Re: Mozilla Becomes Very Very Slow while display Website
try renaming the panacea.dat file in your profile directory. Yeh You-Ying wrote: > Hello, > > Recently I got problems while visit websites with Mozilla(0.9.7 & > 0.9.8+). > Mozilla became very very slow while displaying, even looked like > stop... > I reinstalled my OS(win98SE) and reinstalled Mozilla 0.9.7, the > situation > is still the same. I do not modify any setting, just use default after > installation. Same website using IE5.x is normal and fast. It's really > frustraition. > > Here are the websites I visited. > http://tw.yahoo.com > http://www.yam.com > > Thanks. >
Anti Virus
I want to know if Mozilla works with AVG antivirus or not. If not will it be. thanks, -- Rob Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mozilla Becomes Very Very Slow while display Website
Hello, Recently I got problems while visit websites with Mozilla(0.9.7 & 0.9.8+). Mozilla became very very slow while displaying, even looked like stop... I reinstalled my OS(win98SE) and reinstalled Mozilla 0.9.7, the situation is still the same. I do not modify any setting, just use default after installation. Same website using IE5.x is normal and fast. It's really frustraition. Here are the websites I visited. http://tw.yahoo.com http://www.yam.com Thanks.
Re: mozilla not accepting SMPT?
seedey wrote: > > I use Mozilla 0.9.8, I tried to enter a SMTP address of Yahoo which is > smtp.mail.yahoo.com, but it rejects it right away. > > Any suggestions? Yes, use someone else for mail !
Re: Mozilla problem
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says... > alpha wrote: > > Can anyone please tell me why PSM will not record the passowrd for some > > sites, one of them is: > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/ > > http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93776 Thx. I thought the was the software that did control the PSM and not the site.
mozilla not accepting SMPT?
I use Mozilla 0.9.8, I tried to enter a SMTP address of Yahoo which is smtp.mail.yahoo.com, but it rejects it right away. Any suggestions?
Re: Bugzilla and search engines
Stuart Ballard wrote:
> Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
>
>>So I propose to change robots.txt to only disallow entries which causes
>>searchs in bugzilla, and allow http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi
>>at least.
>>
>
> I'm not sure that would work: many (most?) search engines disallow
> searching anything with a ? in the URL.
Google does not. Try
http://www.google.com/search?hl=de&q=site%3Amystcommunity.com+Chucker&lr=
for instance (that's my board, sorry about the spam, just an example).
> The only way to make this
> workable would be to use mod_rewrite in the server and allow URLs like
> http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/bugs/103097.html to view a bug.
Well the proposal was about Google, and Google seems to do the job fine.
> [snip]
--
Regards,
Sören Kuklau ('Chucker')
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The best adult matchmaking - it's proven to work!
Title: Find a Partner For Sex With the two best adult matchmaking sites in the world, you can get laid every night of the week! At FantasyMatch.com, you don't have to work hard to fuck. Just enter and you're ready to score! At BestMatch.com, over 300,000 amateur women are waiting for you. WANNA FUCK TONIGHT? USE BOTH FANTASYMATCH AND BESTMATCH FOR THE RIDE OF YOUR LIFE!!! FantasyMatch.com is the LARGEST private sex club on the net! FantasyMatch.com has thousands of beautiful, horny women who have made sex their #1 priority! Use detailed search functions to find your ideal SEX PARTNER, View photos of the hottest women on the site to see who turns you on, Learn women's intimate secrets that they have shared with NO ONE ELSE, Post your profile, self-description, and photo and watch the women come running! Send unlimited, anonymous messages through our secure system and get it on! Married Women, College Students, Party Girls, Secretaries, Girl Next Door, Nurses, and more with only ONE THING ON THEIR MINDS... DATING AND HOOKING UP WITH YOU!!! They want a REAL MAN LIKE YOU and they want to make your dreams come true! Check out their PHOTOS, learn their INTIMATE SECRETS, read their PROFILES, and CONTACT them so you can make a date and HOOK UP TONIGHT! These women are 100% REAL and 100% READY for you to date. Find yourself a REAL WOMAN tonight and make your wildest fantasies come true. "I hooked up with a guy I met at BestMatch two weeks ago, and we've gone out three times since then. It's so easy to meet amazing people who want the same things I do. I was so sick of the "romance game" - I just wanted a place to go to find someone HOT and BestMatch is totally the place!" Lainie T., 26 yrs. old, Fort Myers, FL "My buddies all want to know where I find all the hot girls I've been out with, lately. I hook up a few times a week with different girls I meet at BestMatch and I am having the time of my life! I never knew it could be so easy to meet women." Judd A., 29 yrs. old, New Hope, PA BestMatch.com The wildest site for finding REAL people for dates, relationships and more! NOTE: This is not SPAM! This email was sent to you because your email was entered on a website requesting to be a registered subscriber. If you did not request this email, click here to unsubscribe
Re: Bugzilla and search engines
>>So I propose to change robots.txt to only disallow entries which causes >>searchs in bugzilla, and allow http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi >>at least. > I'm not sure that would work: many (most?) search engines disallow > searching anything with a ? in the URL. The only way to make this > workable would be to use mod_rewrite in the server and allow URLs like > http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/bugs/103097.html to view a bug. > > (In order to make it usefully indexable, you'd also have to have an > autogenerated page containing 13 links, one to each bug. Otherwise > your carefully crafted URLs would never get hit in the first place. > Fortunately that page, while humungous, wouldn't take too much CPU to > generate). Google doesn't care about '?' in URLs. Squid is who does. Just removing the robots.txt limitation would be anough, as bugs URLs are anywhere in the net and the bug themselves point to other bugs. > PS The mod_rewrite rule could look something like this: > > RewriteEngine On > RewriteRule ^/bugs/(.*)\.html$ /show_bug.cgi?id=$1 > > I may have the syntax slightly wrong, but it's something like that. On the ather hand, having this showtut to access bugs by number will be nice and it will provide a permanent URL for a bug. URLs that doesn't depend on the technology which is being used in the server.
Re: Bugzilla and search engines
Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote: > > So I propose to change robots.txt to only disallow entries which causes > searchs in bugzilla, and allow http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi > at least. I'm not sure that would work: many (most?) search engines disallow searching anything with a ? in the URL. The only way to make this workable would be to use mod_rewrite in the server and allow URLs like http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/bugs/103097.html to view a bug. (In order to make it usefully indexable, you'd also have to have an autogenerated page containing 13 links, one to each bug. Otherwise your carefully crafted URLs would never get hit in the first place. Fortunately that page, while humungous, wouldn't take too much CPU to generate). Stuart. PS The mod_rewrite rule could look something like this: RewriteEngine On RewriteRule ^/bugs/(.*)\.html$ /show_bug.cgi?id=$1 I may have the syntax slightly wrong, but it's something like that. -- Stuart Ballard, Programmer FASTNET - Internet Solutions 215.283.2300, ext. 126 www.fast.net
Bugzilla and search engines
Currently bugzilla.mozilla.org disallow indexing by search engines. The robots.txt file has: User-agent: * Allow: /index.html Disallow: / Having the bug pages indexed by Google is of course a good thing: * Google could be used to search if a bug has already been reported, and it will probably make a better job than the current search system. * If someone searchs about a company Google will probably shown an evangelism bug reported to his website. * If someone is searching about a web feature (e.g. border-collapese) Google will be able to display Mozilla's bug about that. So I propose to change robots.txt to only disallow entries which causes searchs in bugzilla, and allow http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi at least. Thoughts?
Re: Passwords
Raj Bhaskar wrote: >> Help. I managed to arrange (inadvertantly) it so that Mozilla 9.8 no >> longer wants to use the original "somenumber.s" file for remembering >> passwords (also form data but this is easier to redo). It created a >> new file. I have the old file and would like to use the data in it. >> How do I go about tranferring the info? > > > Assuming that the original file wasn't protected by a master password > (or that the two passwords were the same) then you should be able to > just rename the old .s file to the same name as the new one > and then restart Mozilla. see bug 113581 for more details -- > http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=113581 > Raj, Thanks for the response. I tried your suuggestion and could not make it work; probably I messed it up. What did work however was letting Mozilla create a new password file and than using notepad copying and pasting. Howie -- Howard M. Stark 337 Mildahn Road Macedon, NY 14502-9130 Phone: 585.388.7856 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LatinMOZ has a new Look
although it does not work %100 in nightly builds, orbit3 gives a much better approach to the modern theme. at last there is colors in mozilla modern. definitely worth trying. Peter Lairo wrote: > Lancer wrote: > >><-- sorry dude, but this was more interesting. ;) > > > > Hey, there's a new ORBIT theme linked there. That is a very nice and > bright looking theme. Here is the direct link: > > http://www.ninelineman.com/orbit3/ >
mozilla 1.0 development cycle
As we advance towards the Mozilla 1.0 development cycle we must plan carefully to ensure we meet the objectives defined by the "manifesto" (http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap/mozilla-1.0.html). Among these objectives stability is of paramount importance. To best ensure the trunk remains as stable as possible throughout the Mozilla 1.0 development cycle, two practices will be employed: driver approval for all checkins, and managed landings for high-impact and high-risk patches. The policy for driver-approved checkins is described in the updated Mozilla Roadmap (http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html). To summarize, the trunk will be open throughout the development cycle but a=drivers will be required for all patches, regardless of size or complexity. Drivers require that high-impact or high-risk patches be managed using the Patch Landing Tool (PLT; formerly the Branch Landing Tool). The PLT is an easy-to-use web-based tool for managing the landing of high-risk or high-impact changes onto the tree. Instructions for PLT are available at http://komodo.mozilla.org/planning/mozilla-patch-landing-tool.html. If you think your change is high-risk or high-impact then in all likelihood, drivers will as well. The following historical cases provide a benchmark for changes that need to be managed: * medium to large new features (e.g. adding a new application, LDAP support) * infrastructural (e.g. printing support, font management, image library, NSPR, libpr0n) * UI widgets (e.g. folder outliner, editor component) * APIs (e.g. change to XUL tags, XPCOM interface) * affecting a broad cross-section of code (e.g. skins, relicensing) These example show the value of the PLT after the 1.0 release, as we take more aggressive changes in 1.1. Some other recent changes that would have benefited from patch landing management include: * turning on MathML in the default extensions * client tag revisions for NSS updates * link toolbar led to a 5% page load regression If you're planning any significant landings during the mozilla 1.0 development cycle, please make use of the PLT to communicate your changes well in advance of landing them. Drivers and reviewers may require you to use use the PLT if they determine that your patch is of high risk as tolerance for regressions is considerably low in this end-game. If you have any questions about code contributions or any specific landings for mozilla 1.0 please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks for your support! Peter Bojanic and Brendan Eich per [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Passwords
> Help. I managed to arrange (inadvertantly) it so that Mozilla 9.8 no > longer wants to use the original "somenumber.s" file for remembering > passwords (also form data but this is easier to redo). It created a new > file. I have the old file and would like to use the data in it. How do I > go about tranferring the info? Assuming that the original file wasn't protected by a master password (or that the two passwords were the same) then you should be able to just rename the old .s file to the same name as the new one and then restart Mozilla. see bug 113581 for more details -- http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=113581 -- Rajnish Bhaskar, IT Education Unit University of Glasgow remove NOSPAMMATE from email address to reply
Re: Can't add people to address book
* Dman84 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > this is a known problem, there are several bugs about no caret in the > fields, and fields dont get focus, for more than just the > addressbook.. account wizard is affected, and probably more stuff in > composer. Thanks for the information. Is there any workaround for the adress book? -Philipp -- Fachbegriffe der Informatik - einfach erklärt: #261: Imperative Programmierung Die meisten Menschen sind nunmal aber daran gewöhnt, einen Vorgang in einzelne Anweisungen aufzuteilen (Geh in Kueche, Öffne Kühlschrank, Nimm Pizza, ...) (Daniel Fischer)
Re: Right-click to validate?
> Somehow I doubt this is the reason. In Feb 18 builds I am also seeing a > wierd bug whereby I can't press the down arrow key in the autocomplete > dropdown box. This was caused by the fix to bug 115686 and was fixed in the next nightly (see that bug for details). Raj.
Re: LatinMOZ has a new Look
Lancer wrote: ><-- sorry dude, but this was more interesting. ;) Hey, there's a new ORBIT theme linked there. That is a very nice and bright looking theme. Here is the direct link: http://www.ninelineman.com/orbit3/ -- Regards, Peter Lairo
Re: Can't add people to address book
Philipp v.Thunen wrote: > Hi, > > I cannot add new entries to the address book: If I click on 'New card', > the dialog appears, but I cannot write something into the fields. > Build# is 2002022103 (just downloaded), I have this problem since > 20020217, but I cannot find this problem in bugzilla. > Do you have an useful hint? :-) > > -Philipp > > this is a known problem, there are several bugs about no caret in the fields, and fields dont get focus, for more than just the addressbook.. account wizard is affected, and probably more stuff in composer. -dman84
Re: latest build bookmarsk scroll bug when?
nospam@nospam wrote: > Does anyone know when bookmark scrolling bug will be fixed? > > It's propably easy for mozilla developers and for me it stops me testing > latest builds > > Best Reagrds > adolf > keep an eye on this bug: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=124485.. this is the bug that should fix the underlining problem. -dman84
