AstroSkipper Posted January 24 Author Share Posted January 24 (edited) 8 hours ago, Mathwiz said: Turned out Serpent 55 had updated uBO to version 1.17.4 overnight! Apparently, returning to a "sane" version number allowed Serpent 55 to find a "newer" version at AMO. 1.17.4 is a WebExtensions version, but it does run in Serpent 55. However, it's much, much older and lacks many of the filter lists @AstroSkipper had added. Had to uninstall uBO, reinstall @AstroSkipper's version, reload my settings from backup, and turn off auto-updating of uBO in the browser's Extensions page. Things seem to be back to normal again, but that was a huge mess. Hopefully there won't be any more unpleasant surprises! @Mathwiz Very strange! In my latest release uBlock Origin 1.16.4.31, I have removed the auto-update function of the internal list of all preselected filter lists and the updateURL inside the install.rdf file. Therefore, my fork can't actually initiate any auto-update actions. Did you install uBlock Origin 1.16.4.31 after a complete cleaning of all remnants as I described in my article? Very important is to delete the ublock0.sqlite file in the profile subfolder extension-data before installing uBO. And don't install uBO on top of an already existing installation! It won't work properly. I personally do not use the auto-update function of the Add-ons Manager in @roytam1's browser editions. All update processes are done by me manually. Therefore, this never happened to me. Edited January 24 by AstroSkipper Update of content 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 24 Author Share Posted January 24 (edited) @Mathwiz I have thought about your problem again and could imagine that you may have installed the uBO webextension in the past. Could I be right? In any case, I will examine this issue in my Serpent 55 installation the next days. If, contrary to my expectations, I find that Serpent 55 tries to automatically update the legacy extension uBlock Origin to the latest compatible webextension, I can make my fork so unique that it can never be identified as uBlock Origin again. Then, it couldn't be automatically updated anymore by whatever mechanism. The updating of my fork/mod should only be done by a manual editing of its code inside the xpi file unless gorhill would decide to support the legacy extension again which, however, will probably never be the case. PS: Please, test your issue in a fresh, clean profile and report here! Thanks! Edited January 24 by AstroSkipper Update of content 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 (edited) 8 hours ago, AstroSkipper said: I have removed (redacted) the updateURL inside the install.rdf file. Therefore, my fork can't actually initiate any auto-update actions. ... When an extension provides its own "update URL" (inside its install.rdf file), this takes precedence over the "default" updating process by the browser the extension is installed in ... IIANM, uBO "beta" (as in 1.16.4.31b2) updates itself via "GitHub", so you just removed that update pathway... If you pay more attention at @Mathwiz's post, he wrote: 16 hours ago, Mathwiz said: Apparently, returning to a "sane" version number allowed Serpent 55 to find a "newer" version at AMO. (AMO: addons.mozilla.org); this update pathway is controlled by the browser itself (NOT by the extension) and it's realised by the browser "querying" (at set intervals) the default extensions repo (AMO in the case of St55) for an updated, compatible, version of all the already installed extensions - this function is controlled in St55 by below about:config pref: extensions.update.url;https://versioncheck.addons.mozilla.org/update/VersionCheck.php?reqVersion=%REQ_VERSION%&id=%ITEM_ID%&version=%ITEM_VERSION%&maxAppVersion=%ITEM_MAXAPPVERSION%&status=%ITEM_STATUS%&appID=%APP_ID%&appVersion=55.0&appOS=%APP_OS%&appABI=%APP_ABI%&locale=%APP_LOCALE%¤tAppVersion=%CURRENT_APP_VERSION%&updateType=%UPDATE_TYPE%&compatMode=%COMPATIBILITY_MODE% and since, as you hinted, uBO-legacy and uBO-WE have the same extensionID, the browser can and will update it, eventually, to the compatible, WE, version extant in AMO... Kindest regards. PS: UXP-based browsers have cut all "ties" to AMO, which is currently hosting only WEs, thus this issue can't be witnessed in St52/NM28/etc. ; but, "we" do have, few as they may be, dedicated St55 users here ... Edited January 24 by VistaLover 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 24 Author Share Posted January 24 (edited) 5 hours ago, VistaLover said: (AMO: addons.mozilla.org); this update pathway is controlled by the browser itself (NOT by the extension) and it's realised by the browser "querying" (at set intervals) the default extensions repo (AMO in the case of St55) for an updated, compatible, version of all the already installed extensions - this function is controlled in St55 by below about:config pref: extensions.update.url;https://versioncheck.addons.mozilla.org/update/VersionCheck.php?reqVersion=%REQ_VERSION%&id=%ITEM_ID%&version=%ITEM_VERSION%&maxAppVersion=%ITEM_MAXAPPVERSION%&status=%ITEM_STATUS%&appID=%APP_ID%&appVersion=55.0&appOS=%APP_OS%&appABI=%APP_ABI%&locale=%APP_LOCALE%¤tAppVersion=%CURRENT_APP_VERSION%&updateType=%UPDATE_TYPE%&compatMode=%COMPATIBILITY_MODE% and since, as you hinted, uBO-legacy and uBO-WE have the same extensionID, the browser can and will update it, eventually, to the compatible, WE, version extant in AMO... Kindest regards. PS: UXP-based browsers have removed all "ties" to AMO, which is currently only hosting WEs, thus this issue can't be witnessed in St52/NM28/etc. ; but, "we" do have, few as they may be, dedicated St55 users here ... Right! Of course, I know that the browser checks for extension updates via the pref extensions.update.url. That was exactly what I restored in Mypal 68 months ago, described in my article Restoring the manual and automatic update function for extensions in Mypal 68.13.3b. But, I mainly use New Moon 28, and there is no support for webextensions at all. BTW, I never activated the automatic updates in any @roytam1's browsers. And TBH, I never thought Serpent 55 would look for webextension updates for a legacy extension. But as I already mentioned, I can make my mod/fork such unique as I did in the case of my fork Check My IP Address & Location 1.3. Then, updates won't be found for it any longer. PS: And the more I think about it , the more I am now inclined to do just that. One more thing @VistaLover, I totally forgot to say thanks for your deeper insights on that matter! Edited January 24 by AstroSkipper Update of content 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 (edited) FYI, I already created an update version of uBlock Origin 1.16.4.31. I made a lot of changes. I even installed and tested this version in Serpent 55. @Mathwiz When searching for extension updates in this browser, an update to the webextension of uBlock Origin is no longer offered. In any case, I am now back in testing mode. Cheers, AstroSkipper Edited January 25 by AstroSkipper Update of content 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fightingfalcon Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 Hello from the USA! I have been a user of uBlock Origin Legacy for more than 5 years now. I just installed your new (31) version on the latest Basilisk and Pale Moon and it works with no problems! I was wondering if you would be able to have V31 compatible with a email client program called Epyrus (Epyrus E-Mail client) Click on the "repository" link for the code base info. I contacted the author about this and he told me to contact you. Also, with future version of UBO, will we be able to update it (manually) via the browsers add-on manager/check for updates? Or will we have to re-install the program from the ZIP file? I also do all my updates manually. That way I am in control of what happens on my system. Also, THANK YOU for fixing/updating the base filter lists. The ones in V30 just would not update/work correctly. (Especially Online Malicious URL Blocklist. That one NEVER worked properly for many years.) Once again, thank you for all your efforts in keeping UBO going. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 (edited) 2 hours ago, Fightingfalcon said: I have been a user of uBlock Origin Legacy for more than 5 years now. I just installed your new (31) version on the latest Basilisk and Pale Moon and it works with no problems! Hello @Fightingfalcon! I'm glad to hear that. 2 hours ago, Fightingfalcon said: I was wondering if you would be able to have V31 compatible with a email client program called Epyrus (Epyrus E-Mail client) Click on the "repository" link for the code base info. I contacted the author about this and he told me to contact you. I have never installed or used Epyrus. What are the system requirements? As far as I know, Epyrus is a Thunderbird 52-based mail client that builds against UXP. uBlock Origin Legacy is fully compatible with Thunderbird 52, Interlink and MailNews. If the developer of Epyrus made changes preventing uBlock Origin Legacy to run properly in Epyrus, then these changes have to be reverted by the Epyrus' developer and nobody else to restore compatibility. IMHO, it therefore doesn't seem to be a problem of uBlock Origin but a problem of Epyrus. If the Epyrus developer turns you away and tells you to contact me, then he just doesn't want to deal with your problem. And please, don't forget I am not the developer of uBlock Origin who is gorhill and unfortunately stopped development a few years ago! I am just providing here a special mod of the legacy extension uBlock Origin to fix a couple of issues and to keep it as up-to-date as possible. Edited January 25 by AstroSkipper Update of content 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 (edited) 19 hours ago, Fightingfalcon said: Also, with future version of UBO, will we be able to update it (manually) via the browsers add-on manager/check for updates? Or will we have to re-install the program from the ZIP file? I also do all my updates manually. That way I am in control of what happens on my system. For using my mod uBlock Origin Legacy, you have to download the xpi file from this thread and to perform a clean install. All is described in detail in my article uBlock Origin Legacy - A special mod by @AstroSkipper where you'll always find the most recent version. 19 hours ago, Fightingfalcon said: Also, THANK YOU for fixing/updating the base filter lists. The ones in V30 just would not update/work correctly. (Especially Online Malicious URL Blocklist. That one NEVER worked properly for many years.) Once again, thank you for all your efforts in keeping UBO going. You're welcome! And thank you for your kind words! Edited January 26 by AstroSkipper Update of content 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCyborg Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 11 hours ago, AstroSkipper said: As far as I know, Epyrus is a Thunderbird 52-based mail client that builds against UXP. uBlock Origin Legacy is fully compatible with Thunderbird 52, Interlink and MailNews. If the developer of Epyrus made changes preventing uBlock Origin Legacy to run properly in Epyrus, then these changes have to be reverted by the Epyrus' developer and nobody else to restore compatibility. IMHO, it therefore doesn't seem to be a problem of uBlock Origin but a problem of Epyrus. If the Epyrus developer turns you away and tells you to contact me, then he just doesn't want to deal with your problem. Nope, that's not how this game works. Epyrus != InterLink && Epyrus != MailNews Therefore, if the extension doesn't work on it as-is, it must be adapted. Extensions must be tailored to the application they extend, it's always been this way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 26 Author Share Posted January 26 (edited) 52 minutes ago, UCyborg said: Nope, that's not how this game works. Epyrus != InterLink && Epyrus != MailNews Therefore, if the extension doesn't work on it as-is, it must be adapted. Extensions must be tailored to the application they extend, it's always been this way. Nope! Epyrus is a Thunderbird 52-based mail client that builds against UXP (official statement). The legacy extension uBlock Origin works in the email clients Thunderbird 52, Interlink and MailNews. If due all modifications made by the developer of Epyrus the compatibility has been broken, then this can't be the problem of the developer of uBlock Origin who I am not. BTW, forget about Epyrus! Neither the installer version nor the portable version is compatible with Windows XP. Thus, I am definitely out, and that's how the game works. Edited January 26 by AstroSkipper 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCyborg Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 51 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said: Epyrus is a Thunderbird 52-based mail client that builds against UXP (official statement). Long-term, this becomes less relevant as applications evolve. You can't expect eg. Thunderbird 52 extension to be compatible with application that is not Thunderbird 52 and doesn't do things Thunderbird 52's way. athenian200 was clear in that matter. But sure, you're not the developer and you're free to not look into the compatibility with Epyrus. 1 hour ago, AstroSkipper said: then this can't be the problem of the developer of uBlock Origin It's always the problem of the extension developer, but yeah, gorhill decided years ago XUL won't be his problem anymore. So I guess it's really not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 26 Author Share Posted January 26 (edited) 2 hours ago, UCyborg said: It's always the problem of the extension developer Not really! If a developer of an extension had never supported and didn't want to support a certain software, it is therefore unfortunately not a problem of an extension developer. The request was done in terms of a legacy extension but the corresponding software does not support older legacy Windows operation systems such as Windows XP. None of this makes any sense to me. That's why I'm not interested. For Windows 7 and up, there are so much modern email clients available which fully satisfy all the needs of a user. Thus, no real need for another one. And isn't the developer of Epyrus this athenian200 who speaks so incredibly respectfully and kindly about us here: Quote Yeah, New Moon is like a cheap Chinese knockoff of Pale Moon... LOL. But yeah, the MSFN-type people are basically the reason why Pale Moon temporarily closed the git repos to the public and started just publishing tarballs for that brief period. It is a little infuriating to watch people misuse your code and then blame you for it. Though we've learned that we can't let our anger at that make us give up the benefits of open and collaborative development. I wouldn't lift a finger for a disrespectful guy like that. 2 hours ago, UCyborg said: but yeah, gorhill decided years ago XUL won't be his problem anymore. So I guess it's really not. Right! Edited January 26 by AstroSkipper Update of content 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 27 Author Share Posted January 27 (edited) As I already mentioned, I am just testing my new release uBlock Origin Legacy 1.16.4.32 regarding how effective the filter lists selected by me and some custom filters are. Here is my result in New Moon 28 on the adblocker testing site https://test.adminforge.de/adblock.html where all connections are allowed by ematrix for testing purpose: Cheers, AstroSkipper Edited January 27 by AstroSkipper 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fightingfalcon Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 Oh WOW! That site is awesome! (I got a 93% score with V31, which is great!) I am bookmarking that site in my security folder. Now I have a way to test UBO in real time! Thanks for the link Astroskipper! Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicolaasjan Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 (edited) Besides Spam404 (see here and here), MVPS HOSTS also has to be removed from uBlock0_1.16.4.31. See: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/2032 https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/commit/858fdaced3fbaf2d4c16aaa71cdab2b050e890b7 Edited January 27 by nicolaasjan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now