clarify why --with-app-basename isn't used #13

sertonix commented 2025年02月17日 21:17:54 +01:00

Ref librewolf/gentoo@6803b62ee3

The librewolf package in the chaotic-aur has started using the --with-app-basename option. I hope they see this and remove it again.

Ref https://codeberg.org/librewolf/gentoo/commit/6803b62ee344a9e2a4f981660722463c789ddc83 The librewolf package in the chaotic-aur has started using the --with-app-basename option. I hope they see this and remove it again.

xiota commented 2025年02月17日 22:21:18 +01:00

This PR is misguided. I just installed chaotic-aur/librewolf 135.0-1 built on Fri 14 Feb 2025 07:41:12 AM UTC and a few other forks that set --with-app-basename. The user-agent was not affected with a new default profile. Checked using https://www.whatismybrowser.com/detect/what-is-my-user-agent/. For librewolf, it is:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:135.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/135.0

This PR is misguided. I just installed `chaotic-aur/librewolf 135.0-1` built on Fri 14 Feb 2025 07:41:12 AM UTC and a few other forks that set `--with-app-basename`. The user-agent was not affected with a new default profile. Checked using `https://www.whatismybrowser.com/detect/what-is-my-user-agent/`. For librewolf, it is: ``` Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:135.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/135.0 ```

xiota commented 2025年02月17日 22:48:00 +01:00

User agent appear unstable, but not clearly related to --with-app-basename. See discussion at #2235

User agent appear unstable, but not clearly related to `--with-app-basename`. See discussion at #2235

sertonix commented 2025年02月17日 23:05:02 +01:00

I extended the comment now to be correct. Ref librewolf/issues#2235 (comment)

I extended the comment now to be correct. Ref https://codeberg.org/librewolf/issues/issues/2235#issuecomment-2839789

xiota commented 2025年02月17日 23:11:54 +01:00

This PR is still misguided, especially with how emphatic the comment is: "DO NOT USE!" Would be more acceptable if it said "Avoid use." However, if resist fingerprinting (RFP) is turned off, change in user agent is intended behavior. The default setting is RFP enabled. If users turn it off, that is their intention and responsibility.

---

This PR should be closed without merge for following reasons:

• Intended to communicate with maintainers of a third-party repo. No longer needed because the alternate package has been updated.

• Does not address greater issues with the PKGBUILD. The AUR package has been borderline unusuable since Jan 2024. Sometime during the last few months, it has become completely unbuildable. AUR users should not be burdened by such a useless commit.

This PR is still misguided, especially with how emphatic the comment is: "DO NOT USE!" Would be more acceptable if it said "Avoid use." However, if resist fingerprinting (RFP) is turned off, change in user agent is intended behavior. The default setting is RFP enabled. If users turn it off, that is their intention and responsibility. ----- This PR should be closed without merge for following reasons: * Intended to communicate with maintainers of a third-party repo. No longer needed because the alternate package has been updated. * Does not address greater issues with the PKGBUILD. The AUR package has been borderline unusuable since Jan 2024. Sometime during the last few months, it has become completely unbuildable. AUR users should not be burdened by such a useless commit.

Technetium1 commented 2025年02月19日 19:41:04 +01:00

I'd like to confirm my agreement with @xiota, but also want to emphasize that it is appropriate to change the language for this commented line as other issues are addressed. unlear? is not satisfactory to me, however the comment may not even be needed later. It makes sense to leave this in a draft state until the next major revisions rather than close.

I'd like to confirm my agreement with @xiota, but also want to emphasize that it is appropriate to change the language for this commented line as other issues are addressed. `unlear?` is _not_ satisfactory to me, however the comment may not even be needed later. It makes sense to leave this in a draft state until the next major revisions rather than close.

sertonix commented 2025年03月03日 19:38:26 +01:00

@ohfp Thanks for trying to fix this but I think that someone might re-add --with-app-basename in the future when there isn't a (scary) comment. Thoughts?

@ohfp Thanks for trying to fix this but I think that someone might re-add `--with-app-basename` in the future when there isn't a (scary) comment. Thoughts?

This pull request has changes conflicting with the target branch.