search for: 1221368

Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "1221368".

2016 Apr 29
3
C5: The Firefox ESR 45.1.0 Nighmare
...ood issuing a security improvement when, as Johnny replied in another posting, " With respect to CentOS-5, it seems this patch was not migrated to the 45.0.1 install: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1025187 from this bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221368 " essential parts were omitted. Perhaps Up-Stream were pre-occupied with another fundamental change to the product we know and love ? (well, not C7 yet) I use Firefox extensively for a multitude of tasks. -- Regards, Paul. England, EU. England's place is in the European Union...
2015 May 20
2
CentOS 5.11 / Firefox 38 -- totally borked...
The subject line is deliberate. It looks like firefox 38 is infliting a rerun of http://marc.info/?l=centos&m=141288474630498&w=2 upon us. Addons are downloaded into /tmp, but never installed. Not even Install addon from file works. Going back to ff31. Grumbling ...
2016 Apr 29
0
C5: The Firefox ESR 45.1.0 Nighmare
...replied in > another posting, > > " With respect to CentOS-5, it seems this patch was not > migrated to the 45.0.1 install: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1025187 > > from this bugzilla: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221368 " > > essential parts were omitted. Perhaps Up-Stream were pre-occupied with > another fundamental change to the product we know and love ? (well, not > C7 yet) > > I use Firefox extensively for a multitude of tasks. OK, when red hat releases a firefox update, we build it....
2015 May 20
0
CentOS 5.11 / Firefox 38 -- totally borked...
...n Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:39:15PM +0100, Lars Hecking wrote: > > The subject line is deliberate. > > It looks like firefox 38 is infliting a rerun of > http://marc.info/?l=centos&m=141288474630498&w=2 upstream is aware of it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221368 Tru -- Tru Huynh http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/cent...
2015 May 27
2
firefox 38 question
Is Firefox 38 still borked for Centos 5? It shows up as available for update, but I don't recall seeing anything saying the problems noted here have been fixed. thanks, -chuck --
2015 May 20
1
CentOS 5.11 / Firefox 38 -- totally borked...
...+0100, Lars Hecking wrote: >> >> The subject line is deliberate. >> >> It looks like firefox 38 is infliting a rerun of >> http://marc.info/?l=centos&m=141288474630498&w=2 > > upstream is aware of it: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221368 > > Tru Tru created these while we wait: http://people.centos.org/tru/firefox-38.0-4.el5.centos.bz1221368/ See if that fixes the issue for you. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 byt...
2016 Apr 28
1
Firefox 46.0 fails on CentOS 6.7 due to GTK3 requirement
Johnny Hughes writes: [...] > I should have the CentOS-6 (and CentOS-5) version of Firefox 45 out in a > couple of minutes .. currently building metadata and testing them on > https://ci.centos.org/ Broken, at least on CentOS5. The same file/addon download problem that has plagued every new update release in I don't remember how long. File downloads go to 99% and then stop, or
2004 Sep 10
0
beta 1.0.3 ERROR
--- David Willmore <davidwillmore@iamanidiot.com> wrote: > > The test script doesn't seem to stop on error. I noticed this > in the logs: > > ++++++ testing level 1 interface > simple iterator on read-only file > generating FLAC file for test > testing 'metadata.flac'... 0... 1... content... PASSED > is writable = 1 > ERROR: iterator claims file
2016 Apr 29
5
C5: The Firefox ESR 45.1.0 Nighmare
Centos replaced well-running customise Firefox with version ESR 45.1.0 * All the add-ons (language dictionaries, Adblock Plus, Classic Theme Restorer etc.) were disabled with no simple method of reactivating them. Reason given was they were "unsigned". * About:config xpinstall.signatures.required = false partially reduced the problem. * Then possible to reactivate some disabled