Latest Firefox Releases Coming to Ubuntu 10.04

By , Published January 11, 2012

Firefox 3.6 in Ubuntu 10.04

From February 17th Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10 users will be automatically upgraded to the latest release of Firefox.

The move comes as a result of Ubuntu’s decision to follow Mozilla’s ‘rapid release’ cycle for Firefox.

Currently Ubuntu pushes updates users of Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10 with ‘point’ releases for Firefox 3.6. These updates contain important security and bug fixes but do not add any additional features.

In the fast-moving world of the web where newer technologies are adopted all the time it’s vital that users are capable of getting the fullest experience possible.

Canonical’s Micah Gerstensays the sync-up will provide users on older releases with ‘new web technologies, security enhancements, and performance improvements.’

As part of the decision the Ubuntu repositories will ‘track’ Mozilla’s Rapid Release Cycle going forward. This will push a Firefox update out to users of Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10 every six weeks.

Firefox 3.6, the default browser of Ubuntu 10.04 LTS, reaches ‘end of life’ status in April this year.

Related posts:

  1. Firefox 7 Released
  2. Firefox 5 released; faster release cycle and fewer features
  3. Gorgeous Elementary Firefox skin is coming soon
Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • christian

    Good.
    Now they just need to do this for all apps without doing it for system libraries and we’re getting somewhere.

    • http://paglias.net/ Paglia

      for appas sent using the new developer center is now possible to update their apps also in the current vrsion, althought most apps are avalaible in other ways

      • https://profiles.google.com/phonixor phonixor

        indeed… but the repos are to full of crappy apps, that don’t support things like the default theme, copy paste etc properly…. they should rebuild the main repo’s and set higher demands… (and move the stuff that does not qualify to a dumpster repo)

        • http://paglias.net/ Paglia

          Agree. the problem is that ubuntu import the WHOLE Debian repository into itself repos non only system sofwtare but also all ugly apps

          • https://profiles.google.com/phonixor phonixor

            sound nothing like something that a simple filter couldnt solve…

          • http://twitter.com/howythegeek Howy

            True. But it also gives variety. The only thing they can do is promote the good apps. It’s fine by me that I have a choice of apps, but going to some funny-looking toolkit that looks like something pulled from the 90′s… It shouldn’t happen.
            I’d suggest a way of reporting about apps that should be moved to the “dumpster”.

    • https://profiles.google.com/phonixor phonixor

      Agreed, however newer apps need newer libraries sometimes(if backwards compatability gets broken)… so they will have to make it so that multiple versions of libraries can work togheter on the same system… (this is of course already for some the case)

    • Anonymous

      I entered the comments section on this news only to say exactly what you’ve said. If Ubuntu can achieve the goal of separating system updates from app updates, I can see a bright future for it, despite its many design mistakes.

    • Anonymous

      Chakra does this. Half-rolling release.

    • https://launchpad.net/~oppifjellet OpenNingia

      apps _depends_ on system libraries you know? :)
      to upgrade Firefox like that they had to bundle all the dependencies in the package. Would you like that for all the apps?

    • Anonymous

      I think ALL is a little much, but I do get your point; many apps should be updated like this.

  • Anonymous

    I have to celebrate this decision. Im using LTS at home, but as a webdeveloper, this was frustrating!

    • http://twitter.com/makkay makkay

      Couldn’t you just add the Mozilla PPA in your software sources?

      • Anonymous

        Of course I could. And I did. But its always better when it works out-of-the-box. :)

        Plus this means more people moving forward in web browser version, which is also positive for the web :)

  • http://twitter.com/zc456 Squeaks

    My jaw dropped.

  • Anonymous

    Now if only they did this for all third party apps like libreoffice, vlc and openshot etc

    • https://launchpad.net/~tim.timwahrendorff rakete

      newer packages means newer dependencies, means that you have an completly updated system if you go that way to the end. It cannot work like this in every case…

      • Anonymous

        If they can jump from Firefox 3.6 to 9 without much problems then I doubt there would be any major issues in updating most non Gnome apps like Openshot, VLC and Banshee

        • http://twitter.com/MarcoDahms Marco Dahms

          Also it would be good if their own products get some polish. Can not describe how sad it is to see the ubuntuone-client on lucid compared to oneiric…

        • https://launchpad.net/~tim.timwahrendorff rakete

          Who says backporting firefox 9 is easy?
          While you get a roadmap for firefox, not all dev teams are as well organized as Mozilla.

          It’s the old thing: You want a stable system, use LTS, you want newest software? Use the newest release or ppa’s.

          Also keep in mind that LTS Versions are primarily meant for companys, or more general: “people who work with their computer”, that need a reliable support plan.

          At least my company would not see any need in having the newest versions of VLC, Openshot and Banshee, but of course we need a decent and recent Webbrowser, cause we develop Webapplications ;)

          • Anonymous

            What about say Open/Libre Office and Firezilla, Geany, Eclipse and other productivity tools that do not rely on the latest Gnome libraries.

          • https://launchpad.net/~tim.timwahrendorff rakete

            sure, but these aren’t changing as fast as firefox nowadays does. Plus they are not by default installed apps. 
            I am just saying… An LTS gets security updates and fixes, no newer version. Firefox 3.6 support ends in April… I am not sure why canonical do not update to Firefox 10 when its out and leave it that way… its also kind of an “LTS” version for firefox…

          • Ms. Polly

            They would have more time if they just concentrated on LTS releases only, so people wouldn’t have to upgrade every 6 months to get the latest or use 10 ppas – just sayin.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZKTU6NNEMGR6NRSFTCYJSHY7EQ James

            I have to disagree here, having more up to date applications does not have to result in a less stable system. The separation of application and libraries (system components etc) is long needed.At the moment running a non LTS release gives you application updates for around 18 months for a few select programs. Just not enough if you value your system for programs you use daily and in my case use to earn a living. 

            With an LTS now 5 years but you will be stuck with outdated software that can prove almost useless over this time.If I run a Mac  I guess I would have around 4 years of usable time for application, by that I mean I can run up to date software without reinstalling my entire OS. This is a bonus to me. I use both Ubuntu and OSX and at the moment I prefer the App Store in OSX to the software centre in Ubuntu. People really do care about what software they run… if anything I think people care less about the environment, such as unity, they use.

        • Anonymous

          VLC and Openshot aren’t gnome apps.

          • Anonymous

            I said non Gnome apps like VLC and Openshot

          • Anonymous

            My mistake…

      • Anonymous

        How does chakra do this, then?

        • https://launchpad.net/~tim.timwahrendorff rakete

          ask them, not me :D

          I am just a softwaredeveloper for myself and I see the great work canonical is doing.

          We can discuss about release cycles, LTS versions, rolling releases and stuff. But I can’t give ultimative answers. There are more than one way for a reason. Canonical went the LTS/Develop Release way. Debian goes stable/ testing/experimental, Arch is a rolling release. All have their own problems and difficulties. Greatest thing her: You can chooose you way!

      • Anonymous

        That’s true, but libreoffice for example are very conservative on newer deps. Take a look, it still depends on gtk 2.10.4 for example:
        http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/system-requirements/

  • http://profiles.google.com/jbozman0 James Bozman

    How is this going to work going forward?

    I think the LTSs should follow the ESRs so that businesses can standardize but not get stuck with an out of date browser if they stay on the same LTS for the full term of 5 years.

    The regular releases should follow the current trend of updating for every FF release.

  • http://twitter.com/MarcoDahms Marco Dahms

    Lucid now can do the barrel roll :D

  • Anonymous

    This is a horrible idea on canonicals part. Many companies have Ubuntu 10.04 deployed and depend on the fact that FF 3.6 is there to stay. Ubuntu upgrading LTS users to the latest version of Firefox is like MS upgrading XP users from IE6 to IE9. Sounds like a great idea and is in the consumer environment but in a corporate setting its a complete disaster. 

    • Anonymous

      …what?

      What harm could possibly do update to FF9?

      On the other hand, theres no benefit in keeping a browser that in 3 months will be without support :P

      By the way, Microsoft is making updating browser in Windows mandatory in the coming months! :)

      PS: I think IE9 isnt available in XP ;)

      • Anonymous

        Ah, another reason to stay away from Windows ;)

    • Anonymous

      The whole point of this move is to benefit businesses. In April FF 3.6 won’t get any more security updates. The latest version of Firefox in February will be a new LTS release of firefox, produced mainly to help businesses’

      • Anonymous

        I work as an IT at a high school and the web apps the teachers use are only certified to work with FF3.6 and IE7 and 8. If the computers were running Ubuntu 10.04 and were automatically upgraded to the latest Firefox then it would break compatibility with the app. Im not saying upgrading is a bad thing, I just think the update should be pushed as optional rather than mandatory as part of system updates.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GE4EYP3QOQ246PLG2Y2DOD2NIQ Dr. Fly

          You can always uncheck updates you don’t want in the Update Manager, you know.

          • Anonymous

            Haha, yeah I was thinking that too… since when are updates not optional, lol?

            An IT should know this, updates can always be blocked/locked.

        • Anonymous

          You can also download the binaries of ANY version here: https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/

          Out of curiosity. Which apps are those that break with Firefox4+?

          • Anonymous

            i think the misinterpretation is that it should be 3.6+, though not everyone understands that… especially sometimes the officials that uphold the rules

    • http://twitter.com/zc456 Squeaks

      How exactly is upgrading your browser a bad thing? Compatibility only matters to IE cause IE team wrote themselves into a wall.

  • Anonymous

    One less ppa on my 10.10 lappy, and on my mom’s lucid netbook. Yay.

  • AneDijitak

    Hey, that ‘classic’ look, it’s beautiful!

  • Samuel Orr

    Sadly, the web browser for the LTS release does indeed need to be updated. This is simply because the older versions can not keep up with the rapidly changing web technology.

    Keeping software the same version (with security support) makes sense in almost all situations except for one like this. Though as was said, any rupture to the infrastructure will be felt by clients such as medium to large businesses. Trust me they do not want to upgrade anything that changes the user experience.

    I agree that is boils down to a case of pros and cons. Which I believe Mozilla themselves weighed when they decided to adopt a rapid release schedule.

  • https://launchpad.net/~esteinma Erik

    Thanks OMG! for posting some Lucid news :P Feel a little less forgotten as Lucid user ;)

  • Chad Germann

    LTS versions should use Mozilla’s new Extended support release .
    http://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox-extended-support-release/

    and seance Mozilla does not want it shipped Mozilla branded. they could Ubuntu brand it

    • Anonymous

      Do I smell an icy weasel?

  • http://twitter.com/howythegeek Howy

    I thought this was a bump of an old article…

  • Aleksandr Chepurnoy

    >> Firefox 3.6, the default browser of Ubuntu 10.04 LTS, reaches ‘end of life’ status in April this year.
    Pointless. In April Ubuntu 12.04 will be released, and this is also an LTS release.

    • Anonymous

      I can tell you that most LTS users will not switch to a never LTS version just because it can. First it needs testing, after which deployment begins. This takes 3/6 months. Some only start upgrading when 12.04.1 is released.

    • https://launchpad.net/~esteinma Erik

      Yes but Lucid is supported for another year after the release of Precise. Maybe people want to keep using Lucid troughout that time.

  • Anonymous

    I am a great supporter of the backports system. Imho this is an absolute must for any company catering the enterprise and bringing out long support cycle for their products. Research, design and develop a stable and secure product and backport security and stability related packages from time to time. This is great from canonical, but i think they need a backports team ( Dunno if they have one already) who will test packages to death, before committing.

  • Anonymous

    10.04 was the release where my friends and I really fell in love with Ubuntu. It has only gotten better. :)

  • http://twitter.com/ux92 uvazquez

    I’m always sticking with the latest LTS version of Ubuntu. I hate needing to do clean installs every 6 months. It just sucks. Upgrading sometimes messes up the system.

    Although I don’t like rolling release systems, I like the idea of being allowed to keep my old LTS for the period it was intended to be kept in the first place, and lastly Canonical did not respect that. But well, I hope this changes soon.

  • Satish Saravanan

    It is January 17 not February 17.

 
News