Mypal 68 in Windows XP - Custom Buttons and Extensions

[AstroSkipper]

FYI, the Nuchi-Sporif UC.JS script loader, the best script loading method, presented in the first post of this thread for years, has stopped working with @feodor2's new release Mypal 68.14.8b. All other methods based on the Nuchi script loader won't work anymore, either.  The Xiaoxiaoflood script loading method which is now recommended by @feodor2 is unfortunately the worst of all methods tested by me some months ago.  I won't use it in any case and have changed to the Alice0775 script loading method in fourth place in my ranking list. Several scripts don't work anymore and have to be fixed due to all changes. Same applies to CSS stylesheets. I have already adapted a whole series of both to the "new" Alice0775 script loading method and to the new browser. @feodor2 seems to have removed XUL and XBL completely from Mypal 68.14.8b. Although the legacy Custom Buttons extension still can be installed, it is now somewhat broken. The internal code editor completely stopped working. And as expected, Xiaoxiaoflood's extension loader can't help either.  That would have been a miracle if it had been different.  I wish everyone lots of fun fixing scripts and stylesheets. 

Edited Thursday at 05:01 PM by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[AstroSkipper]

@feodor2 Due to the changes in Mypal 68.14.8b, the Firefox Add-ons page shows the yellow message box even with compatible extensions "You need an updated version of Firefox for this extension". Here, for example, is the extension TWP - Translate Web Pages whose latest version 10.1.1.1 has a minimum version of 64: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/traduzir-paginas-web/ TBH, this message is now displayed on all extension pages, and it doesn't matter whether the extension is compatible or not. So, what's going on here? Somehow, your browser seems to have become versionless.

Edited Friday at 03:23 PM by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[AstroSkipper]

46 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

@feodor2 Due to the changes in Mypal 68.14.8b, the Firefox Add-ons page shows the yellow message box even with compatible extensions "You need an updated version of Firefox for this extension". Here, for example, is the extension TWP - Translate Web Pages whose latest version 10.1.1.1 has a minimum version of 64: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/traduzir-paginas-web/ TBH, this message is now displayed on all extension pages, and it doesn't matter whether the extension is compatible or not. So, what's going on here? Somehow, your browser seems to have become versionless.

Ok. This issue seems to belong to all old browsers. To get rid off this yellow message box, you need an updated user agent. Firefox 128 is now the minimum:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0

 

[VistaLover]

5 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

This issue seems to belong to all old browsers. To get rid off this yellow message box, you need an updated user agent. Firefox 128 is now the minimum:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0

... Respectfully, I beg to disagree ... While 128 is the currently supported Firefox ESR version, the previous ESR (Firefox 115) is also supported, for the sake of Win7/8/8.1 users (support will end, supposedly, next September); the minimum Fx version supported by AMO, is, thus, 115 ...

FirefoxESR-115 has the same User Agent String as the release channel Fx-115 had, which was (e.g., on Win7 SP1 32-bit):

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

For Firefox versions 110-119, the "rv:" value was frozen to 109, due to a Mozilla bug ...

Below is r3dfoxESR-115.13.0 (a FirefoxESR-115 fork that is able to run under Vista SP2) with a SSUAO of:

general.useragent.override.addons.mozilla.org;Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

visiting https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/traduzir-paginas-web/ :

When the above SSUAO is "lowered" to Fx-114,

general.useragent.override.addons.mozilla.org;Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/114.0

... the issue you reported occurs:

So, probably until the end of Sep 2025, Firefox 115 is now the minimum...

Kindest regards.

[AstroSkipper]

17 hours ago, VistaLover said:

So, probably until the end of Sep 2025, Firefox 115 is now the minimum...

Sorry but unfortunately, I have to disagree when it comes to Windows XP -> Windows NT 5.1 and Mypal 68. As you know, this topic here is about Mypal 68 in Windows XP . I have tested all possible Firefox version numbers by a SSUAO in Mypal 68.14.8b, and 128 was definitely the minimum to get rid of the yellow message box. Any version lower than 128 failed.

Greetings, AstroSkipper

Edited 22 hours ago by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[feodor2]

So here I give more information.

I did same path as firefox did, and put 74 version because this is where I stopped of clean of xul, yes not all xull stuff has been removed, this essential about interfere new functions, remember wrong icons on permissions.

Also you may want to learn yourself what and when removed between 68-74. For everybody else this is unnecessary junk information waste to discuss.

[AstroSkipper]

13 hours ago, feodor2 said:

So here I give more information.

I did same path as firefox did, and put 74 version because this is where I stopped of clean of xul, yes not all xull stuff has been removed, this essential about interfere new functions, remember wrong icons on permissions.

@feodor2 Thanks for the information!  So, does that mean Mypal 68.14.8b is at the same level as Firefox 74, behaves in the same way and extensions with a minVersion  of 69 up to 74 now should work in your browser? 

13 hours ago, feodor2 said:

Also you may want to learn yourself what and when removed between 68-74. For everybody else this is unnecessary junk information waste to discuss.

For all, who have to fix those UC.JS scripts, CSS stylesheets and custom buttons that no longer work, the changes from 68 to 74 are very important to be able to make all the necessary modifications. Therefore, it is not "unnecessary junk information". Some time ago, I already had researched all the essential changes. And as far as I'm concerned, I had to fix a lot. Fortunately, I am almost through with that.

Edited 3 hours ago by AstroSkipper
Update of content