Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Firefox 1.0 Preview Release Candidates Available

Posted by timothy on from the cutting-edge-is-the-bleeding-edge dept.

blakeross writes "The preview release of Firefox 1.0 is just around the corner, and we've now got candidate builds available. Please help us bang on these builds to ensure that the preview release is sound and ready to go, as this will be our largest and most public release to date. We're also working hard on an exciting and unprecedented grassroots campaign that will launch with the preview release, so stay tuned."

25 of 88 comments (clear)

  1. Good thing, too. by adolf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Would you believe that I just reloaded Slashdot in Firefox, right as this article is posted, only to have the thing turn glacial and unusable?

    You'd think we'd be farther along than this after a decade.

    Let's hope that the new Firefox RC series Doesn't Suck. (That earlier versions tended to suck less in general than other browsers does not a non-sucky browser make.)

    --
    Kid-proof tablet..
  2. Not to complain... by dmayle · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not just to complain..., but has the Slashdot reflow bug been fixed in 1.0? It's been known for ages, but it's recently gotten much worse in 0.9.x (In 0.8 I rarely had the problem, under 0.9.3 under three different operating systems, (and three different microarchitectures) I get it more times than not on Slashdot articles and comments.)

    Granted, I won't give up the best browser I've ever used, but it's getting to be really annoying.

    And come on, we all know that the Mozilla devs spend more time reading Slashdot than anything else, so why hasn't it been fixed yet?

    1. Re:Not to complain... by colinramsay · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217527

      That's the bug. It's fixed on the main trunk but not on the Firefox 1.0 branch... yet.

      --
      Free iPods - now in the UK!
    2. Re:Not to complain... by jilles · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217527 , according to this, it has been fixed. I'm running the release candidate now and everything looks ok. It never really bothered me anyway.

      --

      Jilles
    3. Re:Not to complain... by colinramsay · · Score: 2, Informative

      "The problem is fixed on the trunk, which is why the status says "fixed". It is known not to be fixed on the Firefox 1.0 branch or Mozilla 1.7 branch (which is clear if you read the previous comments)."

      From Michael Lefevre in the bug comments. It's marked FIXED for the trunk, not the aviary branch.

      --
      Free iPods - now in the UK!
    4. Re:Not to complain... by cymen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I managed to trigger it on the main page after 3 reloads.

      Anyone find updates for disabled extensions? Going to hunt down Adblock, SessionSaver, and BugMeNot updates.

    5. Re:Not to complain... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is definitely a Gecko bug (the rendering component of Mozilla and Firefox) relating to incremental reflow, not a problem with Slashcode. It's not something to be glossed over. On the other hand, as others have pointed out, it's fixed in Gecko -- just the fix hasn't been rolled into Firefox.

      In the meantime, you could try disabling incremental rendering (at the cost of potentially greater delay until a web page is in a readable state) and see if that works around the problem: go to about:config and add a boolean value for content.notify.ontimer and set it to false.

      There's some random Firefox-related discussion on a forum here. While these people don't really know what they're talking about, they do nicely list the incremental reflow prefs that you can play with. You might be able to come up with a reasonable workaround until the fix gets rolled in.

      Remember to set the prefs back when you update Firefox to a fixed version -- you don't want to be either burning CPU time like mad or waiting longer than you need to to be reading pages.

      --
      May we never see th
    6. Re:Not to complain... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Hunt down updates"?

      You can just use the Tools->Extensions->Update feature.

      --
      May we never see th
    7. Re:Not to complain... by Homology · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Not just to complain..., but has the Slashdot reflow bug been fixed in 1.0? It's been known for ages, but it's recently gotten much worse in 0.9.x

      Security-wise, the 0.9 series are worse as well. Enough so that the port maintainers at OpenBSD will not yet upgrade from 0.8 to 0.9.x until later. OpenBSD will mark the port as broken rather than upgrade.

    8. Re:Not to complain... by cymen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "You can just use the Tools->Extensions->Update feature."

      I wish. It never works here. For example, Adblock with the update detected an updated version but couldn't install it. All the other extensions weren't recognized as being updated but in fact did have updates.

      Has it these feature *ever* worked for you?

      BugMetNot 0.60 here: extensions.roachfiend.com (mozdev still has 0.50 version that is incompatible)

      SessionSaver & Adblock from mozdev worked.

    9. Re:Not to complain... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Has it these feature *ever* worked for you?

      I think I picked up one update at one point.

      The only problems I've had with updating plugins, really, came when I tried to update a very old version of AdBlock to a newer version and the update really screwed up rendering (a known bug), requiring a lot of hair-pulling and eventually a prefs.js deletion.

      I'm not running into problems ATM, but then I plan to wait to update Firefox until Fedora packages and ships the next version, nicely tested and all.

      --
      May we never see th
    10. Re:Not to complain... by _xeno_ · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I wrote my own extension, so yes, the update feature has worked for me in Firefox 0.9.3.

      However, it's never displayed as an "Update Available" in the status bar like it's supposed to. If you double click on the "Update" area to make Firefox search for new updates now, it doesn't work either. In fact, the only way it does work is to go to Tools -> Extensions, specifically select my extension, and then choose "Update."

      After that, it worked fine.

      So... yes, it works. Sorta.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    11. Re:Not to complain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      sigh I have answered this like 3 times last month mozillazine (stupid noobs dont know how to search).
      oh well here it is again
      http://preferential.mozdev.org/preferences. html

    12. Re:Not to complain... by jdkane · · Score: 2, Funny

      Thanks. Glad you're willing to help out despite how exhausting it might be.

  3. Change log? by julie-h · · Score: 2, Informative

    Have anyone found the ChangeLog from 0.9.3 to 1.0rc ? It isn't in the tar.gz =(

    1. Re:Change log? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/releases/0 .10.html http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/bigger-pictu re.html#newin1.0pr1

  4. Meta RC by reignbow · · Score: 4, Funny

    So this is the candidate for the preview release for the final release? What is this called? Release Candidate Candidate?

    --
    Divide et impera!
    1. Re:Meta RC by arcade · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So this is the candidate for the preview release for the final release? What is this called? Release Candidate Candidate?

      Personally I think the entire concept of "Release Candidate" has been abused severly in many Open Source projects. A Release Candidate should be released, and if no showstoppers is found it in - it should become the FINAL release.

      I shuddered when KDE had both "RC1" and "RC2" in their release schedule long before they had actually reached that stage. An RC2 should never - in my opinion - be planned on beforehand.

      Anyways. "Final Beta" would probably be a nice name for it. ;)

      --
      "Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
    2. Re:Meta RC by cymen · · Score: 2, Funny

      I agree. We should move to SP1, SP2, SP3, SP4, SP5, and maybe SP6 instead of RC1 and RC2. These SP releases convey a stronger message to the consumer that "their problems are our #1 goal" than such driveling things like RC1 and RC2 that they will never download and use. Why wait for a well-tested release when you can always service pack your problems away!

  5. What I hate about Mozilla Firefox for Windows... by fluor2 · · Score: 2, Informative

    is that pages with lots of pictures scroll VERY slow. it's much faster in IE.

  6. Lets... by fozzmeister · · Score: 2

    ... See if they can stop it prompting me twice for everything!

  7. Re:One Yay and one Boo by hsoft · · Score: 2, Informative

    Oh wait, web developer DOES work. I thought it wouldn't work because I had a warning that Web developer doesn't work with the new version... But having tried is quickly, it works!

    Which means: Only Yays for Firefox 1.0!

    --
    perception is reality
  8. unprecedented grassroots campaign? by foniksonik · · Score: 4, Funny

    "unprecedented grassroots campaign"

    Read this as "we'll be posting announcements on Slashdot every day for the next month"...

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  9. how can in be more public? by portscan · · Score: 2, Interesting
    this will be our largest and most public release to date


    Firefox is already at the top of the Mozilla.org website, taking up about 6 times as much space as the full Mozilla suite. There has been no real marketing for Netscape, Mozilla, or Firefox recently, so I am wondering how this release will be more public. Any ideas?
  10. Re:What I hate about Mozilla Firefox for Windows.. by SecretMethod70 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Firefox wants to be a popular browser, it needs to fix this bug for that very reason. Porn drives the internet, and if a person's browser crashes or crawls to a halt when they're looking at porn, they're not going to stick with said browser. They'll go back to IE, where they can look at porn (and also get viruses) more easily. This bug is probably one of the most important bugs in Firefox that needs to be fixed, and it's been there for a LONG time now.