Your browser is unsupported

General Feedback
7

It has always been Discourse. The Purism forums had to be restored from an earlier snapshot because of a recent DDoS attack.

So did you try out any of our suggestions?

1 Like
8

I get the same message with my favourite browser on the L5: Angelfish. Also since the incident, and only on this forum. Before there was no problem. Other websites still work as they should.

9

Thanks for all the hints. My problem is since the incident and with only this forum. Something has definitely changed. I will update my FreeBSD and FF to a recent bleeding edge version which will take some time due to vacation.

10

I’m thinking the ‘fault’ lies with the website, not the browsers.

11

@wimdows , if you (or someone else facing the same problem) with a recent FF you could send a mail to @joao.azevedo or @dos that they look into the issue. I can’t do it because the FF on my FreeBSD laptop is outdated.

And the forum works fine on my company MacBook with FF 116.0. and also with 102.13.0esr on the L5.

12

Ehm, I am not using Firefox. In fact I uninstalled all (well, both) browsers, and chose Angelfish instead.

Oh, and the forum works properly on my Windows tablet, running Firefox (115.03).

13

Just to check, I re-installed Gnome Web, and it does not have any trouble with running the forums.

14

It has also been updated to a newer Discourse version.

1 Like
15

in about:config change the useragent string to newest version of firefox Windows 11 and it will think its a modern browser and probably work

16

I suspect that is the cause of refusing to serve browers that the forum was perfectly happy with last week.

17

Didn’t work for me in chromium. I confirmed that the string changed to one that is working for me on a different computer by using some “what is my user agent site”.

18

Does anybody know how to change the user agent string in Angelfish?
I use Angelfish because it is the only browser that allows me to do my banking on the L5. None of the other browsers I have tried works for this. I presume this is because of the user string Angelfish deploys. But I don’t know which one that is, nor how to change it.

19

FWIW, in respect of this forum, my browser was working before and is working after and whatismybrowser.com reports (what I already knew to be the case) that my UserAgent string is intentionally dodgy due to Firefox privacy settings (resist fingerprinting?).

Said web site reports

Your web browser looks like: Firefox on Linux
but it’s announcing that it is: Firefox 116 on Windows 10
This conflict might be causing other websites to not detect your web browser properly.

My understanding is that Google announced to the world that UserAgent is being phased out. So any web site that cares about the UserAgent could have a problem.

20

It tells me mine is “Firefox 102 on Linux” (but it should be “-ESR”) and that it’s “out of date,” which is incorrect. For GNOME Web, it says it’s “Chrome 64” :nauseated_face: and also “out of date.”

By the way, I have no trouble accessing the forums on either of those browsers.

Unfortunately, doing this helps Google to strengthen their gatekeeping of the internet. :slightly_frowning_face:

EDIT: @Captain_Morgan, I see now that I mentally glossed over the word “firefox” in your comment and focused on “Windows 11,” which uses Edge (Chrome) as the default browser, hence my comment about Google.

But still… I prefer to fly the GNU/Linux flag in my browsers. :slight_smile:
(And Google still sucks, big time.)

1 Like
21

Angelfish registers as a QtWebEngineBased Browser 5.

22

With August 5 I compiled FreeBSD from git, bleeding edge, and since yesterday after some lovely holidays at the Baltic Sea, I have it now installed in one of my Acer C720 Chromebook laptops. It brings FF 116.0.1 and this forum is fine again.

1 Like
23

I just encountered this message earlier, and given that the browser I use (Pale Moon) has worked fine in the past and is generally up-to-standards (and that I am very stubborn) I found a workaround to force it by writing a Greasemonkey userscript:

This forcefully disables the unsupported browser check by setting the variable to false, and making it read-only so it can’t be changed to true even if the user agent checks fail.

It’s very poor design to refuse to work based on the agent string, instead of actually testing that the needed functions are present (and gracefully degrading functionality). Even more frustrating is that it won’t even give you the option to just accept the risk of not working right and continue anyway. :rage:

Edit: formatting

7 Likes
25

That code isn’t displaying correctly for me. NB: I can verify that the code is all present. It just gets truncated on display.

1 Like
26

Oops, I didn’t notice when posting… apparently using preformatted text does that, changed to block quote instead.

2 Likes
27

You can use ` instead, with two methods:

  1. Using ` between a line of code.
  2. Using ``` separated by a line break, then the code itself, followed by another line break and the closing ```.

So, sudo apt update vs:

sudo apt update

The latter is designed by Discourse to recognize programming languages, although I believe which languages themselves are decided by the administrator. I know CSS is recognized on the Purism community forums.

Your example would be:

    // ==UserScript==
    // @name purism unsupported browser hack
    // @namespace blehwhatever
    // @include https://forums.puri.sm/*
    // @version 1
    // @grant none
    // @run-at document-start
    // ==/UserScript==

    Object.defineProperty(window,“unsupportedBrowser”,{value:false,writable:false,enumerable:true,configurable:true});
3 Likes