@honoriscreed: type 'stamp' into the search box in Options, turn off the last matching option. Come to the support group fb.com/groups/SocialFixerUserSupport

@leocg It had an editable 'post a comment here' box, which failed when I tried to submit. If it isn't intended to allow comments, please don't offer a comment box?

@coder-256 According to the git history, Tampermonkey went closed-source after version 2.9, in early 2013. So it has been that way for 6 years.

Opera's blacklisting of it was far more recent. I would like to hear their reason for doing so; especially as they did not blacklist the ID of the TM version found in their own 'store'.

I reported the listing to the Tampermonkey folks at https://github.com/Tampermonkey/tampermonkey/issues/635

Opera's blacklist of extensions is at https://extension-updates.opera.com/static/omaha/blacklist.txt and appears to be in chronological order of addition to the list. TM is the 2nd last entry; they must have added the last two at the same moment.

@burnout426: that was fixed in a way that should self-repair successfully on package update.

Since this was reawakened: the file I previously pointed to (https://extension-updates.opera.com/static/omaha/blacklist.txt) no longer exists; but TM is still blacklisted by Opera. It appears in my Preferences file -- certainly not by my preference, but injected there by Opera.

Opera! There is no reason to be blacklisting Tampermonkey non-beta.

@derjanb got some sort of response from them a long time ago, some sort of guff about TM being force-installed into people's Opera installations by some sort of malware, then used to run the malware's browser extension. Great. That is a bug, misfeature, attack, however you want to characterize it, ON THE PART OF THE MALWARE, not Tampermonkey!

And whatever that malware was, years ago, it is surely handled by people's antivirus etc. these days.

Please un-blacklist TamperMonkey non-beta, ID 'dhdgffkkebhmkfjojejmpbldmpobfkfo', from the Chrome 'store'. And the one from Opera 'store', but I don't know its non-beta ID as you've hidden it in the web UI.

See also DNAWIZ-49270; github.com/Tampermonkey/tampermonkey/issues/635

There were also comments about it on some of the beta blog posts, but those posts now have zero comments at all (https://blogs.opera.com/desktop/2019/01/opera-59-0-3187-0-developer-update/#comment-4270524260) -- ???

BTW @derjanb you said the Opera 'store' edition would update alongside the Firefox edition, about every 3mo. https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/details/tampermonkey-beta/ is on 4.13.6138, updated 2021-06-22, while FF is on 4.16.6160, updated 2022-04-05.

@filbo: argh, I failed at formatting the setuid instructions. But, you shouldn't really do that anyway. Just install properly with apt install and the postinst script will handle the setuid.

@kilian01: I see 3 separate sets of issues in your log, unclear which of them might be relevant. First, easiest to fix, the sandbox binary has wrong permissions:

$ cd /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/opera-stable
$ sudo chown root opera_sandbox
$ sudo chmod 4755 opera_sandbox

Try after that.

But that is probably actually caused by the 2nd problem: the deb you're installing depends on 4 others, parts of your distro, which are not installed. Because of that it never finished installing, never ran /var/lib/dpkg/info/opera-stable.postinst which would have set up that setuid.

Package libqt5core5a is not installed.
Package libqt5gui5 is not installed.
Package libqt5gui5-gles is not installed.
Package libqt5widgets5 is not installed.
dpkg: error processing package opera-stable (--install):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured

This not only leaves Opera unconfigured, but also missing libraries it depends on.

dpkg -i is the lowest level package installer. It is not meant to handle package dependencies; those belong to the higher APT subsystem. Try running instead: sudo apt install opera-stable_125.0.5729.21_amd64.deb. This will automatically pull in the packages it depends on.

The 3rd issue is a crash:

Trace/breakpoint trap (core dumped)

but that might be caused by the other two issues, so ignore it for now.

@burnout426: that was fixed in a way that should self-repair successfully on package update.

(and no, there was not a second window, I checked pretty carefully. Just one window with 14x FB + 1x Opera has been updated, counted as 26 tabs being closed.)

Whee, 'You can only post once every 120 second(s) - please wait before posting again'

After posting that, I tried to get out of the situation. First I made a backup of ~/.config/opera-developer; then I closed the 126.0.5742.0 window. At that point the 125.0.5720.0 window went crazy, suddenly replacing every tab with a bunco of old Facebook tabs.

So I closed the 125.0.5720.0 window. Once I was sure no Opera processes were running, I completed the update to 126.0.5744.0, then started it, and of course it was a bunch of old Facebook tabs. Specifically, 14 of them, plus an 'Opera has been updated' tab. But when I tell it to close the window, it prompts me that 26 tabs are being closed(?!?).

Closed it. Moved aside ~/.config/opera-developer, replaced it with the backed-up copy. Started 126.0.5744.0 -- and it has my expected current set of tabs.

So, something very wrong with the singleton stuff; and, probably expected shenanigans when unintentionally running 2x simultaneous Opera processes out of the same config directory. Except the '15 tabs = 26' thing is weird.

Two issues, probably not version-specific, but here we go...

TLDR: (1) 'singleton' intended to keep multiple Opera processes from co-running not working; (2) tons of defunct opera-autoupdat processes.

First issue:

(1) my currently running opera-developer is (was) 125.0.5720.0
(2) I allowed the system (Debian 'sid') to update opera-developer several times without actually restarting the process (so 125.0.5720.0 is still running, but something else is in the filesystem; a frequently-changing 'something else' as you issue more updates
(3) today I right-clicked on a URL in my terminal (actually the changelog for 126.0.5744.0, which is queued to be updated) -> Open -- this caused opera-developer 126.0.5742.0, the currently installed-on-filesystem version, to start a new window containing the same tabs as the currently (and still) open 125.0.5720.0 process.
(4) on examination, ~/.config/opera-developer/Singleton* exist and are dated ~10 minutes ago, i.e. when the 126.0.5742.0 process started. The 5742.0 process has SingletonSocket open for listening.
(5) two different directories exist in /tmp, with different SingletonSockets, each of which is open by one of the processes; but the symlink from ~/.config/opera-developer has been changed. I don't see how 'singletons' are 'single' when they rely on a replacable symlink which the program replaces automatically!

Second issue: there are some 600+ defunct 'opera-autoupdat' processes, children of the 125.0.5720.0 process; it seems to have started about 100/day on Dec 5-6-7-8-9-10 (starting with 5 on Dec 4). These might have started when 126.0.5734.0 was installed in place of 125.0.5727.1 (Dec 4 19:44). Unfortunately ps doesn't show exact start times of defunct processes from days ago.

In any case, the parent process of opera-autoupdat should be wait()ing those processes!

@opera-qa-team: I understand what you're saying, but it is self-inconsistent (there was a release in between those two, which mentioned only two bugs). And it is negative to the viewer of the changelogs. I checked the similarity because as I was scanning the newer list, it seemed hauntingly familiar.

If you didn't expect anyone to look at the changelogs, there is no point in posting them. On the other hand, if you do expect people to look at them, please curate them so that they present only new, useful information. It is ok (i.e.: highly encouraged) to say something like 'this release includes all of the fixes mentioned in the changelog for prior release (123.456.whatev)'.

The changelog for 125.0.5729.12 lists almost all of the bugs mentioned for 125.0.5720.0; plus a few more. Contrast to none of the bugs from 125.0.5707.0 being repeated. Was there some glitch in assembling the list for 5729?

@leocg It had an editable 'post a comment here' box, which failed when I tried to submit. If it isn't intended to allow comments, please don't offer a comment box?

Tried to comment on the changelog post, but it failed with:

We are experiencing some problems. Please try again later.
ID: 1764681981.

So I'm posting it here instead.

=====

When viewed in Android Chrome (and probably others), the changelog is formatted such that long lines are truncated, and does not allow 'zoom out', nor horizontal scrolling.

So for instance the 3rd item reads:

DNA-124040 AddressFieldHelperClipboardTest.G|
fails randomly

(where 'G|' is actually about 80% of a 'G').

Please fix the CSS to allow h-scrolling, or allow breaking word wrap.