Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.comp.software.firefox > #16805 > unrolled thread

Unwanted update to 150 just happened

Started byThe Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
First post2026-04-25 08:45 -0700
Last post2026-04-27 04:07 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 91 — 15 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.software.firefox


Contents

  Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 08:45 -0700
    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Retirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.invalid> - 2026-04-25 13:12 -0400
      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-04-25 18:18 +0100
        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Nobody <jock@soccer.com> - 2026-04-25 10:26 -0700
          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 11:01 -0700
            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> - 2026-04-28 10:14 +0100
              Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-28 12:40 -0700
                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> - 2026-04-28 22:21 +0100
                  Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-28 19:36 -0700
                    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened dillinger <dillinger@invalid.not> - 2026-04-29 15:45 +0200
                      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-04-29 15:04 +0100
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-04-29 15:10 +0100
                          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-04-29 15:21 +0100
                            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened dillinger <dillinger@invalid.not> - 2026-04-29 17:26 +0200
                            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-29 19:41 -0700
                      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-04-29 16:47 +0100
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-04-29 16:52 +0100
                          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-04-29 16:54 +0100
                            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-04-29 17:00 +0100
                              Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-02 05:41 +0000
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened dillinger <dillinger@invalid.not> - 2026-04-29 18:11 +0200
                          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> - 2026-04-29 20:20 +0100
                            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-29 20:30 -0700
                              Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-04-30 09:10 +0100
                                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-04-30 10:03 +0100
                              Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened dillinger <dillinger@invalid.not> - 2026-04-30 05:48 +0200
                                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-04-30 14:23 +0100
                                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-30 20:16 -0700
                                  Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-03 21:47 +0000
                                    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-05-03 19:33 -0700
                              Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> - 2026-05-01 07:04 +0000
                                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 09:33 -0700
                                  Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> - 2026-05-01 18:00 +0100
                                  Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-03 21:51 +0000
                                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> - 2026-05-03 11:52 +0000
                    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-01 08:09 +0000
                      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-05-01 09:17 -0700
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2026-05-01 19:10 +0200
                          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened R Daneel Olivaw <Danni@hyperspace.vogon.gov.invalid> - 2026-05-01 20:16 +0200
                            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Nobody <jock@soccer.com> - 2026-05-01 12:57 -0700
                              Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 11:58 -0700
                                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2026-05-02 21:15 +0200
                                  Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 12:53 -0700
                                    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2026-05-02 22:25 +0200
                                      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 22:10 -0700
                                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Nobody <jock@soccer.com> - 2026-05-02 16:40 -0700
                                  Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-05-02 22:01 -0700
                                    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Nobody <jock@soccer.com> - 2026-05-03 18:49 -0700
                            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2026-05-01 22:09 +0200
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-02 12:08 +1200
                          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-05-02 00:11 +0000
    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened R Daneel Olivaw <Danni@hyperspace.vogon.gov.invalid> - 2026-04-25 20:13 +0200
      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 11:25 -0700
        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 11:35 -0700
          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2026-04-25 14:56 -0400
            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED! The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 12:41 -0700
              Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED! "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2026-04-25 15:56 -0400
              Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED! Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2026-04-25 23:03 +0200
                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED! The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 14:51 -0700
                  Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED! "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2026-04-25 18:12 -0400
                    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED! The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 22:13 -0700
            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened R Daneel Olivaw <Danni@hyperspace.vogon.gov.invalid> - 2026-04-26 10:12 +0200
        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2026-04-25 21:40 +0200
    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2026-04-25 14:21 -0500
    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED! The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 12:45 -0700
      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED! The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-25 13:01 -0700
    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2026-04-25 19:58 -0400
      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Retirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.invalid> - 2026-04-26 07:42 -0400
        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened R Daneel Olivaw <Danni@hyperspace.vogon.gov.invalid> - 2026-04-26 18:46 +0200
          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-26 12:11 -0700
            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Nobody <jock@soccer.com> - 2026-04-26 15:47 -0700
              Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-26 17:05 -0700
                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Nobody <jock@soccer.com> - 2026-04-26 18:49 -0700
                  Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-26 21:48 -0700
                    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Retirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.invalid> - 2026-04-27 13:42 -0400
                      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-27 11:28 -0700
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Retirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.invalid> - 2026-04-27 16:01 -0400
                          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-28 12:45 -0700
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2026-04-28 00:23 +0000
                      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-28 08:36 +0000
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2026-04-28 12:35 +0000
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Retirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.invalid> - 2026-04-28 15:42 -0400
                    Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-28 01:14 +0000
                      Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2026-04-28 02:51 +0000
                        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2026-04-28 12:51 -0700
                          Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2026-05-08 15:06 -0500
                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2026-04-26 22:27 -0400
                Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-28 01:12 +0000
            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Retirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.invalid> - 2026-04-27 13:24 -0400
            Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened R Daneel Olivaw <Danni@hyperspace.vogon.gov.invalid> - 2026-04-28 09:15 +0200
        Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-04-27 04:07 +0000

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →


#16839 — Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED!

FromThe Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
Date2026-04-25 22:13 -0700
SubjectRe: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED!
Message-ID<10sk6t9$1bmpd$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16834
On 4/25/26 15:12, Alan K. wrote:
> On 4/25/26 5:51 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 4/25/26 14:03, Frank Miller wrote:
>>> The Real Bev wrote:
>>> [..snip..]
>>>> The update manager hasn't worked for many years.
>>>
>>> Which one; and which Linux distribution do you use?
>>>
>>>> Perplexity (my
>>>> favored AI) finally came up with the answer.  Basically, the update
>>>> changed the policies.json file to match the windows syntax, which
>>>> invalidated it and allowed the update to proceed.  Perplexity's fix:
>>>>
>>>> cat -A distribution/policies.json 		;reveals ^M corruption
>>>> echo '{"policies":{"DisableAppUpdate":true}}' > policies.json ;fixes it
>>>> about:policies 					;confirms "Active"
>>>
>>> So frankly - do you understand this blabber? Do you know what it means?
>>> Or do you blindly follow the instructions of your "favored AI"?
>>>
>>>> I wonder what other as-yet-undiscovered wihshit is lurking in the
>>>> firefox/ directory.
>>>
>>> I wonder if you are willing to understand the functions and the given
>>> facts of a Linux system. The system that you use.
>> 
>> Sure, within limits.  Yes, I understand that.  The problem is when
>> third-party entities interact with other third-party entities, doing
>> things behind the scenes that are invisible to me.  I have other
>> problems too, of course, but my mitochondria are of little interest to
>> anyone here.
>> 
>> I know what cat, echo and chmod do.  So does everyone reading this
>> thread, probably. Why would a linux update apply windows formatting to a
>> linux file?  No idea, seems either stupid or malevolent. Why would
>> anyone suspect such a thing?
>> 
>> I'm sorry if I upset you by posting something you felt was... uh...
>> inappropriate is always a useful word.  I'll try to have a
>> less-obvious-to-you problem next time.
>> 
> The ^M corruption you talk about is not corruption.   I'll get this wrong but read between
> the lines here.   Window uses carriage-return line-feed (CRLF) in text files.  Linux just
> uses carriage-return (CR).  So if you grab a policies file from you window HD, and drop it
> into Linux, it's got extra characters.  

No, I've always used linux tarballs.  I created the policies.json file 
with pico, linux' trivial text editor which I just happened to use in 
1995 and never had a reason to stop.  When firefox does an update it 
touches every file in the firefox/ subdirectory;  at some point firefox 
must have added the LF characters (^M?) which pico can't see. Probably 
when I chose to let it update from 148 to 149;  previous version was 
<100.  If I had just deleted the damaged file and created a new one and 
then made it read-only it probably would have had the same effect.  It 
was just easier to copy+paste the Perplexity output.

This is the kind of weirdness that nobody would think of and why AI is 
so good.  They do hallucinate sometimes, and they're just a bit too 
obsequeious, but I'm ashamed to say that I'm hooked.

> If you had opened it with a proper Linux text
> editor and saved it, you probably would have fixed it, but even that might not do it if
> the editor is not set for force Linux line endings.

pico, a resident linux editor, has apparently worked properly for as 
long as I've used it -- 30 years. There are things it doesn't do, but 
I'm pretty sure it didn't do this.
> The echo in Linux solves the problem nicely as it writes the file in proper Linux text
> format.
  > For larger files you would have to find a dos2unix script, so sed 
command, etc.

pico is fine. Last time I needed something more capable was when I was 
writing dBaseII shit and I can't remember what I used.  Maybe WP if it 
had a text mode.  Before that it was FORTRAN punch cards.  If I need 
pretty stuff I use libreoffice.
> Xed in Mint doesn't seem to give me any issues with Windows files.

I only use windows (11) on a 5-year-old laptop to do taxes.  Maybe zoom 
if I ever needed to use that.  Do people still use zoom?

-- 
Cheers, Bev
    "I love to go down to the schoolyard  and watch all the
     little children jump up and down and run around yelling and
     screaming...They don't know I'm only using blanks."   --Emo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16840

FromR Daneel Olivaw <Danni@hyperspace.vogon.gov.invalid>
Date2026-04-26 10:12 +0200
Message-ID<10skhdl$se4u$1@paganini.bofh.team>
In reply to#16814
Alan K. wrote:
> On 4/25/26 2:35 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 4/25/26 11:25, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 4/25/26 11:13, R Daneel Olivaw wrote:
>>>> The Real Bev wrote:
>>>>> In spite of the policies.json file which has worked before. Is there a
>>>>> new method to stop updates, or are we just hosed?
>>>>>
>>>>> (I just made a similar post, but it doesn't seem to have taken.)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd take a look at about:policies (under 149 or 150) and see what 
>>>> policy
>>>> it suggests.  Mozilla have changed this setting's name before and it
>>>> would not be a total shock if they changed it again.
>>>
>>> 149 is gone.  150 says "The Enterprise Policies service is inactive."
>>>
>>> policies.json is listed in the Documentation List and is exactly what I
>>> have.
>>>
>>> ============
>>> policies.json
>>>
>>> {
>>>      "policies": {
>>>        "DisableAppUpdate": true | false
>>>      }
>>> }
>>> =============
>>>
>>> Is there perhaps a different location from firefox/distribution now?
>>
>>
>> Same location/file on FF149 on a backup from March 31 :-(
>>
>>
> shouldn't that be just true OR false, not both?

He is saying what the Documentation shows.

> 
> And if you're on Linux, I don't think json works.   You do it with 
> update manager there.
> 

Not sure what you mean there, I have /etc/firefox/policies/policies.json 
for my global settings.  One of them is DisableAppUpdate but that is 
just as a backstop, I believe it is ignored (possibly that's the way it 
is compiled).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16817

FromFrank Miller <miller@posteo.ee>
Date2026-04-25 21:40 +0200
Message-ID<69ED18B9.9080100@backwurst.de>
In reply to#16811
The Real Bev wrote:
> On 4/25/26 11:13, R Daneel Olivaw wrote:
>> The Real Bev wrote:
>>> In spite of the policies.json file which has worked before. Is there a 
>>> new method to stop updates, or are we just hosed?
>> 
>> I'd take a look at about:policies (under 149 or 150) and see what policy
>> it suggests.  Mozilla have changed this setting's name before and it
>> would not be a total shock if they changed it again.
> 
> 149 is gone.  150 says "The Enterprise Policies service is inactive."
> 
> policies.json is listed in the Documentation List and is exactly what I 
> have.
> 
> ============
> policies.json
> 
> {
>    "policies": {
>      "DisableAppUpdate": true | false
>    }
> }
> =============

If this is literally what you have as "policies.json" there's no wonder
it doesn't work. You've got to set *either* true *or* false.

> Is there perhaps a different location from firefox/distribution now?

All that doesn't matter if you installed Firefox as a regular packet in
a Linux system. In this case updates are managed by the system and not
by Firefox itself. So a "policies.json" file is obsolete.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16815

FromVanguardLH <V@nguard.LH>
Date2026-04-25 14:21 -0500
Message-ID<1n09qmzo7v0sn.dlg@v.nguard.lh>
In reply to#16805
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> In spite of the policies.json file which has worked before. Is there a 
> new method to stop updates, or are we just hosed?

Did you go into the Help -> About menu?  When you visit there to see
what version you have, they would start an automated update.  Rude!  You
wanted to see the current version, and did NOT click on anything to
start an update.  I got in the habit of visiting the about:support page
to see the version instead of using Help -> About.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16819 — Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED!

FromThe Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
Date2026-04-25 12:45 -0700
SubjectRe: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED!
Message-ID<10sj5ki$10uuo$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16805
On 4/25/26 08:45, The Real Bev wrote:
> In spite of the policies.json file which has worked before. Is there a
> new method to stop updates, or are we just hosed?

Perplexity just solved the problem, also posted further down in the thread.

Basically, the update changed the policies.json file to match the 
windows syntax, which invalidated it and allowed the update to proceed. 
Perplexity's fix:

cat -A distribution/policies.json 		;reveals ^M corruption
echo '{"policies":{"DisableAppUpdate":true}}' > policies.json ;fixes it
about:policies 					;confirms "Active"

-- 
Cheers, Bev
    All bleeding eventually stops.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16823 — Re: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED!

FromThe Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
Date2026-04-25 13:01 -0700
SubjectRe: Unwanted update to 150 just happened -- SOLVED!
Message-ID<10sj6jc$10uuo$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16819
On 4/25/26 12:45, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 4/25/26 08:45, The Real Bev wrote:
>> In spite of the policies.json file which has worked before. Is there a
>> new method to stop updates, or are we just hosed?
> 
> Perplexity just solved the problem, also posted further down in the thread.
> 
> Basically, the update changed the policies.json file to match the
> windows syntax, which invalidated it and allowed the update to proceed.
> Perplexity's fix:
> 
> cat -A distribution/policies.json 		;reveals ^M corruption
> echo '{"policies":{"DisableAppUpdate":true}}' > policies.json ;fixes it
> about:policies 					;confirms "Active"

Did the same to Thundirbird and made the files read-only.  Belt+suspenders.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
   "I read somewhere that 77 per cent of all the mentally ill live in
    poverty.  Actually, I'm more intrigued by the 23 per cent who are
    apparently doing quite well for themselves."       -- Emo Philips

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16837

Frommicky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com>
Date2026-04-25 19:58 -0400
Message-ID<m5lquktkhirn4mhtou1ror5v72uigkrdd4@4ax.com>
In reply to#16805
In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 25 Apr 2026 08:45:01 -0700, The
Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

>In spite of the policies.json file which has worked before. Is there a 
>new method to stop updates, or are we just hosed?
>
>(I just made a similar post, but it doesn't seem to have taken.)

There is a procedure for reinstalling the previous version but I don't
know much about it.   There is a page with a long list of versions for
dlownload

I see that 150 is lurking in my future too. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16841

FromRetirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.invalid>
Date2026-04-26 07:42 -0400
Message-ID<10sktnc$1i9td$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16837
On 4/25/2026 7:58 PM, micky wrote:
> In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 25 Apr 2026 08:45:01 -0700, The
> Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> In spite of the policies.json file which has worked before. Is there a 
>> new method to stop updates, or are we just hosed?
>>
>> (I just made a similar post, but it doesn't seem to have taken.)
> 
> There is a procedure for reinstalling the previous version but I don't
> know much about it.   There is a page with a long list of versions for
> dlownload
> 
> I see that 150 is lurking in my future too. 

Looking at all the posts in this thread, this is one of the rare times
that I'm glad that I use windows 11.  I'm an end user and both want (and
need) to do everything via the GUI.  When I turn on my appliances, I
expect them to be user friendly.  I shouldn't have to understand what
goes on "under the hood" to be able to start and drive my car, stop when
I brake, and steer to the right when I turn the steering wheel
clockwise.  I've driven early model cars (Model A Ford) and had to crank
the engine and adjust the spark advance control on the steering wheel.
Been there, done that.  Much prefer dealing with my Prius.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16842

FromR Daneel Olivaw <Danni@hyperspace.vogon.gov.invalid>
Date2026-04-26 18:46 +0200
Message-ID<10slfgn$uf9g$1@paganini.bofh.team>
In reply to#16841
Retirednoguilt wrote:
> On 4/25/2026 7:58 PM, micky wrote:
>> In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 25 Apr 2026 08:45:01 -0700, The
>> Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In spite of the policies.json file which has worked before. Is there a
>>> new method to stop updates, or are we just hosed?
>>>
>>> (I just made a similar post, but it doesn't seem to have taken.)
>>
>> There is a procedure for reinstalling the previous version but I don't
>> know much about it.   There is a page with a long list of versions for
>> dlownload
>>
>> I see that 150 is lurking in my future too.
> 
> Looking at all the posts in this thread, this is one of the rare times
> that I'm glad that I use windows 11.  I'm an end user and both want (and
> need) to do everything via the GUI.  When I turn on my appliances, I
> expect them to be user friendly.  I shouldn't have to understand what
> goes on "under the hood" to be able to start and drive my car, stop when
> I brake, and steer to the right when I turn the steering wheel
> clockwise.  I've driven early model cars (Model A Ford) and had to crank
> the engine and adjust the spark advance control on the steering wheel.
> Been there, done that.  Much prefer dealing with my Prius.
> 

My impression is that Bev *is* using some form of Windows, policies.json 
works for Windows as well as *nix systems but auto-update is something 
which is basically there for Windows.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16844

FromThe Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
Date2026-04-26 12:11 -0700
Message-ID<10slo10$1pk30$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16842
On 4/26/26 09:46, R Daneel Olivaw wrote:
> Retirednoguilt wrote:
>> On 4/25/2026 7:58 PM, micky wrote:
>>> In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 25 Apr 2026 08:45:01 -0700, The
>>> Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In spite of the policies.json file which has worked before. Is there a
>>>> new method to stop updates, or are we just hosed?
>>>>
>>>> (I just made a similar post, but it doesn't seem to have taken.)
>>>
>>> There is a procedure for reinstalling the previous version but I don't
>>> know much about it.   There is a page with a long list of versions for
>>> dlownload
>>>
>>> I see that 150 is lurking in my future too.
>> 
>> Looking at all the posts in this thread, this is one of the rare times
>> that I'm glad that I use windows 11.  I'm an end user and both want (and
>> need) to do everything via the GUI.  When I turn on my appliances, I
>> expect them to be user friendly.  I shouldn't have to understand what
>> goes on "under the hood" to be able to start and drive my car, stop when
>> I brake, and steer to the right when I turn the steering wheel
>> clockwise.  I've driven early model cars (Model A Ford) and had to crank
>> the engine and adjust the spark advance control on the steering wheel.
>> Been there, done that.  Much prefer dealing with my Prius.

But what if you aren't given choices about things that are important to 
you?  Like, for instance, typeface, size, weight, color etc. or window 
size or placement.  Sorry, Citizen, we know what's good for you... In 
car terms: Sorry, Citizen, you don't need high beams or an adjustable 
driver's seat...

> My impression is that Bev *is* using some form of Windows, policies.json
> works for Windows as well as *nix systems but auto-update is something
> which is basically there for Windows.

No.  This computer is slackware-only.  Perplexity figured that Firefox 
had somehow, in its infinite wisdom, added windows-formatting characters 
(CRLF instead of just CR) to the text file in question.  That seemed to 
be the problem, and the solution given was correct.

You can allow Firefox to auto-update, but apparently choosing to 
check-but-only-update-if-approved is shown but no longer works -- hence 
the need for the text file.

I have a Win11 (sorry I upgraded to 11, 10 was better) laptop that I use 
only for taxes -- because I have to.  Win3.1 was OK, as was Win95, but 
it went downhill from there.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
      Warning:  Objects in mirror appear smarter than they are.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16847

FromNobody <jock@soccer.com>
Date2026-04-26 15:47 -0700
Message-ID<j55tukh2ntm7esck453fqf9a8cra143b7j@4ax.com>
In reply to#16844
On Sun, 26 Apr 2026 12:11:28 -0700, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:


>I have a Win11 (sorry I upgraded to 11, 10 was better) laptop that I use 
>only for taxes -- because I have to. 

Aw... life's so hard, and then the door to the crematorium beckons.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16848

FromThe Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
Date2026-04-26 17:05 -0700
Message-ID<10sm983$1v82r$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16847
On 4/26/26 15:47, Nobody wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Apr 2026 12:11:28 -0700, The Real Bev
> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>I have a Win11 (sorry I upgraded to 11, 10 was better) laptop that I use 
>>only for taxes -- because I have to. 
> 
> Aw... life's so hard, and then the door to the crematorium beckons.

If noboby every complained we'd still be living in caves and eating raw 
meat.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
    If trees could scream, would we be so cavalier about cutting
    them down?  We might, if they screamed all the time, for
    no good reason.                                 - Jack Handy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16850

FromNobody <jock@soccer.com>
Date2026-04-26 18:49 -0700
Message-ID<hqftuk9mci4mtbpj71vfutssmqjfanmof0@4ax.com>
In reply to#16848
On Sun, 26 Apr 2026 17:05:23 -0700, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 4/26/26 15:47, Nobody wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2026 12:11:28 -0700, The Real Bev
>> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>I have a Win11 (sorry I upgraded to 11, 10 was better) laptop that I use 
>>>only for taxes -- because I have to. 
>> 
>> Aw... life's so hard, and then the door to the crematorium beckons.
>
>If noboby every complained we'd still be living in caves and eating raw 
>meat.

But... Win 11 works correctly... Ffox 150.0 works correctly... for
whomever.

Win 11 is essentially souped-up Win 10 which ticked over flawlessly
for how many?  Or Ffox 150.0 for how many without
grizzling/grumbling/bitching?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16857

FromThe Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
Date2026-04-26 21:48 -0700
Message-ID<10smprl$23r7q$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16850
On 4/26/26 18:49, Nobody wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Apr 2026 17:05:23 -0700, The Real Bev
> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>On 4/26/26 15:47, Nobody wrote:
>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2026 12:11:28 -0700, The Real Bev
>>> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>I have a Win11 (sorry I upgraded to 11, 10 was better) laptop that I use 
>>>>only for taxes -- because I have to. 
>>> 
>>> Aw... life's so hard, and then the door to the crematorium beckons.
>>
>>If noboby every complained we'd still be living in caves and eating raw 
>>meat.
> 
> But... Win 11 works correctly... Ffox 150.0 works correctly... for
> whomever.
> 
> Win 11 is essentially souped-up Win 10 which ticked over flawlessly
> for how many?  

It works well enough, but there are things that I don't know how to make 
it do -- like show subdirectories with ALL the file info for as many 
files as I can fit on the screen. 10 did it, but 11 shows me only SOME 
stuff. Visual personalization is really important to me.  I like to be 
able to move and resize windows easily.  I spent a lot of time fixing 
win7 the way I wanted it, but had to stop using it this year.  My heart 
just isn't up to climbing the win11 learning curve just to make my 
once-a-year tax stuff a little easier.

< Or Ffox 150.0 for how many without grizzling/grumbling/bitching?
Grizzling?

-- 
Cheers, Bev
   "When I was a kid my dad once joked that the best way to
    prevent being on a plane with someone carrying a bomb
    would be to bring your own bomb and not detonate it.
    Sounded convincing. What are the odds that two people
    board, each with a bomb?"                    -- Rowdy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16866

FromRetirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.invalid>
Date2026-04-27 13:42 -0400
Message-ID<10so76u$2ipv3$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16857
On 4/27/2026 12:48 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 4/26/26 18:49, Nobody wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2026 17:05:23 -0700, The Real Bev
>> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/26/26 15:47, Nobody wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2026 12:11:28 -0700, The Real Bev
>>>> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I have a Win11 (sorry I upgraded to 11, 10 was better) laptop that I use 
>>>>> only for taxes -- because I have to. 
>>>>
>>>> Aw... life's so hard, and then the door to the crematorium beckons.
>>>
>>> If noboby every complained we'd still be living in caves and eating raw 
>>> meat.
>>
>> But... Win 11 works correctly... Ffox 150.0 works correctly... for
>> whomever.
>>
>> Win 11 is essentially souped-up Win 10 which ticked over flawlessly
>> for how many?  
> 
> It works well enough, but there are things that I don't know how to make 
> it do -- like show subdirectories with ALL the file info for as many 
> files as I can fit on the screen. 10 did it, but 11 shows me only SOME 
> stuff. Visual personalization is really important to me.  I like to be 
> able to move and resize windows easily.  I spent a lot of time fixing 
> win7 the way I wanted it, but had to stop using it this year.  My heart 
> just isn't up to climbing the win11 learning curve just to make my 
> once-a-year tax stuff a little easier.
> 
> < Or Ffox 150.0 for how many without grizzling/grumbling/bitching?
> Grizzling?
> 
Perhaps you should explore programs that provide more features than File
Explorer.  I've never done so because I still can see what I need to do
using File Explorer.
I did my own taxes for more than 65 years until Congress finally made
the tax code so complicated that I could no longer answer all the
questions that Turbo Tax now requires to deal with what my return
requires.  So I blame Congress for me finally having to spend much more
than the price of TurboTax and use a professional tax preparer.
Thinking back, I didn't even need Turbo Tax until about 30 years ago.  I
just used the IRS instructions, pen and paper with an occasional assist
from a pocket calculator or desktop adding machine.  I guess I'm finally
having to pay back all the $$ I saved over all the years I was able to
prepare my own returns.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16870

FromThe Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
Date2026-04-27 11:28 -0700
Message-ID<10so9t8$2hcil$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16866
On 4/27/26 10:42, Retirednoguilt wrote:
> On 4/27/2026 12:48 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> My heart 
>> just isn't up to climbing the win11 learning curve just to make my 
>> once-a-year tax stuff a little easier.
>> 
>> < Or Ffox 150.0 for how many without grizzling/grumbling/bitching?
>> Grizzling?
>> 
> Perhaps you should explore programs that provide more features than File
> Explorer.  I've never done so because I still can see what I need to do
> using File Explorer.
> I did my own taxes for more than 65 years until Congress finally made
> the tax code so complicated that I could no longer answer all the
> questions that Turbo Tax now requires to deal with what my return
> requires.  So I blame Congress for me finally having to spend much more
> than the price of TurboTax and use a professional tax preparer.
> Thinking back, I didn't even need Turbo Tax until about 30 years ago.  I
> just used the IRS instructions, pen and paper with an occasional assist
> from a pocket calculator or desktop adding machine.  I guess I'm finally
> having to pay back all the $$ I saved over all the years I was able to
> prepare my own returns.

I did my own taxes with a calculator and pen and paper for a long time, 
but a friend gave me a copy of Howardsoft (text-only, better than HRB or 
TT) and I never looked back. I tried to e-file with TT, which lied to me 
about success;  I sent in paper anyway, which is fortunate because TT 
did NOT submit it and I would have been late.  I switched to HRBlock 
then.  Clunkier and sometimes it neads to be beaten into submission, but 
it works.  I get the 'Deluxe' version and have done some complicated 
self-employment stuff with it.  The question+answer format is annoying, 
but sometimes it requires you to do that so I just gave up and use it. 
Some things would have been better done by filling in a form directly 
(do you REALLY need a whole sheet of paper for a $12.00 dividend that 
some damn company insists on sending me quarterly checks for?), but I 
didn't.

I don't want to think about this;  I just want to feed in numbers, write 
checks and forget about it for another year.

Perhaps the top-level TT software would do what you need.  It's gotta be 
cheaper than an accountant.  Maybe HRBlock will work better.  It will 
suck in last year's TT return, as TT will suck in last year's HRB return.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
      "To turn is to admit defeat."   -- Hugh Grierson

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16875

FromRetirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.invalid>
Date2026-04-27 16:01 -0400
Message-ID<10sofa4$2lc7n$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16870
On 4/27/2026 2:28 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 4/27/26 10:42, Retirednoguilt wrote:

>> I did my own taxes with a calculator and pen and paper for a long time, 
>> but a friend gave me a copy of Howardsoft (text-only, better than HRB or 
>> TT) and I never looked back. I tried to e-file with TT, which lied to me 
>> about success;  I sent in paper anyway, which is fortunate because TT 
>> did NOT submit it and I would have been late.  I switched to HRBlock 
>> then.  Clunkier and sometimes it neads to be beaten into submission, but 
>> it works.  I get the 'Deluxe' version and have done some complicated 
>> self-employment stuff with it.  The question+answer format is annoying, 
>> but sometimes it requires you to do that so I just gave up and use it. 
>> Some things would have been better done by filling in a form directly 
>> (do you REALLY need a whole sheet of paper for a $12.00 dividend that 
>> some damn company insists on sending me quarterly checks for?), but I 
>> didn't.
> 
> I don't want to think about this;  I just want to feed in numbers, write 
> checks and forget about it for another year.
> 
> Perhaps the top-level TT software would do what you need.  It's gotta be 
> cheaper than an accountant.  Maybe HRBlock will work better.  It will 
> suck in last year's TT return, as TT will suck in last year's HRB return.
> 
I can't see how the top level TT software wouldn't be asking the same
questions (and possibly even more arcane ones) that I already found
beyond my ability to answer.  Apparently the new tax laws require those
questions to be answered to properly compute taxes due.  I was using the
Deluxe version of TT, which has always required a good amount of
calculator fingering but at least I knew what I needed to do and was
confident I was doing it properly (never had a return questioned by the
IRS in my entire life).  But this year, TT asked new questions that I
researched on the web but what I found was just as complicated if not
more so.  If it were simply interest, dividends, short and long term
capital gains, withholding, etc. I wouldn't even bother with TT.  I
won't and can't get into details, but several years ago I ended up
involuntarily owning a type of security that is totally unknown to
probably over 95% of all taxpayers and Congress decided this past year
to complicate taxes related to that ownership even more than it did in
the past.  Four different tax preparers I went to refused to deal with
it.  I finally had to find a CPA who specialized in tax preparation to
do my return. As you can imagine, it wasn't cheap.  In fact, it cost
more than the profit I earned from the investment last year.  I think
I'll sell it. It will probably save me money and I can go back to using
TT -I hope.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16911

FromThe Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
Date2026-04-28 12:45 -0700
Message-ID<10sr2pi$3c77i$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16875
On 4/27/26 13:01, Retirednoguilt wrote:
> On 4/27/2026 2:28 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

>> Perhaps the top-level TT software would do what you need.  It's gotta be 
>> cheaper than an accountant.  Maybe HRBlock will work better.  It will 
>> suck in last year's TT return, as TT will suck in last year's HRB return.
>> 
> ... I
> won't and can't get into details, but several years ago I ended up
> involuntarily owning a type of security that is totally unknown to
> probably over 95% of all taxpayers and Congress decided this past year
> to complicate taxes related to that ownership even more than it did in
> the past.  Four different tax preparers I went to refused to deal with
> it.  I finally had to find a CPA who specialized in tax preparation to
> do my return. As you can imagine, it wasn't cheap.  In fact, it cost
> more than the profit I earned from the investment last year.  I think
> I'll sell it. It will probably save me money and I can go back to using
> TT -I hope.

That makes sense.  Way too many exotic investment possibilities.  Dump it!

OTOH -- I wonder if you can just ignore it completely and let the IRS 
tell you how it should be handled.  Some audits are simple and some 
never happen.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
    There is no such thing as a foolproof device
    because fools are so ingenious.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16877

From"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
Date2026-04-28 00:23 +0000
Message-ID<10soum9$2pgln$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16870
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

>I did my own taxes with a calculator and pen and paper for a long time, 
>but a friend gave me a copy of Howardsoft (text-only, better than HRB or 
>TT) and I never looked back.

I wrote a spreadsheet for the calculations then round to whole dollars
for amounts that are entered into fields on a line of a tax return. I
use Free Fillable Forms, which does rudimentary calculations. If a
calculatioh doesn't match a spreadsheet calculation, I check for a data
entry error. I then print it out and mail it.

Mailing on time with a certified mail receipt, the post office amazingly
took till Sunday, nearly two weeks after mailing, to place it in IRS's
post office box.

Is Howardsoft still a thing updated to Trump's new-style tax returns,
which I really hate?

>. . . 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#16886

FromLawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Date2026-04-28 08:36 +0000
Message-ID<10sprj4$30hmo$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#16866
On Mon, 27 Apr 2026 13:42:52 -0400, Retirednoguilt wrote:

> I did my own taxes for more than 65 years until Congress finally
> made the tax code so complicated that I could no longer answer all
> the questions that Turbo Tax now requires to deal with what my
> return requires.

Do you get a guide booklet? We do
<https://www.ird.govt.nz/en/income-tax/income-tax-for-individuals/what-happens-at-the-end-of-the-tax-year/individual-income-tax-return---ir3/complete-my-individual-income-tax-return---ir3>.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.software.firefox


csiph-web