Firefox uses profiles to store your information. Previous versions of Firefox may have added cruft to your profile that could break the 1.0 release build. The expectation is that you will READ the instructions and upgrade properly, so that you don't get any hassles.
Have you tried a complete uninstallation and reinstallation, including the reconstruction of your profile? I know it sounds stupid but in almost every single case, an old profile with cruft is the fastest way to destabilize Firefox.
The improvement that you haven't seen is when people ONLY want Firefox or ONLY want Thunderbird; you don't have that option with Mozilla, since it's all one huge monolithic program.
While the lack of a shared GRE is still a major thorn in the side of folks who DO use Firefox and Thunderbird together, it's also an advantage for folks who don't use both and don't need extra crap sucking up memory*.
* - yes, I know that Firefox's memory usage by itself isn't exactly stellar either...
This sounds precisely like a problem caused by either incompatible extensions or a crufty profile.
Did you clean out your profile before upgrading to Firefox 1.0? Some folks experience no end of problems if they keep their profiles; after they have wiped them and rebuilt them, no more problems!
Sure, it's a bit of a hassle, but it's far better to start clean IMO...
Because the rendering engine changes needed to fix the bugs created by the god-awful HTML 3.2 emanated by Slashdot's template code were too invasive and "scary" for the Aviary branch. Introducing them could have cuased massive regressions and other problems.
Firefox 1.1 will not break Slashdot anymore. Why the templates haven't been fixed is anybody's guess...
I didn't even know that cryptographic extension signatures _worked_ in Firefox 1.0!
And before you start flaming the Firefox developers over a change that seems rather unfair and ill-timed to you, keep in mind that no matter how stable Firefox was before the 1.0 release, it was beta software. Beta software can be modified at the drop of a hat.
Ergo, you should have at least planned for the possibility that something might change in the 1.0 release, ESPECIALLY if you are actually offering production-level software to people.
Finally, if you are having problems with the Firefox Signtool team (whoever they are), then you should try other avenues of assistance, like the MozillaZine Forums - if you got a "figure it out yourself dumbass"-type response there, I'd be shocked.
Well, not as a security risk - but you could write a Mozilla/Firefox extension that could change the URL bar colour on sites rendered in quirks mode, or popup a dialog box whenever a quirks mode page is entered by the browser.
Because like it or not, SP2 has not been installed by many XP users.
Not to mention the fact that this bug most likely affects MSHTML as a whole, which means that it may appear in all IE versions before SP2 as well. Being able to spoof links like this in all major versions of IE before SP2 is highly dangerous IMO.
Who's going to run the betting pool on how many minutes it takes someone to crack the keys and modify the information?
Better yet, how many kids will lose their tokens?
Not to mention the possibility of the breaching of the privacy of minors.
On paper this sounds like a good way to protect children, but somehow I think the execution of the idea is not going to be as easy as Verisign and Co. think it might be.
Such a module is illegal in the eyes of Linus and Co. because it expressly permits binary-only modules to be loaded and used in the kernel.
If they don't actively block it, they will certainly never merge it into the mainline. Which means that now any company who insists on proving binary-only modules will now need to maintain the module and the KAL at the same time.
It would be better for them to just open part of (or all of) their code.
This is a bug in the Firefox proxy authentication framework, and hopefully if enough people vote for the bug in Bugzilla, or better yet, find a patch for it, then it will be fixed.
No one has mentioned Tabbrowser Preferences, which is a lot more versatile than Single Window and adds a number of other useful features, such as per-tab locking, background/foreground control over several tab functions, and UI for configuring many of the hidden preferences already available in Firefox.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong.
Firefox uses profiles to store your information. Previous versions of Firefox may have added cruft to your profile that could break the 1.0 release build. The expectation is that you will READ the instructions and upgrade properly, so that you don't get any hassles.
Have you tried a complete uninstallation and reinstallation, including the reconstruction of your profile? I know it sounds stupid but in almost every single case, an old profile with cruft is the fastest way to destabilize Firefox.
They probably did work it out - in 1.0. 1.0PR could have had bugs in the update mechanism.
You should take the traditional route and download a full install. Be sure to clear out your profile beforehand.
Define "seems".
The improvement that you haven't seen is when people ONLY want Firefox or ONLY want Thunderbird; you don't have that option with Mozilla, since it's all one huge monolithic program.
While the lack of a shared GRE is still a major thorn in the side of folks who DO use Firefox and Thunderbird together, it's also an advantage for folks who don't use both and don't need extra crap sucking up memory*.
* - yes, I know that Firefox's memory usage by itself isn't exactly stellar either...
This sounds precisely like a problem caused by either incompatible extensions or a crufty profile.
Did you clean out your profile before upgrading to Firefox 1.0? Some folks experience no end of problems if they keep their profiles; after they have wiped them and rebuilt them, no more problems!
Sure, it's a bit of a hassle, but it's far better to start clean IMO...
Because the rendering engine changes needed to fix the bugs created by the god-awful HTML 3.2 emanated by Slashdot's template code were too invasive and "scary" for the Aviary branch. Introducing them could have cuased massive regressions and other problems.
Firefox 1.1 will not break Slashdot anymore. Why the templates haven't been fixed is anybody's guess...
I didn't even know that cryptographic extension signatures _worked_ in Firefox 1.0!
And before you start flaming the Firefox developers over a change that seems rather unfair and ill-timed to you, keep in mind that no matter how stable Firefox was before the 1.0 release, it was beta software. Beta software can be modified at the drop of a hat.
Ergo, you should have at least planned for the possibility that something might change in the 1.0 release, ESPECIALLY if you are actually offering production-level software to people.
Finally, if you are having problems with the Firefox Signtool team (whoever they are), then you should try other avenues of assistance, like the MozillaZine Forums - if you got a "figure it out yourself dumbass"-type response there, I'd be shocked.
Considering that the doctor is actually Scottish...
Anyway, I like the show - once the newness wears off and the actors 'learn' their characters, I'm sure it will do well.
Actually, the name "Mozilla Browser" is dead. Firefox will keep its name for good now, as will Thunderbird, Sunbird, Nvu and Co.
Well, not as a security risk - but you could write a Mozilla/Firefox extension that could change the URL bar colour on sites rendered in quirks mode, or popup a dialog box whenever a quirks mode page is entered by the browser.
Because like it or not, SP2 has not been installed by many XP users.
Not to mention the fact that this bug most likely affects MSHTML as a whole, which means that it may appear in all IE versions before SP2 as well. Being able to spoof links like this in all major versions of IE before SP2 is highly dangerous IMO.
How about a Beowulf cluster of these things! You could run another Beowulf cluster from a power source the size of a shoebox!
Amen!
This is one of the most irritating things about Gmail, made worse by the fact that it actually does get it right some of the time!
I should send some feedback and tell them to stop doing that.
Who's going to run the betting pool on how many minutes it takes someone to crack the keys and modify the information?
Better yet, how many kids will lose their tokens?
Not to mention the possibility of the breaching of the privacy of minors.
On paper this sounds like a good way to protect children, but somehow I think the execution of the idea is not going to be as easy as Verisign and Co. think it might be.
Such a module is illegal in the eyes of Linus and Co. because it expressly permits binary-only modules to be loaded and used in the kernel.
If they don't actively block it, they will certainly never merge it into the mainline. Which means that now any company who insists on proving binary-only modules will now need to maintain the module and the KAL at the same time.
It would be better for them to just open part of (or all of) their code.
Precisely.
If XChat incorporates any GPL-licensed code that they don't get relicensed appropriately by the original authors, then they are in violation.
Why bother releasing it as shareware anyway? Why not release it as freeware?
I should have modded this up....
You do have a point - having the right to tell others your opinion could be interpreted as a valid reason to allow this sort of spam to be permitted.
You can still get that independence!
Use Firefox to build and align your bookmarks in the way you desire, and then export it to an HTML file.
Then, set the homepage of ALL of your browsers to that file!
Problem solved.
The point is that you can give the extension author $20 and then freely uninstall the AdBar extension anyway.
It's funny. Laugh.
It's not supposed to. The changes needed to fix that are too intrusive to be inserted into the Aviary branch.
If you want fixed Slashdot, go and get a trunk nightly build.
Use a trunk nightly build - the changes required are too invasive for the branch nightly builds, which will become Fx 1.0 and all 1.x releases.
Just use Tabbrowser Preferences for now. This bug may be of interest for opening external links.
9 62
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=172
This is a bug in the Firefox proxy authentication framework, and hopefully if enough people vote for the bug in Bugzilla, or better yet, find a patch for it, then it will be fixed.
1 90
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=230
http://tinyurl.com/2doea
1. It's a JavaScript error - you're trying to do swhen.options() somewhere and Firefox's JS parser is telling you that you can't do that ;-)
2. MSN Messenger is not likely to use anything but IE. Get a different MSN client.
No one has mentioned Tabbrowser Preferences, which is a lot more versatile than Single Window and adds a number of other useful features, such as per-tab locking, background/foreground control over several tab functions, and UI for configuring many of the hidden preferences already available in Firefox.
e fs
Read more on my website, http://www.pryan.org/mozilla/site/TheOneKEA/tabpr