Avatar for Username

Sykje yn Support

Mij stipescams. Wy sille jo nea freegje in telefoannûmer te beljen, der in sms nei ta te stjoeren of persoanlike gegevens te dielen. Meld fertochte aktiviteit mei de opsje ‘Misbrûk melde’.

Mear ynfo

Dizze konversaasje is argivearre. Stel in nije fraach as jo help nedich hawwe.

about: build identifier correct ??

aab@purdue.edu
aab@purdue.edu
more options

I have observed that the build identifier for Firefox-5.0.1 is

Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:5.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/5.0.1

and the timestamps on many of the downloaded files seem to agree. On the other hand, the build identifier for SeaMonkey-2.2 is

Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110706 Firefox/5.0 SeaMonkey/2.2

Note the date difference even though the revisons seem to be the same. FWIW - the SeaMonkey timestamps are close to those for Firefox.

Why the difference?

A second curiosity. I know that Firefox-5.0.1 and SeaMonkey-2.2 were very recently released yet the timestamps on the executables are more than a year and a half ago.

How come?

-- Paul Townsend (Purdue Univ., ITaP-ITSO Systems Administrator)

I have observed that the build identifier for Firefox-5.0.1 is Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:5.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/5.0.1 and the timestamps on many of the downloaded files seem to agree. On the other hand, the build identifier for SeaMonkey-2.2 is Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110706 Firefox/5.0 SeaMonkey/2.2 Note the date difference even though the revisons seem to be the same. FWIW - the SeaMonkey timestamps are close to those for Firefox. Why the difference? A second curiosity. I know that Firefox-5.0.1 and SeaMonkey-2.2 were very recently released yet the timestamps on the executables are more than a year and a half ago. How come? -- Paul Townsend (Purdue Univ., ITaP-ITSO Systems Administrator)

Alle antwurden (2)

cor-el
cor-el
  • Moderator
  • Top 10 Contributor
more options

Firefox 4 and later all have the same timestamps in the user agent Gecko/20100101
That value will probably never change again.
It is part of exposing as less privacy information as possible to web servers via the user agent.

You can check the file application.ini in the Firefox program folder to see the BuildID or open the Troubleshooting Information page (Help > Troubleshooting Information).

  • browser.startup.homepage_override.buildID

You can also follow the Build link on the about:buildconfig page.

Bewurke troch cor-el op

aab@purdue.edu
aab@purdue.edu Fraacheigener
more options

Okay, that basically answers question 1.

Question two basically asks when the executables were finalized since many of their timestamps effectivly agree with the "new" UA. If those timestamps are accurate, why weren't the executables released sooner?