Not getting Firefox 80.0.1

Topic

New Reply

I’m pretty sure Firefox came out with version 80.0.1 on Sept. 1.  On my Linux Mint 19.1 I get the FF updates on Update Manager, but I have not gotten it yet.  Please note that I already have FF 80 installed.  Does anyone know what’s going on?

Being 20 something in the 70's was so much better than being 70 something in the insane 20's

Reply | Quote

Replies

Download from here : https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/80.0.1/

1 user thanked author for this post.

Charlie

Reply | Quote

[PaulK]

Download
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/

Release Notes
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/releases/

• This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by PaulK.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Charlie

Reply | Quote

I’m sorry but I’ve never had to update Firefox outside of the Update Manager that comes with Mint 19.1, the updates have always been there within a few days of release.  To do it this way do I have to use something like apt-get in Terminal?  I’m not real comfortable with that yet.  I’m wondering why the Linux guys are dragging their feet on this – or do I need to get a newer Kernel?  I wouldn’t think that should matter since I already have FF 80.

Being 20 something in the 70's was so much better than being 70 something in the insane 20's

Reply | Quote

then you’ll just gonna have to wait a few more days longer until v80.0.1 is issued for your Linux OS, Charlie

1 user thanked author for this post.

Charlie

Reply | Quote

I don’t think a new kernel is the issue. All of my Ubuntu based machines were offered a new 4.15.0-117 kernel this past week (one Ubuntu 18.04 LTS and 3 Mint 19.2 Cinnamon) and I installed it on all of them yesterday.

I’m no linux expert, but frankly, I’d be more apprehensive about messing with the kernel (other than installing what’s offered to me through the Update Manager), than with not being offered FF80.0.1.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Charlie

Reply | Quote

I’ve been offered that 4.15.0-117 kernel in Update Manager too and I haven’t yet installed it.  It seems like I no sooner install a new kernel update, and another one comes along.  This was something I didn’t expect, but if they are just security or program fixes coming from the Update Manager then I guess they’re not too dangerous.

Being 20 something in the 70's was so much better than being 70 something in the insane 20's

1 user thanked author for this post.

DrBonzo

Reply | Quote

[DrBonzo]

This might be drifting off-topic a bit, but it seems appropriate here.

I don’t know how long you’ve been running Linux, and I hasten to add I’m no expert and generally consider myself to be a non-techie person, but here’s my experience with Ubuntu and Mint. I first installed Ubuntu 16.04 in August 2017 about the time when Win 7 machines were apparently randomly getting hit with BSODs. My patching experience with Win 7 had become by that time pretty anxiety inducing (yes, I had backups, images, blah, blah, blah, but I need my stuff to work and don’t have time to waste recovering from MS stupidity). So, I was looking for something better.

I’ve been running Ubuntu 16.04 followed by 18.04 (both LTS) for a little over 3 years on one machine. I’ve been running Mint 19.2 Cinnamon on 2 machines for about a year, and on one machine for about 9 months. Every Friday I install every patch that is offered by the Update Manager. That comes out by my math to be about 1495 patches (that’s 5.75 computer years times 52 weeks times 5 patches a week, the latter number being a conservative guess of the number of patches per computer per week).

I have had 2 instances where on a restart after patch installation I got a message saying the computer had crashed. These both happened on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS but interestingly, if I hadn’t been told the computer crashed I never would have known it! Everything seemed absolutely fine. I have also had 4 instances of getting a message when attempting to restart a Mint 19.2 computer (same computer in all 4 instances) that it could not restart because a program was still active. I clicked the restart anyway option and all was well (as with Ubuntu I could tell absolutely no difference in behavior). This happened on a machine with an Atom processor and I’m assuming I just didn’t wait long enough for some program involved in the updating to finish (the Atom can be torturously slow sometimes, but it makes a good test machine).

These are pretty good results, IMHO, far better than Win 7, and much less stress inducing. The updates rarely take more than 10 minutes, I get detailed listing of progress as patching occurs so I know nothing is freezing, and everything seems to just work. I have a 99+% confidence in the Ubuntu/Mint patching process.

I’m not trying to sell you anything here other than that I think you’re pretty safe installing anything offered to you be the Update Manager.

Edit to add: Regarding kernels, it does seem there have been quite a few in the last month or 2, but they all seem to work just fine.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by DrBonzo.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Charlie, Ascaris

Reply | Quote

Here’s the description (although IMHO not terribly enlightening) of the “minor regressions” FF 80.0 introduced and that FF 80.0.1 apparently fixed.

https://ubuntu.com/security/notices/USN-4474-2

This is for Ubuntu 18.04 LTS, upon which Mint 19 is based. My Ubuntu 18,04 LTS machine did get FF 80.0.1, but none of my 3 Mint 19.2 machines have yet. This sort of thing has happened before, I think with FF and also with other software, although it doesn’t seem to happen very often. I don’t know why, but perhaps the official Mint website might say something about it (I haven’t looked yet)

If you decide to download 80.0.1, then you will likely need to reconfigure it to match any personalization/custom settings, addons, etc. you currently have. To me, I’m not sure it’s worth the hassle, so I’m sitting tight on what I have (FF80.0)

1 user thanked author for this post.

Charlie

Reply | Quote

DrBonzo wrote:

If you decide to download 80.0.1, then you will likely need to reconfigure it to match any personalization/custom settings, addons, etc. you currently have. To me, I’m not sure it’s worth the hassle, so I’m sitting tight on what I have (FF80.0)

Yeah thanks, that makes sense to me.  I’m glad to hear I’m not the only one waiting.  Hope they get it straightened out soon.  Like you, I’m going to sit tight where I am, and everything works fine.

Being 20 something in the 70's was so much better than being 70 something in the insane 20's

1 user thanked author for this post.

DrBonzo

Reply | Quote

DrBonzo wrote:

If you decide to download 80.0.1, then you will likely need to reconfigure it to match any personalization/custom settings, addons, etc. you currently have.

I don’t understand Linux. But for a Windows environment, a ‘point.point’ change is only a change to the program code, and there is no effect on the user’s Profile. Are you/Linux affected by any of the .1 fixes listed here? If not, then you’ll not need-to-make nor notice any change.

Reply | Quote

@PaulK – I don’t know the answer to your question. I hadn’t noticed any of the listed bugs, but that doesn’t seem unusual to me because I rarely have any problems with FF.

Also, though, perhaps I should clarify that above when I say download FF, I mean download it from the Mozilla website, in which case I would think it at least possible that customizations/preference/settings – whatever you want to call them – would need to be redone, particularly if the download was not in the form of an update. Maybe the website can tell if you just need an update or if you need the full 80.0.1 version. I’m not sure I’m saying this very well, but hopefully you get my drift. When I’ve “downloaded” FF with the Mint Update Manager (and also the Ubuntu equivalent of that), it downloads as an update and I’ve never had to redo settings.

Reply | Quote

I’m not using an Ubuntu derivative as my main OS at the moment, but FWIW, I received Firefox 80.0.1 on Fedora on the 2nd (80.0.1), with revisions on the 5th (80.0.1-1) and 6th (80.0.1-2). I have no idea what the revisions were about, but I never had issues with any of them (and I have been trialing, if that’s a word, Firefox as main browser for a bit now, as I am discovering, unfortunately, that more and more sites are refusing to work with Waterfox Classic, even with the useragent spoofed).

I am not sure what the issue was supposed to be with recreating profiles or the like, which I flatly refuse to do (I’ve disabled that frustrating behavior where Firefox and Thunderbird create a new, empty profile if they detect the old one has been sullied by some other version of the program, hopefully). I haven’t seen any changes in my user profile functioning in any of the revisions.

Going into the profiles and zapping the bits that force it to use the new profile has become quite natural for me in this migration I’ve made to Fedora, as the internal versioning systems that Ubuntu and Fedora use for Firefox give it fits when switching from one to the other, even if the Firefox version is the same. Inside the profile folder is a file named compatibility.ini, and it records the version and path of the Firefox that last accessed that profile. That was why I decided to search and see if there is a way to turn off the obnoxious “feature” in the first place.

It’s always good to have backups of the profiles, though, just in case something happens. It can be as simple as navigating to the profile in the file explorer and highlighting the profile and selecting “Compress…” on the context menu. It will create a .tar.gz or .zip file of the highlighted folder, and since these are user folders owned by the local user, it will work without asking for the superuser password. The file will be there in that directory in case you need it.

Dell XPS 13/9310, i5-1135G7/16GB, KDE Neon 6.2
XPG Xenia 15, i7-9750H/32GB & GTX1660ti, Kubuntu 24.04
Acer Swift Go 14, i5-1335U/16GB, Kubuntu 24.04 (and Win 11)

Reply | Quote

I’d rather the Linux Mint folks take their time like is normal for Mint and not push out any new FF until a while after and make sure that it works with Mint. I’ve always gotten FF offered a while after the Windows users get theirs and even when offered up a newest version of FF on Mint(Mint 20 now for me up from 19.3) I always delay that and go here and to Ghacks, other websites, to make sure their are not unexpected feature removals or regressions.

I only want the software offered up via Mint’s update manager and then I’m sure there is not much in the way of issues but I’ll add to that my own due diligence as well!

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

Charlie

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

I’d rather the Linux Mint folks take their time like is normal for Mint and not push out any new FF until a while after and make sure that it works with Mint.

The Mint repo only contains the specific software that is different on Ubuntu and Mint. The large majority of what is in a Mint installation comes from the Ubuntu repo, including Firefox. As soon as Ubuntu makes a new version of these packages available, it will be offered by Mint just as quickly as in Ubuntu proper, unless it is one of the packages Mint blocked and/or replaced with their own.

 

Dell XPS 13/9310, i5-1135G7/16GB, KDE Neon 6.2
XPG Xenia 15, i7-9750H/32GB & GTX1660ti, Kubuntu 24.04
Acer Swift Go 14, i5-1335U/16GB, Kubuntu 24.04 (and Win 11)

Reply | Quote

It’s more than that as I’ll have to see what settings get removed in FF 80.0.1’s about:config because I’ve had to go in there to get the auto-play  settings tweaked to my needs and things disappear there from time to time as far as settings getting removed or changed. But I’m on Mint 20 and have just received my FF 80.0.1 update notice and I’ll have to go over to Ghacks and some other locations and see what’s changed in the about:config settings and whatnot as always and maybe I’ll switch to the FF ESR PPA.

I’ve always thought that Mint should be using the FF ESR release but that rolling release is what’s used.

Reply | Quote

Just moments ago I was offered FF 80.0.1 on my daily driver Mint Cinnamon 19.2. I’m assuming my 2 other Mint 19.2 Cinnamon computers have also been offered 80.0.1 but I have yet to check (and probably won’t for a few days)

1 user thanked author for this post.

Charlie

Reply | Quote

I just got mine today too.  It’s installed and running now.  I don’t know what the big deal was over a 0.0.1 update but I guess they had their reasons.

Being 20 something in the 70's was so much better than being 70 something in the insane 20's

1 user thanked author for this post.

DrBonzo

Reply | Quote

Just like Win10 updates, it’s almost NEVER EVER a pressing need. FWIW you can skip upgrading for long periods of time with little risk.  Sometimes you are better off. They introduce problems also.

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

Charlie

Reply | Quote

I always check Mozilla’s Release Notes to see what’s being changed and depending on what I see, that makes me update sooner or later.  Security changes and improvements get my attention first.  Cosmetic nonsense will make me wait, unless there’s a necessary security fix in there too.  I hate it when they combine the two.  Here’s an example from Mozilla:

Release Notes – Mozilla
http://www.mozilla.org › en-US › firefox › notes
Sep 1, 2020 – 80.0.1. Firefox Release. Fixed a performance regression when encountering new intermediate CA certificates (bug 1661543). Fixed crashes possibly related to GPU resets (bug 1627616). Fixed rendering on some sites using WebGL (bug 1659225). Fixed the zoom-in keyboard shortcut on Japanese language builds (bug 1661895).

Being 20 something in the 70's was so much better than being 70 something in the insane 20's

1 user thanked author for this post.

DrBonzo

Reply | Quote

I check the release notes, too. For me, though, I don’t know most of what they’re talking about and therefore how serious (or unserious) the fixed issues are. And by the time demands of life are dealt with. I’m not much inclined to learn about, for example, “intermediate CA certificates”.

Reply | Quote

Yeah, same here.  But if I see complicated things like that I at least know that there’s probably something relatively important.  “Bug” is a keyword too.  Feature updates like picture-in-picture and the like are not important to me.

Being 20 something in the 70's was so much better than being 70 something in the insane 20's

Reply | Quote