Ask HN: semi-old Firefox/Chrome can't update itslf, requires full reinstal, why? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: semi-old Firefox/Chrome can't update itslf, requires full reinstal, why?

I notice this once every few months when I need Chrome for something and then it says that this version is too old to auto update and shows how to re-download newest version. Same happens with the PC of some older relatives, they don't use it for a month or two and then call me saying that Chrome is again "broken"/"red" (the update button changes color to red when it hasn't been updated for some time) ...

My question is why can't a semi-old browser just update itself or do the re-download itself? Aren't they supposed to be "evergreen"? Looked online but couldn't find any answer.

Edit: this issue only happens when the browser hasn't been used in a while (like more than two months) and didn't have a chance to update itself. Then it refuses to auto update from an semi-old version automatically and tells you to manually re-download it.

View on HN

I'm guessing there are some cryptographic keys included in the installation that requires updating once every N days, and if it doesn't, it's unable to validate new updates somehow.

"Evergreen" when it comes to browsers just means that they try to update themselves rather than letting the OS handle the process, it doesn't mean it's always successful :)

On Windows it isn't possible to remove or rename files and directories that are being used. In order to handle this, you typically have to run some sort of helper application outside of the installation directory. This renames the existing installation directory to a new directory with ".tmp" (often, not always, but this is my guess). If that rename operation fails in the middle of the operation because a file being opened, either by another process or sometimes by an add-on, then the background update fails.

On Mac and Linux it's less complicated which is why they never get the "download the new version" prompt, but Chrome and Firefox have evolved systems for managing how these silent updates work. On Chrome the update button you talk talking about means you haven't closed the browser in awhile. If you see green that means an update has been available for 2 days, orange – 4 days and red – 7 or more days.

My guess is that you are encountering a situation in which the Chrome background helper can't successfully run the update process and then asks you to download the whole thing again so they don't need to rely on the updater and can just move your user files over.

For Chrome, the behavior for me on Windows is exactly as you describe for Mac and Linux. The update happens in the background and button color is used to notify me that a restart is needed to move to the new version.

Firefox on Windows gives me a pop-up indicating a new version is available for download and providing a button to do that now. A restart is still required to get the new version, but AFAIK there's no default visible prompt to indicate the need to restart. If I go to Help -> About Firefox, that tells me I should restart to update...but that's not terribly obvious.

I turn on Linux and Windows machines after 3-6 months of inactivity somewhat often and never hit the issues OP describes, so I feel they are either misinterpreting what they / their relatives are seeing or they have performed other changes to these systems that block the standard behaviors.

> On Windows it isn't possible to remove or rename files and directories that are being used

Besides some access modes you can rename files in use. I did even bothered and tried on firefox.exe I'm typing this - it works fine.

My information might be old. I haven’t worked on a Windows application in 5+ years. At that point you couldn’t.

... it worked like that since Windows XP

You absolutely sure about that? https://www.biology-it.iastate.edu/solution-cannot-rename-fi...

https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/renami...

https://superuser.com/questions/54193/how-can-i-rename-files...

From Mozilla: On Windows, it is not possible to remove or rename files and directories which are being used. In order to handle this, we need to add a little complexity.

The Firefox executable will launch a helper application copied to somewhere outside of the installation directory, most likely the system's temporary directory. The helper application renames the existing installation directory to a new directory with ".tmp" appended to its path name. If the rename operation fails in the middle of the operation because of a file being open by another application, it reverts the change.

Source: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Background_Updates

Yes, see https://imgur.com/a/8XdMVmF

FF tries to rename a directory with files opened under it. No sane OS should allow that.

It might be that the browser onky downloads deltas to install and that after a certain point, those deltas either can't be computed or are large enough that a new download is better.

That would be fine if it did it by itself, and not require you to do it manually.

The connection to the update server must be secured, but it might not be using SSL the way connections to websites normally do. Perhaps the local install has not been updated in a while, so neither have the details about the server certificate. Then the local install might not accept the update server's certificate because the expected details don't match.

I have occasionally seen this type of construction when doing integrations.

Right. But this is Google. Surely they could have figured this out in so many years.

If time could automatically fix issues, then yeah, Google would have been perfect. But every company (including Google) have long-running issues that haven't been addressed for decades at this point, and if no one is getting promoted for fixing the issue (in this particular case of Google's inaction), it's unlikely to be fixed.

Firefox is the same.

A month or two old, and it couldn't update? This is surprising.

I just yesterday stumbled upon somebody's forgotten Firefox v43, and it upgraded itself to latest. It took three relaunches:

1. Peeked in the About box when the second site I tried to load glitched visibly. 2. Let it upgraded itself to v50-something. 3. Site still broken. 4. About box again, to see if it really updated… yep, but another update already downloaded. 5. Let it upgrade again (didn't note the version). 6. Site slightly less broken. 7. Back to the About box, upgrade a third time. 8. Site fully functional, but checked the About box again to be sure… 9. Up-to-date.

Edit: Just checked; user is now on v116.0.2

Not near enough details to answer this question.

What OS?

What version of chrome were you on when it asked you to install manually? (What version was the latest?)

Do you have your PC locked down in any interesting way that may cause problems with the installer?

Do you have the exact wording of the error message? (If you know th is exact wording, you could likely search the code base to find the message)

I've seen Firefox say it will wipe my profile because it was too long since I used it. But never had update issues.

To auto-update, Chrome needs to be restarted. If you never quit Chrome, it will never update. Could this be the issue?

I usually don't use Chrome so it's perma closed and see this behavior only after not opening Chrome for some time (around two (?) months or more). Then when I do opened it, after some time (guess checking for updates in background) it shows the update button in red which just links to re-download Chrome.

Furthermore, sometimes I just ignore the warning and keep using the old version and even after closing/reopening it again it still says the same, so, no, I wouldn't say that this is the issue.

This doesn't rule it out. In both your case and the case of keeping Chrome open constantly, Chrome doesn't get updated in a long time, leading to this issue.

Yeah exactly, it refuses to update itself automatically after not being updated in a while.

That's the issue in my case, why does it want me to re-download it manually, can't it do that itself?

I've seen the issue too. Note that, as the OP says, it affects Firefox too, so, no, it could not be the issue.

This is probably what’s happening especially if the relatives are using a Mac and don’t realize that the red close window button doesn’t quit the application.

In Mac Chrome lets you know an upgrade is available and shows you a button to restart itself to receive the upgrade. I have gone days without pressing the button but never to the point of it asking to download a new version manually.

Right, I'm still a little perplexed that both OP and their family is having these issues, the browsers basically yell at you to update.

This assumes that you use your computer and browser regularly.

There's nobody to yell at you if you don't use your computer... (which my older relatives don't, they just use it once every few months for some gov sites and such, as for me, I don't use Chrome except when a website says "sorry works only on Chrome" which doesn't happen that often thankfully).

And herewith lies the core of the issue, the browser just refuses to auto update if not updated in a while and tells you to re-install it.

It seems like it’s doing the expected and logical action then: it yells at you when you come back to the system but if it can’t update itself it sends you to the manual download. This seems completely reasonable.

It doesn’t really matter why the browsers can’t auto-update with too large of a delta, that’s a concern to the authors of the software.

If you really want to solve this I would write some kind of update script that runs on startup of your computer or manage your browser installations with a package manager.

Or you could use a browser like Safari on Mac where the OS software updates manage the browser.

I received that message and proceeded with auto update, got the latest version and message gone

Reply on news.ycombinator.com