-
Bug
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
P3
-
6u14
-
b02
-
generic
-
generic
-
Not verified
Issue | Fix Version | Assignee | Priority | Status | Resolution | Resolved In Build |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JDK-2200093 | 7 | Jennifer Zuo | P3 | Closed | Fixed | b64 |
We need to bring back the xpiinstall.exe. Here's an email exchange betweem Many, myself and others:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Bill
This applies to Windows system.
Further down the thread, I had sent this to Calvin:
The xpiinstall.exe is invoked through this scenario:
1) User is on a Firefox/Mozilla browser and does not have the Java plugin
2) User goes to a web page that requires the Java plugin;
User is told through a browser info bar, that the page requires the missing plugin; there is a link to get the missing plugin
3) If user chooses to get the missing plugin (in this case Java), the browser presents a link to the xpiinstall.exe.
In this way we are able to distinguish between JRE downloads that come through FF browser.
On 01/23/09 11:29, William Harnois wrote:
> Sounds like we need to bring back the xpiinstall.exe then, right?
>
> Can you walk me through a scenario where I would get xpiinstall.exe?
>
> -Bill
>
>
> ###@###.### wrote:
>> Theoretically, that is correct.
>> Users get xpiinstall.exe via PFS (through a vanity we provided to mozilla).
---------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Bill
This applies to Windows system.
Further down the thread, I had sent this to Calvin:
The xpiinstall.exe is invoked through this scenario:
1) User is on a Firefox/Mozilla browser and does not have the Java plugin
2) User goes to a web page that requires the Java plugin;
User is told through a browser info bar, that the page requires the missing plugin; there is a link to get the missing plugin
3) If user chooses to get the missing plugin (in this case Java), the browser presents a link to the xpiinstall.exe.
In this way we are able to distinguish between JRE downloads that come through FF browser.
On 01/23/09 11:29, William Harnois wrote:
> Sounds like we need to bring back the xpiinstall.exe then, right?
>
> Can you walk me through a scenario where I would get xpiinstall.exe?
>
> -Bill
>
>
> ###@###.### wrote:
>> Theoretically, that is correct.
>> Users get xpiinstall.exe via PFS (through a vanity we provided to mozilla).
- backported by
-
JDK-2200093 need to bring back xpiinstall.exe
-
- Closed
-