Re: Fail 2890 json
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 22:56:41 +0100, Gerald Dodson wrote: Has any one else had this version fail? It is distinctly likely that current CI builds will cause issues. We're undergoing a *huge* JS transition and forcing JS on while we do it. If you encounter issues, turn JS off after loading your browser (note it will turn on again next time the browser loads). Once the JS situation has calmed a little, we'll allow it to be Choices-controlled again. Remember, the CI builds are not guaranteed stable by any means, and as such things like this will happen. We've already found what we believe to be a bug in UNIXLib and we are investingating it -- it can cause the browser to segfault and thus vanish without apparent error. Sadly I can't give you an ETA on this, though I hope we'll be fairly close to our goal by the end of next week. Some of us (myself and Vince included) have been spending a huge amount of our time on this, we're not leaving you in the lurch; and John-Mark has been instrumental in helping track down the UNIXLib issue. D. -- Daniel Silverstone http://www.netsurf-browser.org/ PGP mail accepted and encouraged.Key Id: 3CCE BABE 206C 3B69
Re: Fail 2890 json
On 14 Aug 2015 Daniel Silverstone dsilv...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 22:56:41 +0100, Gerald Dodson wrote: Has any one else had this version fail? It is distinctly likely that current CI builds will cause issues. We're undergoing a *huge* JS transition and forcing JS on while we do it. If you encounter issues, turn JS off after loading your browser (note it will turn on again next time the browser loads). Once the JS situation has calmed a little, we'll allow it to be Choices-controlled again. Remember, the CI builds are not guaranteed stable by any means, and as such things like this will happen. We've already found what we believe to be a bug in UNIXLib and we are investingating it -- it can cause the browser to segfault and thus vanish without apparent error. Sadly I can't give you an ETA on this, though I hope we'll be fairly close to our goal by the end of next week. Some of us (myself and Vince included) have been spending a huge amount of our time on this, we're not leaving you in the lurch; and John-Mark has been instrumental in helping track down the UNIXLib issue. Many thanks, and all your work is much appreciated. Is this possibly an explanation of why, for me, the latest test builds load and then vanish within less than a second? I've reported this on the bug tracker. Best wishes, Peter. -- Peter Young (zfc Os) and family Prestbury, Cheltenham, Glos. GL52, England http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk pnyo...@ormail.co.uk
Re: Fail 2890 json
Daniel Silverstone, on 14 Aug, wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 22:56:41 +0100, Gerald Dodson wrote: Has any one else had this version fail? It is distinctly likely that current CI builds will cause issues. We're undergoing a *huge* JS transition and forcing JS on while we do it. If you encounter issues, turn JS off after loading your browser (note it will turn on again next time the browser loads). Is this a RISC OS thing? I have just built nsgtk and that looks OK (briefly tested caveat etc..) with JavaScript enabled. -- David Pitt
Re: Fail 2890 json
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 09:56:23 +0100, David Pitt wrote: I should have been clearer, I meant JavaScript itself is working, sites that crash on RISC OS didn't crash on Ubuntu. As Rob said -- RISC OS' UNIXLib is suffering a little right now. The JS engine uses setjmp()/longjmp() to do exception management and I think this is possibly the hardest those routines have been exercised on RISC OS in quite some time. D. -- Daniel Silverstone http://www.netsurf-browser.org/ PGP mail accepted and encouraged.Key Id: 3CCE BABE 206C 3B69
Re: Fail 2890 json
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 09:31:36AM +0100, David Pitt wrote: Daniel Silverstone, on 14 Aug, wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 22:56:41 +0100, Gerald Dodson wrote: Has any one else had this version fail? It is distinctly likely that current CI builds will cause issues. We're undergoing a *huge* JS transition and forcing JS on while we do it. If you encounter issues, turn JS off after loading your browser (note it will turn on again next time the browser loads). Is this a RISC OS thing? I have just built nsgtk and that looks OK (briefly tested caveat etc..) with JavaScript enabled. One of the issues we are currently trying to track down appears to be a bug in UnixLib, the library that provides a POSIX API for RISC OS. Your real UNIX system's C library probably doesn't have the same bug so the issue would not present. B.
Re: Fail 2890 json
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 09:31:36 +0100, David Pitt wrote: Daniel Silverstone, on 14 Aug, wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 22:56:41 +0100, Gerald Dodson wrote: Has any one else had this version fail? It is distinctly likely that current CI builds will cause issues. We're undergoing a *huge* JS transition and forcing JS on while we do it. If you encounter issues, turn JS off after loading your browser (note it will turn on again next time the browser loads). Is this a RISC OS thing? I have just built nsgtk and that looks OK (briefly tested caveat etc..) with JavaScript enabled. The auto-turn-on will happen on every platform. The JS initialisation code forces the option. D. -- Daniel Silverstone http://www.netsurf-browser.org/ PGP mail accepted and encouraged.Key Id: 3CCE BABE 206C 3B69
Re: Fail 2890 json
Daniel Silverstone, on 14 Aug, wrote: On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 09:31:36 +0100, David Pitt wrote: Daniel Silverstone, on 14 Aug, wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 22:56:41 +0100, Gerald Dodson wrote: Has any one else had this version fail? It is distinctly likely that current CI builds will cause issues. We're undergoing a *huge* JS transition and forcing JS on while we do it. If you encounter issues, turn JS off after loading your browser (note it will turn on again next time the browser loads). Is this a RISC OS thing? I have just built nsgtk and that looks OK (briefly tested caveat etc..) with JavaScript enabled. The auto-turn-on will happen on every platform. The JS initialisation code forces the option. I should have been clearer, I meant JavaScript itself is working, sites that crash on RISC OS didn't crash on Ubuntu. -- David Pitt
Re: Fail 2890 json
Gerald Dodson, on 13 Aug, wrote: Has any one else had this version fail? Try #2911 or later. -- David Pitt
Re: Fail 2890 json
In article 20150814072335.GB10674@somnambulist.local, Daniel Silverstone dsilv...@netsurf-browser.org wrote: t is distinctly likely that current CI builds will cause issues. We're undergoing a *huge* JS transition and forcing JS on while we do it. If you encounter issues, turn JS off after loading your browser (note it will turn on again next time the browser loads). This is extremely welcome news! Is surely is no small undertaking and I wish you all the best of luck with it! -- Richard Torrens. http://www.Torrens.org.uk for genealogy, natural history, wild food, walks, cats and more!
