You are here

Home » Forums » Support Forums » Internet Apps Support » Firefox Portable

firefox67 static and portable with different profiles

3 posts / 0 new
Log in or register to post comments
Last post
May 26, 2019 - 3:11am
#1
willi uebelherr
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: 2019-05-26 02:36
firefox67 static and portable with different profiles

Dear friends, i found here in the forum similar questions, but mostly with only portable FF67
My working environment:
- windows 10
- static FF67 installed
- portable FF67 with PortableApps

All users on this computer use the static version. I only use PortableApps with FF, TB and others. With version FF66, i opened the portable FF and all external link requests opened in a new tab in the portable instance.
Now, with version 67 it changed. A link start the static version with the default profile.

In bugzilla to this problem i read:
New instances of Firefox use the default profile, even if there is already running instance using another profile
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1553815
"This is the intentional behaviour since Firefox 67. If you want to open a new tab in an existing instance of Firefox you must launch Firefox in a way that targets the profile for that instance."

So, Mozilla changed something, but i don't know, what. Some autors in MozillaZine told me, this is now the consistent way to work with multiple instances and profiles and versions in the same time. Clear, my simple using is not part of that.

If i follow this thinking, then i don't need a portable version of FF, only a portable profile. But if i travel and there is no FF or very old, then i need it. Therefore, i decide to try to continue with this portable actual version with his own profile.

But, what can i do on a simple way, that my open ff-instance is used and create a new tab after i klick on an external link? Internal, in the browser, a klick on a link with "open new tab" works.

I would be very thankful, if anyone can help.

Top
May 26, 2019 - 8:27am
Abraxian
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 6 days ago
Joined: 2010-08-18 10:40
Might be of help

Might be of help:
https://portableapps.com/node/60315
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=3050319

Use Portable Apps on both Flash Drive and HDD/SSD.

Top
May 26, 2019 - 5:22pm
(Reply to #2)
willi uebelherr
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: 2019-05-26 02:36
Dear Abraxian, many thanks

Dear Abraxian, many thanks for your answer.
The text in the forum in portableapps i know.
In the forums.mozilla i am also activ.
And now also in bugzilla.mozilla. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1553815

I invite all of you with your deep experience to the forums.mozilla discussion. This is a common thread with/without portable FF. In my last comment there i wrote:

Dear therube, you wrote:
"You can no longer rely on "documentation" or even your own pre-existing knowledge to know what to do - because FF 67 change what & how things work."

I think, this is not true. What i see is, FF67 follow very strong this definition. FF version and profile is now a unit. The problems comes with the implementation and bad documentation.

@Brummelchen told it a strong logic. I think now the same. And katoda also.

The consequence for me. The basic installation on a system have to be the actual version. Any link use this, normally, if we don't have more then one entries in the browser reference list. In Windows in the registry.

This default instance have to follow the basic logic. For the system, his task is finished. It give the control to firefox. Firefox itself have to organise his own application rules. Never the system.

With that we come to the profile.ini file. This is the instance between system and target FF instance, combined with .exe-file and profile directory.

Before, i never used the installed profile.ini-file. T.Hager in the portable forum wrote about tools to setup the profile.ini-file. Some people propose .bat-files.

Katoda use shortcuts for different versions and their profile.

I only work with portable. It is not the "mass" how Brummelchen wrote. It is very specific. I will follow very strong this logic. I hope, my interpretation is correct. You can help me to find errors. Katoda wrote, he will do the same, that all of us "are happy". Many thanks to him.

I will write, after waiting your answers, in bugzilla.mozilla this interpretation. There are 21 people with a high inside knowledge. Maybe, they can help us to find a stable basic thinking. And i will ask T.Hager, to visit us here in the MozillaZine forum.

Top
Log in or register to post comments