Bug#747828: iceweasel: the UI is completely broken: no menu bar, no status bar...

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2014-05-12 11:40:18 +0900, Mike Hommey wrote:
> severity 747828 wishlist
> title 747828 New UI is confusing at first
> thanks
> 
> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 03:21:01AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2014-05-12 06:49:30 +0900, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 11:11:03PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > > After upgrading to iceweasel 29.0.1-1, the UI got completely broken:
> > > > the menu bar no longer appears, the status bar is absent as well, and
> > > > the user config has completely been modified.
> > 
> > For this one, it appears that upstream provides something[*]
> > (I don't know whether this is complete), but I didn't see
> > anything with the Debian upgrade.
> 
> Oh, so your bug report is really "I don't like the new UI".

Not really. The fact that the menu bar no longer appears could be
regarded as a bug, but since there's no documentation, it's difficult
to say whether this is a bug or the features are available via some
context menu.

After some search, I could see that the problem with the menu bar was
actually a configuration problem with the new version, and one can
get it back.

> I thought it was "iceweasel doesn't work at all", a bit like when
> you get xul errors.

Well, without the menu bar, various major features (this includes
bookmarks) were no longer available. I still don't know how to
get the status bar back.

> > [*] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1008761
> 
> So, as mentioned in the bug, there is a tour... except it's a Firefox
> page on mozilla.org doing that.

The problem is that with the Debian upgrade, this page is not
presented to the user, contrary to what happens with upstream's
version 29.

Upstream also says that this page is available in the Help menu,
but this menu is not available by default with the new UI. Only
a tour can make you know how to get this back!

[...]
> It has been this way for a long time. There's nothing new here.
> -no-remote has never allowed to run two instances on the same profile.

Yes, but that was the first time I could see the buggy and confusing
error message (though apparently not new).

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent at vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)