Mozilla 0.9.3 Released

nexex writes: "Shamelessly ripped from Mozilla.org, "Talkback data shows that recent 0.9.2 branch builds are more stable than Netscape 4.78 and we expect even better results for 0.9.3. Now is the time to try Mozilla again if you've been waiting for stability to improve." Translation: Mozilla is better than ever. Get your copy here."

Comments

What's up with the crappy installer?

[Malc]

On days like this when the server is busy, this network installer crap is useless. Where's the 9MB installer download, eh? I've had to run setup 15 times because it keeps timing out on the download of individual packages. I've basically run the installer once or more for each individual package. The setup program doesn't remember my settings from the last run, so I have to go through modifying every screen of the wizard every time. And after all that, I've still got to manage the downloaded files which aren't where I want them so that I can install on other machines easily.

Word of caution to existing Mozilla users...

[Caduceus1]

Don't dump 0.9.3 over a 0.9.2 Windows installation - things get pretty funky because something isn't compatible.

I got around it by blowing away the existing Mozilla folder and then unpacking the new one fresh.

Re:Word of caution to existing Mozilla users...

[baptiste]

I got around it by blowing away the existing Mozilla folder and then unpacking the new one fresh

Which is exactly what you are supposed to do - there are disclaimers all over Mozilla.org asking you NOT to install over old version during hte beta due to teh problems that arise

Re:Interesting bug

[ChrisCampbell47]

Why is [requiring glibc 2.1+] a bug?

Because they use Bugzilla to track all issues with Mozilla. Since people complain daily about the symptoms that turn out to be glibc problems, it's best to include the info in the bug report and just point people there.

That's also the place to debate the issue.

There are plenty of "bugs" that aren't, including feature-requests, user error, bad HTML/websites (e.g. the TLS mess), et cetera.

Interesting bug

[wiredog]

Mozilla requires glibc 2.1 or later. (Bug 44787)

The question is, why is this called a bug? It seems that requiring glibc 2.1 is fairly common in other programs. Library dependencies are normal, as later versions have APIs that earlier ones lacked, and expected. (Also, annoying if you are not warned, but here we are)

So, why is a dependency a bug?

More stable than Netscape 4.78?

[b1t r0t]

Talkback data shows that recent 0.9.2 branch builds are more stable than Netscape 4.78

That isn't saying much. It is my experience that nitroglycerin is more stable than any version of Netscape 4.xx.