Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
I know, thats why I stuck with the old Netscape 4.08, the later versions just started eating up all my swap and memory, especially I noticed this when I write an e mail from inside my web based e mail service. On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, Dean Price mewed: > Hi all, > I am running Mandrake 7.0 and Netscape 4.08 on a > Pentium 200MMX with 96MB ram with a 133MB Swap. > I have yet to see any problems with any aspect of the > system. > > Just thought I would add my two cents. > > --- Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Vic wrote: > > > > > > I'm running a AMDK6-3 400 with 64M sysram and > > > 90Mb swap, I noticed that unless I stick with > > > netscape version 4.08, all the ones later > > > will start eating up my swap until X crashes. > > > > > > Is this a memory leak? > > > > yup, another thing to love about NutScrape. I try > > to keep an eye on > > memory usage, dont think I ever let it take that > > much. > > > > Here's something to try: startup x without much > > else running, then load > > up netscape, note you memory usage and leave it on > > overnight. See what > > you have the next day (provided its still running). > > Then wonder why 1 > > navigator window requires 30 mb - something I could > > never understand. > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Jeremy mewed: > > > > > > Suprising thing is that I have not had any > > problems with stock mandrake > > > > 7.0's netscape 4.7 YET. *looks for some wood to > > knock on* Previous > > > > versions, and I've tried a few, were another > > story. I've had to delete > > > > the .netscape directories many times. My 7.0 > > install has been up less > > > > than a week, but has had heavy netscape usage so > > I pray this lasts! > > > > And I guess the fake wood I knocked on didn't work, > > 'cause it crashed > > twice since. > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. > http://im.yahoo.com -- My new linux web server with Apache http://kittypuss.penguinpowered.com
Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 02:34:48PM -0900, Civileme wrote: -> Well, I am an aficianado of this wholesome hobby after an experience today. -> -> A user comes to me and says, "StarOffice won't SAVE! What am I supposed to do?" -> -> Well, her system is on an older computer and there wasn't a great deal of -> storage available, and it has one of the WD disks I am rotating out at first -> opportunity. I wondered if she had managed to clutter her home directory -> enough to make something terrible happen. Nice diagnosis. Solution: in Netscape, go to "Edit->Preferences->Advanced->Cache" and 1) discard both of the user's caches, and 2) set reasonable limits. I conjecture that Netscape does not have a mechanism to discard ancient cached pages short of the cache approaching its limits. A simple script based on find run as a cron job should do that. See "Unix Power Tools", O'Reilly, 1st ed. sec. 24.19 for an example. -- -- C^2 No windows were crashed in the making of this email. Looking for fine software and/or web pages? http://w3.trib.com/~ccurley
Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
On Sat, Mar 18, 2000 at 08:45 -0500, John Aldrich wrote: > > Damn! You guys are right! I was at like 90%+ usage on / (where /home > is located) and going into .netscape and doing an "rm -rf cache" > dropped me back down to about 77% usage! Sheesh! That SUCKS! I know > Netscape will recreate the cache directory and such, so I guess I'm > going to have to keep an eye on it! > Thanks for bringing that cache problem to our attention, Civilme!! > John Hmm, that's been common behaviour of Netscape, not only in Linux but also in Windows. Same goes for MSIE. They both are doing that since I know them (which is not very long, though). I remember being told to do a erasing of .netscape (under Linux) and it's equivalence under Windows on a regular basis. Read it in a tricks section in a comp mag about 2 years ago. wobo -- GPG-Fingerprint: FE5A 0891 7027 8D1B 4E3F 73C1 AD9B D732 A698 82EE For Public Key mailto [EMAIL PROTECTED] with Subject: GPG-Request --- ISDN4LINUX-FAQ -- Deutsch: http://www.wolf-b.de/i4l/i4lfaq-de.html
Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
Hi all, I am running Mandrake 7.0 and Netscape 4.08 on a Pentium 200MMX with 96MB ram with a 133MB Swap. I have yet to see any problems with any aspect of the system. Just thought I would add my two cents. --- Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Vic wrote: > > > > I'm running a AMDK6-3 400 with 64M sysram and > > 90Mb swap, I noticed that unless I stick with > > netscape version 4.08, all the ones later > > will start eating up my swap until X crashes. > > > > Is this a memory leak? > > yup, another thing to love about NutScrape. I try > to keep an eye on > memory usage, dont think I ever let it take that > much. > > Here's something to try: startup x without much > else running, then load > up netscape, note you memory usage and leave it on > overnight. See what > you have the next day (provided its still running). > Then wonder why 1 > navigator window requires 30 mb - something I could > never understand. > > > > On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Jeremy mewed: > > > > Suprising thing is that I have not had any > problems with stock mandrake > > > 7.0's netscape 4.7 YET. *looks for some wood to > knock on* Previous > > > versions, and I've tried a few, were another > story. I've had to delete > > > the .netscape directories many times. My 7.0 > install has been up less > > > than a week, but has had heavy netscape usage so > I pray this lasts! > > And I guess the fake wood I knocked on didn't work, > 'cause it crashed > twice since. > __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, you wrote: > By the most amazing coincidence, I ran into very much that problem > just yesterday--Netscape cache beynd the size I requested. More that > that, going into Netscape and tell it to clear the cache . . . didn't > clean up the #@$! thing, either! > Damn! You guys are right! I was at like 90%+ usage on / (where /home is located) and going into .netscape and doing an "rm -rf cache" dropped me back down to about 77% usage! Sheesh! That SUCKS! I know Netscape will recreate the cache directory and such, so I guess I'm going to have to keep an eye on it! Thanks for bringing that cache problem to our attention, Civilme!! John
Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
By the most amazing coincidence, I ran into very much that problem just yesterday--Netscape cache beynd the size I requested. More that that, going into Netscape and tell it to clear the cache . . . didn't clean up the #@$! thing, either! Also, I *can* recommend the "xdu" program for when file systems are full. It makes it *much* easier to home in on the culprit when this sort of thing happens. [Alas, it doesn't seem to be available as a Mandrake package quite yet. I'll look into taking my first foray into the exciting world of creating Mandrake packages though for this wonderful little utitlity that, IMHO, no Unix adminstrator (or user) should be without.] On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, you wrote: | Well, I am an aficianado of this wholesome hobby after an experience today. | | A user comes to me and says, "StarOffice won't SAVE! What am I supposed to do?" | | Well, her system is on an older computer and there wasn't a great deal of | storage available, and it has one of the WD disks I am rotating out at first | opportunity. I wondered if she had managed to clutter her home directory | enough to make something terrible happen. | | Kdiskfree reported in its best full-screen graphic manner that /home was indeed | a long RED bar, without space to create a folder except of course for the | obligatory reserved blocks. | | I symlinked a chunk of space out of /usr/local for the user and asked her to | move or delete files she could do without. | | She managed to decrease usage from 99 Mb down to 96 Mb in this manner. | | Then I looked in a graphic manner and found no large files--none either on a | search except a copy of AIR's iso sitting on ~/Desktop/remotepublic (my | server), nothing in fact over 1 Mb. | | Growling low, I opened Konsole, su'ed, and | | ls -a -l -R -H ~ | grep ./ -A 1 | lpr | | Thank goodness I didn't try to print filenames. There were more than 9000 | | I paged through the nine sheets of printout and found | | ./carmen/.netscape/cache | ttotal 288k | >-- #; the offset (>) is mine so I don't get a nasty note from a | #pine user whose client saw all these lines as signature | #and didn't display them. |# so far, so good Netscape Cache is limited to 5000 Kb | # in preferences on her user space. | ./carmen/.netscape/cache/00 | ttotal 2.6M # HUH? | >-- | ./carmen/.netscape/cache/01 | ttotal 837k | >-- | ./carmen/.netscape/cache/02 | ttotal 3.3M | >-- | ./carmen/.netscape/cache/03 | ttotal 3.4M | >-- | * | * # using * for ellipsis for visibility | * | ./carmen/.netscape/cache/1F | ttotal 2.6M | >-- | | All right, technically Netscape didn't violate instructions. 288 in the cache, | and 32 subdirectories of the cache with 7711 files and a combined total of 84 | Mb, none individually over 3.8M. | | I am stll marveling over this. This is like when 7.0 is a bit slow and I run | top and find lib.ld. consuming a chunk of memory and 84% CPU and none of | its child netscapes even a process in the system... An event which seems to be | on a weekly frequency. So I kill it and the system is fine and netscape starts | up well the next time. | | But this interesting Netscape dodge is a new one on me. To cure it, I went to | the file manager, saved ~/.netscape/archive for later analysis and then deleted | ~/.netscape (which is automatically recursive without asking in kfm). | | Now the user is back to about 11% usage in the home directory, and I will be | looking in with Webmin from time to time, hoping I can get some insight into | how that happened. | | Anyone else have a similar experience? | | Civileme -- I am "Brian, the man from babble-on" (Brian T. Schellenberger). I can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I support http://www.eff.org & http://www.programming-freedom.org . I boycott amazon.com. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/amazon.html .
Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
Vic wrote: > > I'm running a AMDK6-3 400 with 64M sysram and > 90Mb swap, I noticed that unless I stick with > netscape version 4.08, all the ones later > will start eating up my swap until X crashes. > > Is this a memory leak? yup, another thing to love about NutScrape. I try to keep an eye on memory usage, dont think I ever let it take that much. Here's something to try: startup x without much else running, then load up netscape, note you memory usage and leave it on overnight. See what you have the next day (provided its still running). Then wonder why 1 navigator window requires 30 mb - something I could never understand. > On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Jeremy mewed: > > Suprising thing is that I have not had any problems with stock mandrake > > 7.0's netscape 4.7 YET. *looks for some wood to knock on* Previous > > versions, and I've tried a few, were another story. I've had to delete > > the .netscape directories many times. My 7.0 install has been up less > > than a week, but has had heavy netscape usage so I pray this lasts! And I guess the fake wood I knocked on didn't work, 'cause it crashed twice since.
Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
I'm running a AMDK6-3 400 with 64M sysram and 90Mb swap, I noticed that unless I stick with netscape version 4.08, all the ones later will start eating up my swap until X crashes. Is this a memory leak? On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Jeremy mewed: > Sheldon Lee Wen wrote: > > > Go figure. Crappy product. Can't wait for KDE2's Konquorer or > > maybe Mozilla under Linux will shape up. > > Yes, we are all at the edge of seats for these and the edge of our > patience with Netscape. > > Suprising thing is that I have not had any problems with stock mandrake > 7.0's netscape 4.7 YET. *looks for some wood to knock on* Previous > versions, and I've tried a few, were another story. I've had to delete > the .netscape directories many times. My 7.0 install has been up less > than a week, but has had heavy netscape usage so I pray this lasts! > > If Opera ever gets out of that pre-pre-pre-alpha usability stage they've > been in forever they might be another contendor. One thing they have > that deserves a mondo cool award is little widgets at the bottom of the > window that can do things like zoom and toggle pictures for that window > only. (why do somee web designers think everyone runs at 640x480 and > specify tiny font sizes? That sucks at 1600x1200) -- My new linux web server with Apache http://kittypuss.penguinpowered.com
Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
Sheldon Lee Wen wrote: > Go figure. Crappy product. Can't wait for KDE2's Konquorer or > maybe Mozilla under Linux will shape up. Yes, we are all at the edge of seats for these and the edge of our patience with Netscape. Suprising thing is that I have not had any problems with stock mandrake 7.0's netscape 4.7 YET. *looks for some wood to knock on* Previous versions, and I've tried a few, were another story. I've had to delete the .netscape directories many times. My 7.0 install has been up less than a week, but has had heavy netscape usage so I pray this lasts! If Opera ever gets out of that pre-pre-pre-alpha usability stage they've been in forever they might be another contendor. One thing they have that deserves a mondo cool award is little widgets at the bottom of the window that can do things like zoom and toggle pictures for that window only. (why do somee web designers think everyone runs at 640x480 and specify tiny font sizes? That sucks at 1600x1200)
Re: [expert] Netscape bashing
Civileme > A user comes to me and says, "StarOffice won't SAVE! What am I supposed to do?" [snip] > Anyone else have a similar experience? Well, yes, but on HP-UX Netscape would do that occasionally. On a different netscape rant I have had a myrid of problems with netscape and StarOffice working together. Occasionally it won't even start. Someone (my wife, kids, brother, mother, etc) on my box will click on star office and nothing will happen. If you run it from the commandline it returns right away, no errors. OR, it'll load but as soon as you try to open a file or open star writer it'll segfault. The solution? Remove the users .netscape directory. I don't know why but this seems to fix it every time. Go figure. Crappy product. Can't wait for KDE2's Konquorer or maybe Mozilla under Linux will shape up. Sheldon. -- == "Definitions involving chicken heads no longer apply." -Jon katz ==
[expert] Netscape bashing
Well, I am an aficianado of this wholesome hobby after an experience today. A user comes to me and says, "StarOffice won't SAVE! What am I supposed to do?" Well, her system is on an older computer and there wasn't a great deal of storage available, and it has one of the WD disks I am rotating out at first opportunity. I wondered if she had managed to clutter her home directory enough to make something terrible happen. Kdiskfree reported in its best full-screen graphic manner that /home was indeed a long RED bar, without space to create a folder except of course for the obligatory reserved blocks. I symlinked a chunk of space out of /usr/local for the user and asked her to move or delete files she could do without. She managed to decrease usage from 99 Mb down to 96 Mb in this manner. Then I looked in a graphic manner and found no large files--none either on a search except a copy of AIR's iso sitting on ~/Desktop/remotepublic (my server), nothing in fact over 1 Mb. Growling low, I opened Konsole, su'ed, and ls -a -l -R -H ~ | grep ./ -A 1 | lpr Thank goodness I didn't try to print filenames. There were more than 9000 I paged through the nine sheets of printout and found ./carmen/.netscape/cache total 288k >-- #; the offset (>) is mine so I don't get a nasty note from a #pine user whose client saw all these lines as signature #and didn't display them. # so far, so good Netscape Cache is limited to 5000 Kb # in preferences on her user space. ./carmen/.netscape/cache/00 total 2.6M # HUH? >-- ./carmen/.netscape/cache/01 total 837k >-- ./carmen/.netscape/cache/02 total 3.3M >-- ./carmen/.netscape/cache/03 total 3.4M >-- * * # using * for ellipsis for visibility * ./carmen/.netscape/cache/1F total 2.6M >-- All right, technically Netscape didn't violate instructions. 288 in the cache, and 32 subdirectories of the cache with 7711 files and a combined total of 84 Mb, none individually over 3.8M. I am stll marveling over this. This is like when 7.0 is a bit slow and I run top and find lib.ld. consuming a chunk of memory and 84% CPU and none of its child netscapes even a process in the system... An event which seems to be on a weekly frequency. So I kill it and the system is fine and netscape starts up well the next time. But this interesting Netscape dodge is a new one on me. To cure it, I went to the file manager, saved ~/.netscape/archive for later analysis and then deleted ~/.netscape (which is automatically recursive without asking in kfm). Now the user is back to about 11% usage in the home directory, and I will be looking in with Webmin from time to time, hoping I can get some insight into how that happened. Anyone else have a similar experience? Civileme
