Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Mozilla Firefox 1.5.0.4 Released 375

Posted by CowboyNeal from the pointy-point-releases dept.
KrayzieKyd writes "God Bless Mozilla. Firefox has just notified me that Firefox version 1.5.0.4 has just been released with release notes and according to Mozilla's website, the same has been released for Thunderbird with its own release notes."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla Firefox 1.5.0.4 Released More

Mozilla Firefox 1.5.0.4 Released

Comments Filter:

  • Freshmeat? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mtenhagen ( 450608 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @04:38AM (#15452114) Homepage
    Are we getting slashdot articles for each verion bump of the mozilla products? I tought freshmeat was created for that.

    Is there something special about this release? According to the release notes these bugs where removed. Great but not enough for a slashdot article.

    MFSA 2006-43 Privilege escalation using addSelectionListener
    MFSA 2006-42 Web site XSS using BOM on UTF-8 pages
    MFSA 2006-41 File stealing by changing input type (variant)
    MFSA 2006-39 "View Image" local resource linking (Windows)
    MFSA 2006-38 Buffer overflow in crypto.signText()
    MFSA 2006-37 Remote compromise via content-defined setter on object prototypes
    MFSA 2006-36 PLUGINSPAGE privileged JavaScript execution 2
    MFSA 2006-35 Privilege escalation through XUL persist
    MFSA 2006-34 XSS viewing javascript: frames or images from context menu
    MFSA 2006-33 HTTP response smuggling
    MFSA 2006-32 Fixes for crashes with potential memory corruption
    MFSA 2006-31 EvalInSandbox escape (Proxy Autoconfig, Greasemonkey)

    • Re:Freshmeat? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by cperciva ( 102828 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @04:43AM (#15452133) Homepage
      Are we getting slashdot articles for each verion bump of the mozilla products?

      Well, we seem to get slashdot articles about every MSIE security flaw; by that standard a new release of FireFox which fixes 12 security flaws (5 of them rated "critical") is certainly slashdotworthy.

    • Re:Freshmeat? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, 2006 @05:05AM (#15452199)
      Well the FAQ of the release notes does say:
      What can I do to help?

      We need all the exposure we can get ... Submit a story to Slashdot and other news sites about the release.
      Someone was bound to follow the instructions.

      • Re:Freshmeat? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by MobileTatsu-NJG ( 946591 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @07:53AM (#15452655)
        "Submit a story to Slashdot and other news sites about the release. Someone was bound to follow the instructions."

        Ah, so this is a Slashvertisment.
        • That's okay though, because it's a Free Software Slashvertisement!

          On the other hand, it is preaching to the choir a bit -- it would be better to try to get it listed on news sites with less technical audiences.
    • But it's Firefox! :-p
    • Well, I think Slashdot should - it might be a minor update, but it is important. Mind you, I haven't seen any mention of Firefox 2 alpha 3, which was released a week ago.

      I'm sure someone out there realises why I mentioned this.

  • Seamonkey also updated (Score:5, Informative)

    by darteaga ( 806257 ) <darteaga@y[ ]om ['a.c' in gap]> on Friday June 02, 2006 @04:46AM (#15452144)
    Seamonkey, the new version of the old mozilla suite (Netscape-like) has also been updated. The release notes: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/releases /seamonkey1.0.2/ [mozilla.org].

  • Incremental Updates (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Nighttime ( 231023 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @04:46AM (#15452147) Homepage Journal
    I thought one of the benefits of Firefox 1.5 was incremental updates i.e. patches that that are in the 100s of KBs range. However, watching the progress meter for this latest update it will have eventually downloaded 6.1MB, which is basically the full version of Firefox.

  • Here we go... (Score:5, Funny)

    by jginspace ( 678908 ) <jginspace@[ ]oo.com ['yah' in gap]> on Friday June 02, 2006 @04:57AM (#15452174) Homepage Journal
    I'd like to hear about memory management issues, frequent crashes and how Opera was there first - in that order. I need a refresher; it must be while since v1.5.0.3.

    • Re:Here we go... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by l3v1 ( 787564 )
      I used to hear a lot about such "memory management" issues, and a lot of them turned out to be lack of knowledge about configuration options regarding firefox's memory cache and page history cache sizes. Some issues are there besides these easily manageble ones, no debate about that, but most of them only come up after firefox running continuously for days (for me that is sometimes 1-2 weeks), which makes them unnoticable for most home users. Still, it would be good to solve these issues someday.

      • Re:Here we go... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by LS ( 57954 )
        I don't think the average user should have to worry about "memory management". Memory is something that should be abstracted away and not exposed to anyone but an advanced user. If in normal usage the caching features cause undesirable behavior, I consider this a defect in the design, if not the implementation.

        LS

      • most of them only come up after firefox running continuously for days (for me that is sometimes 1-2 weeks), which makes them unnoticable for most home users

        You forget that Firefox is still mostly used by the techical minority -- there's probably quite a lot of us with heavy usage patterns like that. I, for example, tend to keep Firefox up until it crashes, and usually have between 1 and 5 windows with at least 10 tabs each open all the time.

        Memory leaks, crashes, and the fact that each tab isn't handled b

  • Show the world and be taken seriously! (Score:5, Informative)

    by MindPrison ( 864299 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @05:00AM (#15452181) Journal
    I think it's excellent with all these updates. Firefox if absolutely worth the attention.

    Before Firefox - our local banking etc. where only accepted on Internet Explorer and nothing else, leaving out Mac and Linux users. Today Firefox is so respected that our country's Largest Bank support it!

    Way to go FIREFOX!.
    • Today Firefox is so respected that our country's Largest Bank support it!
      So, they are supporting only certain browsers? Seems like an indication that _they_ shouldn't be taken too seriously. I have the same problems with some (but not all) banks where I live.
      • You're completely right. Why would a BANK give a hoop about browser support? Why would they maybe be a bit anal about security concerns?

        Who CARES if they only support a couple browsers because they're so paranoid they don't trust opera/safari/konq etc. That is a GOOD THING.

        But you'd throw your trust at a bank simply because they supported everyone? Whether that support is tested to be secure or not?

        Silly argument you've got there, if you value your money that is.
    • This reflects much more on your CRAPTASTIC bank than on the wide distribution of Firefox.
      Any bank that still has been restricting access to IE only during the last two years (many would say even longer than that) should be beaten unconscious and shot, given IEs widely known rather big insecurity issues (sure, Firefox also has its share of issues, but it's nowhere near as severe, often and unpatched as is IE).

      What, online banking, using IE? Eeeeeeckck!!
    • I wonder how much of that is because firefox is so popular with geeks. I don't know of any geek that doesn't use it as their primary browser. Chances are very high that whoever developed the site was using firefox (with the awesome web developer extension) to test it all along.

  • Menu Delay (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, 2006 @05:01AM (#15452182)
    Is it just me or are the menus like 4 times faster at least? Or is it this patch changes firefox so that my old registry tweak setting windows menu paint dealy from 400ms to 0ms now being recognized by FF? I'ts not a simple memory leak fix because I have 1.5 gigs and I never noticed FF slowing down after long term use.

    Or am I just crazy and nothing changed at all? maybe it was the extention update to cute menus cyrstal SVG
  • for software update notifications. Really mind boggling technology isn't it?
    Oh wait, it's not 1996....

  • 1.5.0.4 is major.significant.minor.forget-it (Score:3, Insightful)

    by k1980pc ( 942645 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @05:05AM (#15452196)
    Hardly looks like news. And I'm already tired of Mozilla team not addressing the most critical issue - memory hogging. Brushing that aside is not going to help the developers or the users.

    • Re:1.5.0.4 is major.significant.minor.forget-it (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Jerf ( 17166 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @10:37AM (#15453855) Journal
      Fixing "memory hogging" generally require significant architecture changes. This is not the sort of thing you get on a x.x.x.1 release.

      I'm sure they're addressing this issue as it is easily now the #1 complaint about Mozilla. I recall it having memory issues even before plugins and the memory-hogging history-full-page-store feature (the one where you hit "back" and the page is just supposed to pop up, not re-render or re-request), but those two issues have magnified the issue into something that can't be ignored or poo-poo'ed anymore; I, too, will often see my Firefox hovering around the 600MB mark, and I recently installed that memory leak test tool and it didn't come up often at all.

      Probably ought to shut off that feature; doesn't seem to do much for me anyhow.

  • disappointing (Score:5, Funny)

    by distantbody ( 852269 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @05:28AM (#15452258) Journal
    And I *still* can't find text within a textbox...

  • Spellbound (Score:3, Funny)

    by Supurcell ( 834022 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @06:18AM (#15452387)
    If only my Spellbound plug-in would work again. Now howe will aye bee able two correct my pore spelling?

    Now if only there was a plug-in for the correction of misused homonyms.

  • Thunderbird now in mac universal binary (Score:5, Informative)

    by anticypher ( 48312 ) <anticypher.gmail@com> on Friday June 02, 2006 @06:31AM (#15452421) Homepage
    Just tested with the newest macintel universal binary, and it is significantly faster than 1.5.0.2 (which also claimed universal binary, but they fucked up).

    If you let software update happen on a mac intel, it doesn't update to 1.5.0.4 universal, but just updates the PPC image. You need to download the new universal image, and install that over the older version, and then it runs.

    They still haven't addressed all the networking problems yet, but I really don't ever expect them to.

    the AC

    • Re:Thunderbird now in mac universal binary (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      If Thunderbird transitions to universal binaries in the same way Firefox has just done, then from the next release it will be universal only, and the updater will map PPC-->Universal and Universal-->Universal.

  • Changelist (Score:2, Redundant)

    by krunk4ever ( 856261 )

    Fixed in Firefox 1.5.0.4
    MFSA 2006-43 Privilege escalation using addSelectionListener
    MFSA 2006-42 Web site XSS using BOM on UTF-8 pages
    MFSA 2006-41 File stealing by changing input type (variant)
    MFSA 2006-39 "View Image" local resource linking (Windows)
    MFSA 2006-38 Buffer overflow in crypto.signText()
    MFSA 2006-37 Remote compromise via content-defined setter on object prototypes
    MFSA 2006-36 PLUGINSPAGE privileged JavaScript execution 2
    MFSA 2006-35 Privilege escalation through XUL persist
    MFSA 2006-34 XSS viewin

  • Bon Echo (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Vexorian ( 959249 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @08:31AM (#15452869)
    I am currently using Bon Echo Alpha 3 . I tried 1.5.0.4 and it seems much stabler and faster than 1.5.0.3 but it seems to me that Bon echo is still the best firefox version, It seriously is awesome.

  • Default update setting flawed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LS ( 57954 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @08:43AM (#15452932) Homepage
    Considering that privacy and security are big concerns for every large software project these days, I believe that Firefox's default update setting should be changed. If you go to Tools --> Options --> Advanced --> Update, and you haven't changed your default settings, you will find that it is set to "Automatically download and install the update". Even Microsoft wouldn't do this, so why is it acceptable in Firefox? It should default to "Ask me what I want to do.", and during the first update, a checkbox should be provided asking the user if he wants automatic updates from then on.

    My 2 cents.

    LS
    • it's acceptable because it's a web browser, and not the whole operating system. IE does not have an option for automatic updates, Windows does.

      Firefox DOES ask you if you want to install it or not, mine did at least.

Slashdot Top Deals

The rule on staying alive as a program manager is to give 'em a number or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once.

Close