Yesterday when I went tried to access my email account thre was a notice on the top of the page stating.
"You are using an older version. Use the latest browser version for your security and a faster web experience. Free download here!"
Today I've removed and reinstalled Midori web browser and rebooted but I still keep getting the same mesage.
Both yesterday and today trying to log into my email I'm told I forgot to log out and press here to continue which takes me back to the log in page.
My question is since the advice/posting is not from mageia is it safe to accept the download?
I'm running mageia 4 lxde and don't want to install either firefox or Chromium
You will sometimes see this kind of warning when using a lesser known browser. The developers are basically lazy and are only checking for an up to date version of the major browsers; usually this means IE, Firefox and Chrome. If you are lucky they may also include Opera!
If you are running something like Midori, I would ignore it. Out of idle curiosity, where does the download link point?
Thanks for your response:).
In response to your idle curosity I hit the "button" to update my browser and was redirected to a Firefox site and the many download buttons for Firefox.
I didn't download it, for I'm not convinced there would not be a trojan in the download. However I did install (using urpmi) both Opera and Dillo --- Fortunately Opera got into my email account and I'm yet to have a look at Dillo
edit. I'm getting the same advice from Opera..... it's an old browser...... but atleast Opera is getting into my email account ... for the moment.
Originally Posted by elija
I wouldn't call developers lazy if you've ever had to do QA and see how big a test matrix is you'd understand why only the most popular apps, browsers in this case are. If you really want your favorite app QA'd then volenteer, I'm sure they would love to have another beta-banger and get you access to the test scripts, and bug-base for reporting.
This is a conversation I've had with members of the SAMBA team and other FOSS projects how QA is the area lacking compared to commerical software. Finding volenteers to do QA is very hard, most people just want to code. QA can be very boring work confirming bugs, negative testing, regression testing, every time something major or minor changes because the simplist fix can have unexpected side effect where you wouldn't expect them. One of the big software companies I worked for was good at nothing went out the door without a full QA cycle, and a full QA cycle not only takes a lot of time, it is expense. So at times we have bug fixes we have to shelve because no time or money for a QA cycle. So attitude because a documented bug is as good as a bug fix. For big products fixes would have to wait till there was a stack of fixes and we could justify the time and cost of a QA cycle. In FOSS world cost isn't a factor, but getting bodies to do QA work is. There is a lot more to software development than most realize especially a nightmare like a browser with multiple standards to support, plugins, muliple API's, and now desktops and mobile devices, test process is HUGE.
Probably wise. If you don't trust the link then I wouldn't download fromit
Originally Posted by meggin
Heh. I've been a professional programmer for over thirty years. Trust me, I know exactly how lazy we are. Code reuse, object orientation, automated test suites, code coverage, test driven development. All created so we don't have to do so much work. Or at least so we don't have to do it twice!
Originally Posted by docbop
I've worked in places where things were thrown live to see what happened. I hated it especially when we had to go live on a Friday. I've worked in places where a single line change required a test plan that had to work through every branch in the program's code. With expected results and a space for actual results. This was back in the days when test plans were written by hand on paper and in that particular company, even back in the mid 1980s, had to be completed and approved before making the change. If the actual results didn't match for every code branch (complete code coverage) the change couldn't go live and had to be re-visited. That was pretty horrific also but at least the live systems never crashed! Most places I've worked have been somewhere in the middle of those extremes.
One of my all time favourite quotes:
"It should be noted that no ethically-trained software engineer would ever consent to write a DestroyBaghdad procedure. Basic professional ethics would instead require him to write a DestroyCity procedure, to which Baghdad could be given as a parameter." — Nathaniel Borenstein
LOL. That's hilarious! Thank you. I try to code that way too.
Originally Posted by elija