Join the Mozilla’s Test Days event from Dec 2–8 to test the new Firefox address bar on Firefox Beta 134 and get a chance to win Mozilla swag vouchers! 🎁

Funkcionalnosć tutoho sydła so přez wothladowanske dźěła wobmjezuje, kotrež maja waše dožiwjenje polěpšić. Jeli nastawk waš problem njerozrisuje a chceće prašenje stajić, wobroćće so na naše zhromodźenstwo pomocy, kotrež na to čaka, wam na @FirefoxSupport na Twitter a /r/firefox na Reddit pomhać.

Pomoc přepytać

Hladajće so wobšudstwa pomocy. Njenamołwimy was ženje, telefonowe čisło zawołać, SMS pósłać abo wosobinske informacije přeradźić. Prošu zdźělće podhladnu aktiwitu z pomocu nastajenja „Znjewužiwanje zdźělić“.

Dalše informacije

SHA512SUMs for Firefox 46.0 are useless. Why?

  • 1 wotmołwa
  • 2 matej tutón problem
  • 7 napohladow
  • Poslednja wotmołwa wot philipp

more options

Before Firefox 46.0, I could download the SHA512SUMS file, check its signature with gpg, then use that file to check that the copy of Firefox I was downloading was intact and hadn't been tampered with. I'd even created a script that downloaded the files and checked them for me. There are at least two things wrong with the SHA512SUMS file available for Firefox 46.0:

1. The filenames in it no longer correspond to the filenames on your site. Example: the entry for en-US linux-i686 for 45.0 has this for a filename after the SHA512 sum:

> linux-i686/en-US/firefox-45.0.tar.bz2

which reflects the actual directory and filename that the file is stored as. In contrast, the same entry for firefox 46.0 is:

> firefox-46.0.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2

... but the file on your website is still stored in the linux-i686/en-US directory as "forefox-46.0.tar.bz2".

Yes, I could correct for that in my script. But at's annoying, and also there's the second problem:

2. Some files aren't even in the SHA512SUMS file. The Windows files are nowhere to be seen. There's no ".exe" string in the file.

Please tell me this whole thing is an error that will be fixed?

Before Firefox 46.0, I could download the SHA512SUMS file, check its signature with gpg, then use that file to check that the copy of Firefox I was downloading was intact and hadn't been tampered with. I'd even created a script that downloaded the files and checked them for me. There are at least two things wrong with the SHA512SUMS file available for Firefox 46.0: 1. The filenames in it no longer correspond to the filenames on your site. Example: the entry for en-US linux-i686 for 45.0 has this for a filename after the SHA512 sum: > linux-i686/en-US/firefox-45.0.tar.bz2 which reflects the actual directory and filename that the file is stored as. In contrast, the same entry for firefox 46.0 is: > firefox-46.0.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2 ... but the file on your website is still stored in the linux-i686/en-US directory as "forefox-46.0.tar.bz2". Yes, I could correct for that in my script. But at's annoying, and also there's the second problem: 2. Some files aren't even in the SHA512SUMS file. The Windows files are nowhere to be seen. There's no ".exe" string in the file. Please tell me this whole thing is an error that will be fixed?

Wšě wotmołwy (1)

more options

Wubrane rozrisanje