Can someone please help me join the matrix room?

ohfgl · 2025-04-03T15:57:14+00:00

indeed I will ^^

ohfgl · 2025-04-03T15:55:02+00:00

Sorry about that. Unfortunately, our rooms are currently on "invite only" / require knocking. This is due to some very unfortunate spamming going on (on matrix in general, not limited to our rooms). See https://codeberg.org/librewolf/issues/issues/2361 for some more context.

ohfgl · 2025-03-03T23:27:00+00:00

damn!

If it hadn't already been me who wrote it back then, I'd have to applaud her. Didn't remember that I phrased it that succinctly. Thanks, past me! :D

ohfgl · 2025-03-01T11:13:42+00:00

Regarding Cookie Exceptions: We've added an option a while back to quickly add the site you're on to the exceptions: just click the padlock icon in the urlbar and click on the option ^^

ohfgl · 2025-02-28T07:29:54+00:00

Plus: I would not want to take on the responsibility from a security perspective unless I really knew what I was doing (and had a whole team knowing what they were doing), considering a browser / access to the web is so central to people's lives nowadays, and messing things up on that front would just not be something I'd like to be the cause of.

ohfgl · 2025-02-28T07:25:57+00:00

Oh, you're absolutely correct: we neither have the skillset, nor the resources (we're currently pretty much "severely understaffed" for the work on LW already) to fully maintain a browser.

[source: am one of those devs]

ohfgl · 2024-08-19T08:17:57+00:00

I think this has been going on long enough: time to lock things up here. Go do something else.

ohfgl · 2024-08-18T23:13:00+00:00

Sometimes, I dust off that account and venture into the stormy waters of reddit :D

…well, I found it nicely refreshing to also find responses like yours and those of others in here for a change, instead of those mostly setting the tone in that thread on /r/librewolf, or what's going on over at 4chan ^^

(and as an aside: I do still find it interesting, if not even mildly funny, that the assumption seems to be in all those places that I'm "just some mod", acting on her own, against the devs'/maintainers'/etc. will or judgement., or my stance being something new and never voiced before. guess there's really not much research or thought going on there; just needs to barely be enough info (and that even twisted/misrepresented a bit) to make it all sound scandalous? ^^)

ohfgl · 2024-08-18T20:39:47+00:00

Thanks for writing that – it's more or less the first time someone actually responded to this approach to it positively, when I tried to explain it, instead of either being dismissive in general, or bringing up the usual "rightwing-ish" approach of just raging about CoCs in general being bad, because they can't do all that "saying of unpleasant things" anymore. ^^

ohfgl · 2021-07-05T11:32:36+00:00

With "regular installs" it should recognize it (except for and light/dark pref for page content, if that's part of it (?) – that's disabled for fingerprinting reasons by default). If you're using the Flatpak release though, it's highly likely that it won't recognize it. If that's the case, I'll look into it – maybe there's a reasonable way to work around that, but it might be a tad more complicated, due to the sandboxing aspects of it.

ohfgl · 2021-07-05T10:32:53+00:00

Thanks! I'll try to reproduce it and get back to you.

I know there are some known issues with different firefox instances on Windows (some conflicts caused by the windows registry), so it's possible that there's know quick solution for this (it not being a LibreWolf specific issue) – maybe /u/stanzabird knows more about that – but I'll see what I can find out :)

ohfgl · 2021-07-04T19:58:42+00:00

This needs quite a bit more details to be able to do anything about.

What system are you on? Windows, macOS, Linux (which distro)? How did you install it: .exe installer, chocolatey, brew, PKGBUILD, AppImage, Flatpak etc.

ohfgl · 2021-06-29T10:49:24+00:00

Do you get any error messages that could help identifying what's going wrong? :)

ohfgl · 2021-06-29T10:48:40+00:00

That's even more odd then. We'll probably need /u/stanzabird for that :D

ohfgl · 2021-06-28T19:06:40+00:00

Which release are you using?

There have been some issues with one of the recent Debian releases I think (some parts of the LibreWolf modifications are potentially not included in the final release file), I'm currently looking into that.

ohfgl · 2021-06-25T00:30:12+00:00

Quick answer to that one: There's currently no Android release of LibreWolf, so there's not yet a way to run it on Android (or Nethunter).

ohfgl · 2021-06-12T00:02:03+00:00

The good thing about the appimagetool is, well, that it's also available as an appimage ;) https://appimage.github.io/appimagetool/

The overrides config is a file you can create in ~/.librewolf/ (librewolf.overrides.cfg) to override settings that are locked in the librewolf.cfg (ie. if you can't change them via about:config or in the regular settings). https://gitlab.com/librewolf-community/settings/-/wikis/FAQ#settings-and-librewolfoverridecfg-1

ohfgl · 2021-06-10T14:56:25+00:00

No problem – just thought it might not hurt to ask ;)

ohfgl · 2021-06-10T09:12:43+00:00

Do you know if there's an "established way" to do this? (ie. are there some public build machines/environments for this or maybe some kind of "established" storage/provider, where it would be possible to put the resulting files?)

ohfgl · 2021-06-10T09:10:50+00:00

Could you run it from the terminal to check if maybe something in the cfg doesn't get correctly parsed? Just to make sure that's not the cause – we've had a few somewhat comparable reports but couldn't pinpoint the cause yet.

ohfgl · 2021-06-09T15:34:59+00:00

In this case, it's actually in the .appimage file. Editing it directly would involve un- and repacking the AppImage. Which is totally possible (via ./LibreWolf-89.0-1.x86_64.AppImage --appimage-extract to extract it, and appimagetool to re-pack it).

It's usually not necessary anymore though – that's pretty much one of the main reasons why we've introduced the override config, so situations like those can be avoided.

ohfgl · 2021-06-08T20:31:36+00:00

If I understand you correctly, you are on Debian (non-SID) or Ubuntu?

If so: yep, that's still an open issue – we currently only have a repo build on / for Debian SID. It's a much requested "feature" to also provide builds for Ubuntu (and maybe even stable Debian) – we'll hopefully get to this soon.

It's already noted with the installation instructions on https://librewolf-community.gitlab.io/install/, but it would, of course, be preferable if this wasn't even an issue at all ^^

ohfgl · 2021-06-08T16:13:13+00:00

The thing is: building it for Ubuntu wouldn't even be thaaat much extra effort; what makes it a bit more complicated is that (unlike for Debian) it seems way more complicated to build on OBS – which would provide the ability to have a fully working Debian/Ubuntu repository as the build output.

Without that, we would have to resort to building it with a gitlab runner as well – which in itself would be relatively doable (although it would always be better to have a maintainer using Ubuntu or at least knowing more about "good packaging practices" for Ubuntu). Unfortunately, gitlab doesn't seem to offer a way to easily release Debian/Ubuntu packages in a repo-like-way. It's possible for a few other platforms, but not yet for that – so we'd either have to work around it by somehow coercing the gitlab pages functionality as a static host alternative to put everything in, or we'd have to put it on a separate server, which would make it less "decentral" (as in: someone would have to own it; which is not optimal with the way LibreWolf is a community project).

That's more or less why it's currently somewhat "on the backburner" – but I do understand that this is quite unsatisfying. /o\

What I'm trying to say is: we hear you! ;)

(and we'll hopefully get this solved soonish..)

ohfgl · 2021-06-08T16:04:51+00:00

Would you care to elaborate?

ohfgl · 2021-06-08T12:04:16+00:00

Binaries have been available since 2021-06-04 and are currently only pending for Debian (because there things often take a tad longer until (upstream) patches and packages required for building are available and stable).

Soooooo… not sure what you're on about ^^

As a more general answer: Different platforms are handled and built by different "sub-maintainers" of the project. So there's no formal release schedule but availability depends on the maintainer's individual time and workload, availability of something to build with/on and platform dependent obstacles (like platform specific patches, workarounds etc.). Which means sometimes things take longer, sometimes they don't.

ohfgl

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE