Opened 6 months ago

Last modified 34 hours ago

#30473 needs_information defect

update Tor Browser proposal 102 to account for Tails team feedback

Reported by: mcs Owned by: brade
Priority: Medium Milestone:
Component: Applications/Tor Launcher Version:
Severity: Normal Keywords: AffectsTails, ux-team
Cc: intrigeri, anonym Actual Points:
Parent ID: Points:
Reviewer: Sponsor:

Description

We need to update proposal 102 "Integration of Tor Launcher into Tor Browser Core" to account for feedback we received from the Tails team (intrigeri). See the discussion here:
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tbb-dev/2019-February/000962.html
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tbb-dev/2019-February/000963.html
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tbb-dev/2019-February/000964.html

Child Tickets

Change History (7)

comment:1 Changed 5 months ago by intrigeri

Cc: intrigeri added
Keywords: AffectsTails added

comment:2 Changed 5 months ago by anonym

Cc: anonym added

comment:3 Changed 5 months ago by anonym

Good news! I have managed to get Tor Launcher from Tor Browser 9.0a1 running successfully in Tails. I just extracted it from browser/omni.ja, changed the directory layout to what is required and adjusted the paths in chrome.manifest accordingly.

Previously I discussed with geko about adding a pref for disabling Tor Launcher, but the TOR_SKIP_LAUNCH env var is enough our needs.

So, in the end, it seems Tails doesn't need any changes at all to Tor Launcher. But this would change if we learn that Firefox 68esr will drop XUL standalone support.

Last edited 5 months ago by anonym (previous) (diff)

comment:5 in reply to:  3 ; Changed 5 months ago by mcs

Status: newneeds_information

Replying to anonym:

Good news! I have managed to get Tor Launcher from Tor Browser 9.0a1 running successfully in Tails. I just extracted it from browser/omni.ja, changed the directory layout to what is required and adjusted the paths in chrome.manifest accordingly.

Previously I discussed with geko about adding a pref for disabling Tor Launcher, but the TOR_SKIP_LAUNCH env var is enough our needs.

So, in the end, it seems Tails doesn't need any changes at all to Tor Launcher. But this would change if we learn that Firefox 68esr will drop XUL standalone support.

This is good news. Do you prefer the new "extract from omni.ja" approach instead of pulling a Tor Launcher tree and running make standalone? If no one is using make standalone I think we should remove it (rather than spending time to maintain it).

comment:6 in reply to:  5 Changed 5 months ago by anonym

Replying to mcs:

Do you prefer the new "extract from omni.ja" approach instead of pulling a Tor Launcher tree and running make standalone?

Yes! In fact, we haven't used make standalone for a couple of years (we just extract the XPI that ships with the Tor Browser Bundle).

If no one is using make standalone I think we should remove it (rather than spending time to maintain it).

Yes, dropping it is fine with us. Sorry for not making this clearer to you earlier!

comment:7 Changed 34 hours ago by antonela

Keywords: ux-team added
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.