Caution about Thunderbird 52 and binary extensions
vseerror at lehigh.edu
Wed Nov 16 21:27:25 UTC 2016
On 11/16/2016 4:07 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 11/16/2016 4:00 PM, Jörg Knobloch <jorgk at jorgk.com> wrote:
>> On 16/11/2016 21:50, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>> Ugh... now I have to go open 49 Extensions to check for DLL's...
>> That's way too many ;-)
> Heh, yeah, I know, but I really do use most of them... that said, I did
> see a few I probably don't need anymore...
>> Another suggestion. In a few days (watch bug 1314955), download a Daily
>> build and check which extensions stopped working.
> Excellent idea, thanks, I'll do that...
>> I don't think there are many binary extensions around.
> Hopefully - but Murphy really likes me for some reason...
You really don't need to check or worry. In practical terms no author
in their right mind would add a binary requirement to their addon unless
they had to. And we pretty much know the list of such addons, which
Kent just stated.
More information about the tb-planning