# How to open Firefox 3 without defaulting to Offline



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Essentially, as root, edit the file /etc/dbus-1/system.d/NetworkManager.conf, and change all instances of: 
<allow send_interface="org.freedesktop.NetworkManager"/>
to:
<deny send_interface="org.freedesktop.NetworkManager"/>

Then save changes and reboot making sure that Work Offline was not checked when you last exited Firefox 3.

Reference: Firefox in Hardy defaults "Offline"(post#6).

-- Tom


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> Essentially, as root, edit the file /etc/dbus-1/system.d/NetworkManager.conf, and change all instances of:
> <allow send_interface="org.freedesktop.NetworkManager"/>
> to:
> <deny send_interface="org.freedesktop.NetworkManager"/>
> ...


Must be specific to Ubuntu, no troubles on PCLOS.


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi RootbeaR,

Yes, it's a problem with Ubuntu 8.04 LTS, Hardy Heron.

-- Tom


----------



## rmrfstar (Jul 8, 2008)

Why would this have to do w/ Ubuntu lotusclat79/rootbear?

Don't edit NetworkManager.conf.

1) Open Firefox
2) In address bar, type about:config
3) Search/Filter for "offline"
4) Toggle off (double-click) browser.cache.offline.enable


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

This thread is a little bit misleading. This isn't a Firefox issue, it's a networking issue. If the network manager reports no network connection, ANY application that supports an "offline" mode will be affected. In fact, in the very post where the NetworkManager config file change is posted pidgin is mentioned along with Firefox. If you always have a working network connection, this shouldn't be an issue.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

Yes, for sure it is a networking issue, but one that has a side effect on Firefox defaulting to coming up offline - and, as you say, perhaps other applications that support an offline mode.

Trust me, I work from a 56k dialup ISP connection, and it very much affects Firefox on my setup using a Live CD.

Regardless of your point that this shouldn't be an issue, it is an issue - and, a very annoying one at that.

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> Yes, for sure it is a networking issue, but one that has a side effect on Firefox defaulting to coming up offline - and, as you say, perhaps other applications that support an offline mode.


Don't take my word for it, read the thread you posted the link to. 



> Trust me, I work from a 56k dialup ISP connection, and it very much affects Firefox on my setup using a Live CD.


The question I have is what behavior do you expect when you start Firefox, or any other network aware application that has an "offline" mode, without a "live" Internet connection?



> Regardless of your point that this shouldn't be an issue, it is an issue - and, a very annoying one at that.
> /QUOTE]My point, as stated above, is this shouldn't be an issue *if you have a working Internet connection*. If you are in the habit of running network aware apps _without_ having a network connection, that's fine but that's an issue with your computer usage and nothing else. The implication of your thread is there is some kind of "problem" related to Firefox on Ubuntu when I don't think that's the case at all.
> 
> Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

tomdkat said:


> Don't take my word for it, read the thread you posted the link to.
> 
> The question I have is what behavior do you expect when you start Firefox, or any other network aware application that has an "offline" mode, without a "live" Internet connection?
> 
> ...


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> It is not what I expect - i.e. Firefox developers decided to add the offline mode as default, which even if you changed it to disabled, always came up be default offline - which was a major user interface change of expectations which I did not want.


I'm just not seeing this behavior at all. I did some testing this morning. I'm using Firefox 3 on Ubuntu 8.04, just like you. I'm running the 64-bit version and I don't know if you are or not.

If a network connection is present when I start Firefox, it doesn't start in offline mode.

If there isn't a network connection present when I start Firefox, it starts in offline mode. If Firefox is in offline mode, in the _File_ menu there is a place where I can check _Work Offline_ to toggle the offline mode on or off.

If there wasn't a network connection present when I started Firefox, it started in offline mode. If the network connection became available, Firefox automatically went out of offline mode.

I'm just not seeing the "offline mode as default" behavior you're talking about. What I am seeing is Firefox "responding" to the presence of a network connection when it starts.



> Firefox developers messed with my computer usage and in the process made it very annoying!


That's exactly why I'm making an "issue" out of this.  The Firefox developers didn't change or do anything. *This is NOT a change in Firefox behavior*!



> Many, many Firefox users were annoyed - which is why the linked to message at the Ubuntu forums was created to provide a work around to automate a cleaner launch of Firefox without the user having to always have to change the offline to not offline.


Yep and my point is in that thread, they identify the issue being a *networking* issue, not a Firefox issue.



> It was a major pain the the a** to the way many users work - not offline, but online when they launch Firefox.


I can understand it but if people are having issues connecting to the Internet when they have an active network connection, something else is wrong. As was pointed out in the thread you linked to, the workaround was to alter the *NetworkManager*'s behavior. By doing this, you're impacting EVERY network aware application on your system. This has NOTHING to do with Firefox.



> P.S. *I always launch Firefox after I am connected to my ISP*, and even if I launch it before I connect, I don't care if I get a connection issue message from FF, because I know why and am in control of when I connect.


If this is the case, then you need to look into an issue with Ubuntu's dial-up support. If you dial into your ISP and establish a network connection _before_ you start Firefox, you've got fundamental networking issues to address. How do you confirm you're fully connected before you start your browser? Do you display your assigned IP address or something?

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

I am running the 32-bit Live CD of Ubuntu 8.04 LTS (Hardy Heron). Note: the Live CD is as it was initially distributed with FF 3.0b5, and I overwrite the files with FF 3.0 with my setup scripts to get the updates I have applied via Synaptic Pkg Mgr. FF 3.0b5 did not launch with an offline mode as I recall, but FF 3.0 does.

I can see why you are still posting in this thread - i.e. the difference in our connection service makes our separate versions of both system and FF behave differently.

Yes, my assigned IP address is fully displayed when the dialup connection is ready. And, if I start up FF before I have launched wvdial to dialup via the modem I have, it just displays a Connection Not Found message on my Forecastbar Enhanced weather add-on for FF at the rhs of my top menu bar were it displays - no problem as I know what's going on, and the add-on redetects the connection after a small while and loads the weather data. I have roughly 75 or so RSS feeds that kick off when I launch FF, and that takes a couple of minutes to reach a stable state such that the normal fetch time for a web page occurs.

The issue is not with Ubuntu's dialup support and is not with any fundamental networking issues - the problem is likely that the FF developers do not consider dialup when they implement new features like the offline mode for startup. Since I have a fully consistent workaround to the problem, I really don't care about how the developers mucked it up - they may provide a better model in the future - who knows?

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> I can see why you are still posting in this thread - i.e. the difference in our connection service makes our separate versions of both system and FF behave differently.


I disagree. I believe there's a networking issue in your dial-up configuration that's causing your issue.



> Yes, my assigned IP address is fully displayed when the dialup connection is ready.


That's good to know. The only remaining question is why does the Network Manager _not_ recognize the dial-up network connection as being active at the time Firefox is started.



> The issue is not with Ubuntu's dialup support and is not with any fundamental networking issues - the problem is likely that the FF developers do not consider dialup when they implement new features like the offline mode for startup.


I wholeheartedly disagree. Why? Because I *was* able to get Firefox 3 to start in offline mode on my system. How? By disconnecting the network cable. The Network Manager reported my network connection as not being established and when I started Firefox, it started in offline mode. I exit Firefox and plugged my network cable back in to my router and the network connection was restored. I then started Firefox and it started in normal mode (i.e. not in offline mode). If you're on a dial-up connection and the Network Manager doesn't think a network connection has been established when you ARE connected to the Internet, that is a problem and one you should investigate further.

Firefox won't be "aware" of your Internet connection being a dial-up connection or a broadband connection, other than the speed with which files can be downloaded. More importantly, Firefox won't care. As long as there is an Internet connection, it can function.

This is NOT a Firefox issue. It's a dial-up networking issue, in your case.

EDIT: I found these bug reports against Network Manager:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/network-manager/+bug/147119
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/191889

Looks like uninstalling Network Manager is one option, disabling the reporting of the network state in Network Manager is another option, or waiting for an update to Network Manager to be released is a third option. In the comments for bug #191889, someone posted a link to a Firefox extension to disable offline mode completely, if you're interested in that.

The Network Manager issue is reported to affect Pidgin, Firefox 3, and Evolution.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

tomdkat said:


> I disagree. I believe there's a networking issue in your dial-up configuration that's causing your issue.
> 
> That's good to know. The only remaining question is why does the Network Manager _not_ recognize the dial-up network connection as being active at the time Firefox is started.
> 
> ...


Hi tomdkat,

There is no issue in my dialup configuration. It is the same as it has always been and it is stable.

With regard to FF 3.0, every time I disabled offline mode and exited FF, the next time I launched FF, it launched in offline mode when I was connected to my ISP. No user control.

Starting FF 3.0 in offline mode is a no-brainer, i.e. it is the default. Disconnecting the network cable is cheating wrt this particular problem. Note: I use a Live CD, whereas you probably have an installed system - world's apart. For example, one of the unique changes that the Ubuntu developers made to 8.04 (off topic from FF) is to not display the disk icons on the Desktop. Even with Ubuntu Tweak, in the Live CD environment, I am unable to display the disk icons when I issue the mount command. The CD disc icon does display when a CD is automatically detected, however. I suspect that there is more software in Gnome that is missing from the Live CD version that would otherwise get installed and disk icons would then display. Neither is there a fine enough grain of control in the Gnome-editor (desktop) with regard to displaying the disk icon feature to engage displaying the actual icon when you mount a disk.

I understand where you are coming from and you may be correct, however, I have a workaround solution that avoids the problem.

The problem is the side-effect of the network changes in the OS on the 3rd party browser, i.e. FF 3.0 - a problem you do not have, but which is quite apparent for myself and other users.

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> There is no issue in my dialup configuration. It is the same as it has always been and it is stable.


First, I never questioned your dial-up configuration but I said there was an issue with Ubuntu's dial-up *support*, meaning something broke related to dial-up networking with Ubuntu 8.04. Apparently, a change to Network Manager is the culprit.



> With regard to FF 3.0, every time I disabled offline mode and exited FF, the next time I launched FF, it launched in offline mode when I was connected to my ISP. No user control.


Yep, this is because of the Network Manager issue. Uninstall Network Manager (one option) and the issue goes away.



> Starting FF 3.0 in offline mode is a no-brainer, i.e. it is the default.


It is NOT the default. Even you have proven it's not the default. How? Because if you use the option of disabling Network Manager's reporting of network connection state (which I guess is the moral equivalent of uninstalling Network Manager completely), Firefox responds differently. If Network Manager is fully operational, it won't correctly report the network connection status and Firefox starts in offline mode. If Network Manager isn't involved, Firefox "assumes" an active network connection. Firefox is simply responding to the underlying system reporting its networking state. Also, we can't forget the *other* apps being affected by Network Manager's behavior as well.

A "default" setting is a setting set in the standard distribution of the browser. Some distro maintainers might make some changes (like Ubuntu disabling Firefox's ability to check for updates on its own) but given Network Manager's involvement, I don't think this was changed by the Ubuntu maintainers.



> Disconnecting the network cable is cheating wrt this particular problem. Note: I use a Live CD, whereas you probably have an installed system - world's apart. For example, one of the unique changes that the Ubuntu developers made to 8.04 (off topic from FF) is to not display the disk icons on the Desktop. Even with Ubuntu Tweak, in the Live CD environment, I am unable to display the disk icons when I issue the mount command. The CD disc icon does display when a CD is automatically detected, however. I suspect that there is more software in Gnome that is missing from the Live CD version that would otherwise get installed and disk icons would then display. Neither is there a fine enough grain of control in the Gnome-editor (desktop) with regard to displaying the disk icon feature to engage displaying the actual icon when you mount a disk.


Granted, your running in a liveCD environment is a different configuration than my running from an installed environment. However, I don't believe your running in a liveCD environment is relevant since my disconnecting my network cable accomplished the *same behavior* in Network Manager. So, when I disconnected my network cable, Network Manager reported to Firefox there was no network connection and Firefox started in offline mode. Cool. That is correct behavior. When you connect to the Internet via dial-up, Network Manager reported to Firefox there was no network connection and Firefox started in offline mode. I don't think your running in a liveCD environment matters. Furthermore, in one of those bug reports SEVERAL people complained about the same issue you had with Firefox starting in offline mode and NOT ONE indicated they were running in a liveCD environment.



> The problem is the side-effect of the network changes in the OS on the 3rd party browser, i.e. FF 3.0 - a problem you do not have, but which is quite apparent for myself and other users.


This is definitely true and a completely different statement than the one you made in the first post of this thread.


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

See here, here, and here.

Long story short: there is a Firefox bug posted, and a workaround.

The difference in opinions that we have is not whether FF starts at all in offline mode when the network is disconnected (correct), but that because of the bug, it defaults to offline mode when the network connection exists (for dialup: i.e. ppp0 rather than eth0). Network manager clearly interferes with dialup which you should be able to run alongside a different network connection anyway without the side effects that seem to be plaguing FF.

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> Hi tomdkat,
> 
> See here, here, and here.
> 
> ...


Thanks for those links and they confirm what I've been posting above all along. It's a Network Manager issue and it looks like Network Manager 0.7 might resolve the issue for those using dial-up or ppp oriented connections. I've got no problem with your second paragraph above and we're both on that same page. It's the "this is a Firefox bug" that I had issue with, since it clearly isn't.

Personally, I don't agree with the proposed change of having Firefox check for a specific version of Network Manager since that "binds" the browser to lower level functionality that should be a "black box". However, given people's resistance to simply unchecking "work offline" I guess you've got to do something to quiet the masses. More often than not, those opposed to unchecking "work offline" admit it's an annoyance (as you have admitted) and I don't think it's appropriate to change the functionality of the browser due to an "annoyance" caused by an underlying part of the operating environment (GNOME in this case vs the kernel). I'm not a Firefox developer so it's not my call on which changes are appropriate and which ones aren't.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

What do you mean people's resistance to simply unchecking "work offline" - we all tried that and it reverted to the opposite behavior we all expected?

If that action had actually worked, there would have been no problem, but, as you can see - there was a Big problem.

In this case, clearly, the FF developers made the wrong call and a portion of the user base suffered the problem.

-- Tom

P.S. I will check to see what default Network Manager version I am running and whether 0.7 fixes the problem. Ok, it looks like I am running 0.6.6 version of the Network Manager for Ubuntu 8.04 LTS - I have all of the repositories in my apt sources.list and do not see any available 0.7 Network Manager there nor at the Gnome website.


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> What do you mean people's resistance to simply unchecking "work offline" - we all tried that and it reverted to the opposite behavior we all expected?


What I mean is people would rather not deal with the issue of an incorrect network connection state being reported to Firefox by simply unchecking "work offline" in the File menu, which addresses the issue directly. You can read comments in this bug report to see what I mean. People acknowledge they "could" uncheck "work offline" to resolve the issue for the duration of that Firefox session but their insistance that Firefox, which is NOT the problem, be "fixed" is resistance to focusing their energy on getting the actual problem fixed.

Additionally, I think you're misunderstanding the "work offline" switch in the File menu. That switch is to configure Firefox's mode of operation _at that time_. If you're online surfing the web with Firefox, you can check the "work offline" option and it will stop connecting to the Internet. You can then uncheck it and it will connect to the Internet, provided the network connection is still there. That File menu setting isn't intended to be a "saved" option that is set with other browser options, like the size of the browser cache or whether to have Firefox check to see if it's the default browser or not.



> If that action had actually worked, there would have been no problem, but, as you can see - there was a Big problem.


The thing is, people acknowledge manually unchecking "work offline" DOES work for them. They just don't want to have to uncheck that (at least until Network Manager is fixed).



> In this case, clearly, the FF developers made the wrong call and a portion of the user base suffered the problem.


Not at all. In the bug report I posted the link to above, one person suggests *Ubuntu* made the "wrong call" by including Network Manager in the distro, considering the version they included is "broken". Keep in mind, *uninstalling Network Manager solves the problem*. The method you posted above also solves the problem by disabling the incorrect reporting Network Manager is doing. That is a *Network Manager* problem _not_ a Firefox problem.



> P.S. I will check to see what default Network Manager version I am running and whether 0.7 fixes the problem. Ok, it looks like I am running 0.6.6 version of the Network Manager for Ubuntu 8.04 LTS - I have all of the repositories in my apt sources.list and do not see any available 0.7 Network Manager there nor at the Gnome website.


Yep, I'm running the same version as you and *that's the problem*.  In fact, one of the links you posted above points to a bug report that has a link to version 0.7 of Network Manager that could be downloaded, I believe.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

You have your opinion and I have mine.

What I experienced directly is that by clicking Work Offline to an unchecked state prior to Quit from FF was insufficient to cause FF to launch in an online state - i.e. the specific bahavior of the preceeding FF 3.0 Release Candidate 1 and 2 and Beta 3.0b5 did not have the behavior that FF launched into the Work Offline mode - so, why the change for FF 3.0?

The FF developers made a change that caused the subsequent behavior of FF 3.0 to be different. I did not experience the same thing you appear to have read in the comments. In my case, FF 3.0 never failed to launch in Work Offline mode no matter what I did, until I applied the workaround to the Network Manager code. That it worked is good enough for me to give me the launch behavior of FF 3.0 - remember, I am not working from an installed OS here - only a Live CD with very few updates.

Even with all of my repositories updated, I did not find a Network Manager 0.7 nor at the Gnome primary development website.

Your assertion about Network Manager is speculative. If it is not available from the prime development web site at Gnome, it is not available as a general release.

Just to note: I do have a network card, but I have no connection for it - only a 56k dialup phone line. If and when I choose to get FiOS, I will be able to see a connection and will not need the dialup modem. I am certain Network Manager will work as advertised at that time. I see no reason to uninstall Network Manager even though I do not make use of it (and even though it has a side effect to my dialup setup). My dialup setup for the pppd is a customized setup that I built for my original Linux installation (still bootable) that I now use for storage instead of Internet use.

At present the network symbol upon mouse over presents the text - No network connection. 

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> What I experienced directly is that by clicking Work Offline to an unchecked state prior to Quit from FF was insufficient to cause FF to launch in an online state


*Of course* it won't do this. Why? That's NOT the purpose of that switch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you would have unchecked "work offline" after starting Firefox, that will change the mode Firefox started in. It won't change any "default" setting because there is NO "setting" to change! You're changing Firefox's mode of operation and Firefox is responding to the network connection state the system is reporting, plain and simple. This isn't my opinion, this is *fact*. (I mean the part about Firefox responding to the network connection state being reported by Network Manager).



> - i.e. the specific bahavior of the preceeding FF 3.0 Release Candidate 1 and 2 and Beta 3.0b5 did not have the behavior that FF launched into the Work Offline mode - so, why the change for FF 3.0?


Ah yes, let's talk about FF 3b5 for a moment. First, you DO realize then when you use *beta* software, the behavior of that software isn't "guaranteed" or "set in stone" because development is still active on it. Why Ubuntu included the beta version of Firefox in the 8.04 release, I have no idea and I was actually quite shocked they would do that. The same applies to the release candidates except the release candidates will undergo fewer changes since the developers are in bug fixing mode, fixing bugs that they consider serious enough to hold up the release. No major functional changes will go into a release candidate release unless a major function is severely broken. If anything, the Firefox developers finalized the *planned upon new feature* of using D-bus (I believe) on Linux to better communicate with the underlying system. Network Manager also uses D-bus and I believe this is how Network Manager comes into the picture. I'm still a bit sketchy on how all of these pieces fit together.

Generally, if you use beta software it's *at your own risk* and the developers make NO guarantees or assurances the betas will even work, let alone be stable. To base your position on the behavior of *beta* software doesn't make sense to me but I guess you'll consider that "my opinion".

One last thing I would like to add, people have reported, in some of the BugZilla bug reports, that they *have* experienced this issue with Firefox 3b3 and 3b4.



> I did not experience the same thing you appear to have read in the comments.


So, you're saying after you started Firefox and unchecked "work offline" you STILL couldn't access the Internet? In your previous posts, you never indicated if you _actually_ unchecked "work offline" after starting Firefox.



> In my case, FF 3.0 never failed to launch in Work Offline mode no matter what I did, until I applied the workaround to the Network Manager code. That it worked is good enough for me to give me the launch behavior of FF 3.0 - remember, I am not working from an installed OS here - only a Live CD with very few updates.


I think we've established this is NOT environmental (in terms of you running from a liveCD vs me running from a full installation). We're BOTH running Network Manager 0.6.6 and that version of Network Manager has the issue. We're on a level playing field.



> Even with all of my repositories updated, I did not find a Network Manager 0.7 nor at the Gnome primary development website.
> 
> Your assertion about Network Manager is speculative. If it is not available from the prime development web site at Gnome, it is not available as a general release.


*Ahem* I stated Network Manager 0.7 is expected to have this issue resolved. I never stated it was *released* yet but in the threads you posted that had links to bug reports on the issue, people were discussing their experiences with using Network Manager 0.7 to resolve this issue. So, *when it's available* this whole thread becomes mute. For the time being, check out these links:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=676992
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/219906

In my Google search results, I believe I found comments indicating Network Manager 0.7 might already be part of some other distros, even though it's still in beta or under development. I guess technically speaking, the version of Network Manager we're using now is in the same status and 0.7. Here are some relevant links:

How to: Install Network Manager 0.7 SVN on Hardy
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=797059

Of course, I suggest waiting until Network Manager 0.7 is officially released.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.0/+bug/191889
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/191889
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/network-manager/+bug/147119

I was mistaken previously. The comments I found regarding people using Network Manager 0.7 came from the bug report links I posted above, not that you had posted.



> Just to note: I do have a network card, but I have no connection for it - only a 56k dialup phone line. If and when I choose to get FiOS, I will be able to see a connection and will not need the dialup modem. I am certain Network Manager will work as advertised at that time.


Yep. The comments I'm reading indicate Network Manager 0.6.6 doesn't support PPP well, yet version 0.7 does a better job.



> I see no reason to uninstall Network Manager even though I do not make use of it (and even though it has a side effect to my dialup setup). My dialup setup for the pppd is a customized setup that I built for my original Linux installation (still bootable) that I now use for storage instead of Internet use.


You have effectively uninstalled it through the workaround you implemented above. Firefox can run without Network Manager being installed. Given your liveCD environment, it will probably be harder for you to uninstall Network Manager and that won't be worth the effort.

You should actually read through the links I've posted above. Some people are using wvdial, as you are, as well as other tools. Some are using dial-up connections, some are using 3G connections, and so on. If you're looking at pointing a finger at someone, point it at the Ubuntu maintainers. One of those bug report links actually identifies this Network Manager problem *before* 8.04 was released (at least I think the discussion took place before 8.04 came out). So, this isn't anything new and isn't something "discovered" by Firefox users. Firefox is definitely affected but this isn't a Firefox issue.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

Excuse me, but in about:config there is a switch, browser.offline, that gets toggled every time you click on Work Offline. Clicking on the switch the first time the event occurred did indeed cause FF to go into an online state - but, that only lasts for the session, i.e. it is insufficent to last between sessions (which is the behavior that I expected, but did not get)!

No previous versions of FF ever caused the new default behavior of Work Offline upon launch.

Never said I couldn't access Internet after unchecking Work Offline.

What you said about Network Manager in post #17 was:


> Yep, I'm running the same version as you and that's the problem. In fact, one of the links you posted above points to a bug report that has a link to version 0.7 of Network Manager that could be downloaded, I believe.


When it is necessary, I will followup - thanks for all of your comments!

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> Excuse me, but in about:config there is a switch, browser.offline, that gets toggled every time you click on Work Offline. Clicking on the switch the first time the event occurred did indeed cause FF to go into an online state - but, that only lasts for the session, i.e. it is insufficent to last between sessions (which is the behavior that I expected, but did not get)!


Great! The behavior you describe is a good thing. That means Firefox is working correctly in that unchecking "work offline" enables you to get online. As I have posted above, the "work offline" switch controls Firefox's behavior for that session. It's not intended to be a "permanent" setting, like the others I mentioned above. For a moment there, I was starting to think you couldn't access the web _at all_ (regardless of unchecking "work offline" or not) without mucking with Network Manager. Thanks for confirming the behavior. What you experienced during the "uncheck" test is mostly what I experienced when I unplugged my network cable.



> No previous versions of FF ever caused the new default behavior of Work Offline upon launch.


Firefox 3 is the *first* version of Firefox to "use" D-bus messages or otherwise interact with Network Manager. This choice to interact with D-bus isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's just Network Manager is reporting bogus info and that is causing problems with *several* network aware apps that also "use" D-bus.



> Never said I couldn't access Internet after unchecking Work Offline.


Yep, you just never said anything about unchecking "work offline".  You focused on what happened when Firefox started up, which is why I had to ask.



> What you said about Network Manager in post #17 was:
> 
> When it is necessary, I will followup - thanks for all of your comments!


Yep, I was mistaken in post #17. I corrected myself on that in post #19. I thought I found that info in the links you posted and the info I was referring to was actually in the bug report links *I* had posted links to.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

The new Release Notes of Firefox 3.0.1 say:
Fixed a Linux issues where, for users on a PPP connection (dialup or DSL) Firefox always started in "Offline" mode (bug 424626)

The comments make interesting reading among the developers.

Looks like I should now be able to backoff my changes to NM. I have just now installed FF 3.0.1 and still need to make the backoff changes.

-- Tom

P.S. I have now backed off my original changes to the NetworkManager.conf file, and rebooted - all is well again.


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

Yep, I saw that and a lot of that commentary was in the bug report links I posted above. 

Dan Williams was right on the money with his comments. 

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

Comment #90 Martin Steigerwald 2008-07-04 10:34:45 PDT says it all.

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

Comment #90 says a lot, but definitely leaves even MORE out. 

Obviously, that person doesn't understand software development. The statements made about Network Manager clearly show he doesn't understand or realize that Network Manager is still in active development, hence the 0.x version numbering. I don't think Network Manager developers "advertise" that it supports ALL kinds of network interfaces or connections 100% correctly, *yet*. I'm sure that poster hasn't even been to the Network Manager site to find out what it is and what it's actually trying to do.

His points about the software "trying to be smarter than the user" are completely idiotic since the very "creature comforts" he might appreciate in some applications are the result of those applications "trying to be smarter than the user".

The problem here is this: people are frustrated that Firefox didn't "just work" when they used it. They have no clue as to why it didn't but it bugged the hell out of them that it didn't. All they wanted is for Firefox to work and really don't care how or why but only *that* it works. Sure, a simple and easy "workaround" is to uncheck a setting but apparently doing that is a bit too much to ask. So, they want Firefox "fixed" because *Firefox* appears "not to work".

Now, at face value I can certainly understand that point of view and can see why someone would be frustrated. *However* to attempt to base a technical argument on an emotional reaction is (what's a nice way to phrase this...) not the best approach to take. Even in that bug report, the bulk of the discussion was about Network Manager and why? Because Network Manager *was* the problem and the Firefox developers were gracious enough to accomodate the frustrated users.

Think about the various browsers you've used over the years. How many had configuration options relating directly to the underlying networking of the operating environment? Let's see, Internet Explorer has the "Internet Options" configuration dialog but that's really at the Windows level since you can access it through Control Panel. Ok, just about all non-IE browsers have some kind of proxy setting where you can configure a direct connection to the network or configure a proxy server or have it detect a proxy, if necessary. Firefox provides the "about:config" interface to allow you to tweak a lot of the internal settings of the browser for special cases. If those were all "common" kinds of settings, they would be available in the main configuration interface. But I digress....

I think post #95 is more appropriate. A "band-aid" was provided by the Firefox developers. As people *choose* to either stop using Network Manager on their system or migrate to the newer versions as they come out, the need for this "band-aid" will go away.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

The original problem still stands - i.e. FF developers lack a strong QA and decision matrix in the area of what features and dependencies to include without understanding the side effects on the total user population of their decision.

No self respecting competent QA organization would have let FF out the door under the circumstances of depending on a non-existent future version of software (NM v7).

Needless to say it is a daunting open-software project that carries with it the pressures of release schedules.

Knowing when to back-off is as important as knowing when to include - neither of which met a minimum standard IMHO for good sound software engineering - and I've been doing SE for several decades!

But, don't take my word for it - but, do take the user's word for it - they are the lifeline of any really good software product, and will always let you know one way or the other.

Case of developers not in touch with users - one fact stands out, and that is that the very last FF 3.0 RC2 did not have that feature, which begs the question of why they included it under the mistaken assumptions they made without exploring the consequences and missing the opportunity to get meaningful user feedback.

Chalk this one up to experience gained (hopefully) by inexperienced developers/managers making the decisions.

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> The original problem still stands - i.e. FF developers lack a strong QA and decision matrix in the area of what features and dependencies to include without understanding the side effects on the total user population of their decision.


This is certainly NOT the original problem but it certainly is more of a broader spectrum issue. You claim Firefox developers lack a "strong QA" yet you probably know very little about it. I don't know much about the internals of their QA process or procedures but from snipets of comments I've read here and there (mainly in some developer blogs I stumbled across in links on various forums) the Firefox QA process is stronger than you might think. Let's keep things in perspective here: we're talking about an obscure case of people on dial-up or other PPP-oriented Internet connections using Network Manager (through their Linux distribution of choice) which is interfering with Firefox's ability to go online due to a bug in Network Manager. You're saying you would have preferred the ENTIRE Firefox 3 release be held up because of this? What about Windows and Mac users who don't fit into this category? Are the Linux users impacted by this in the majority of Linux network configurations? Of course, I have NO idea but I would venture to speculate there are far MORE Linux users with broadband Internet connections than without. So, the Firefox QA process is "weak" because an obscure minority of users was hit by a bug in *another* software component? Sounds like an emotional argument to me.....



> No self respecting competent QA organization would have let FF out the door under the circumstances of depending on a non-existent future version of software (NM v7).


The same could be said about Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, and just about any other software vendor that develops an app in use today. What I find most ironic about this entire discussion we've been having is your refusal to place blame where it truly lies: the Linux distribution maintainer. Firefox can run fine without Network Manager installed. Firefox *does not* require Network Manager to function. This is a fact. Here is another fact: the Ubuntu maintainers chose to include Network Manager in their distribution. Other distro maintainers did the same. Since we're talking about Firefox on Ubuntu, let's focus on Ubuntu. The Ubuntu maintainers are the ones who need to perform the system and integration testing to make sure their "package" works as intended. Why aren't you asking why the Ubuntu maintainers didn't more thoroughly test the distro before releasing it? Here is another fact: the Ubuntu maintainers included a *beta* version of Firefox as the *default* browser in their *GA* release of the Ubuntu. Why would they do that? I can see making FF3b available as an additional browser, like Epiphany, but to make it the default? Doesn't make much sense to me.

So, if you're wanting to get to the "heart" or the "root" of the matter, you really need to focus your energy toward the Ubuntu maintainers (in this case). They are the ones who need to make sure ALL of the software they bundle works correctly since _they_ provide the package (the distro) that we, the end users, will use. Why aren't you questioning the QA process of Ubuntu?



> Needless to say it is a daunting open-software project that carries with it the pressures of release schedules.


Yep, to stay competitive they must make their dates since we, the users, don't have the patience to wait. Fortunately, the Firefox development and release schedule is pretty transparent. We don't have access to everything but we can see their time lines and know when slips occur, etc.



> Knowing when to back-off is as important as knowing when to include - neither of which met a minimum standard IMHO for good sound software engineering - and I've been doing SE for several decades!


I do agree that it's NOT good "cram stuff in" for the sake of getting it in. This makes me question some of the decisions the Ubuntu maintainers made.



> But, don't take my word for it - but, do take the user's word for it - they are the lifeline of any really good software product, and will always let you know one way or the other.


I do take the users' word for it. Tons of them love FF3 because it works and works very well. Others have issues with stability on their particular systems. Others have issues with extentions causing grief.



> Case of developers not in touch with users - one fact stands out, and that is that the very last FF 3.0 RC2 did not have that feature, which begs the question of why they included it under the mistaken assumptions they made without exploring the consequences and missing the opportunity to get meaningful user feedback.


I don't believe this is a fact. Go back and read the links I posted above. People impacted by this Network Manager problem encountered is with FF*b3* and *b4*. Even you stated you had the problem with *b5*. The inclusion of D-bus support *is not* something that was added after RC2 came out. I think that is a fact and one that you've supported with your previous comments in this thread.

As for developers not being in touch with users, I think the Firefox developers are very much in touch with its user base. They might not agree with everything the users have to say and they realize the users really understand far less about how Firefox is developed or even works than the users themselves realize but they tend to be responsive to the user community and I think they do a great job of it!



> Chalk this one up to experience gained (hopefully) by inexperienced developers/managers making the decisions.


It certainly will be interesting to see how the Ubuntu maintainers deal with this kind of thing in future releases. I certainly hope the inexperienced users also learn from this and do a more to learn about the software they are using and the system configuration they are using so they can use their systems in ways that suit them the best.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

Apparently, whatever fix they installed in FF 3.0.1- it does not work on my setup. Back to the work-around for me.

Never implied entire FF release should be held up, just that whatever changes they made between RC2 and 3.0 final release should have been backed off until they understood all the ramifications of releasing not-fully-developed future NM software capability (which they "thought" they could - basically, an incomplete set of assumptions must have been in play, or a lack of testing in QC/QA to not spot the problems, or the pressure of schedules drove them to it).

Also, we are not talking about "an obsure dialup use case" here - what we are talking about is the great malaise that all developers at one time or another suffer from until they gain real expertise and experience "at the system level" - i.e. hubris - they "think" they either know it all, or no one else does, even before they have learned to think. It is no wonder that software development is as poor as it is these days.

It is a simple matter of human failure that if there had been a formal specification and means of verification that it was correct, complete and the implementation met the specification - but, I digress - the water has fallen over the dam, so, the most rational thing the developers could have done is to back off the change, the locus of which was centrally located around the use of dbus and NM signals that they clearly did not understand the full ramifications about.

Really well-run development projects in software engineering do at least two major things:
1) They document design decisions (i.e. the reason for them), and if the reason gets stuffed by some lame decision later on, then the design decision can be reconsidered in light of reality - usually changing specifications.
2) They do not make decisions by committee (as it appears from the discussion, not that the discussion does not represent valuable points-of-view) - someone has to have a wider perspective - usually, the system engineer of a project.

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> Apparently, whatever fix they installed in FF 3.0.1- it does not work on my setup. Back to the work-around for me.


Wait a minute, above when you posted the link to the bug report indicating the Firefox side-effect had been dealt with in 3.0.1, you indicated that you backed off your Network Manager change and "all is well again", to quote you directly. Was it working at some point and then it stopped? Also, there was an Ubuntu update of Firefox (or something Firefox related) the other day. How do you pick up Ubuntu updates, given your configuration? This is the UA string for the version I'm running right now:

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.0.1) Gecko/2008071717 Firefox/3.0.1

Ubuntu released two Firefox 3.0.1 updates. One came out right before 3.0.1 went GA and then one went out after 3.0.1 was GA.



> Never implied entire FF release should be held up, just that whatever changes they made between RC2 and 3.0 final release should have been backed off until they understood all the ramifications of releasing not-fully-developed future NM software capability (which they "thought" they could - basically, an incomplete set of assumptions must have been in play, or a lack of testing in QC/QA to not spot the problems, or the pressure of schedules drove them to it).


"not-fully-developed future NM software capability"? What the hell does *that* mean? NM's deficiencies are *not* the responsibility of the Firefox developers. It's the responsibility of the NM developers and NM is part of the GNOME project. As I read more about this, it looks like Firefox 3 introduced support of D-Bus on Linux. You can also read this. Sounds reasonable. Now, according to this:


> nd since the NetworkManager components communicate with each other using dbus, it's easy to to build network-aware applications in languages like C, C++, and Python.


I understand Firefox to be simply asking the "system", via D-Bus, what the current network connection state is. Network Manager responds _via D-Bus_ with an incorrect state for those with PPP connections. Now, we know Firefox is completely capable of running WITHOUT Network Manager being installed so we know Network Manager *itself* is not a requirement. Network Manager is "getting in the way" for PPP connection users, obviously. The comments you make above apply directly to the Ubuntu maintainers, not the Firefox developers. The Ubuntu maintainers provide the software its users can use to support dial-up Internet connectivity. The Ubuntu maintainers are the ones who integrate the software and get the various parts communicating with each other. Your comments are completely misdirected.



> Also, we are not talking about "an obsure dialup use case" here - what we are talking about is the great malaise that all developers at one time or another suffer from until they gain real expertise and experience "at the system level" - i.e. hubris - they "think" they either know it all, or no one else does, even before they have learned to think. It is no wonder that software development is as poor as it is these days.


Looking at the specifics of this case, we certainly ARE talking about an obscure minority of Linux users. Look at the Firefox install base and the numbers of people with various Linux distros who complained about it. In the grand scheme, these numbers will minuscule. Taking a step back and looking at this from a broader perspective, I think you're right. Some developers think they "know it all" and that's not necessarily a good thing. I also do agree software development quality has suffered over the years but for a different reason or set of reasons.



> It is a simple matter of human failure that if there had been a formal specification and means of verification that it was correct, complete and the implementation met the specification - but, I digress - the water has fallen over the dam, so, the most rational thing the developers could have done is to back off the change, the locus of which was centrally located around the use of dbus and NM signals that they clearly did not understand the full ramifications about.


I agree with your comments except the responsibility for doing what you describe falls on the Ubuntu maintainers, not the Firefox developers. Now, for some bizarre reason you're convinced the D-Bus support was "added" or something post Firefox 3rc2. You *yourself* have indicated *YOU* experienced the problem with Firefox 3*b5*. I've provided documentation of *OTHERS* reporting the problem in Firefox 3*b3* and Firefox 3*b4*. It's clear to me that the D-Bus support was in place during the BETA cycles of Firefox 3 and was LEFT IN during the release candidate cycles. What makes you think something "changed" in relation to this post FFrc2? What change do you think was made?



> Really well-run development projects in software engineering do at least two major things:
> 1) They document design decisions (i.e. the reason for them), and if the reason gets stuffed by some lame decision later on, then the design decision can be reconsidered in light of reality - usually changing specifications.
> 2) They do not make decisions by committee (as it appears from the discussion, not that the discussion does not represent valuable points-of-view) - someone has to have a wider perspective - usually, the system engineer of a project.


I agree with both of these things. I do believe the Firefox development team implements both of these things. I know they publicly publish a roadmap and they publicly publish info on their QA processes and so forth. I'm not sure if they publicly publish any of the internal design documentation. I guess you could subscribe to a developer mailing list to see what kind of information might be disseminated there.

One last thing, given the *fact* the Network Manager issue plagues *other* applications, and not "just" Firefox, why are you refusing to look at the Ubuntu distro maintainers? In the end, it's their choice to include a "broken" Network Manager that is impacting software distributed _by them_.

EDIT: I just found this on this page:



> It should be easy to configure dial-up and ADSL out of the box, we should use Network Manager to at least bring the connections up and down.


Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

NM 6.6 is not necessarily broken - just incomplete in terms of development as a version.

Ubuntu distributed the latest version of the software for NM. Obviously, the FF developers may have concluded it to be full featured (when in fact it was not).

Yes, I spoke too soon about all being well - as after I backed off the workaround and rebooted, the plague of offline reoccurred.

I suspect it has more to do with my Live CD environment which is not a full featured Ubuntu installation.

Yes, I have seen the FF roadmap, but strangely, was never able to find a schedule to which they would commit until it was announced about a month or so before release.

Ubuntu 8.04 release preceded the FF 3.0 release.

Not surprising - most software is released with bugs in it.

I've gotten over it - have you?

BTW, if I experienced the problem during FF 3.0b5 (as you say), I probably had the workaround in place as soon as I found it and put it in place - looks like June 2, 2008 by the date on the file I have with the workaround.

You talk about an obscure minority of FF users as if you have access to data that says so - if so, what's your data? Sounds like an assumption to me, so I will call it that. Just so you know, I call 'em as I see them! 

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> NM 6.6 is not necessarily broken - just incomplete in terms of development as a version.


With regard to PPP support, it certainly IS broken (the release is *0*.6.6, not even at version 1.0 yet) and the next release should fix this aspect of Network Manager.



> Ubuntu distributed the latest version of the software for NM. Obviously, the FF developers may have concluded it to be full featured (when in fact it was not).


Obviously, the Ubuntu maintainers concluded version 0.6.6 of Network Manager was considered to be "full featured" since they included it with the 8.04 release of Ubuntu. The Firefox developers weren't focusing on Network Manager as you think they might have. You can't forget that FF3 *works without Network Manager being installed*.



> I suspect it has more to do with my Live CD environment which is not a full featured Ubuntu installation.


Maybe but what troubles me the most about this entire thread is you mentioned *nothing* about your unique configuration in your initial post OR the *fact* this behavior is experienced only under certain conditions *at all*.



> Yes, I have seen the FF roadmap, but strangely, was never able to find a schedule to which they would commit until it was announced about a month or so before release.


They seem to have changed how they publish their schedules. This page contains an example of what I was used to seeing, where the scheduled dates for code freeze and so on were posted along with the actual dates those events took place. I remember older roadmaps clearly illustrating when dates were missed or goals met early, etc.



> Ubuntu 8.04 release preceded the FF 3.0 release.


Well, yeah which means Firefox 2 *should have been the default browser* and not Firefox 3.



> I've gotten over it - have you?


I wasn't impacted by the issue, so I couldn't care less about it.  I was hung up over your misrepresentation of it.



> BTW, if I experienced the problem during FF 3.0b5 (as you say), I probably had the workaround in place as soon as I found it and put it in place - looks like June 2, 2008 by the date on the file I have with the workaround.


I was mistaken. You didn't report the problem in FF 3b5 but others had reported the problem with FF 3b3 and 3b4.



> You talk about an obscure minority of FF users as if you have access to data that says so - if so, what's your data? Sounds like an assumption to me, so I will call it that. Just so you know, I call 'em as I see them!


Yep, I'm talking about the number of Linux users using dial-up Internet connections, not the number of Firefox users. This issue doesn't impact Firefox users on Windows or Mac OS X so I wouldn't include them in this. As for numbers, I don't have any. However, if PPP connections on Linux were the majority, Network Manager would have made PPP connections the priority (hey that rhymes! ).

Are you thinking I'm mistaken in my assertion that the number of Linux users with dial-up Internet connections are in the minority? How many threads do we have on this forum about dial-up connections on Linux vs threads about Ethernet or wireless connections on Linux?

I think we're the same in that we both "call 'em as [we] see 'em". 

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

I never once misrepresented the issue in terms of my first-hand experience with it whereas your second-hand opinion seems to have been hung.

You seem to talk about numbers without having any - is my point!

From the get-go, when FF is launched by clicking on a local file (this is one case), then it is safe for FF to assume that it is not transacting any fetch over the Internet for which a connection is required. However, that is no reason to assume that FF should therefore be in a "Work Offline" mode either!

If FF has the smarts to know when it is being asked to fetch something on the Internet - which I think we can all agree without chasing a wild goose about "smarts" as it doesn't take much - it should also probably be able to detect whether it has a suitable connection to the Internet (by virtue of its configuration) - but wait, in the connection settings there is only info about proxies - not whether there is dialup, dsl, or fiber types.

Apparently, assumptions were offloaded to NM under its latest (at the time) configuration capabilities (which unfortunately did not cover dialup - possibly dsl modems as well).

Suffice it to say - software today is very complex when system interfaces are given to have attributes which are still under development, and one should not expect software to be correct in all cases.

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> I never once misrepresented the issue in terms of my first-hand experience with it whereas your second-hand opinion seems to have been hung.


That's very true and obviously you must qualify your position on representation to limit the scope to what you experienced first hand. This three page is about far MORE than your first hand experience, wouldn't you agree? The misrepresentation is in your presentation of the initial issue and in your assertion that this is a Firefox issue, when it really is not. That goes far beyond your first hand experience. As for my "second hand" opinion, it's been supported by fact and other people's first hand experiences.



> You seem to talk about numbers without having any - is my point!


You have yet to provide ANY evidence supporting assertions you've made, which I have questioned above. Your reference to my not having actual numbers seems like you're thinking I'm "hiding" the fact I don't have any. I've stated I didn't have any in previous comments so I'm not sure why you're harping on this UNLESS it's because you acknowledge my underlying point is correct. Without having any numbers, if the majority of Ubuntu Linux users connecting to the Internet used dial-up connections, as you do, this issue probably would not have existed. Why not? Because the Ubuntu maintainers would not have shipped a distro release that would have "broken" most of its user base. Do you need me to provide numbers to make this more clear for you?

Here is a comment from Dan Williams in the Firefox bug report referenced in the FF 3.0.1 release information:


> Some distros probably turned on NM 0.6 by default before it was ready for the
> majority of that distros userbase. We didn't turn NM on by default in Fedora
> until Fedora 9 mainly because we felt that only NM 0.7 covered enough use-cases
> to be turned on by default (PPP for example).





> From the get-go, when FF is launched by clicking on a local file (this is one case), then it is safe for FF to assume that it is not transacting any fetch over the Internet for which a connection is required. However, that is no reason to assume that FF should therefore be in a "Work Offline" mode either!


First, your assumption is wrong. When FF is launched by clicking a local file, it can't assume an Internet connection will not be required. Why not? Because, that local file could reference *items on an external website* to load. I run into that frequently when assisting people on this forum with website issues. They post the HTML for their page, I save it locally, I open the local file from my hard drive and the page loads images (and other stuff) directly from their website. Second, FF isn't "assuming" to go into offline mode _because_ you opened a local file. FF went into offline mode because the underlying environment told it there was no network connection present. If this issue truly was a FF issue, people *without* dial-up or PPP-oriented Internet connections *would be affected* since the scenario you describe is possible *regardless* of network connection type, PPP or other.



> If FF has the smarts to know when it is being asked to fetch something on the Internet - which I think we can all agree without chasing a wild goose about "smarts" as it doesn't take much - it should also probably be able to detect whether it has a suitable connection to the Internet (by virtue of its configuration) - but wait, in the connection settings there is only info about proxies - not whether there is dialup, dsl, or fiber types.


FF doesn't need any "smarts" to know when it's being asked to fetch remote files. The HTML file will tell it what files to fetch and from where. As for the connection settings, Opera has the same kinds of settings as Firefox. On Windows, IE uses an external control panel that other apps use as well (like Safari on Windows, for example). Your implication here is FF is "missing" something. My point is the browser should not and does not care about the *actual* kind of underlying network connection. Why would it care?



> Apparently, assumptions were offloaded to NM under its latest (at the time) configuration capabilities (which unfortunately did not cover dialup - possibly dsl modems as well).


I don't think an assumption was made. I think a question was asked (is there an active network connection?) and the underlying system (Network Manager, in this case) responded "No". If I unplug my network cable, I get the *same behavior as you*.



> Suffice it to say - software today is very complex when system interfaces are given to have attributes which are still under development, and one should not expect software to be correct in all cases.


I wholeheartedly agree. I think in some cases, software today is overly complex and I'm not sure when this increase in complexity started taking place.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

Hi tomdkat,

Apparently, when a user dictates to Work Offline (using NM), it does the following:
Effectively, if you are using network manager properly and are online, starting
firefox and choosing 'work offline' will still land you online and loading the
pages over the network, even though you actively tried to tell firefox not to
do this.

Quite the opposite of the behavior I experienced.

Since the FF developers accepted it as a bug, and did not punt the issue to the OS, it remains a FF bug which is yet to be fixed.

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> Apparently, when a user dictates to Work Offline (using NM), it does the following:
> Effectively, if you are using network manager properly and are online, starting
> firefox and choosing 'work offline' will still land you online and loading the
> pages over the network, even though you actively tried to tell firefox not to
> do this.


Really? That's interesting since that's precisely the behavior I'm *not* seeing. I'm still using Network Manager 0.6.6 since I use a wired Ethernet connection to my router to access the Internet and thus am not affected by the Network Manager 0.6.6 issue.

Here is what I did:

Started Firefox 3 like I normally do
Viewed your post above
Switched to "work offline" manually using the option in the "File" menu
Clicked "Reply" to reply to the thread
Could not reply since I was in offline mode
Attached are screenshots of the results of the above steps.

Now, the *actual* bug I believe you're talking about is when you start Firefox with the Profile Manager, such that it asks you which profile to load, and you choose a profile with "work offline" selected. When Firefox starts like this, it effectively ignores that option to start in offline mode and starts in normal, online mode. _That_ behavior most certainly IS a bug since the user's request to start the selected profile in offline mode was ignored. That, however, is a completely different issue than what we're describing AND has NOTHING to do with Network Manager. In fact, that should actually be a separate bug report but it got added in the comments of the FF bug report on this issue.

Peace...


----------



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

tomdkat said:


> Really? That's interesting since that's precisely the behavior I'm *not* seeing. I'm still using Network Manager 0.6.6 since I use a wired Ethernet connection to my router to access the Internet and thus am not affected by the Network Manager 0.6.6 issue.
> 
> Here is what I did:
> 
> ...


Hi tomdkat,

I picked up the data for my previous post by looking at the latest comments in the bug report.

-- Tom


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

lotuseclat79 said:


> Hi tomdkat,
> 
> I picked up the data for my previous post by looking at the latest comments in the bug report.
> 
> -- Tom


Yep, I know and that's why I mentioned the profile manager in my response to you above. I saw the same comment as you, comment #96:


> Someone marked my other bug, 441491
> (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=441491) as a duplicate of this
> bug, and now that they're filed together it needs to be included in this
> discussion.
> ...


When choosing "work offline" in the profile manager window that appears (if FF is configured to start with the profile manager), the behavior described above is correct. I've confirmed it personally AND with my Ethernet wired network connection (I'm NOT using PPP). I do agree this is a browser bug because FF is ignoring the "work offline" profile manager choice. This was most likely an oversight and something that definitely should be fixed. If you use their last paragraph as the *sole* description of the behavior, the described behavior is inaccurate. I believe the person who posted that comment in the bug report was describing Firefox's behavior when using the profile manager to choose which profile to use and which mode to start in.

Peace...


----------

