On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Brian Behlendorf wrote: > On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > > > Why don't you run firefox with -g and get a dump and backtrace > > out of it? > > Because, as I said earlier this thread: > > I do try it every couple of weeks to see if it works, but the best it > gets is two-three web sites and then the seg fault. I realize until I > sit down with a stack trace I haven't earned the right to complain, so I > haven't yet, figuring it'll be important enough someday to someone > clueful enough. Or, Macromedia will some day lighten up and let Mozilla > include it as part of the web browser by default. Or something. > > ...and that I've got nowhere near the chops to do anything useful with a > stack trace that I'm sure others do. I thought I'd pipe up in response to > Ruben's message to provide a data point. Am I the only one for whom > Firefox and www/flashplugin-firefox doesn't work?
Is it that hard to type 'firefox -g', alias firefox="firefox -g", or whatever, and use it that way for a few days to see if you can get a trace? I'm just wondering if it has the same problem as linuxpluginwrapper, or bad assumptions about mutexes being recursive or unlocking one you don't own. Most folks I know use the linuxpluginwrapper so we don't have any experience with the native flash player. I think I recall trying it and it not working, hence the use of linuxpluginwrapper. -- DE _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"