeaMonkey and Thunderbird using the same version of Gecko engine as Firefox 2.
Analada Posted March 31, 2009 Posted March 31, 2009 This is interesting - I've thought that Mozilla stopped releasing Firefox versions from 2.x family.Thank you for the info - I'll check 2.0.0.22 pre soon. Btw, BenoitRen is correct - SeaMonkey and Thunderbird using the same version of Gecko engine as Firefox 2.Got some further info on it....It's unsupported (of course) ...The Bon Echo nightlies continue to be built, and fixes for securityissues sometimes get checked into the Bon Echo branch. They're also *undocumented* Daily a new version:http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/fir...est-mozilla1.8/Use at what one's own risk, but then, what's new in that?
rainyd Posted March 31, 2009 Posted March 31, 2009 I've installed localized (polish) version of 2.0.0.22pre and no problems so far. In fact, IMHO, this version is faster than last official version!Btw, I like that new icon too.
Philco Posted March 31, 2009 Posted March 31, 2009 I've installed localized (polish) version of 2.0.0.22pre and no problems so far. In fact, IMHO, this version is faster than last official version!Btw, I like that new icon too. polish? This link only EN version....
ldb Posted March 31, 2009 Posted March 31, 2009 Are you all installing these builds on top of your old FF installs or uninstalling first? The built in updater is not picking these up as I never got a notification for release 2.0.0.21. Did you have to reinstall your plugins if uninstalling?Thanks
rainyd Posted March 31, 2009 Posted March 31, 2009 polish? This link only EN version....Here you have link to the localized versions for Windows/Linux/Mac: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/fir...ozilla1.8-l10n/
rainyd Posted March 31, 2009 Posted March 31, 2009 (edited) Are you all installing these builds on top of your old FF installs or uninstalling first? The built in updater is not picking these up as I never got a notification for release 2.0.0.21. Did you have to reinstall your plugins if uninstalling?ThanksI've uninstalled my previous version of FF but uninstaller keeps plugins - you don't need install them again (at least that was in my case). Edited March 31, 2009 by rainyd
Chozo4 Posted April 1, 2009 Posted April 1, 2009 (edited) (but I have two Firefox extensions that will not work with 3x and I don't want to give up those extensions.)Have you tried using the 'Nightly Tester Tools' for firefox 3 to see if those two plugins really, in fact, will not work? The 'Nightly Tester Tools' overrides the compatibility version block and allows you to force older plugins to activate. At worse if it doesn't work afterward you can just reinstall firefox 2 (or a backup in the event you did that beforehand with your ff2 install). Edited April 1, 2009 by Chozo4
rainyd Posted April 1, 2009 Posted April 1, 2009 Chozo4, I know this is a common mistake but there's a subtle difference between extensions and plugins.Btw, when I've tested one of the first versions of Firefox 3 (with KernelEx) the Nightly Tester Tools wasn't able to help me with incompatible extensions.
ldb Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 I tried Bon Echo 22pre, but went back to Firefox 20 due to crashes related to shockwave. Could not install shockwave 11 as it would immediately crash my otherwise stable machine. Reinstalled shockwave 10 and now all is well again.
chromatic47 Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 Thanks for the tip. Now using Bon Echo 2.0.0.22pre with no problems. This version is noticeably faster than last official release.
bristols Posted April 8, 2009 Posted April 8, 2009 Wow. I find that 2.0.0.22pre is more responsive than 2.0.0.20, too. Thanks to the xt guy for the tip.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now