Alan Shoemaker wrote:
>
> Steve Philp wrote:
> >
> > Alan Shoemaker wrote:
> > >
> > > Axalon Bloodstone wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Alan Shoemaker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Axalon Bloodstone wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Eosnet Team wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.netscape.com/download/selectlanguage_1_702_411.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Here is a link to the latest version of netscape. (maybe more stable?)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I wouldn't recommend it, it's just as broken as the 4.61. (everybody
> > > > > > remebers the segfault on link insertion right?)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
> > > > > > --Axalon
> > > > > --Axalon
> > > > >
> > > > > EXCUSE ME!! That statement really puts me off! 4.61 is what is in
> > > > > Mandrake's updates for 6.0!!?? It was recommended in this forum as an
> > > > > acceptable fix for the problems associated with 4.5. Now you say this
> > > > > new (4.7) version is just as bad as the fix we had for the Mandrake 6.0
> > > > > distribution (which I still am using). Well, what's that mean,
> > > > > EXACTLY!!?? If 4.7 is just as bad as 4.61 then upgrading to it
> > > > > shouldn't be any more of a problem than continuing to use 4.61, or
> > > > > should it??!! Sheeesh!!!!
> > > > >
> > > > > Alan
> > > >
> > > > Your excused, I do not thing you've been following the netscape saga
> > > > closely enough. They link the glibc version against 2.0, we supply 2.0.1
> > > > and 2.1.1, both of wich are incompatable with the binarys. The version of
> > > > netscape we currently ship is the libc5 with a really fancy loader.
> > > > I've installed both the glibc and libc5 versions here, libc5 fails to even
> > > > load because it doeesn't use the loader (exactly what one would expect),
> > > > the glibc (still linked against old glibc) acts just like the orignal 4.61
> > > > that was released, java works when it wants, you have to make sure to
> > > > click "ok" and not just hit enter on a passowrd dialog, inserting a link
> > > > in composer still causes an instant segfault.
> > > > So yes, my expectations of netscape held true, and i stand by my original
> > > > analysis of netscape.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Axalon....that's probably so. And I'm confused. Is the glibc version I
> > > ordered on CD not going to work (I mean work like the 4.61 version from
> > > updates that I'm using now)? From what you said above, the answer is
> > > no. Ok, so is any version not massaged and customized by Mandrake going
> > > to work (especially one with 128 bit encryption) like the update's
> > > 4.61? I believe that the answer is no also (from your comments above).
> > > Is there any way I can get a working copy usable with Mandrake 6.0/6.1
> > > that includes 128 bit encryption (my on-line bank requires it). Thanks,
> > > and I'm sorry for the overly-emphatic message (I wrote it in during the
> > > wrong moment in time). (-:
> > >
> > > Alan
> >
> > I seem to recall seeing a utility that will patch your existing Netscape
> > to support 128bit encryption. I don't recall the name (Fortify comes to
> > mind, but I think that's an SSL util). Searching Google or Freshmeat
> > for "netscape encryption" may turn something up, though.
> >
> > --
> > Steve Philp
>
> Steve....yep, '"netscape encryption" fortify' on google found it. I'm
> downloading now. Thanks.
>
> Alan
Alan where did you find the fortify for the Linux version of Netscape I
only see the Windows and NT versions? Can you send me a link for the
Linux one?
Thanks
Jeanette
