I upgraded my Firefox yesterday and Google Gears stopped working. I
am running Ubuntu Hardy Heron and used the apt-get update method to
update Firefox. Firefox is at version 3.0.15.
Here is the error message:
"Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible
with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3).
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 9:01 AM, yotta <dvog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I upgraded my Firefox yesterday and Google Gears stopped working. I > am running Ubuntu Hardy Heron and used the apt-get update method to > update Firefox. Firefox is at version 3.0.15.
> Here is the error message:
> "Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible > with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3).
Reinstalling doesn't fix it (at least not the OP's error), same
problem here. 0.5.32.0 is installed, if you go to Add-Ons and find
updates it will tell you 0.5.33.0 is available. Allow it to download
the update and when it attempts to install the error dialog is back.
Fedora 10, Firefox 3.0.14 (which is libgcc 4.3.2 based).
-te
On Nov 5, 2:45 pm, Dallas Vogels <dvog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fixed it by reinstalling Gears. I went tohttp://gears.google.comand > clicked on the link in "Click here to re-install."
> Problem solved.
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 9:01 AM, yotta <dvog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I upgraded my Firefox yesterday and Google Gears stopped working. I
> > am running Ubuntu Hardy Heron and used the apt-get update method to
> > update Firefox. Firefox is at version 3.0.15.
> > Here is the error message:
> > "Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible
> > with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3).
> I upgraded my Firefox yesterday and Google Gears stopped working. I
> am running Ubuntu Hardy Heron and used the apt-get update method to
> update Firefox. Firefox is at version 3.0.15.
> Here is the error message:
> "Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible
> with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3).
Bump
Ubuntu 9.04 / FF 3.0.15
"Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible
with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3). Please contact the
author of this item about the problem.
On Nov 9, 5:52 am, satbunny <tom.zun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bump
> Ubuntu 9.04 / FF 3.0.15
> "Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible
> with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3). Please contact the
> author of this item about the problem.
> On Nov 9, 5:52 am, satbunny <tom.zun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Doesn't fix the problem, the version stays the same
> > On Nov 5, 10:45 pm, Dallas Vogels <dvog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Fixed it by reinstalling Gears. I went tohttp://gears.google.comand > > > clicked on the link in "Click here to re-install."
> Also having this problem and did try a reinstall of gears with no
> luck.
> Ubuntu 9.04 / 2.6.28-16-generic and FF 3.5.5
> On Nov 9, 7:47 pm, dundeemt <dunde...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Bump
> > Ubuntu 9.04 / FF 3.0.15
> > "Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible
> > with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3). Please contact the
> > author of this item about the problem.
> > On Nov 9, 5:52 am, satbunny <tom.zun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Doesn't fix the problem, the version stays the same
> > > On Nov 5, 10:45 pm, Dallas Vogels <dvog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Fixed it by reinstalling Gears. I went tohttp://gears.google.comand > > > > clicked on the link in "Click here to re-install."
What does Gears require to be compatible with my Linux system?
If you'd like to run the Gears for Firefox on a Linux (32-bit)
platform, please make sure your system has glibc 2.3.5 or higher and
libstdc++6 (Gears 0.3) or libstdc++5 (Gears pre-0.3).
--------
OK. i've got libstdc++6 installed, but glibc? searching for glibc my
package manager shows only glibc-doc and glibc-source. maybe they
mean libc6? (mine is at 2.7-10) described as the GNU C Library:
Shared Libraries.
"Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible
with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3). Please contact the
author of this item about the problem.
I believe that Gears developers mistake Linux_x86-gcc3 build for a
build that uses gcc-3.
In fact, it means gcc version 3 or 4 (and I imagine 99.9% of browsers
are built with gcc version 4)
On Nov 13, 4:02 pm, Valdis Ozols <v.oz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I upgraded my Firefox yesterday and Google Gears stopped working. I
> am running Ubuntu Hardy Heron and used the apt-get update method to
> update Firefox. Firefox is at version 3.0.15.
> Here is the error message:
> "Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible
> with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3).
Click the little star in the upper left corner to lend your support to
this bug - only 6 people have done this so far but there's like a
bajillion on the mailing list running into it.
-te
On Nov 13, 3:35 am, dimpase <dimp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Same here, on Debian stable (Lenny),
> Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.15) Gecko/2009102815
> Iceweasel/3.0.6 (Debian-3.0.6-3)
> OK, I can try to build the browser from source, and it (hopefully)
> will fix the problem, but still...
> Can't you Gears guys build a version that runs on Linux_x86-gcc3?
> Thanks,
> Dmitrii
> On Nov 5, 1:01 am, yotta <dvog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I upgraded my Firefox yesterday and Google Gears stopped working. I
> > am running Ubuntu Hardy Heron and used the apt-get update method to
> > update Firefox. Firefox is at version 3.0.15.
> > Here is the error message:
> > "Google Gears" could not be installed because it is not compatible
> > with your Firefox build type (Linux_x86-gcc3).
i followed the link and found the explanation of the problem there to
be clear and, at least in my case, IDed the problem perfectly. but
when i selected the 32-bit version for what i thought would be more
instructions an install dialog came up, i balked. what is it
installing? etc...
On Nov 13, 6:17 am, aot2002 <jasonbron...@gmail.com> wrote:
Ron, if you look closer at the link on that page it goes to install an
old version of Gears (0.5.25.0), which won't actually fix any
problems. Jason is going to see the upgrade dialog pop up on him again
in another day or so, installing this file just downgraded his Gears
and hid the problem.
The bug is that the 0.5.33.0 Gears upgrade from Google is faulty and
needs to be fixed upstream.
-te
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:14, Ron Wolf <ron.e.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i followed the link and found the explanation of the problem there to
> be clear and, at least in my case, IDed the problem perfectly. but
> when i selected the 32-bit version for what i thought would be more
> instructions an install dialog came up, i balked. what is it
> installing? etc...
thanks Troy & Te. everyone look at Te's post, follow the link and help
prioritize this problem as Te suggests.
mostly to save others the effort of looking further into a possible
fix for this, i want to document that i found this reference to the
problem (or a similar one)
that included the suggestion to download the xpi file, edit the
included install.rdf file, and then install from the edited file. i
used wget to download the xpi and zip to extract the install.rdf.
however, the line that is suggested for editing in the install.rdf
already shows the suggested 'fix'. that is "3.5.*" is in the
install.rdf. so looks like this isn't the problem and that this
gambit won't help.
On Nov 13, 11:18 am, troy engel <troyen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ron, if you look closer at the link on that page it goes to install an
> old version of Gears (0.5.25.0), which won't actually fix any
> problems. Jason is going to see the upgrade dialog pop up on him again
> in another day or so, installing this file just downgraded his Gears
> and hid the problem.
> The bug is that the 0.5.33.0 Gears upgrade from Google is faulty and
> needs to be fixed upstream.
> -te
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:14, Ron Wolf <ron.e.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > i followed the link and found the explanation of the problem there to
> > be clear and, at least in my case, IDed the problem perfectly. but
> > when i selected the 32-bit version for what i thought would be more
> > instructions an install dialog came up, i balked. what is it
> > installing? etc...
I checked out that support.mozilla.com link, and I think they had the
right target but the wrong solution (possibly a typo). Instead of
3.5.* (which is what the line reads in the download) it should read
3.6 (which is what it read in previous versions). I posted more at the
link in Te's post.
This could be a Firefox bug, as the Mozilla documentation states that
"3.5.*" should be a valid value.
On Nov 14, 6:02 pm, Ron Wolf <ron.e.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> thanks Troy & Te. everyone look at Te's post, follow the link and help
> prioritize this problem as Te suggests.
> mostly to save others the effort of looking further into a possible
> fix for this, i want to document that i found this reference to the
> problem (or a similar one)
Check out the bug report again, go to my last update at the bottom --
the problem is actually that the download is a 64bit version of Gears,
not the version numbers listed in the install.rdf file. The Gears team
will need to compile and release a proper 32bit version of 0.5.33.0
into the channel for us...
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:15, John F. <johnf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I checked out that support.mozilla.com link, and I think they had the
> right target but the wrong solution (possibly a typo). Instead of
> 3.5.* (which is what the line reads in the download) it should read
> 3.6 (which is what it read in previous versions). I posted more at the
> link in Te's post.
> This could be a Firefox bug, as the Mozilla documentation states that
> "3.5.*" should be a valid value.
> On Nov 14, 6:02 pm, Ron Wolf <ron.e.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> thanks Troy & Te. everyone look at Te's post, follow the link and help
>> prioritize this problem as Te suggests.
>> mostly to save others the effort of looking further into a possible
>> fix for this, i want to document that i found this reference to the
>> problem (or a similar one)
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 8:47 AM, <tigre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hello peeps,
> i notice programs such as many ff extensions and ggl gears, tend to fall
> out of synch with firefox updates. On the mozilla extension developer's
> extension, in the forum i found an answer from 'roachfiend', to a similar
> query about a similar problem, wondering if it applies to this topic, here
> is a quote from the article in XUL forum:
> " Target application is what you’re gearing this for. The ec8030f7… is
> unique to Firefox, so leave that alone. The minversion and maxversion is
> what versions of Firefox it will be compatible with. There was a big stink
> about this recently, since the developers introduced 0.9.1, shortly after
> telling us to make sure and only put a maxVersion of 0.9. This does not
> compute. So I recently modified mine to go to 9.9, which will ensure
> compatibility through the next few versions of Firefox. This isn’t the type
> of thing that mozilla will support, since they can only recommend keeping
> the maxVersion to the current release, but it’s the best way to keep you
> sane, so you don’t have to update your extensions every few weeeks."
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:15 AM, John F. <johnf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I checked out that support.mozilla.com link, and I think they had the
>> right target but the wrong solution (possibly a typo). Instead of
>> 3.5.* (which is what the line reads in the download) it should read
>> 3.6 (which is what it read in previous versions). I posted more at the
>> link in Te's post.
>> This could be a Firefox bug, as the Mozilla documentation states that
>> "3.5.*" should be a valid value.
>> On Nov 14, 6:02 pm, Ron Wolf <ron.e.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > thanks Troy & Te. everyone look at Te's post, follow the link and help
>> > prioritize this problem as Te suggests.
>> > mostly to save others the effort of looking further into a possible
>> > fix for this, i want to document that i found this reference to the
>> > problem (or a similar one)
hello peeps,
i notice programs such as many ff extensions and ggl gears, tend to fall out
of synch with firefox updates. On the mozilla extension developer's
extension, in the forum i found an answer from 'roachfiend', to a similar
query about a similar problem, wondering if it applies to this topic, here
is a quote from the article in XUL forum:
" Target application is what you’re gearing this for. The ec8030f7… is
unique to Firefox, so leave that alone. The minversion and maxversion is
what versions of Firefox it will be compatible with. There was a big stink
about this recently, since the developers introduced 0.9.1, shortly after
telling us to make sure and only put a maxVersion of 0.9. This does not
compute. So I recently modified mine to go to 9.9, which will ensure
compatibility through the next few versions of Firefox. This isn’t the type
of thing that mozilla will support, since they can only recommend keeping
the maxVersion to the current release, but it’s the best way to keep you
sane, so you don’t have to update your extensions every few weeeks."
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:15 AM, John F. <johnf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I checked out that support.mozilla.com link, and I think they had the
> right target but the wrong solution (possibly a typo). Instead of
> 3.5.* (which is what the line reads in the download) it should read
> 3.6 (which is what it read in previous versions). I posted more at the
> link in Te's post.
> This could be a Firefox bug, as the Mozilla documentation states that
> "3.5.*" should be a valid value.
> On Nov 14, 6:02 pm, Ron Wolf <ron.e.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > thanks Troy & Te. everyone look at Te's post, follow the link and help
> > prioritize this problem as Te suggests.
> > mostly to save others the effort of looking further into a possible
> > fix for this, i want to document that i found this reference to the
> > problem (or a similar one)
> hello peeps, > i notice programs such as many ff extensions and ggl gears, tend to fall out > of synch with firefox updates. On the mozilla extension developer's > extension, in the forum i found an answer from 'roachfiend', to a similar > query about a similar problem, wondering if it applies to this topic, here > is a quote from the article in XUL forum:
> " Target application is what you’re gearing this for. The ec8030f7… is > unique to Firefox, so leave that alone. The minversion and maxversion is > what versions of Firefox it will be compatible with. There was a big stink > about this recently, since the developers introduced 0.9.1, shortly after > telling us to make sure and only put a maxVersion of 0.9. This does not > compute. So I recently modified mine to go to 9.9, which will ensure > compatibility through the next few versions of Firefox. This isn’t the type > of thing that mozilla will support, since they can only recommend keeping > the maxVersion to the current release, but it’s the best way to keep you > sane, so you don’t have to update your extensions every few weeeks."
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:15 AM, John F. <johnf...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I checked out that support.mozilla.com link, and I think they had the > > right target but the wrong solution (possibly a typo). Instead of > > 3.5.* (which is what the line reads in the download) it should read > > 3.6 (which is what it read in previous versions). I posted more at the > > link in Te's post.
> > This could be a Firefox bug, as the Mozilla documentation states that > > "3.5.*" should be a valid value.
> > On Nov 14, 6:02 pm, Ron Wolf <ron.e.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > thanks Troy & Te. everyone look at Te's post, follow the link and help > > > prioritize this problem as Te suggests.
> > > mostly to save others the effort of looking further into a possible > > > fix for this, i want to document that i found this reference to the > > > problem (or a similar one)
