Add-on not being compatible with latest releases of Firefox
blchupin at iinet.net.au
Thu Aug 18 12:40:18 UTC 2011
On 18/08/11 21:47, Alan Pope wrote:
> On 18 August 2011 12:28, Basil Chupin<blchupin at iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> If it weren't for my current belief that you are not a complete deadhead, I
>> would have responded to this stupid respsonse of yours in a totally
>> different manner.
> Delightful. I was merely pointing out that it's nobodys fault than
> your own if you're running "crack of the day" that it breaks now and
Oh, is that what you were trying to convey? Then I suggest that you get
a bit more articulate and say what you want to say in the right way.
We all know that being on the "bleeding edge" has its "moments of
excitement" - but that is not what I was conveying in my post because I
wasn't conveying "excitement" but rather a solution to those who were
either already running FF >#6 or were thinking about it.
> Firstly, as I mentioned, someone mentioned in this mail list that FF 8 was
> much faster than the version I installed (#7), and an improvement on version
> #6, available in Ubuntu, after which I installed Aurora #8 from the Mozilla
> site and found that it WAS was faster than FF6 and even #7 - and which I
> acknowledged in this list.
> Speed comes at a price.
Maybe yes, maybe no. All depends if you know how fast you can go and how
to handle the fast speed.
> You made no comment about this in this list at the time.
> I (and everyone else for that matter) am under no obligation to
> respond to every mail.
But of course - this is "a taken".
However, it has a slightly different rendition when it comes from the
only moderator of this list (sorry, the only *officially* listed
moderator of this list).
> But now, suddenly, you come out and decide to make an 'in depth
> You asked a specific question, I gave an answer, sorry you don't like
> the answer.
Al (may I call you Al?), what is the "specific question" I asked to
which you "gave an answer" and which I didn't like?
Please quote from my original post.
>> Is my post off-topic and not relevant to those who may be using Firefox #7
>> or #8, or now #9?
> Your post was about running Firefox on Ubuntu. How is that offtopic?
I don't know - I asked the question. Form your response I take it that
my post is not OF.
> Secondly, what was your purpose in stating what you just stated above
> when someone here posted a totally useless piece of info about taking
> apart a mouse to get rid of some crap inside it and which had nothing
> remotely do with anything associated with Ubuntu or Linux?
> I have no idea what you're talking about. I sometimes miss mails, so
> maybe I missed this interesting tid-bit of mouse control.
Understandable. You cannot be expected to read every post which is
posted in this list.
> And following from this, am I allowed to post another piece of
> information about Logitech keyboards and Logtitech mice which may
> assist their users to overcome a potential problem they may encounter
> when using them?
> I'm pretty sure you know what goes and what doesn't go on this list.
To be honest, I really don't know.
What is written here seems to depend on what you manage to read and
decide as to its contents or on what some "list police" here report and
complain about to (?)you or the "Council" (or whatever the correct term
is) as happened in the case of Sounder.
> Have a nice day!
Shall try and do so even though it is raining here, and the days are
Nevertheless, I am lifted in spirits following stimulating exchanges :-) .
(I hope that you didn't "riot" too much recently :-) .
But more seriously, I hope that you weren't affected in any way by the
"Oh what a tangled web we weave
When first we practice to deceive."
Sir Walter Scott
More information about the ubuntu-users