Search Support

Avoid support scams. We will never ask you to call or text a phone number or share personal information. Please report suspicious activity using the “Report Abuse” option.

Learn More

Update for FF68.0.2 TRASHED my separately installed V 56.0.2 with ALL OF THE ADD-ONS THAT I MUST HAVE.

  • 10 பதிலளிப்புகள்
  • 1 இந்த பிரச்சனை உள்ளது
  • 6 views
  • Last reply by Eldar Value

1st, please read my prior question for background as to why I MUST HAVE BOTH VERSIONS @ https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1265937 - "Is there any "Extension" that is capable of storing CONSECUTIVE "Screen Captures" in the Same Directory or do I have to continue to use FF 56.0.2".

This question has to do with the VERY poorly written v68.0.2 update.

If you read my prior post, address above, I MUST KEEP V56.0.2 ALIVE IN ORDER TO SAVE REPETITIVE CONSECUTIVE SCREEN PRINTS IN THE SAME DIRECTLY - v68.0.1 HAD NO CAPABILITY OF DOING THAT, AND NEITHER DOES V68.0.2 APPARENTLY.

FOLLOWING THE ADVICE OF SEVERAL CONTRIBUTORS - I WAS TOLD THAT I JUST NEEDED TO INSTALL v68+ IN A DIRECTORY OTHER THAN "Mozilla Firefox" SUCH AS "Mozilla Firefox - NEW", IN THE C:\Program Files DIRECTORY.

I HAD v56.0.2 RUNNING ON ANOTHER TASK, OPENED V 68.0.1, WHICH DEMANDED AN UPDATE - IT COULD NOT EVEN TELL THAT THE MESSAGE CAME FROM 68.0.1, INSTEAD IT UPDATED THAT TO 68.0.2, BUT IT ALSO TRASHED MY INSTALLATION OF 56.0.2

WHILE EXECUTING THIS HORRIBLE UPDATE, IT DID NOT ASK WHICH DIRECTORY TO INSTALL IT IN - IT JUST PLOWED AHEAD AND DESTROYED MY V56.0.2 INSTALLATION, AS WELL AS MY ACCESS TO THE ONLY USABLE SCREEN CAPTURE ADD-ONS - SINCE V57+ DESTROYED THOSE.

THE FACT THAT NOW EVEN UPDATES ARE SO POORLY WRITTEN, IT APPEARS THAT THE END OF THE ROAD IS AHEAD FOR MOZILLA.

I MUST HAVE A DOWNLOAD LINK TO V56.0.2 WHICH SHOULD RESTORE MY ADD-ONS. (NOT DRECTED FROM FROM PAGE https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/install-older-version-of-firefox#w_i-still-want-to-downgrade-ae-where-can-i-get-the-previous-version TO https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ ("Index of /pub/firefox/releases/") TO THE ENTRY FOR "Dir 56.0.2/" THEN TO https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/ ("Index of /pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/').

THIS "LIST" OF FILES FOR FF V56.0.2, HAS NO INSTRUCTIONS AS TO WHAT FILE WHICH USERS NEED TO DOWNLOAD TO RESTORE WHAT MOZILLA's FF V68.0.2 UPDATE DESTROYED - AGAINST MY SETTINGS AND WISHES & WITHOUT MY PERMMISION.

IF MOZILLA WILL NOT FIX THE WEB-EXTENSIONS - THIS USER MUST HAVE V56.0.2 BACK NOW ! ! !

RETALIATING AGAINST USERS WHO REQUIRE 2 INSTALLATIONS, JUST TO COMPLETE BASIC BROWSING TASKS (56.0.2 & 68.0.2) SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY TO PRODUCE USABLE SCREEN CAPTURES WITHOUT HAVING TO REPETITIVELY RE-NAVIGATE TO THE SAME DESIRED DIRECTORY TIME, AFTER TIME, IS TRULY EVIL.

PLEASE DIRECT ME TO A USABLE LINK TO DOWNLOAD A FUNCTIONAL VERSION OF 56.0.2 - OR PLEASE INDICATE WHAT FILES NEED TO BE DOWNLOADED AND EXECUTED FROM https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/ ("Index of /pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/').

FIX YOUR 68.0.2 UPDATES SO THERE IS NO IMPACT ON ANY OTHER VERSIONS IN DIFFERENT DIRECTORIES - THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THIS HAPPENING ESPECIALLY SINCE I HAD 52.0.6 SET TO NEVER UPDATE.

THIS USER MUST HAVE V56.0.2 (and its functional add-ons) BACK NOW IN ORDER TO DOCUMENT PAYING MY BILLS ! ! !

1st, please read my prior question for background as to why I MUST HAVE BOTH VERSIONS @ https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1265937 - "Is there any "Extension" that is capable of storing CONSECUTIVE "Screen Captures" in the Same Directory or do I have to continue to use FF 56.0.2". This question has to do with the VERY poorly written v68.0.2 update. If you read my prior post, address above, I MUST KEEP V56.0.2 ALIVE IN ORDER TO SAVE REPETITIVE CONSECUTIVE SCREEN PRINTS IN THE SAME DIRECTLY - v68.0.1 HAD NO CAPABILITY OF DOING THAT, AND NEITHER DOES V68.0.2 APPARENTLY. FOLLOWING THE ADVICE OF SEVERAL CONTRIBUTORS - I WAS TOLD THAT I JUST NEEDED TO INSTALL v68+ IN A DIRECTORY OTHER THAN "Mozilla Firefox" SUCH AS "Mozilla Firefox - NEW", IN THE C:\Program Files DIRECTORY. I HAD v56.0.2 RUNNING ON ANOTHER TASK, OPENED V 68.0.1, WHICH DEMANDED AN UPDATE - IT COULD NOT EVEN TELL THAT THE MESSAGE CAME FROM 68.0.1, INSTEAD IT UPDATED THAT TO 68.0.2, BUT IT ALSO TRASHED MY INSTALLATION OF 56.0.2 WHILE EXECUTING THIS HORRIBLE UPDATE, IT DID NOT ASK WHICH DIRECTORY TO INSTALL IT IN - IT JUST PLOWED AHEAD AND DESTROYED MY V56.0.2 INSTALLATION, AS WELL AS MY ACCESS TO THE ONLY USABLE SCREEN CAPTURE ADD-ONS - SINCE V57+ DESTROYED THOSE. THE FACT THAT NOW EVEN UPDATES ARE SO POORLY WRITTEN, IT APPEARS THAT THE END OF THE ROAD IS AHEAD FOR MOZILLA. I MUST HAVE A DOWNLOAD LINK TO V56.0.2 WHICH SHOULD RESTORE MY ADD-ONS. (NOT DRECTED FROM FROM PAGE https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/install-older-version-of-firefox#w_i-still-want-to-downgrade-ae-where-can-i-get-the-previous-version TO https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ ("Index of /pub/firefox/releases/") TO THE ENTRY FOR "Dir 56.0.2/" THEN TO https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/ ("Index of /pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/'). THIS "LIST" OF FILES FOR FF V56.0.2, HAS NO INSTRUCTIONS AS TO WHAT FILE WHICH USERS NEED TO DOWNLOAD TO RESTORE WHAT MOZILLA's FF V68.0.2 UPDATE DESTROYED - AGAINST MY SETTINGS AND WISHES & WITHOUT MY PERMMISION. IF MOZILLA WILL NOT FIX THE WEB-EXTENSIONS - THIS USER MUST HAVE V56.0.2 BACK NOW ! ! ! RETALIATING AGAINST USERS WHO REQUIRE 2 INSTALLATIONS, JUST TO COMPLETE BASIC BROWSING TASKS (56.0.2 & 68.0.2) SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY TO PRODUCE USABLE SCREEN CAPTURES WITHOUT HAVING TO REPETITIVELY RE-NAVIGATE TO THE SAME DESIRED DIRECTORY TIME, AFTER TIME, IS TRULY EVIL. PLEASE DIRECT ME TO A USABLE LINK TO DOWNLOAD A FUNCTIONAL VERSION OF 56.0.2 - OR PLEASE INDICATE WHAT FILES NEED TO BE DOWNLOADED AND EXECUTED FROM https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/ ("Index of /pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/'). FIX YOUR 68.0.2 UPDATES SO THERE IS NO IMPACT ON ANY OTHER VERSIONS IN DIFFERENT DIRECTORIES - THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THIS HAPPENING ESPECIALLY SINCE I HAD 52.0.6 SET TO NEVER UPDATE. THIS USER MUST HAVE V56.0.2 (and its functional add-ons) BACK NOW IN ORDER TO DOCUMENT PAYING MY BILLS ! ! !

Doug மூலமாக திருத்தப்பட்டது

All Replies (10)

Reinstall V 56.0.2 BUT use the manual option. Then load V 56.0.2 in a different folder than the default.

Also, remember that each version must use its own profile folder.

For the V 56.0.2, create a shortcut that points to its folder and profile. Example: (on one line) "C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox_56\firefox.exe" -P Firefox_56

Firefox Quantum cannot safely share profile folders with legacy versions. Did 68.0.2 convert your 56.0.2 profile folder? Program folders come and go, the profile has the important stuff so that is what you would need to restore from backup if it was converted.

Hi FredMcD.

1st, I don't know which files under https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/ ("Index of /pub/firefox/releases/56.0.2/') that I need to download & which to execute.

I'm fairly certain that this will be fairly tedious.

BUT I MUST HAVE MY FF 56.0.2 ADD-ONS BACK ASAP.

If I knew which files to download, do you think that copying my 20 April 2019 backup into the 56.0.2 directory, then renaming "C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox to C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox 56 - If I then reinstall 56.0.2 into that directory do you think that 56 reinstall would the prior add-ons (that were installed at the time of my last backup?

OR should I try a system restore to 7 Aug 2019 (will delete 8 programs, including 68.0.2, will impact 6 more including 56.0.2. (since that is the newest "backup" I have.

I know that I should also restore the contents of the profile for 56.0.2 which appears to have the add-ons in it, but the 68.0.2 update did overwrite several Profile entries.

I've never needed to do this before, so I'm not sure how to reattach the (restored) profile for 56.0.2 with whatever entry that I name the 56.0.2 re-installation directory.

What will keep the next 68+ update from overwriting parts of 56.0.2 - the "Do not update" was already checked?

One last question, should I uninstall 68.0.2 first or I could just do a "System Restore". Is there is a "Manual" install for it too?


Hi jscher2000,

Thanks.

As I wrote above, the 68.0.2 installation did overwrite or added items to my 56.0.2

I'll wait to see what approach seems best to FredMcD and you, and go from there.


Thanks

Hi Doug, don't use System Restore. Instead you can use a utility to export out your profile folder separately so you can do a selective restore without wiping out the rest of your folders.

For example, see the steps I posted here: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1264670#answer-1237685

As for how to find an installer on the FTP server, they are sorted into individual folders by OS and language/locale.

Check out jscher2000 above post first.

If you can recover those files, place them in temporary storage. Then we can tell you how to create a new profile using that data.

Hi jscher2000 & FredMcD,

Thank you both for the quick replies.

jscher2000, i followed your suggestion from earlier today.

All of the folder options (where appropriate) are set to show all hidden files & folders, EXCEPT THE SYSTEM OS FILES/FOLDERS.

I downloaded & installed "System Restore Explorer", then rebooted.

Unfortunately, "System Restore Explorer" will not show anything on the C: drive - which is where everything that I need to restore lives. (I left the developer a "Feedback" message asking for a solution.)

This does not seem like a workable fix.

When I open Win 7 Restore Points, the only programs that will be deleted or impacted are all on my C: drive.

I have attached the 2 very small lists of deleted/impacted programs.

I then downloaded and installed ShadowExplorer-0.9 - Vastly superior - Finds all drives included in "Restore Point."

I plan on making backups of my profiles & program files first.

Should I delete 68.0.2 next?

Then should I do the ShadowExplorer-0.9 restores of both my profile and the 56.0.2 files.

Followed by renaming the 56.0.2 program directory & reinstalling 56.0.2 in the renamed directory.

I do not know how to connect the 56.0.2 programs with the 56.0.2 profile (& can I rename the profile to indicate that it is the 56.0.2 profile)?

Then reinstalling 68.0.2.

Doug மூலமாக திருத்தப்பட்டது

Did you try ShadowExplorer?

The Firefox profile folder isn't part of the Windows Program folder, so looking for files to restore there won't help.

Firefox uses two locations for the Firefox profile folder, so make sure to look in the correct location in "AppData\Roaming" and not in "AppData\Local". Location used for the main profile that keeps your personal data (Root Directory on about:preferences).

  • C:\Users\<user>\AppData\Roaming\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\<profile>\

You can use the button on the "Help -> Troubleshooting Information" (about:support) page to go to the current Firefox profile folder or use the about:profiles page.

Hi jscher2000, FredMcD, & cor-el,

Thank you all for your help with this...

Unfortunately, I created a mess for myself while cleaning up after "System Restore Explorer"... I had simply deleted each "Mounted" restore point as I finished trying several points... then did not "Empty the Recycle Bin" and instead used a shredding utility - I did not think about how many 100,000's of individual files that would be... lol...

Once the shred starts, it must take them out of the hands of Windows completely.

I'm going to have to contact McAfee to see how to clear the "memory" of these files existence, short of complete uninstall/re-install if I can avoid it, but not a big deal. (I did re-install it already though.)

I did download and tried "ShadowExplorer" before my mess - it looks like that will get me to the files that I will need from the prior restore point. Thanks!

After I get this cleaned up, I probably will add a reply here to get your ideas regarding putting both versions back together, with their profiles separate.

Hopefully, this will just take me a couple of days.

Thanks again

Firefox versions 57 and above engines are different (from gecko to quantum), and that caused that.