Hi,
Since upgrading Firefox to v13 I have big problems with some flash commercials. I have downgraded to v12 again. Youtube seems to be alright though.
Here’s an example that crashes with v13:
Expert - Startsida
Try to click on the flash -> crash.
Anyone else seen this?
openSUSE 12.1,
KDE 4.8
Nvidia g105m with prop. drivers.
Fresh FF profile.
/Anders
falolaf:
Hi,
Since upgrading Firefox to v13 I have big problems with some flash commercials. I have downgraded to v12 again. Youtube seems to be alright though.
Here’s an example that crashes with v13:
Expert - Startsida
Try to click on the flash -> crash.
Anyone else seen this?
openSUSE 12.1,
KDE 4.8
Nvidia g105m with prop. drivers.
Fresh FF profile.
/Anders
How did you upgrade to Firefox 13? Last check it wasn’t in the update repository, and the one in the mozilla repository is the beta, dated 21-April-2012.
Love to test it, but I’m still running Firefox 12.0 with flash 11.2.202.233-15.1, since the flash update crashes, not Firefox
rafter22:
How did you upgrade to Firefox 13? Last check it wasn’t in the update repository, and the one in the mozilla repository is the beta, dated 21-April-2012.
Love to test it, but I’m still running Firefox 12.0 with flash 11.2.202.233-15.1, since the flash update crashes, not Firefox
Index of /repositories/mozilla/openSUSE_12.1
Seems to be the release, not beta.
Anyway tested the flash 11.2.202.236-24.1, released today, but with the same behaviour.
/Anders
Installed flash 11.2.202.236-24.1, released today, and Firefox Beta (14) did not crash, on the one video I tested it on. Sorry can’t test it on 13. It doesn’t show up when I use YaST > Software management > Package > All Packages > Update if newer version available.
Can someone explain why Firefox 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, and Thunderbird 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 releases are in the update repository, but now I have to add the mozilla repository to get updated to version 13, which doesn’t update the packages anyway?
Yup, with that same flash version and Firefox 13.0-2.1 everything’s working fine again.
Did you test with the link from the first post?
/Anders
On 2012-06-11 19:16, rafter22 wrote:
> Can someone explain why Firefox 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, and Thunderbird
> 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 releases are in the update repository, but now I
> have to add the mozilla repository to get updated to version 13, which
> doesn’t update the packages anyway?
Why the hurry? It will go to the update directory when appropriate.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
robin_listas:
On 2012-06-11 19:16, rafter22 wrote:
> Can someone explain why Firefox 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, and Thunderbird
> 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 releases are in the update repository, but now I
> have to add the mozilla repository to get updated to version 13, which
> doesn’t update the packages anyway?
Why the hurry? It will go to the update directory when appropriate.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
When is appropriate?
In the six week release cycle, Firefox 13 and Thunderbird 13 have been released for a week now. Next release is in 5 weeks.
Not having any Flash problems with Firefox 14.0b1 on the OP’s link.
On 2012-06-12 15:46, rafter22 wrote:
> When is appropriate?
When they solve important security issues that are needed, and the version
is adequately tested.
> In the six week release cycle, Firefox 13 and Thunderbird 13 have been
> released for a week now. Next release is in 5 weeks.
Consider them minor versions. These people have number madness.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
robin_listas:
On 2012-06-12 15:46, rafter22 wrote:
> When is appropriate?
When they solve important security issues that are needed, and the version
is adequately tested.
> In the six week release cycle, Firefox 13 and Thunderbird 13 have been
> released for a week now. Next release is in 5 weeks.
Consider them minor versions. These people have number madness.
Minor versions are like Thunderbird 12.0.1, which didn’t have any security fixes, but fixed these problems.
Thunderbird Release Notes
Here are the important security issues fixed in Firefox and Thunderbird 13.0. Four critical.
Security Advisories for Firefox
Security Advisories for Thunderbird
Versions were adequately tested for six weeks as beta, or should have been.
I think those are the last betas in the Mozilla repository since they predate the release.
user
June 12, 2012, 5:51pm
11
On 06/12/2012 03:46 PM, rafter22 wrote:
> When is appropriate?
in the past it has generally taken about one week after its release for
the openSUSE team to test, package and push a new mozilla version to the
update repo…
that seems reasonable to me…
–
dd
On 2012-06-12 17:36, rafter22 wrote:
> Minor versions are like Thunderbird 12.0.1, which didn’t have any
> security fixes, but fixed these problems.
Versions from 4 onwards are all minor to me. One major number change every
few months is not a real major.
> Versions were adequately tested for six weeks as beta, or should have
> been.
No, adequately tested as non beta in the mozilla repo, then they may
deserve to pass to the official update repo.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
On 06/12/2012 03:46 PM, rafter22 wrote:
> When is appropriate?
in the past it has generally taken about one week after its release for
the openSUSE team to test, package and push a new mozilla version to the
update repo…
that seems reasonable to me…
You are correct some did take longer than others to appear in the update repository.
Firefox 12.0, which is the first version I installed through YaST was available the day after Mozilla released it.
Version:
12.0-2.26.1
Build Time:
Wed 25 Apr 2012 12:58:05 PM EDT
While version 11.0 was available 2 days after the Mozilla release
Version:
11.0-2.23.1
Build Time:
Thu 15 Mar 2012 02:29:35 PM EDT
Others did take longer.
robin_listas:
On 2012-06-12 17:36, rafter22 wrote:
> Minor versions are like Thunderbird 12.0.1, which didn’t have any
> security fixes, but fixed these problems.
Versions from 4 onwards are all minor to me. One major number change every
few months is not a real major.
> Versions were adequately tested for six weeks as beta, or should have
> been.
No, adequately tested as non beta in the mozilla repo, then they may
deserve to pass to the official update repo.
Few months! Try every six weeks.
Yes, I think the hold up on this release is, the maintainer is waiting to see if there is going to be a 13.0.1 release (minor version) aka chemspill.
You would think testers would find the problems with all the testing done on a version over 18 weeks. Probably a fix for the Windows version anyway.
On 2012-06-13 16:06, rafter22 wrote:
> Others did take longer.
Well, you may ask the maintainer. He reads the mail list.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
With FF 13.0.1 everything seems to work now.
Most people using Linux can’t get Flash Player 11.3, so I don’t know what problem that update will fix for Linux users.
Well I was wandering the same thing but I guess it’s labeled there as open source news for a reason. Maybe the 11.2 version suffers from the same problem ? Ah ok I guess it’s labeled open source because of firefox. Never mind about this then