I can see that from addons.mozilla.org, PM is recognized as:
Palemoon 26.4 as a FF 24.9
Palemoon 27.3 as a FF 27.9
where i can see this association Palemoon-Firefox? is at Mozilla addons server?
At first view, it doesn't seem related to User Agent:
PM26.4 is Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:38.9) Gecko/20100101 Goanna/2.1 Firefox/38.9 PaleMoon/26.4.1
PM27.3 is Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:45.9) Gecko/20100101 Goanna/3.2 Firefox/45.9 PaleMoon/27.3.0
On the other hand, Ihave and addon (firessh 94.11) which install correctlyin PM27.3.
However in PM26.4 after editing install.rdf file to force installation, during installation it shows a message error "corrupt..."
in chrome.manifest i see that following lines are different from previous version (firessh 94.10) :
component {dbc42190-21eb-11e0-ac64-0800200c9a66} components/sshProtocol.js
contract @mozilla.org/network/protocol;1?name=ssh {dbc42190-21eb-11e0-ac64-0800200c9a66}
category profile-after-change FireSSHSSH @mozilla.org/network/protocol;1?name=ssh
are these lines related to a new feature and incompatible backwards?
Why am I so interested in previous thing?
I find out that i need these 2 versions of Palemoon, and I keep both updated copying the /user folder, so I am interested in know if there is a solution for this type of issue, or I just should only install addon version compatible with FF 24.9
PM 26 and 27 -compatibility differences
Moderators: FranklinDM, Lootyhoof
Re: PM 26 and 27 -compatibility differences
addons.mozilla.org gets served a specific useragent.
As documented in many locations, there is no single Firefox version that Pale Moon "compares to" - our browser application code is our own. AMO gets served a particularly old version of Firefox because it is roughly the closest Firefox front-end version that extensions should be compatible with to be able to run on Pale Moon (i.e.: pre-australis).
The user agent string is an arbitrary string. We are forced to present these strings arbitrarily to websites to make them accept Pale Moon as a "Firefox variant". If we don't do that, there are (unfortunately) many, many sites that will "slam the door shut in your face" for "not using a supported browser" or falling back to mobile or (even worse) IE6- style website code when the browser is "unknown".
As documented in many locations, there is no single Firefox version that Pale Moon "compares to" - our browser application code is our own. AMO gets served a particularly old version of Firefox because it is roughly the closest Firefox front-end version that extensions should be compatible with to be able to run on Pale Moon (i.e.: pre-australis).
The user agent string is an arbitrary string. We are forced to present these strings arbitrarily to websites to make them accept Pale Moon as a "Firefox variant". If we don't do that, there are (unfortunately) many, many sites that will "slam the door shut in your face" for "not using a supported browser" or falling back to mobile or (even worse) IE6- style website code when the browser is "unknown".
"Sometimes, the best way to get what you want is to be a good person." -- Louis Rossmann
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite
Re: PM 26 and 27 -compatibility differences
Thanks Moonchild,
Your explanation is very clarifying, so I understand that you have define different arbitrary strings for some common pages such a AMO.
Just for curiosity. Can you list other pages that have associated other custom user agent string?
Your explanation is very clarifying, so I understand that you have define different arbitrary strings for some common pages such a AMO.
Just for curiosity. Can you list other pages that have associated other custom user agent string?
Moonchild wrote:addons.mozilla.org gets served a specific useragent.
As documented in many locations, there is no single Firefox version that Pale Moon "compares to" - our browser application code is our own. AMO gets served a particularly old version of Firefox because it is roughly the closest Firefox front-end version that extensions should be compatible with to be able to run on Pale Moon (i.e.: pre-australis).
The user agent string is an arbitrary string. We are forced to present these strings arbitrarily to websites to make them accept Pale Moon as a "Firefox variant". If we don't do that, there are (unfortunately) many, many sites that will "slam the door shut in your face" for "not using a supported browser" or falling back to mobile or (even worse) IE6- style website code when the browser is "unknown".
Re: PM 26 and 27 -compatibility differences
Go to the about:config page in Pale Moon, type useragent.override into the Search field, and it will give you a list.dapgo wrote:Can you list other pages that have associated other custom user agent string?
Nichi nichi kore ko jitsu = Every day is a good day.
Re: PM 26 and 27 -compatibility differences
Thanks a lot
it was exactly what i was looking for
it was exactly what i was looking for
Nigaikaze wrote:Go to the about:config page in Pale Moon, type useragent.override into the Search field, and it will give you a list.dapgo wrote:Can you list other pages that have associated other custom user agent string?
Re: PM 26 and 27 -compatibility differences
Thanks for that.Nigaikaze wrote: ...Go to the about:config page in Pale Moon, type useragent.override into the Search field, and it will give you a list.
Re: PM 26 and 27 -compatibility differences
You're welcome!
Nichi nichi kore ko jitsu = Every day is a good day.