634233 - (support-win64-thunderbird) [Tracking meta bug] officially support Windows 64-bit builds in Thunderbird

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(Thunderbird :: Build Config, enhancement)

Description

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

Firefox is working towards supporting (and making official) 64-bit builds on Windows. We should be doing the same on Thunderbird.

Currently though, this isn't high priority and will unlikely be included in a Gecko 2.0 based release as the gecko platform won't be officially supporting 64-bit builds, hence we won't be either.

We will slowly start to ramp up 64-bit windows support on Thunderbird ready for some future release, however the time scales are as yet undetermined and this will depend on Firefox support of the 64-bit builds, so please be patient.

This bug will be used to track the work necessary for Thunderbird. Core issues are tracked by bug 471090.

Comment 1

[Duane S.]

BUMP - Come on guys - It's been a year.  Win64 is now the DOMINATE OS and virtually ALL new OS installations of any type are 64bit. Windows 7 is about to be replaced and the bug track 471090 listed above has not been updated in TWO YEARS !!

Mozilla has had OFFICIAL 64 bit nightly builds for Windows 7 x64 in nightly/latest-comm-central for some time, but..... Alas, I am unable to find 64bit windows builds for Lightning.

I would love to try out Comm-Central 64 bit WITH Lightning on Windows.  It runs great without Lightning, but this is a show stopper for me as I cannot use it with any regularity.

Pretty Please -
64bit Windows builds for 16.0+ versions of Thunderbird Comm-Central x86_64
Pretty Please -

Comment 2

[Duane S.]

Are you serious ?!  Your statements do not lend much comfort to the future development of Thunderbird.

I have been running win64 version of Firefox full time for over a year.  Firefox HAS delivered for a very long time in the nightly trunk.  The third party Win64 build of Thunderbird was a pain, but it runs and the OFFICIAL win64 Thunderbird nightly (comm-central) runs nicely as well.

Firefox HAS delivered to the point that all extensions need to pony up or die.  The fact that your public has been asking for this for two years is reason enough to develop a solution.  It matters little whether there is significant technical reason - it is what is being asked for and you will soon find greatly diminished support for 32 bit apps on windows.  Perhaps 64 might solve some of the slowness from operating ludicrously large imap accounts.

Anyway - I think that having Lightning is a critical feature for many organizations and would be the tipping factor to push wide spread adoption.

In the mean time, I guess I just have to be envious of 64bit Outlook 2007 (along with Word and Excel - all 64 bit version as verified by task manager and file properties) that came PREINSTALLED on my daughter's bleeping netbook in 2011.

Just my .02 cents.

Signed,
Patiently Waiting.

Comment 3

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

Duane, whilst 64 bit is perceived to be better, we know from testing that Firefox 64 bit is not currently as fast as the 32 bit version. The work required to get 64 bit ready for release is significant and has been decided it is not the highest priority. You can read more about the decision here:

http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/browse_thread/thread/1cc83f09e7f5efe3/ec7afa6636637c71?lnk=gst&q=windows+64#ec7afa6636637c71

Thunderbird has already made the decision not to support 64 bit officially until Firefox does, as a significant part of the code base comes from Firefox, and would put us at risk of issues if it was not supported by Firefox.

If you have any queries about these decisions, please use the relevant planning lists and not bugzilla - bugzilla is for bug tracking and fixing things, not for policy decisions.



As I realise this hasn't been mentioned before, for those tracking this bug, nightly 64 bit builds of Thunderbird are available from:

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/thunderbird/nightly/latest-comm-central/

These should be considered experimental and whilst we will try to keep these going, it is not our highest priority, so they may break for a period of time if we encounter 64 bit specific issues.

Comment 4

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

setting URL items which might not block, but which might be of interest - namely TB+mailnews, keyword=64bit https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?type1-0-0=substring;keywords=64bit%2C%20;keywords_type=allwords;list_id=3662014;field0-0-0=short_desc;type0-0-1=substring;field0-0-1=keywords;type1-0-1=allwordssubstr;resolution=---;classification=Client%20Software;classification=Components;query_format=advanced;type0-0-0=anywordssubstr;field1-0-0=short_desc;product=MailNews%20Core;product=Thunderbird;field1-0-1=short_desc

Comment 5

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

Note, Firefox has bumped their minimum requirements to win7/64, per bug 1094013 and bug 1093741

Comment 7

[Óvári]

Added CC from bug 1226149.

Comment 8

[Micke Forsberg]

Hi guys.

Well, Firefox has an official x64 out since v43.0 or 42.0 I think. 
Will we see an x64 official from Thunderbird soon? The 3:rd party ones are old, not any good. 
I want the official build.

Comment 9

[Kent James (:rkent)]

We would like to support 64 bit Thunderbird, but somebody has to be motivated to put in the work. This is complicated because it requires support from the Mozilla build team, but they are not tasked to do anything new for Thunderbird, only maintain the old.

Comment 10

[David Berman]

I would very much welcome 64-bit Thunderbird to be supported. It's time!

Comment 11

[Chris]

If you cannot support both branches then retire 32bit, the problem is the argument that 64bit requires excessive effort does not hold water whilst you do support 64bit linux.

I see there is 64bit nightly builds, surely all one has to do is apply the nightly build script also to stable and job done?  At the very least do it for beta builds.

Comment 13

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

This probably wouldn't be hard to finish off for version 52 ... not so certain about the mapi piece.

Comment 14

[Todd]

Any idea when this will appear on http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/?

Comment 15

[Jorg K (CEST = GMT+2)]

I'm not tracking this for TB 52.

Comment 18

[Todd]

No sign of it in 
   https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/52.4.0/
or any of the betas

Comment 21

[Pulsebot]

Pushed by [e-mail]:
https://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/e8e3559eeb07
Add a release-style mozconfig for win64; r=me

Comment 22

[Worcester12345]

Is there a place to start testing 64 bit "beta" builds of Thunderbird?

Surely, this has got to be wrapping up soon. Are there tracking bugs for starting to ship this to small groups, the same way it was done for Firefox?

Comment 23

[Óvári]

(In reply to Worcester12345 from comment #22)
> Is there a place to start testing 64 bit "beta" builds of Thunderbird?

https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/63.0b1/win64/
 
> Surely, this has got to be wrapping up soon. Are there tracking bugs for
> starting to ship this to small groups, the same way it was done for Firefox?

https://github.com/thundernest/thunderbird-website/issues/49#issuecomment-403233127

Comment 24

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

Magnus, after bug 1509918 is fixed, do you see any other blockers, tests in particular? https://mzl.la/2V4bUgW looks clean, but is there anything in https://mzl.la/2ZfkdFU where 64bit is in the bug comments?

And how do you foresee rolling this out? Do you think we need more users testing 64bit in beta to the extent that we would do Enable-32bit-to-64bit-migration aka bug 1390850? Or...

An alternative to auto-pushing users to 64bit on initial roll out, is through self-selection via manual download activity:

• have https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/beta/all/ serve 64bit builds to 64bit users - https://github.com/thundernest/thunderbird-website/issues/49

• do same when version 68 ships: https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/all/ and https://www.thunderbird.net/ (and typically manual DL is where most of the initial uptake happens, because we do not enable automatic updates for big releases until we have a better understanding of the quality in the general user population, i.e. non-beta users)

• after some comfortable period of time, then enable some automated migration to 64bit builds

I favor an slower roll out on initial support, unless there is demonstrated value in some automated roll out.

Comment 25

[Magnus Melin [:mkmelin]]

I don't see any particular blocking issues if that bug gets fixed.
Agreed it needs some more testing though and preferable slow roll-out. Serving 64bits to users downloading like you write sounds good (after that).

Not sure how the auto-update roll-out for migration happens. If we can do that slowly it would be great.

We need to make sure testing profile-per-install doesn't mess up users when upgrading them (it's in another install location, right?)

Comment 26

[Worcester12345]

Just updated to 60.8.0 (32-bit). Still 32 bit.

Comment 27

[Rob Lemley [:rjl]]

The migration will not happen until sometime after 68.0 I believe. The change in 60.8 was to set the registry keys in Windows that will allow a future version to be used as the migration. I don't expect 68.0 to be the version we do that.

Comment 28

[Magnus Melin [:mkmelin]]

Any reason not to put the 64 bit up for beta download now? https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/beta/all/
And also default 64 bit download.

I think we've pretty much given up on bug 1509918, and would just ignore it (it's a one time thing, if you click a button).

Comment 29

[Óvári]

(In reply to Magnus Melin [:mkmelin] from comment #28)
See https://github.com/thundernest/thunderbird-website/issues/49#issuecomment-403233127

Should you comment at:
https://github.com/thundernest/thunderbird-website/issues/49
?

Comment 30

[Magnus Melin [:mkmelin]]

My comment was more for driver discussion. AFAIK at the moment bug 1509918 is the only problem, but I think we can go ahead with that still unresolved.

Comment 31

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

(In reply to Magnus Melin [:mkmelin] from comment #28)

Any reason not to put the 64 bit up for beta download now? https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/beta/all/
And also default 64 bit download.

Yes, I think the timing is good to expose it on public download and this doesn't need to block putting it on beta. And as Rob pointed out, auto migration to 64bit isn't going to happen for a few some time.

NI Rob, Andrei to move that forward, assuming there are no other objections.

I think we've pretty much given up on bug 1509918, and would just ignore it (it's a one time thing, if you click a button).

Who is "We"? I don't think bug 1509918 comment 30 suggests we give up - two ideas are offered, one offers a lower bar. It also hints that we need to modernize TB shell integration anyway - are you suggesting we ignore that need? (Perhaps needs a different bug?)

Also "giving up" forces the 64bit-capable portion of 25% of our users into a support scenario. (25% of our users are still on Windows 7 - for beta that should be 10k-15k users). That's a pretty huge number and so ignoring doesn't seem like a good idea.

Comment 32

[Magnus Melin [:mkmelin]]

There is also bug 1509918 comment 32 (and you may agree or not, but even revving the engines we'd just putting effort on an EOL OS before we could get it shipped). I'm just saying it's unlikely any developer would magically appear to fix it since it's not easy for anybody to be personally annoyed by it (they would just click ok and be done with it), and it's not super justified to put other resources on it either IMHO.

I don't think it's a support scenario to have to click a button.

Comment 33

[Jorg K (CEST = GMT+2)]

Very strange. I'm on Windows x64 with TB x64. With that option to check at startup, I don't see a problem. That said, we are in urgent need to fix bug 1509918 and get TB aligned with FF, see bug 1509918 comment #38 and bug 1509918 comment #23 and above. My vote is to hire someone who is competent in the field for that limited defined task.

Comment 34

[Rob Lemley [:rjl]]

(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk) from comment #31)

NI Rob, Andrei to move that forward, assuming there are no other objections.

AFAIK It's a matter of updating the website to know about the win64 arch. The download bouncer URLs work already. I think the bigger question has been UX related.

I tried to mangle the website code myself to help Andrei and ran into some problems..

• The "all downloads" page looks squashed after adding a new column for Win64.
• I can add the win64 arch easily enough, but it's sort of global. Enabling for beta also enables for release.
  That can be fixed with some hackery, but then..
• The download page that does OS detection and gives you a single download button doesn't seem to know about win64. I got lost in the javascript pretty quickly and aborted. So even when I use a 64-bit Firefox on 64-bit Windows I was getting a link to the 32-bit download.
• I looked at firefox.com, and they link you to the stub installer (which is not ready for prime time for us). There's only only stub installer for Windows, it happens to be 32bit but it will download the 64-bit version if your machine qualifies...

Comment 35

[Óvári]

(In reply to Rob Lemley [:rjl] from comment #34)

• The "all downloads" page looks squashed after adding a new column for Win64.

https://github.com/thundernest/thunderbird-website/issues/49

• I can add the win64 arch easily enough, but it's sort of global. Enabling for beta also enables for release.
  That can be fixed with some hackery, but then..

Does it really matter as TB is available as a 64-bit download at https://www.m64.info/index.php/thunderbird-64-bit-download? Would be nice if the link was on the official TB webpage.

Do most people download Thunderbird from the Free Download button or do they first click on Systems & Languages at https://www.thunderbird.net/ or https://www.thunderbird.net/channel/?

ETA for TB 68 is this month too.

• The download page that does OS detection and gives you a single download button doesn't seem to know about win64. I got lost in the javascript pretty quickly and aborted. So even when I use a 64-bit Firefox on 64-bit Windows I was getting a link to the 32-bit download.

Can this be looked at later? Perhaps this will enable a gradual TB transition from 32-bit to 64-bit?

• I looked at firefox.com, and they link you to the stub installer (which is not ready for prime time for us). There's only only stub installer for Windows, it happens to be 32bit but it will download the 64-bit version if your machine qualifies...

Can this be looked at later? Perhaps this will enable a gradual TB transition from 32-bit to 64-bit?

What do you think?

Thank you

Comment 36

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

(In reply to Magnus Melin [:mkmelin] from comment #32)

There is also bug 1509918 comment 32 (and you may agree or not, but even revving the engines we'd just putting effort on an EOL OS before we could get it shipped).

Your instinct may be correct. But let's consider history and hard numbers. Published MS EOL may be 2020, but if history of the XP experience informs the future then we're very far from end of Thunderbird support. XP was EOL in 2014 but not dropped by firefox until 2018. If win7 dies similarly and my math is correct, then Firefox drops win7 in 2022 or 2023, not 2020.

25% of 25M users is 6M win7 users. But we also need to know in bug 1509918 what percentage of users would be affected, and how :

• Is the bug summary accurate (it states every startup)?
• All win7 or just a tiny subset?
• Is the available "workaround" as easy and obvious to the average user as you suggest?

I'm just saying it's unlikely any developer would magically appear to fix it since it's not easy for anybody to be personally annoyed by it (they would just click ok and be done with it),

Sure, the random developer fixing something they care about is a rare bird. But we have money, planning chops, and good comments in the bug, so random developers shouldn't be a factor if fixing is determined by analysis to be important.

I don't think it's a support scenario to have to click a button.

Anything changed and unexpected catches the average user's attention, especially during an update.

Comment 37

[Andrei Hajdukewycz [:sancus]]

So, it sounds like we want Windows x64 enabled for beta, and for live only after 68 is released. Given that we are building 68 now, I will just write a patch to enable x64 on both release and beta and push it sometime after 68 is live on the site. I may not be done until then anyway, depending on when it actually goes live.

Comment 38

[Jorg K (CEST = GMT+2)]

While your at it, we also need to make the MSI packages available somehow, see bug 1516741.

Comment 39

[Andrei Hajdukewycz [:sancus]]

(In reply to Jorg K (GMT+2) from comment #38)

While your at it, we also need to make the MSI packages available somehow, see bug 1516741.

https://github.com/thundernest/thunderbird-website/issues/85 - will go on org page.

Comment 40

[Worcester12345]

If I am reading this bug right, there is only 1 bug blocking Thunderbird 64 from becoming a reality?

Comment 41

[Aaron Kelley]

(In reply to Worcester12345 from comment #40)

If I am reading this bug right, there is only 1 bug blocking Thunderbird 64 from becoming a reality?

64-bit Thunderbird is already available.
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/all/

Comment 42

[Worcester12345]

When any given user, running version 60 goes to "Help:About", it will automatically upgrade them to the latest version in 64 bit?

If not, then I would NOT say it is "already available". It needs to be automatic and without extra steps involved.

Comment 43

[Sören Hentzschel]

It needs to be automatic

Nope, definitively not. Not even Firefox does automatic migrations from 32 bit to 64 bit. Firefox did this one time, but it was an one-time event. Why should this be a requirement for Thunderbird? Nothing, really nothing in the word "available" contains something about automatic migration, it means only what it says: available. I don't say that Thunderbird shouldn't do something similar but it's not a blocker for saying that 64 bit builds are available and call this meta bug fixed. This is bug 1556748.

Comment 44

[Worcester12345]

(In reply to Sören Hentzschel from comment #43)

It needs to be automatic

Nope, definitively not. Not even Firefox does automatic migrations from 32 bit to 64 bit. Firefox did this one time, but it was an one-time event. Why should this be a requirement for Thunderbird? Nothing, really nothing in the word "available" contains something about automatic migration, it means only what it says: available. I don't say that Thunderbird shouldn't do something similar but it's not a blocker for saying that 64 bit builds are available and call this meta bug fixed. This is bug 1556748.

OK, to clarify, I created a new bug 1598866

Comment 45

[Worcester12345]

I think at this time, going to 64 bit Thunderbird helps more than it hurts. Wayne, the suggestion to do this has resulted in far fewer problems with memory, slowness, and lock-ups. Thanks for that. I think the benefit to others is worth moving this forward.

Comment 46

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

I have no objection with moving to 64bit. But in the short term horizon there are still critical higher priority items for the product. So I would say that doing this is more likely in the second half of the 78 cycle.

Comment 47

[Worcester12345]

User impact if declined: People will continue to run into bugs and crashes involving memory issues.
Is this code covered by automated tests?: Don't know
Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: 64 bit downloads are in public areas for download currently.
Needs manual test from QE?: Don't know
If yes, steps to reproduce:
List of other uplifts needed: None
Risk to taking this patch: Low. This will reduce crashes and other bugs for Thunderbird, freeing up valuable resources to work on other critical components.
Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): This patch shouldn't be risky because 64 bit is already in effect and available for public download. This bug will just automate the process for those who are capable of using it. This same method has been used for Firefox with great success.
String changes made/needed: Don't know.

Comment 48

[Worcester12345]

(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk) from comment #46)

I have no objection with moving to 64bit. But in the short term horizon there are still critical higher priority items for the product. So I would say that doing this is more likely in the second half of the 78 cycle.

https://blog.thunderbird.net/ says:
"Updating to Thunderbird 78 is highly recommended to ensure you will receive security fixes, because no more fixes will be provided for Thunderbird 68 after September 2020."

So, with that mostly behind us, it is time to move on. I'd say there is nothing holding 64 bit back at this point.

Comment 49

[Sören Hentzschel]

(In reply to Worcester12345 from comment #48)

https://blog.thunderbird.net/ says:
"Updating to Thunderbird 78 is highly recommended to ensure you will receive security fixes, because no more fixes will be provided for Thunderbird 68 after September 2020."

What exactly does this quote about the EOL of Thunderbird 68 have to do with the migration from 32-bit to 64-bit? 🤔

Comment 50

[Worcester12345]

(In reply to Sören Hentzschel from comment #49)

(In reply to Worcester12345 from comment #48)

https://blog.thunderbird.net/ says:
"Updating to Thunderbird 78 is highly recommended to ensure you will receive security fixes, because no more fixes will be provided for Thunderbird 68 after September 2020."

What exactly does this quote about the EOL of Thunderbird 68 have to do with the migration from 32-bit to 64-bit? 🤔

I quoted above it what it was in reply to. They said "the second half of the 78 cycle".

Comment 51

[Sören Hentzschel]

Yes. And still it's unclear what you want to say. The quote is about the update from Thunderbird 68 to Thunderbird 78. There is no relation to the migration from 32-bit to 64-bit at all.

Comment 52

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

And the second half of 78 starts in 2021.

Comment 53

[Worcester12345]

(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk) from comment #52)

And the second half of 78 starts in 2021.

I may have confused this with Firefox, which has been out in 64 bit for quite a while now.

I notice that with bug 1509918 not really being about 64 bit, that there are no longer any other bugs blocking this one.

Comment 54

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

I don't see anything concerning in these bug queries that mention 64 bit: https://mzl.la/2LzKLQ8 https://mzl.la/3aabPiF And according to bug 1509918 comment 65, that bug need not be a blocker.

Unsure about whether any accessibility software might be impacted?

Ali, can you speak to the question above ?

Comment 55

[Ali Savas]

By now, it shouldn't make a difference to a screen reader whether it's a 64-bit or 32-bit application. With Java it would be important info, but not with native applications.

Comment 56

[Worcester12345]

Shouldn't this also depend on bug 1558573 ?

Comment 57

[Rob Lemley [:rjl]]

I don't see why the stub installer should be a prerequisite to the migration. All it does is make the initial download smaller for end users and figure out whether to grab the 32bit or 64bit full installer. AIUI, the website is being updated to make the 64 bit installer the default rather than the 32bit. It effectively accomplishes the same thing.

Comment 58

[Worcester12345]

Was just attempting to follow the lead set by Firefox for consistency sake.

Comment 59

[Worcester12345]

It has been many months now that all the dependencies were met. Just wondering if there is any remaining reason to not move forward on this.

Comment 60

[andrew]

I've ran into problem when Thunderbird consumes 3gb of ram and then crashes. Nothing helps. This is ridiculous, I have 64gb of ram I can afford it.
It's 2021 for Pete's sake

Comment 61

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

(In reply to andrew from comment #60)

I've ran into problem when Thunderbird consumes 3gb of ram and then crashes. Nothing helps. This is ridiculous, I have 64gb of ram I can afford it.

andrew, please create a new bug report with your crash ID. Instructions https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/mozilla-crash-reporter-tb#w_viewing-crash-reports

Comment 63

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

Bug 1556748 is dependent on this bug, not the other way around. Reversing the dependency, so all the blockers are now gone and this meta is done.