Returning user here. So far I'm really impressed with n

>>61832824
just like go to about:addons and drag-and-drop the xpi file there

>>61832824
set "xpinstall.signatures.required" to false in about:config

>>61832850
doesn't work, getting same error.
>>61832846
how do I download the file if when I press it auto installs?

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases/download/1.13.9b7/uBlock0.webext.xpi

God I hoped firefox was past this crap. oh well.

File: Untitled.png (41KB, 1065x676px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 1065x676px

>>61833044

>>61833044
I think you have to relaunch FF after you change the about:config line

>>61833044
>how do I download the file if when I press it auto installs?
download it with chrome :^)

>>61833160
"Save link as" after a right click

>trying to install non-mozilla approved addons in new versions of firefox
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *breathes in* HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>61833139
obviously I did that

File: ­.png (3KB, 350x118px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 350x118px

>>61832846
uninstalled fireshitmeme

>>61833658
Is this shit for real? No way to bypass it?

Fuck that... adiós, Firefox, if that's the case.

File: Untitled.jpg (230KB, 983x403px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 983x403px

>>61833748
>>61833658
Works on my PC.

I had to do this though >>61832850

>>61833797
>LEGACY/HYBRID
you fucking imbecile it's not a PURE webextension

>>61833797
It's not webext dude.

File: output.webm (891KB, 984x586px) Image search: [Google]

891KB, 984x586px

>>61833843
My bad, still works for me though.
You're doing something wrong.

>>61833913
>>61833914

>>61833748
Only on stable by default and you can twiddle a bit to allow it.

>>61833914
What do you use to record that webm?

File: enjoy.jpg (640KB, 1104x624px) Image search: [Google]

640KB, 1104x624px

>>61833999

>>61833914
doesn't work

File: about.jpg (295KB, 990x589px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 990x589px

>>61834029
Make sure you do >>61832850 then restart Nightly and try, that's all I did and it works for me, otherwise I'm not sure why.

>>61834029
I tried, works for me as well. Just change the about:config entry, go to github and click the link. it should give you a couple warnings, but if you proceed it will install it.
I'm not sure whether it's linked to the stable or development channel though. Up until now I was using the hybrid one on the latter.

>>61834029

don't see why it would matter in this case but set this to true

extensions.allow-non-mpc-extensions

>>61832824
>returning to the sinking ship

>>61834140
What browser do you use?

File: ublock.png (35KB, 554x290px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 554x290px

spooky permissions

>>61832824
Just scroll down the mozilla addon page to see developing version.

>>61834245
Not really.

>>61832824
get it working yet?

>>61832824
not sure why you need pure webext version instead of hybrid one.
just install newest version from https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin/versions/beta
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Firefox-WebExtensions
>Note that uBO/webext-hybrid will still be labelled as "Legacy" in about:addons, because uBO/webext-hybrid is really an embedded WebExtension. Once the legacy storage has been imported at first install by the thin legacy wrapper, uBO/webext-hybrid will fully function as a pure webext extension despite the "Legacy" label.
there is literally nothing wrong with hybrid version

>>61834590
"Legacy" label is killing me. Only non-webext addon I have. Fucking gorhill should kys 2bh.

File: .png (67KB, 752x466px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 752x466px

No legacy here

>>61834729
then you'll need to not click download link directly, but right-click and select 'save link as'.
then install from downloads folder like other anon showed

>>61834820
aaand it doesn't even work for myself when I try it now. disregard

>>61833914
Shame this doesn't work for beta 56. Oh well.

>>61834845
Why only get half the pie, Just use Nightly.

File: 1287761943620.jpg (99KB, 636x819px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 636x819px

>mfw enabling stylo and webrender

>>61834857
Can't have it restarting and potentially breaking daily. Yeah happens I know rarely happens but still, I need a working browser to make daily living.

>>61834729
>>61834841
setting xpinstall.signatures.required to false heled

>>61834903
enjoying those broken websites?

>>61834845
removing the signing requirement is only for developer/nightly, if you want to use unsigned addons on release/beta you have to use the unbranded versions found here https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Extension_Signing#Unbranded_Builds

>>61834948
Epic.

>>61832824
Is it faster than chrome? I don't care for the botnet but I like the new firefox design better. I wouldn't mind it being a little slower.

>>61835117
Try it yourself, why would you trust what anyone on /g/ tells you?

File: Untitled.png (130KB, 1917x1047px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1917x1047px

>>61835117

stylo enabled 57.0a1 (2017-08-09) (64-bit) vs Version 60.0.3112.90 (Official Build) (64-bit)

>>61835746
forgot to mention chrome has no extensions installed

Should I even enable webrenderer? everywhere I see people saying it's incomplete and pretty much broken

>>61834948
Epic for the win. Let me just write my own browser while I'm at it :^)

>>61835923
it's not broken for me but it's quite unstable, it depends on the websites.
For example, i had a lot of crashes on websites with video contents

>>61834245
That's still 9000 times less access than the non-WebExt version has.

>>61834845
>Shame thi
You can get unbranded builds of Stable and Betea from here:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Extension_Signing#Unbranded_Builds
Alternatively just go with Developer Edition or Nightly.

All of these channels can toggle

xpinstall.signatures.required