hello guys i try to learn more about how to create firefox add-ons
by following this article
Getting_Started_with_Firefox_Extensions
but when i try to install the add-on
firefox add-ons manger tell me this could not be verified to use in firefox
i read this article and try give me the same can any one tell me how to avoid this problem
I think you should look into this instead: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/SDK the legacy SDK will go away at some point, so better start now using the latest SDK.
When doing that, you will use jpm (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/SDK/Tutorials/Getting_Started_%28jpm%29) With which you can test add-ons without installing them (jpm run)
Related
This could be the motivation I need to move to Chrome for development. Working on an application with PouchDB (syncing with a CouchDB instance). I see everywhere that there are links to a Firefox add-on called PouchDB-Inspector which is meant to join the developer tools arsenal. True for Chrome - which does install and work. Firefox - the link is dead - Not found.
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/pouchdb-inspector/
Does anyone know where it is? Is it discontinued? Done with? Never to be found again?
Any help would be great? Thanks.
This add-on seems to be currently unavailable from addons.mozilla.org, but you can get it from it's github project page. The creator also provides a link to the current xpi file that you can install manually.
I'm trying to get PECL OAuth to work on a Windows dev box (using WAMP). I found two dlls for older versions at Pierre's site but neither of them seem to work.
Adding the DLL to the relevant wamp\bin\php\php5.x.x\ext directory and then ticking the option in the PHP extensions flyout does not add anything OAuth related to the output of phpinfo() and if I try to instantiate an OAuth object I get a "Class 'OAuth' not found" error.
Is there anywhere (or any way) that I can get hold of working DLLs (ideally for the latest 1.2.2 version of OAuth, but any 1.0 or higher stable version will do). The maching in question is running 32bit Windows (Vista).
I hope somebody can help where Google has failed me so far...!
Thanks in advance,
Christian
I'm just barely beginning to delve into this whole thing, so I'm not quite sure which way is up, but does this article on oAuth, Xampp, and Windows, scroll down for the English, do the trick?
Let me know as I'm eager to figure all this out too!
And/or would one be able to build it with windows?
I've recently started using watir-webdriver and so far am a big fan. However I need to be able to test Safari too, and I don't have access to a mac to be able to use Safari-Watir.
Does anyone know a good alternative to use for testing Safari on a windows machine? (In Ruby of course)
Thanks
(important, see UPDATE below)
the Selenium Webdriver folks are apparently waiting for something from Apple in order to support safari. I would not hold your breath.
Apple does have a version of Safari for the PC, I'm not sure how good the current version is, the initial releases were.. um, well, lets just say they had issues (lots of issues)
Personally (mostly for security reasons) I would not run it nor recommend anyone use it for any purpose other than downloading Chrome or Firefox. But unfortunately a lot of apple users use it because it's what came with their systems, which means to the extent apple users are part of your target market, you have to test on it.
For the moment that means you'll need to use Safariwatir, which has not as far as I can tell had an update for a year or more.
the current state of support on both the Selenium/Webdriver side and the Safariwatir side was discussed recently in this thread in the watir general group on google
UPDATE
Webdriver now has Safari support, which makes direct support of safari (I think on a mac only at this point) possible. See http://watirmelon.com/2012/04/17/using-watir-webdriver-with-safari-at-last/ for more info.. still a bit DYI but I'm sure it will get more accessable soon.
Mike, seems this is available now. Alister Scott wrote up some instructions on his blog Using Watir-Webdriver with Safari At Last
Unfortunately this still a bit DYI because you have to build your own safari extension, which requires getting certificates and such from apple, and I'm not sure if you can create the right environment to build that stuff on anything other than a mac.
I'm building a Ruby program that uses several other programs, and while most of them are programs I can download and run on this computer, one has to be accessed and run through a web browser.
I actually have two questions: I've found Watir which looks like a good web automation tool, but it's meant for testing. Is it still okay to use Watir for automation in the main program, not for testing? Or is there something better out there to use?
The other question I have is that I can't get Watir to work. I downloaded the firewatir-1.6.5 gem and installed jssh for Firefox 3.6, but when I run
b = Watir::Browser.start("the_web_page_address")
it just opens a new Firefox window to Google, and I'm given the error:
Unable to connect to machine : foo.bar.baz.blah on port 9997. Make sure that JSSh is properly installed and Firefox is running with '-jssh' option (Watir::Exception::UnableToStartJSShException)
I've run Firefox with -jssh but that doesn't seem to help.
Watir is perfectly suitable for automating browsing tasks. I've personally used it a couple of times for that purpose. However, you might also want to look at other solutions, such as Selenium.
Now, to be honest, I don't have much to say about your second question;
I'm assuming you've set Watir to open firefox by setting
Watir::Browser.default = 'firefox'
If so, things should be running as normal. Did you restart firefox since installing jssh? Did you install Watir and jssh as instructed on the tutorial?
I can suggest running Watir with Internet Explorer, instead of Firefox, but that might be unsuitable for your application. If all else fails, try the other framework I recommended earlier.
You also might want to check out a headless option. Sometimes it's not necessary to install an automation framework like Watir or Selenium when something simple like mechanize would suffice. Really depends on the complexity of what you're trying to automate!
http://mechanize.rubyforge.org/mechanize/EXAMPLES_rdoc.html
The reason I ask is mostly due to how Google Chrome installation works once you click the "Accept and install" button from Firefox. After you click the installation is started directly and when it's completed Chrome itself starts up.
Firefox does not show any "Save" or "Confirm" dialogs after you click the Install button (on Chrome install web page).
Now, is this standard behaviour? Or might it be due to having an old version of Chrome already on the computer (Note: The new version was still installed from Firefox).
Seems a bit risky to me, all you have to do is fool the user to click something and then you can do whatever you want on his machine, or? Personally I thought things like this only worked with IE/ActiveX.
Looking at the code of the chrome download page, they seem to be using three mechanisms:
Standard download
OneClick (using the google updater plugin)
ClickOnce (using the .NET Framework assistant plugin)
ClickOnce is widely available due to the pervasiveness of .NET 3.5 SP 1 (in which it is bundled).
This is absolutely not standard behaviour. It looks like it is some kind of extension in Firefox. This will not work in Opera, IE or Safari. For those they might use different methods. For IE maybe ActiveX. The rest just downloads a small setup file.
Microsoft has a propritary solution which is always included in their development programs, called ClickOnce. It needs .NET Framework. .NET Framework installs a Firefox extension for ClickOnce, and for everything else you can just run the setup.exe.
Google's updater is standard and open source, (called Omaha) but there are no open source server implementations as yet. It can be found here.
The way I understand it working is that when you download a file you trigger the updater with an ID and it takes care of the installation and maintenance of the program.
(speculative) I suspect the old installation or rather its updater took over at that point. As for the risk: If the Chrome guys did their homework (and I suspect they have), then Chrome will check for signatures on the file, etc. before running anything. That's standard behavior for updaters (sane ones, at least) and prevents abuse at that point.