537341 - Change fennec 1.0 rc to firefox branding

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(Firefox for Android Graveyard :: General, defect)

Description

[Tony Chung [:tchung]]

Tested on N900, Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux armv71; en-US; rv:1.9.2b6pre) Gecko/20091230 Firefox/3.6b6pre Fennec/1.0b6pre


The fennec 1.0 RC files need to be branded for release.   Not sure if you want to call it firefox or fennec, but we need to update the naming schema to match what will be for production.

- rename fennec*.deb to firefox*.deb?
- can't have fennec 1.0b6pre.  lose the pre or something

places i've seen needing updates:
- the .install file executes "fennec 1.0b6pre" at App manager
- about: shows the buildID to shows:  "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux armv71; en-US; rv:1.9.2b6pre) Gecko/20091230 Firefox/3.6b6pre Fennec/1.0b6pre"
- The Maemo application manager displays: "fennec 1.0b6pre"
- there's no firefox icon in the application manager, just a generic blue square icon

Comment 1

[Tony Chung [:tchung]]

nom for blocking fennec 1.0.  cc'ing aki

Comment 2

[:Gavin Sharp [email: [e-mail]]]

(In reply to comment #0)
> - rename fennec*.deb to firefox*.deb?

We decided this wasn't necessary.

> - can't have fennec 1.0b6pre.  lose the pre or something

This is fixed.

> - the .install file executes "fennec 1.0b6pre" at App manager
> - The Maemo application manager displays: "fennec 1.0b6pre"

This should be fixed by changes made in bug 537396, can you confirm?

> - about: shows the buildID to shows:  "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux armv71;
> en-US; rv:1.9.2b6pre) Gecko/20091230 Firefox/3.6b6pre Fennec/1.0b6pre"

This is intentional and isn't a problem.

> - there's no firefox icon in the application manager, just a generic blue
> square icon

Not sure what this is about, can you reproduce it with rc2?

Comment 3

[Stuart Parmenter]

branding is correct now, please file individual bugs for any other issues

Comment 4

[Aakash Desai [:aakashd]]

verified gavin's resolutions on tony's problems. Tony, for the no icon problem, it's a maemo related issue. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=538175 tracks the problem.