The url http://update.mozilla.org/update.rdf is specified by the pref "update.app.url" for the Software Update of Firefox. But opening this file results in an 404 Not Found error. Firefox displays a (way too generic) error messages when clicking on "Update" in the extensions manager because of that. Maybe we can upload a dummy file until we have a proper feed?
I tried having a blank file there (to stop the apache error_log from filling with 404s), but I suspect it may be the cause of the recent firefox crashes WRT update. I do need to know what's supposed to happen with this file though. Going to attempt to find out from Ben.
Um, Ben's webservice isn't running on port 80, so I think this default needs to change.
Component: Update → Extension/Theme Manager
Product: mozilla.org → Firefox
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox1.0beta
Version: other → unspecified
alanjstr, you don't happen to know the right port? Or is the webservice not running yet?
Last I saw it was 8080, with some weird path.
Created attachment 151067 [details] update.rdf for Firefox 0.9 This is taken from the "goat" version, but it's for Firefox 0.9 instead of 1.2. It has to be served as text/rdf, as Ben explains in his doc: http://www.bengoodger.com/software/mb/extensions/packaging/extensions.html It's also available on http://www.steffen-wilberg.de/update.rdf (as text/rdf) right now. If you want to try it, set the pref "update.app.url" to that location. The benefit is that Software Update doesn't time out and the u.m.o server log isn't filled with 404s. Beware, an empty file served as text/rdf crashes Firefox.
(In reply to comment #7) > Created an attachment (id=151067) > The benefit is that Software Update doesn't time out and the u.m.o server log > isn't filled with 404s. Beware, an empty file served as text/rdf crashes > Firefox. heh, the UMO error log is 140mb ;-) already... I tried an empty text/rdf file already to stop that, unaware it caused a crash. (whoops) Reassigning to the right owners for this component, instead of update. (Always Reassign to default when moving. :-) ) Does this file need to posted on update?
Assignee: nobody → bugs
QA Contact: mozilla.update → bugs
> Does this file need to posted on update? Yes, to http://update.mozilla.org/update.rdf. Make sure it is served as text/rdf. Adding "AddType text/rdf;charset=UTF-8 .rdf" to the .htaccess file should do the trick.
Let's toss this bug around a bit...
Component: Extension/Theme Manager → Software Update
...back to mozilla.org/update...
Assignee: bugs → nobody
Component: Software Update → Update
Product: Firefox → mozilla.org
QA Contact: bugs → mozilla.update
Target Milestone: Firefox1.0beta → ---
Version: unspecified → other
...and marking fixed.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
How is this not a bug in the application if it points to a bogus URL?
The URL was only bogus because the file was missing from the server. That was solved by putting the right file on the server, which makes it a server-side issue.
Ok, so Firefox is going to call update.rdf, which does nothing. Unless we do browser sniffing to redirect it to a update.php?firefox or some such. In which case, that forces us to detect what application is calling the url instead of the application telling us what it needs. I think we're trying to solve this "problem" from the wrong way. Fix the application to point to the right url, instead of making the website cope.
Who says the file does nothing? It tells Software Update that version 0.9 of Firefox is the recent version. Other products, like Thunderbird, and localized products can be added to that file as additional RDF entries. No need to do browser sniffing.
I forgot to add that the file itself provides the necessary link. The url for the product Firefox, version 0.9, is http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/.
So it can have multiple RDF:Descriptions? If so, then ok.
Update.rdf is the smartupdate datasource... I know it works properly for Firefox because I tested it. :-) This is not an application bug, it belongs in update. You'd have to ask Ben if it can support multiple RDF:Descriptions or not.. my understanding is it can. Though the current one doesn't include the data for Thunderbird. Hopefully by the time Tbird hits 0.8, mscott or ben will provide that.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Component: Update → Web Site
Product: mozilla.org → Update
Version: other → unspecified
Product: addons.mozilla.org → addons.mozilla.org Graveyard
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.