I see a whole hell of a lot of posts here about mozilla being
unpredictable. Is it just the unpredictable nature of mozilla that
*my* builds are very predictable? Jeez, i've used ie6 on my
colleague's computer, and it is annoying compared to mozilla.
-HC
JTK wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN_LaG says...
> >
> >jesus X wrote:
> >
> >> Marc Leger wrote:
> >>
> >>>You're telling me Microsoft is going from 86% to 20%. That's a decrease of
> >>>66%.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Umm, there was a time when Netscape had 90+ percent of the market, and
DeMoN_LaG wrote:
> fire-eyes wrote:
>
>> DeMoN_LaG wrote:
>>
>>> JTK wrote:
>>>
I and everyone else on the planet despise software which requires
rebooting after install. Especially if doing so is only so that said
software can load (or rather, "preload") a bunch of crap into mem
Hi,
when I open Mozilla 0.9 the Skin looks very wrong and some menus are not
displayed. Can it be that that is because of the German windows? Look at
the Screenshot(23,8 KByte) in the attachment.
Thanks
Frank
Hello,
Does automatic proxy configuration through a file work now in Mozilla? I
heard that this was fixed sometimes ago but at least in our firm Mozilla
won't run with the proxy (I can set the proxy manually)
Any info on this or does somebody know in which group I could ask?
Thank you very muc
Frank Wein wrote:
> when I open Mozilla 0.9 the Skin looks very wrong and some menus are not
> displayed. Can it be that that is because of the German windows? Look at
> the Screenshot(23,8 KByte) in the attachment.
This effect happens most of the times when an existing 4.xx profile had
been
JTK wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN_LaG says...
>
>>jesus X wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Marc Leger wrote:
>>>
>>>
You're telling me Microsoft is going from 86% to 20%. That's a decrease of
66%.
>>>Umm, there was a time when Netscape had 90+ percent of the market, and MS was
Hy!
I'm having problems installing mozilla. After installing the gdk/gtk
libraries there is still an error message after loading the execute file
"mozilla":
nsNativeComponentLoader:
GetFactory(/export/software/sources/mozilla/mozilla/components/libwidget_gtk.so)
Load FAILED with error: ld.so.1:
Garth Wallace wrote:
> Holger Metzger wrote:
>
>> On 6/3/01 8:53 PM, Marcin Nosarzewski wrote:
>>
>>> I've just installed Mozilla 0.9 on my Win98 and I think it's great.
>>> But there's a little thing that makes me mad, a really small thing.
>>> It's a sound when new message arrives. In NN 4.7
Tim Wunder wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN_LaG says...
> >
> >>jesus X wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Marc Leger wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> You're telling me Microsoft is going from 86% to 20%. That's a decrease of
> 66%.
>
>
> >>>Umm, there was a time when
JTK wrote:
> >He's just saying it's impossible for that to reverse.
> Yeah, um, no, he's saying that it's impossible for Mozilla or the Politburo at
> Netscape "Open"HQ to play any part in such a hypothetical reversal.
Yeah, um, it's still just as stupid and wrong. No one knows where the future
w
Marc Leger wrote:
>
> > Umm, there was a time when Netscape had 90+ percent of the market, and MS
> > was nowhere to be found. Pinhead.
> And look at Netscape/Mozilla's market share now, numbnuts.
You till don't get it do you? Current marketshare does NOT mean that you can't
be rendered nearly i
JTK wrote:
> > However, IE leads the way in bringing my whole
> >system down in the field of about 6 to 0. Mozilla has never killed my
> >OS. IE 6 has. IE 5.5 has. IE 5.0 has. I don't consider that
> >acceptable for my web browser
>
> I don't consider that either a) truthful or b) acceptabl
JTK wrote:
> > BZT! Wrong answer. It's to keep them on the Windows XP desktop.
> Oh yeah, right right. Has nothing to do with the fact that Maozilla is
> an insane, slow memory hog.
No, they are totally unrelated. AOL doesn't use ALL of Mozilla in it's clients,
just the rendering engine, Gec
fire-eyes wrote:
> Way to support people who are curious enough to find out how to get it
> and then use it.
JTK is not interested in actually using it, nor in it succeeding. JTK has been
hanging around for a long time trying to get everyone to walk away from it. I've
asked him why, and the best
Slug wrote:
> Garth Wallace wrote:
>
>> Holger Metzger wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/3/01 8:53 PM, Marcin Nosarzewski wrote:
>>>
I've just installed Mozilla 0.9 on my Win98 and I think it's great.
But there's a little thing that makes me mad, a really small thing.
It's a sound when new mes
Chuck Simmons wrote:
> Tim Wunder wrote:
>
>>JTK wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN_LaG says...
>>>
>>>
jesus X wrote:
>Marc Leger wrote:
>
>
>
>>You're telling me Microsoft is going from 86% to 20%. That's a decrease of
>>66%.
>
Hello,
I'd like to use stylesheets to position the main body of an article over a
graphic. I've done this here:
http://www.pgs.ca/main_file.php/Prevention/20/
However I've run into a number of problems with this. Although the text doesn't
physically drag across the right side bar, I can
> the tag is cool because it aligns both inline and
> block data.
> I know there is div.centerme {text-align: center} which only
> works on inline data and then there is
> div.centerme { margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto} or
> whatever for block data. Is there a way to do both at once?
>
>
"Jeffrey W. Baker" wrote:
>
> A fix was committed for 83401 into the Mozilla tree. I'm looking at the
> diffs and it looks like this will prevent Mozilla from contacting an HTTP
> server that listens on a well known port other than 80, such as 25 or 389.
> What business is it of Mozilla's that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ashant) wrote in <3b1d9de9.1954913
@news.mozilla.org>:
>I have been using the bookmark management window, and think that it
>would be nice if I could have the preference to change the default
>behaviour of the double-click -- it should open the properties of the
>book mark rath
To be blunt, a problems for whom? Mozilla parsing problems, or for the
server working on the other end of the connection?
Clarence (Andreas M. Schneider) wrote:
> "Jeffrey W. Baker" wrote:
>
>>A fix was committed for 83401 into the Mozilla tree. I'm looking at the
>>diffs and it looks like
jesus X wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
> > >He's just saying it's impossible for that to reverse.
> > Yeah, um, no, he's saying that it's impossible for Mozilla or the Politburo at
> > Netscape "Open"HQ to play any part in such a hypothetical reversal.
>
> Yeah, um, it's still just as stupid and wrong.
DeMoN_LaG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Orrin Edenfield wrote:
>>> When AOL ships the next versions of their product, why would they agree
>>> to use Microsoft IE products as the default product for AOL instead of
>>> imbedding Mozilla? Is it that important to AOL to be on the Windows XP
>>> deskt
Rip Toren wrote:
>
> To be blunt, a problems for whom? Mozilla parsing problems, or for the
> server working on the other end of the connection?
Spammers could use it to send spam with other people's
IP address.
Clarence
Ashant wrote:
>
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:31:48 -0500, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I and everyone else on the planet despise software which requires
> >rebooting after install. Especially if doing so is only so that said
> >software can load (or rather, "preload") a bunch of crap into me
jesus X wrote:
>
> Marc Leger wrote:
> >
> > > Umm, there was a time when Netscape had 90+ percent of the market, and MS
> > > was nowhere to be found. Pinhead.
> > And look at Netscape/Mozilla's market share now, numbnuts.
>
> You till don't get it do you? Current marketshare does NOT mean that
Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
>
> I guess this was already discussed in bug 83401 but how would I know?
> That's another one of those bugs that non-netscape people can't see. This
> project would feel a lot more open with fewer of those. If there is a
> security issue and this patch is saving me from
Frank Wein wrote:
> Hi,
> when I open Mozilla 0.9 the Skin looks very wrong and some menus are not
> displayed. Can it be that that is because of the German windows? Look at
> the Screenshot(23,8 KByte) in the attachment.
It's definitely nothing to do with running a German version of Windows.
OK
I am trying to get a grip on this.
The spammer uses this magic URL in his browser. The browser connects to
'host' at port 25, while expecting to implement an FTP login. The remote
server picks up the 'SMTP commands here' and the envokes sendmail to
send some spam?
Is this possibly a
> Oh, but it is. Thet's common knowledge that when IE crashes it's very easy
for
> it to take down the whole OS, necessitating a reboot. There have been
utilities
> created by users to help work around that, but it's still a necessary
evil.
> That's due to the wonderful "integration".
Whatever du
fire-eyes wrote:
> DeMoN_LaG wrote:
>
>> JTK wrote:
>>
>>> I and everyone else on the planet despise software which requires
>>> rebooting after install. Especially if doing so is only so that said
>>> software can load (or rather, "preload") a bunch of crap into memory
>>> which I don't want t
jesus X wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
> > > However, IE leads the way in bringing my whole
> > >system down in the field of about 6 to 0. Mozilla has never killed my
> > >OS. IE 6 has. IE 5.5 has. IE 5.0 has. I don't consider that
> > >acceptable for my web browser
> >
> > I don't consider that eit
Sorry I don't have any advice, but just wanted to let you know
you're not alone. I'm having the same problem with Mozilla 0.9.
I tried installing it on two machines, both running RH 7.0
with recent updates; it works on one machine but segfaults
on the other. No problems of this sort with Netscap
Marc Leger wrote:
>>Now now, you IE users don't want that. Really, think aboout it: Mozilla
>>/ netscape etc goes away.
>
> I want Microsoft everything. I want to call a .NET webservice and my dog
> brings me the paper.
How much MS stock do you own?
>>No competition for IE. Not really a co
Carlfish wrote:
>
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 05:34:26 GMT, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> somehow managed to type:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN_LaG says...
>
> >>Um, MS released FINISHED browsers that hose systems.
> >
> >Um, which ones?
>
> Internet Explorer 4.0
Don't for get 5.0. Nor
JTK wrote:
> jesus X wrote:
>
>>Did anyone really
>>think that Bill Gates would make goo on his promise of IE being created and
>>maintained for every platform Netscape supported?
>>
>
> Oh, I was pretty sure from the start he'd make goo out of that promise
> ;-).
Making fun of someone for mak
Rip Toren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> don't follow what the browser does to tie the two (it's input and
> sendmail) together.
It connects, sends all the commands need to send an email, quits, and then
gives an error because the browser didn't get what it was expecting.
> Can you go into more d
JTK wrote:
> jesus X wrote:
>
>>JTK wrote:
>>
When AOL ships the next versions of their product, why would they agree to
use Microsoft IE products as the default product for AOL instead of
imbedding Mozilla?
>>>Try a nightly.
>>>
>>BZT! Wrong answer. It's to keep them on the
Hi All,
Are there any existing date/time parsing tools available in mozilla ?
Which librairies could be used for regular expression matching ?
Thanks for your help !
Gael
Rip Toren wrote:
>
> OK
>I am trying to get a grip on this.
>
> The spammer uses this magic URL in his browser. The browser connects to
> 'host' at port 25, while expecting to implement an FTP login. The remote
> server picks up the 'SMTP commands here' and the envokes sendmail to
> send
> I guess this was already discussed in bug 83401 but how would I know?
> That's another one of those bugs that non-netscape people can't see.
This is not necessarily the case; it could be the Security group instead.
The patch had r=gagan. No sr= is listed, but both blizzard and sspitzer
have co
Marc Leger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whatever dude. You must have one helluva sh*tty puter. I have W2K with IE
> 6 beta on my both my laptop and desktop. NEVER, EVER crashes. AND, I have
> .NET beta installed on both. I recommend you buy a W2K For Dummies book.
He didn't specify W2K. W2K
> Try asking [EMAIL PROTECTED] about this,
Done.
Gerv
Ok;
This is getting interesting. Now, the question is whether the browser
is the correct place to work this problem? I can probably get arround
the Mozilla restriction by using a port re-director on the local
machine. Then what do we have?
1) Users puzzled about selective refusals to connect
Marc Leger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I want Microsoft everything. I want to call a .NET webservice and my dog
>brings me the paper.
So, why are you here?
--
Adam Fitzpatrick
Tim Wunder wrote:
> DeMoN_LaG wrote:
>> JTK is a troll that does nothing but complain and bitch, and also on
>> occasion has a tendancy to bend the truth or flat out lie. He always
>> complains and says Mozilla sucks and they should just stop working on
>> it now and give up and let IE win, e
Rip Toren wrote:
>
> It seems to me it has just become more obscure. The real problem seems
> to be the server on port 25 accepting the mail for forwarding. That
> input could come from a perl script, a telnet, or a custom program as
> well as Mozilla. Maybe the connection should be blocked in Te
JTK wrote:
> Ashant wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:31:48 -0500, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I and everyone else on the planet despise software which requires
>>>rebooting after install. Especially if doing so is only so that said
>>>software can load (or rather, "preload") a bunc
Marc Leger wrote:
>>Oh, but it is. Thet's common knowledge that when IE crashes it's very easy
>>
> for
>
>>it to take down the whole OS, necessitating a reboot. There have been
>>
> utilities
>
>>created by users to help work around that, but it's still a necessary
>>
> evil.
>
>>That's due t
Stuart Ballard wrote:
>
> I have to wonder though if there's a better way to solve this bug than
> just block access to port 25. Isn't it sufficient to refuse to connect
> to an ftp URL if CR or LF appear in the username or password (because
> those characters are part of the protocol and no real
JTK wrote:
> jesus X wrote:
>
>>JTK wrote:
>>
However, IE leads the way in bringing my whole
system down in the field of about 6 to 0. Mozilla has never killed my
OS. IE 6 has. IE 5.5 has. IE 5.0 has. I don't consider that
acceptable for my web browser
>>>I don't consi
On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 10:59:06 -0700, gael coudreuse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Are there any existing date/time parsing tools available in mozilla ?
>Which librairies could be used for regular expression matching ?
Javascript has regular expressions built-in.
Matthew Wilson
Rip Toren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems to me it has just become more obscure. The real problem seems
> to be the server on port 25 accepting the mail for forwarding. That
It has to; that's what its there for. However, the difference is it accepting
mail for YOU, and accepting mail for s
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Stuart Ballard"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stuart Ballard wrote:
>>
>> I have to wonder though if there's a better way to solve this bug than
>> just block access to port 25. Isn't it sufficient to refuse to connect
>> to an ftp URL if CR or LF appear in the us
I had the same problem (with nightlies) when I tried to install to any
location other than /usr/local/mozilla. Try installing to the default
directory (/usr/local/mozilla) and see if that helps.
Regards,
Hoarycripple
On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:02:53 +0200, Christian Hunewald
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
"Hoary Cripple" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I see a whole hell of a lot of posts here about mozilla being
> unpredictable. Is it just the unpredictable nature of mozilla that
> *my* builds are very predictable? Jeez, i've used ie6 on my
> co
Rip Toren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ok;
> This is getting interesting. Now, the question is whether the browser
>is the correct place to work this problem?
[snip]
>It seems to me it has just become more obscure. The real problem seems
>to be the server on port 25 accepting the mail for forw
Stuart Ballard wrote:
>
> Rip Toren wrote:
[snip]
> I have to wonder though if there's a better way to solve this bug than
> just block access to port 25. Isn't it sufficient to refuse to connect
> to an ftp URL if CR or LF appear in the username or password (because
> those characters are part
DeMoN_LaG wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
>
> > Ashant wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:31:48 -0500, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I and everyone else on the planet despise software which requires
> >>>rebooting after install. Especially if doing so is only so that said
> >>>software
I am not a Mozilla developer. So, if this is not the proper forum to as
this question, please point me in the right direction.
Problem: I have a URL that requires "Basic" authentication. When the
server responds with a 401 (Auth-required), it also sends a
"Set-Cookie:" in the header. Now, this
When can I use a nightly with bugzilla? My build from Monday says that
it's from May 14th when I try to update a bugzilla bug with it.
How do I fix this, without modifying the user-agent string, which breaks
the java plugin, since it depends on it being mozilla-ish.
--
Remove REMOVE_THIS from
JTK wrote:
> DeMoN_LaG wrote:
>
>>JTK wrote:
>>
>>>Ashant wrote:
>>>
On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:31:48 -0500, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I and everyone else on the planet despise software which requires
>rebooting after install. Especially if doing so is only so that said
>
JTK wrote:
> I and everyone else on the planet despise software which requires
> rebooting after install. Especially if doing so is only so that said
> software can load (or rather, "preload") a bunch of crap into memory
> which I don't want there until I need it.
If you're on Win9x, look at t
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Johnny Yen wrote:
>
> I've got a real issue with this, Ian. Most all of the sites in the world
> use tables for layout. Now we have to code specifically for Moz/N6+ to
> render them correctly?
Nope. If you use tables for layout, then use an HTML 4.0 Transitional
DOCTYPE, and
And it came to pass that Adam Bailey wrote:
>DeMoN_LaG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Orrin Edenfield wrote:
When AOL ships the next versions of their product, why
would they agree to use Microsoft IE products as the
default product for AOL instead of imbedding Mozilla? Is
it
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> Did you even read the article? The talks between AOL and Microsoft have
> broken down.
But then the started talking again.
-
-
Mustafa Hirji wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> says...
>
>>Did you even read the article? The talks between AOL and Microsoft have
>>broken down.
>>
>
> But then the started talking again.
>
Kast I heard they weren't talking. Maybe AOL will realize they have
en
hello, all;
i just started re-using mozilla after a few months of using netscape
4.75.
i am running red hat linux 7.0 (although thinking of switching to ROCK
linux, to cut down on the 'bloat-factor' which i'm beginning to hate
so much.), and running mozilla 0.9, not a nightly build, just the
mil
Hi,
I don't want to shutdown my mozilla on my linux box. I have tried to remove
the "File->Close" and "File->Quit" menu by editing the chrome, and it works
fine.
But I want also mozilla not to shutdown even if you click the "x" (cross
button) on the upper right of the window (if you use window man
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, demon-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Mustafa Hirji wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > says...
> >
> >>Did you even read the article? The talks between AOL and Microsoft have
> >>broken down.
> >>
> >
> > But then the started talkin
I'm not entirely sure if this is the correct forum to post to, but I'm
going to try. If I'm posting to the wrong forum, please let me know.
I'm attempting to get the 6-5 build of Mozilla for OS X to run. I've
been completely unsuccessful in getting this build, or any other for
that matter - to r
72 matches
Mail list logo
