MX Linux Forum

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 4:23 am**

Via an icon I use a Terminal command syntax like this in a script to make Firefox open 3 windows in one click:

firefox --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/' --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/iso-download-mirrors/#checksumsignatures' --new-window 'https://endoflife.date/mxlinux'

( I love it! lol )

However sometimes after updating I have for a while had a problem using it because only one of the windows works correctly.
Two of them are blanks and their close buttons in the upper right corner does not work.
To close them I have to use the right click menu on the icons in the panel.
When I have done that and try again all 3 windows normally opens correctly.

I don't know if it is a syntax problem, a Firefox problem, an update problem or something else.
How to solve.? :-)

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 4:26 am**

According to the forum rules (please read): Please provide full Quick System Info, use copy for forum button, no edits.
LiveUSB version is OK if needed.

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 4:31 am**

Sorry, here we go:

Code: Select all

System:
  Kernel: 6.1.0-32-amd64 [6.1.129-1] arch: x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 12.2.0
    parameters: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz-6.1.0-32-amd64 root=UUID=<filter> ro quiet splash
  Desktop: Xfce v: 4.20.0 tk: Gtk v: 3.24.38 info: xfce4-panel wm: xfwm v: 4.20.0 vt: 7
    dm: LightDM v: 1.32.0 Distro: MX-23.5_x64 Libretto October 15  2023 base: Debian GNU/Linux 12
    (bookworm)
Machine:
  Type: Laptop System: Dell product: Latitude E7240 v: 01 serial: <superuser required> Chassis:
    type: 9 serial: <superuser required>
  Mobo: Dell model: 060GR9 v: A00 serial: <superuser required> BIOS: Dell v: A08 date: 02/18/2014
Battery:
  ID-1: BAT0 charge: 25.2 Wh (54.8%) condition: 46.0/46.0 Wh (100.0%) volts: 7.5 min: 7.4
    model: SMP DELL KWFFN33 type: Li-ion serial: <filter> status: not charging
CPU:
  Info: model: Intel Core i5-4300U bits: 64 type: MT MCP arch: Haswell gen: core 4 level: v3
    note: check built: 2013-15 process: Intel 22nm family: 6 model-id: 0x45 (69) stepping: 1
    microcode: 0x26
  Topology: cpus: 1x cores: 2 tpc: 2 threads: 4 smt: enabled cache: L1: 128 KiB
    desc: d-2x32 KiB; i-2x32 KiB L2: 512 KiB desc: 2x256 KiB L3: 3 MiB desc: 1x3 MiB
  Speed (MHz): avg: 1003 high: 1036 min/max: 800/2900 scaling: driver: intel_cpufreq
    governor: ondemand cores: 1: 1001 2: 1036 3: 945 4: 1030 bogomips: 19953
  Flags: avx avx2 ht lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 ssse3 vmx
  Vulnerabilities:
  Type: gather_data_sampling status: Not affected
  Type: itlb_multihit status: KVM: VMX disabled
  Type: l1tf mitigation: PTE Inversion; VMX: conditional cache flushes, SMT vulnerable
  Type: mds mitigation: Clear CPU buffers; SMT vulnerable
  Type: meltdown mitigation: PTI
  Type: mmio_stale_data status: Unknown: No mitigations
  Type: reg_file_data_sampling status: Not affected
  Type: retbleed status: Not affected
  Type: spec_rstack_overflow status: Not affected
  Type: spec_store_bypass mitigation: Speculative Store Bypass disabled via prctl
  Type: spectre_v1 mitigation: usercopy/swapgs barriers and __user pointer sanitization
  Type: spectre_v2 mitigation: Retpolines; IBPB: conditional; IBRS_FW; STIBP: conditional; RSB
    filling; PBRSB-eIBRS: Not affected; BHI: Not affected
  Type: srbds mitigation: Microcode
  Type: tsx_async_abort status: Not affected
Graphics:
  Device-1: Intel Haswell-ULT Integrated Graphics vendor: Dell driver: i915 v: kernel arch: Gen-7.5
    process: Intel 22nm built: 2013 ports: active: DP-2 off: eDP-1 empty: DP-1, DP-3, DP-4,
    HDMI-A-1, HDMI-A-2 bus-ID: 00:02.0 chip-ID: 8086:0a16 class-ID: 0300
  Device-2: Sunplus Innovation Laptop Integrated Webcam HD type: USB driver: uvcvideo
    bus-ID: 2-4:3 chip-ID: 1bcf:2985 class-ID: 0e02
  Display: x11 server: X.Org v: 1.21.1.7 compositor: xfwm v: 4.20.0 driver: X:
    loaded: modesetting unloaded: fbdev,vesa dri: crocus gpu: i915 display-ID: :0.0 screens: 1
  Screen-1: 0 s-res: 1920x1080 s-dpi: 96 s-size: 509x286mm (20.04x11.26") s-diag: 584mm (22.99")
  Monitor-1: DP-2 mapped: DP-1-1 pos: primary model: Dell U2713HM serial: <filter> built: 2013
    res: 1920x1080 hz: 60 dpi: 82 gamma: 1.2 size: 597x336mm (23.5x13.23") diag: 685mm (27")
    ratio: 16:9 modes: max: 2560x1440 min: 720x400
  Monitor-2: eDP-1 note: disabled model: BOE Display 0x05da built: 2013 res: 1920x1080 dpi: 125
    gamma: 1.2 size: 277x156mm (10.91x6.14") diag: 318mm (12.5") ratio: 16:9 modes: 1366x768
  API: OpenGL v: 4.6 Mesa 22.3.6 renderer: Mesa Intel HD Graphics 4400 (HSW GT2)
    direct-render: Yes
Audio:
  Device-1: Intel Haswell-ULT HD Audio vendor: Dell driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus-ID: 00:03.0
    chip-ID: 8086:0a0c class-ID: 0403
  Device-2: Intel 8 Series HD Audio vendor: Dell 8 driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel
    bus-ID: 00:1b.0 chip-ID: 8086:9c20 class-ID: 0403
  API: ALSA v: k6.1.0-32-amd64 status: kernel-api tools: alsamixer,amixer
  Server-1: PipeWire v: 1.0.0 status: active with: 1: pipewire-pulse status: active
    2: wireplumber status: active 3: pipewire-alsa type: plugin 4: pw-jack type: plugin
    tools: pactl,pw-cat,pw-cli,wpctl
Network:
  Device-1: Intel Ethernet I218-LM vendor: Dell driver: e1000e v: kernel port: f080 bus-ID: 00:19.0
    chip-ID: 8086:155a class-ID: 0200
  IF: eth0 state: down mac: <filter>
  Device-2: Intel Wireless 7260 driver: iwlwifi v: kernel modules: wl pcie: gen: 1
    speed: 2.5 GT/s lanes: 1 bus-ID: 02:00.0 chip-ID: 8086:08b1 class-ID: 0280
  IF: wlan0 state: up mac: <filter>
  IF-ID-1: wwan0 state: down mac: <filter>
Bluetooth:
  Device-1: Intel Bluetooth wireless interface type: USB driver: btusb v: 0.8 bus-ID: 1-1.3:3
    chip-ID: 8087:07dc class-ID: e001
  Report: hciconfig ID: hci0 rfk-id: 5 state: up address: <filter> bt-v: 2.1 lmp-v: 4.0
    sub-v: 500 hci-v: 4.0 rev: 500
  Info: acl-mtu: 1021:5 sco-mtu: 96:5 link-policy: rswitch hold sniff
    link-mode: peripheral accept service-classes: rendering, capturing, audio, telephony
RAID:
  Hardware-1: Intel 82801 Mobile SATA Controller [RAID mode] driver: ahci v: 3.0 port: f060
    bus-ID: 00:1f.2 chip-ID: 8086:282a rev: N/A class-ID: 0104
Drives:
  Local Storage: total: 238.47 GiB used: 194.73 GiB (81.7%)
  SMART Message: Unable to run smartctl. Root privileges required.
  ID-1: /dev/sda maj-min: 8:0 vendor: Samsung model: SSD SM841 mSATA 256GB size: 238.47 GiB
    block-size: physical: 512 B logical: 512 B speed: 6.0 Gb/s type: SSD serial: <filter> rev: 3D0Q
    scheme: MBR
Partition:
  ID-1: / raw-size: 238.47 GiB size: 233.67 GiB (97.99%) used: 194.73 GiB (83.3%) fs: ext4
    dev: /dev/sda1 maj-min: 8:1
Swap:
  Kernel: swappiness: 15 (default 60) cache-pressure: 100 (default)
  ID-1: swap-1 type: file size: 3 GiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) priority: -2 file: /swap/swap
Sensors:
  System Temperatures: cpu: 55.0 C mobo: 43.0 C sodimm: SODIMM C
  Fan Speeds (RPM): cpu: 3992
Repos:
  Packages: pm: dpkg pkgs: 2218 libs: 1106 tools: apt,apt-get,aptitude,nala,synaptic pm: rpm
    pkgs: 0 pm: flatpak pkgs: 0
  No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian-stable-updates.list
    1: deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm-updates main contrib non-free non-free-firmware
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian.list
    1: deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm main contrib non-free non-free-firmware
    2: deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security bookworm-security main contrib non-free non-free-firmware
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/mx.list
    1: deb http://mirrors.dotsrc.org/mx-packages/mx/repo/ bookworm main non-free
Info:
  Processes: 212 Uptime: 1h 23m wakeups: 2 Memory: 7.66 GiB used: 1.8 GiB (23.5%) Init: SysVinit
  v: 3.06 runlevel: 5 default: graphical tool: systemctl Compilers: gcc: 12.2.0 alt: 12
  Client: shell wrapper v: 5.2.15-release inxi: 3.3.26
Boot Mode: BIOS (legacy, CSM, MBR)

I just doubt there is much need for it since the problem occurs on 5 different computers and on both Lenovo and Dell.

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 7:37 am**

@Jakob77 wrote:

I just doubt there is much need for it since the problem occurs on 5 different computers and on both Lenovo and Dell.

Since we are not in our users' offices or dens overlooking their shoulders, we have to make this requirement universal and for the same reason we can't take their word on this issue.

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 8:16 am**

Two areas of concern:
1) your Samsung SSD is at least ten years old
https://www.dell.com/support/home/en-ca ... erid=0j8f2
Since the Latitude is Dell's enterprise offering, if you got this laptop secondhand, you should assume that it has been heavily used and that maybe it should be replaced.
2) this laptop was shipped with Windows 8 Pro
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-De ... 324.0.html
The CSM module built into it's UEFI Set Up Utility (bios) was in place to allow users to roll back to the more stable Win 7. It was not meant for use with any other operating system and doing so can produce some odd behaviour over time.

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 2:42 pm**

The errors only appear after an update.

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 2:45 pm**

Does it work if you open Firefox normally one time after update?

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 3:42 pm**

Discostu wrote: Fri Apr 04, 2025 2:45 pm Does it work if you open Firefox normally one time after update?

Thank you for asking. :-)
I am not sure what "normally" is.
I have only seen the error when I use the syntax for opening more than one window.
And it is only the first time after an update it happens.
I am not completely sure if it is always and only when the update includes software for Firefox.

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 3:58 pm**

What I mean is that it would not be surprising to me if Firefox needed a normal startup (one window) after an update to initialize and that this does not work with three windows being opened simultaneously.

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 5:17 pm**

Jakob77 wrote: Fri Apr 04, 2025 2:42 pm The errors only appear after an update.

If it only happens after an update you could change your script into a two steps (commands) to test.

Have your script open one window and then a short sleep before the command to open the other two windows.

Posted: **Fri Apr 04, 2025 6:17 pm**

towwire wrote: Fri Apr 04, 2025 5:17 pm
Jakob77 wrote: Fri Apr 04, 2025 2:42 pm The errors only appear after an update.
If it only happens after an update you could change your script into a two steps (commands) to test.

Have your script open one window and then a short sleep before the command to open the other two windows.

Thank you.
I don't like it but I guess you are on the right track.
It seems the Firefox syntax is not reliable and it is better to let Linux handle it.
One of the computers was suddenly hit conical by the problem and that gave me a chance to do some testing.
This syntax for Terminal seems to be more reliable:

Code: Select all

firefox 'https://mxlinux.org/' & firefox 'https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/iso-download-mirrors/#checksumsignatures' & firefox 'https://endoflife.date/mxlinux'

EDIT:

I go with this one and see what happens:

Code: Select all

firefox --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/' & firefox --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/iso-download-mirrors/#checksumsignatures' & firefox --new-window 'https://endoflife.date/mxlinux'

Posted: **Mon Apr 07, 2025 7:40 am**

There has been one more happening that I can't explain.
As towwire suggested I therefore now also add some sec. sleep before opening the last two windows:

Code: Select all

(sleep 3s && firefox --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/') & (sleep 2,5s && firefox --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/iso-download-mirrors/#checksumsignatures') & (sleep 0s && firefox --new-window 'https://endoflife.date/mxlinux')

I will go with that and see what changes but I don't like to name it a solution.
I think it still ought to be completely straight forward to make a reliable syntax for opening some new windows in Firefox.

Posted: **Mon Apr 07, 2025 7:53 am**

@Jakob77 wrote:

I think it still ought to be completely straight forward to make a reliable syntax for opening some new windows in Firefox.

It's a trap we all fall into when we assume that human logic = Linux logic.

Posted: **Mon Apr 07, 2025 8:35 am**

Jakob77 wrote: Mon Apr 07, 2025 7:40 am I think it still ought to be completely straight forward to make a reliable syntax for opening some new windows in Firefox.

This is what home page settings do. One sets the home page in Settings and then, when starting Firefox, one can immediately go to that page on startup. There's even a neat feature that lets you specify multiple URLs as multiple home pages by using "|" to combine them in a single string.

Posted: **Mon Apr 07, 2025 9:58 am**

Thank you but if I use this Terminal command:

Code: Select all

firefox --help

Then I can still read this line:

--new-window <url> Open <url> in a new window.

Adding more options has never been a problem before, and this syntax for Terminal has worked perfectly for many years:

Code: Select all

firefox --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/' --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/iso-download-mirrors/#checksumsignatures' --new-window 'https://endoflife.date/mxlinux'

There has to be something wrong..?

Has anybody replicated the phenomenon.?

Posted: **Mon Apr 07, 2025 10:50 am**

that line works perfectly here.

Posted: **Mon Apr 07, 2025 11:02 am**

Same here.. works fine.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 2:50 am**

Did you try to use it for opening Firefox the first time after updates.?

My happy life with Firefox based on limited expectations is being put on a test.
Except for the security settings I aim not to save and keep any important data inside Firefox.
After a fresh install I restore nothing to Firefox. The little configuration needed is done manually and hopefully I can avoid add-ons.
Not even my favorites are saved in Firefox. I have them in icons and scripts, and I backup the panel safely with the MX-Tool for it.
As long as the Firefox Terminal syntax works with my icons it just takes me where I want to go.
And with those limitations used for years Firefox has been a fantastic browser that can 'drill' almost any page. :-)

However, now when the Terminal syntax is not reliable anymore the happy days are over. Opening more than one window was taking it too far.
If you use a configuration that is only used by a limited group of people there will always be a risk that some update will overlook it and eliminate the option later on. And nobody else can see or understand it is a problem so it will likely not be fixed for a very long time.
I recon it can never be completely avoided but I think it is sad when it happens, and with the Terminal syntax we are in my opinion on ground that ought to be completely solid and stable after any update.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 3:35 am**

Firefox has been updated for me on the 3rd of April, so yes.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 4:54 am**

If you want to replicate the error you may have to run the Terminal command as the very first thing after updating.
I am not sure it is every time or if the update has to include Firefox software to make it happen.
Slower pages might make it more significant.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 5:27 am**

Jakob77 wrote: Tue Apr 08, 2025 4:54 am If you want to replicate the error you may have to run the Terminal command as the very first thing after updating.

I haven't looked into this more closely, but the first thought that comes to mind as a developer is, maybe the page content that Firefox shows you after an update (you know, the kind of "What's new with this browser?" stuff that browsers tend to show after being updated) is interfering with the pages it is supposed to open on that same run based on command line parameters. Again, I haven't looked into this, it's just a hunch.

If that is the case, it could potentially be mitigated by disabling all that stuff that causes out-of-the-ordinary pages to show on the first run after an update. If there is no actual fix forthcoming, that is.

So at the very least all relevant settings starting with "startup.homepage_override" would need to be switched to disable such overrides. See the browser's about:config and turn off at least browser.startup.homepage_override.mstone and startup.homepage_override_url and see if it makes a difference in the long run. There are potentially more settings related to the page opening behavior after an update.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 5:38 am**

Or just open firefox normally after an update. Then that is out of the way, and after that you can happily use your lines again.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 5:45 am**

Eadwine Rose wrote: Tue Apr 08, 2025 5:38 am Or just open firefox normally after an update. Then that is out of the way, and after that you can happily use your lines again.

That works but isn't that elegant :) as you need to know, as a user, if/when an update has taken place, and need to manually think about this thing each time, if you don't want to see your preferred mode of operation fail randomly. It's a minor annoyance, of course. Just thinking about it in general, a fix that actively alters a situation once so that you don't have to repeat a mitigation routine manually... is better from that perspective. Imo and all that xD

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 6:00 am**

Isn't elegant..

Ok. I think the complaint here needs to be laid down at firefox by the user so they stop doing that. They are the cause, then they should fix it.

(not that they are going to, because there IS no problem)

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 6:05 am**

Eadwine Rose wrote: Tue Apr 08, 2025 6:00 am (not that they are going to, because there IS no problem)

Huh, hmm, in the possible (but not at all necessarily so) case of my hunch being correct, i.e. this snag being caused by the page/url override happening on first launch after update, that would be an unwanted/unintentional side effect (not parsing and acting upon multiple window loads based on the command line parameters in that situation). Again I repeat I don't know if this is the case, but it's a realistic possibility. All in all, the above "there is no problem" I find a slightly weird attitude coming from an admin of a distro forum, hmm.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 6:13 am**

Well.. I can state my own opinion as well, and that is my opinion.

Just open firefox normally after an update, and then use the code thing again. It's what I would do to solve this.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 6:15 am**

Eadwine Rose wrote: Tue Apr 08, 2025 6:13 am Well.. I can state my own opinion as well, and that is my opinion.

Ok :) , I thought you categorically stated there is no problem. No worries.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 6:59 am**

Maybe you could alter your script a bit.

Preparation:
1. Find a configuration file that contains the current Firefox version (let's call it "firefoxFile").
2. Write that version in a file that you have created (let's call it "yourFile").

Alter your script:
1. At the start of your script, check if the version in firefoxFile and yourFile match.
2a. If they do, no update has happened. Goto 3
2.b. If they don't, there was an update. Write the new version from firefoxFile into yourFile. Start Firefox without parameters. Wait 3 seconds.
3. Run your script like you did before

Maybe, that way your script will also work after update, with the difference that you have four windows instead of 3 and the latter come 3 seconds later than usual.

I have not tried if this works, but it seems to me to be the direction you'd need to go.

Posted: **Tue Apr 08, 2025 8:19 am**

Thank you for your thoughts.

This is mostly some more background and details for people who likes scripts:

Jakob77 wrote: Mon Apr 07, 2025 7:40 am There has been one more happening that I can't explain.
As towwire suggested I therefore now also add some sec. sleep before opening the last two windows:
Code: Select all
(sleep 3s && firefox --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/') & (sleep 2,5s && firefox --new-window 'https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/iso-download-mirrors/#checksumsignatures') & (sleep 0s && firefox --new-window 'https://endoflife.date/mxlinux')
I will go with that and see what changes but I don't like to name it a solution.
I think it still ought to be completely straight forward to make a reliable syntax for opening some new windows in Firefox.

For me there is still a bug.
I use the command in a script that first turns on wifi and afterwards turns it off again.
However in this new version somho the last of the script is skipped.
So to make sure wifi is still turned off automatically after the last Firefox window is closed I have now added some more peasant coding to the command:

Code: Select all

(sleep 3s && firefox --new-window 'https://www.dmi.dk/lokation/show/DK/2614567/R%C3%B8nbjerg/') && netoff2 & (sleep 0s && firefox --new-window 'https://www.dr.dk/nyheder') && netoff2 & (sleep 2,5s && firefox --new-window 'https://data.nordpoolgroup.com/auction/day-ahead/prices?deliveryDate=latest&currency=DKK&aggregation=Hourly&deliveryAreas=DK1') && netoff2

"netoff2" is here a command (a script) that turns off wifi only if Firefox is closed. The new syntax is supposed to make sure an attempt is made for every single window being closed.
Naturally it won't make much sense to test my new syntax without having the script "netoff2", so it is just meant for reading.

Why all this trouble.?
Why not just have one icon for one page.?
I might go back to that because as much as I can fall in love with my own advanced peasant coding this feels a little too crazy, even for me. LOL

But it hurts my senior configuration badly if I have to give it up.

One click on one icon opens all the pages the elder person wants to see on daily basis (I once had more than 10).
My client likes it very much but when there is a problem with closing windows and getting off the internet I get complaints and I don't like complaints.! ;-)

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2025 1:33 am**

On my test computer made from a snapshot the problem appears to be chronic now.
So it can get worse and develop into more than just a phenomenon that occurs the first time after updating. And maybe therefore it is not too good that I ask if someone can replicate it. There might be a risk.

I believe I have found the real reason for the problem (or at least another interesting point of view to it) that I want to share:

Users mouse work for opening 3 pages without my senior configuration:

Internet on: 1 move - one click - one move - 1 move - one click
Open 3 pages: 1 move - one click - 1 move - one click - 1 move - one click
Internet off after use: 1 move - one click - 1 move - one click

Users mouse work for opening 3 pages with the senior configuration:

One move - one click

Can you see the difference.?!
Imagine it is pages you want to see 2 times a day.
365 x 2 = 730
730 x 7 = 5110

Then it saves the mouse arm for more than 5.000 moves and clicks per year.
I believe that will be good for everybody.!
And then try to imagine when you get older and more tied and your eyes are not so good anymore and your hands and fingers are stiff and shake a little.

7 times easier and faster to use and remember.!

7 times smaller risk to do wrong clicks.!

7 times more convenience.!

Do you get it.? :-)

So the only real reason for the problem is that I am the only one who use what everybody ought to demand and configure.
If we all did it the problem I have would be common and therefore solved so fast that I would never be given time enough to mention it in this forum.

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2025 2:53 am**

Jakob77 wrote: Thu Apr 10, 2025 1:33 am Users mouse work for opening 3 pages without my senior configuration:

Internet on: 1 move - one click - one move - 1 move - one click
Open 3 pages: 1 move - one click - 1 move - one click - 1 move - one click
Internet off after use: 1 move - one click - 1 move - one click

Users mouse work for opening 3 pages with the senior configuration:

One move - one click

Can you see the difference.?!
Imagine it is pages you want to see 2 times a day.
365 x 2 = 730
730 x 7 = 5110

Then it saves the mouse arm for more than 5.000 moves and clicks per year.

I don't see what you're talking about. I get that efficiency of movement is a thing. But you're not getting that 5000-to-1 efficiency from a broken script, now, are you?

Are you suggesting that shortcuts exist? Yes. We know that shortcuts exist.

I work with at least a dozen bookmarks every day. Often more. I certainly don't open each one by hand. I have a different workflow which works regardless of if Firefox updates or not.

I spend a lot fewer than a dozen clicks to do it[0]. By your argument, that makes my workflow better than yours. And it doesn't need a forum thread to debug it, either.

There's this old proverb in English: "penny wise and pound foolish". It means to focus on the minor details to the detriment of the big picture. If you love shell scripting and want to run firefox -n this -n that -n theotherthing, that's great.

But there are so many other, better ways of managing a functional, browser-based environment. So many so that sticking to a shell script that, clearly, isn't working even for the one person who professes how efficient it is, is reductio ad absurdum.

[0] My browser situation is notably uncommon. I use userspace sandboxes and OneTab. Right this instant I have at least ten different compartmented sessions across four different browsers to run things. I haven't pestered the MX Linux forum about this config for several years. Your actual mileage may vary.

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2025 5:18 am**

DukeComposed wrote: Thu Apr 10, 2025 2:53 am But you're not getting that 5000-to-1 efficiency from a broken script, now, are you?

I think that one is too cheap. My user does. And I don't believe the script is broken. It is something else.
The script has served me perfectly for many years.
I find it hard to believe a guy like you don't think the users should be able to rely on the Terminal firefox command for opening more than one window. In Ubuntu they might once upon a time have kept users in the dark by saying that only GUI is reliable,, but here in MX.. today.?? - You must be kidding me. lol
In my opinion we are almost as close to the basic user foundation as it gets, and therefore I am a little disappointed in the lack of understanding of the vital importance of reliability.

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2025 10:27 am**

From everything I am reading here it seems like there is some issue with firefox notices on an update. This is not an "MX issue" this is a firefox / use issue. I think calling this 'a vital importance of reliability" is reaching FAR beyond.

The obvious work around has been suggested - work the script to get around this issue.

Two additional things that would work to get around this problem would be:
a) Set the user's firefox home page(s) to the page(s) you want to have open when firefox opens. (This seems like a no brainer to me.)
__ and
b) Setup a bookmark folder with the locations you want them to open and then right click on the bookmark folder and "Open All Bookmarks"
( some place around here I saw someone was in fact opening a folder like this on firefox startup... so possibly a third method here too )

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2025 12:30 pm**

CharlesV

You are right it looks like the change of syntax makes a patch that works around the problem.
That is a huge advantage by the script that it is possible, and I love that too but it doesn't solve the problem. It just hides it and feels a bit like driving a tank in a peaceful city.
It is still a lot better than messing around with GUI. Simply copy a file to ~/bin that makes it all work immediately seems like a no brainer to me. :-)
As I wrote the script has worked perfectly for many years, and it still does. I can't say the same about my firefox GUI config.

The Terminal syntax must be vital. As I am sure you know the Terminal command for starting Firefox is also to be found in the original Firefox icon.

I hope you are right that it is about an update mistake from Firefox and that it will never happen again but since nobody else has seen the problem it feels like there is not being taken care of it so it might as well happen again on this slippery road.
Also it looks like the error is permanent now on my test computer, and from my point of view that changes it to be more than just a firefox problem, if that is what it was to begin with.

It is not like the world is going under because my test computer starts to melt down a little but I think it might give an opportunity to find out what the problem really is. I have no strong idea myself but maybe some smart people here could ask for some terminal output and nail the problem.? :-)

Posted: **Thu Apr 10, 2025 2:14 pm**

Jakob77 wrote: Thu Apr 10, 2025 5:18 am therefore I am a little disappointed in the lack of understanding of the vital importance of reliability.

I am a little disappointed in the lack of understanding of the point I was making: the efficiency of an unusable thing, even if it's neat, is zero. You have to go with what works. If the script works how you want it to work? Great. If it breaks whenever the browser updates, then that's another way of saying it doesn't work. One option is to stop updating the browser.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2025 2:46 am**

DukeComposed

Thank you. I get your point, and I hope you get mine. :-)
As much as you will agree to that MX is broken because there is something wrong with Firefox...
Just as much will I agree to that my script is broken because a Terminal command for starting Firefox suddenly stops working correctly.

You are not the first experienced guy who suggest to skip some updating.
I am not there yet. If my clients go to private pages I want their browser to be fully updated for security.
I can't defend anything else. And I use the same config, so I might as well demand the same for myself.

--

Another temporary conclusion:

In my world the problem is still not solved to the bottom but if there is nothing new and it doesn't show itself anymore for others or on my original installed computers, then it might be time I let it go crazy and just live with my belt and braces patchwork.

viewtopic.php?p=815599#p815599

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2025 3:12 am**

Jakob77 wrote: Fri Apr 11, 2025 2:46 am You are not the first experienced guy who suggest to skip some updating.
I am not there yet.

Let me tell you about my life.

I enjoy something I call New Browser Day. New Browser Day is the day I download and deploy a new browser on my system(s). This involves exporting the bookmarks (I use OneTab) to a text file, checking that text file into a source control repository, clearing the browser sandbox, updating the sandbox with the new browser, and then optionally restoring the bookmarks.

I have 40 sandboxes.

So I don't exactly "skip some updating". New Browser Day happens in my home fairly often. It's just a matter of controlling precisely when and how I change my browser, and the rest of the time it works how I expect it to work because I'm in control of what it does and how it does it. I maintain a few ancient browser sandboxes for reasons and I just recently updated the oldest one after a year or more of planning/procrastination.

Is this the right solution for you? No, not necessarily.

But my point is that this is what works for me, how I want it to work. If the system ever broke, I wouldn't bother complaining here that it used to work, but now it doesn't, so something needs to get fixed. I'd triage the error and adapt. Maybe a minor fix, maybe a major one. This is just something to expect as tools and systems change over time. The workflow I had when I ran Windows XP probably won't still work on Windows 10. The workflow I have on Windows 10 doesn't work on Windows XP. By comparison, this seems like a minor bug: updates futz with the startup script.

So, simply, control when the updates happen. I do. It's more work for me because I want my browsers to maintain a strict security boundary, but at the end of the day the simplest solution remains: my browser doesn't change until I explicitly let it change.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2025 9:49 am**

I just updated MX again on my test computer, and there was also some software for Firefox.

After the updating was finished the Firefox Terminal command syntax for opening more than one window was working correctly again.

So until proven otherwise it now looks like not only the error in the syntax has been corrected but the damage done by the bug has also been repaired.

That is MX for us.!

Thank you very much from here to the developers. :-)

DukeComposed

Interesting but you are just a little too advanced to be compared with my client. ;-)

Posted: **Sat Apr 12, 2025 7:30 am**

Jump high and fall deep... I am sorry, I was too optimistic too soon.

My test computer made by a snapshot is still cured after an update but I have seen the problem again on two other computers and one of them is my clients office computer with an original install.

I guess I will hang on to my crazy almost bulletproof belt and braces patchwork syntax for a very long time now.
viewtopic.php?p=815599#p815599

Thank you all for your time.

MX Linux Forum

Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update

Re: Terminal syntax for Firefox fails after update [Solved]