Asa Dotzler wrote:
JTK wrote:
Brian Clark wrote:
Hey, this was gone for a while, and now it is back. After installing
Mozilla 2001091108 on my MacOS 9.1 system, the first browser window
that opens up upon launch is the Netscape 6.1 setup page.
I really don't mind, but is seems like it
Hello folks,
Is your mozilla's bookmark working fine?
I'm having verious problems with bookmarks. I take a look at bugzilla
and found out there are many bug reports already, so I suppose
developers are dealing with these problems.
I wondering if my problmes are worth reporting.
- cannot
Thank you for input. I followqed rge directions on that site, but i am still
having problems. When I click on a url in an e-mail messege MS explower
launches instead of Netscape ^. Is there some other problem?
Christopher Jahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL
JTK wrote:
If we use that permission to change it to plain MPL now we
have given away that right, and then will have to seek permission from
contributors later to change from MPL to MPL/GPL.
However, if you use that right to change them to plain GPL, or even
LGPL, you'll have no need to seek
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Currently I'm using
- Mozilla/0.9.4+ (2001091108)
- Linux-2.4.x, gblic-2.2.x (Tried for both RedHat 7.1 and Kondara 2.0)
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
where did you get de 0.94 ??? It's still not released !!
regards
Frederik
Frederik Vos wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Currently I'm using
- Mozilla/0.9.4+ (2001091108)
where did you get de 0.94 ??? It's still not released !!
He's using a nightly build.
All nightly builds after 0.9.4 has branched have a version of 0.9.4+.
Asa Dotzler wrote:
Brian Clark wrote:
Hey, this was gone for a while, and now it is back. After installing
Mozilla 2001091108 on my MacOS 9.1 system, the first browser window
that opens up upon launch is the Netscape 6.1 setup page.
I really don't mind, but is seems like it would be kind
Ian Winter wrote:
Thank you for input. I followqed rge directions on that site, but i am still
having problems. When I click on a url in an e-mail messege MS explower
launches instead of Netscape ^. Is there some other problem?
If setting it under View -- Advanced -- System doesn't work then
Christian Biesinger wrote:
JTK wrote:
If we use that permission to change it to plain MPL now we
have given away that right, and then will have to seek permission from
contributors later to change from MPL to MPL/GPL.
However, if you use that right to change them to plain GPL, or even
Doing this would make it illegal to release Netscape 6.something w/o
releasing the sourcecode.
Just a clarification: Netscape does release the source code to the
open-source parts of Netscape 6.
Nope. Not if Mozilla was LGPLed.
If Mozilla were only LGPLed, then this would cause a great
I've moved my profile to a different directory, but it was a lot of
prefs.js hacking and I had to redo all my filters :(
And still every new profile I create still gets in the Application Data
folder.
Isn't there a way I can move my mozilla profiles and get it updated
automatically? Or in
Hi, I'm having trouble connecting to my.monster.com . It tells me that
cookies are not enabled on my browser, while it says they are in
preferences. I'm visiting a friend (I'm across the street from the
pentagon, actually) and I just downloaded mozilla to his computer
tuesday, so I can't
Cookies are horked today
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99286
Looks like the bug just got fixed.
- Pratik.
Ben Ruppel wrote:
Hi, I'm having trouble connecting to my.monster.com . It tells me that
cookies are not enabled on my browser, while it says they are in
Does anyone know how to force the 'BACK' button in Netscape 6.1? I
currently have a hyperlink labeled 'GO BACK' that simply calls
history.back(). When I run my scripts (that contain combination of frame
and remote scripting), somehow the behavior of history.back() isn't quite
the same as
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Gervase Markham wrote:
Nope. Not if Mozilla was LGPLed.
If Mozilla were only LGPLed, then this would cause a great deal of
inconvenience to many of our distributors, who do not wish to refactor
Mozilla into libraries to avoid having to open source code they do not
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
Frederik Vos wrote:
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Currently I'm using
- Mozilla/0.9.4+ (2001091108)
where did you get de 0.94 ??? It's still not released !!
He's using a nightly build.
All nightly builds after 0.9.4 has branched have a
Ian Hickson wrote:
And before anyone suggests it, licensing MPL/LGPL would be pointless,
since the MPL allows everything the LGPL allows and more
But IMO the MPL does not allow including Mozilla code in an LGPLed
library and distributing the resulting work under the LGPL, at least not
if one
And it came to pass that Ian Winter wrote:
Thank you for input. I followqed rge directions on that
site, but i am still having problems. When I click on a url
in an e-mail messege MS explower launches instead of
Netscape ^. Is there some other problem?
Yes - you're using Outlook 5.5, which
I'm really annoyied with bookmark problems, so I decided to see where
could be wrong.
Wnen I take a look at bookmark.html in .mozilla/profile name/dir, I
found there are *many* entries which has the *same* bookmark info. I
deleted these bogus entries using editor. It seems bookmark is usable
Where in the source does mozilla handle the user pressing the tab key to
go to the next link on the page?
--
richard
The link,
http://home.netscape.com/communicator/v4.5/passwords/doit.html
was once the location to enable or disable profile passwords on a shared
machine. It is no more. Anyone know where this feature can be
enabled/disabled now? I am keen to re-enable the option on a new install
for both 4.7x
I'm running Netscape Communicator 4.72 and have been for about five
years with few or no problems. Recently a problem came up that I have
been unable to solve. When I subscribe to a newsgroup, it disappears
from my subscribed list when I close Netscape and then reopen it. This
started happening
You Know Who ~ wrote:
If it's a bug, they will likely take care of it without a vote.
--
You Know Who~
``
No matter how cynical you get,
it is impossible to keep up. -- Lily Tomlin
Cat stuff, Win Help Purgatory @
If you have ever shared your Mozilla profile with a Netscape application
you are likely to run into this and in some cases worse bugs.
This is the first time I have heard this! If this is a serious issue,
why is it not publicized more?
Also, how do I manage more than one profile with
Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
Hello folks,
Is your mozilla's bookmark working fine?
Nope, because of bug 95906:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95906
It's sounds like its causing you some pain as well.
--
? Mike Gratton - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
! Leader in leachate production and
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Frank Hecker wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
And before anyone suggests it, licensing MPL/LGPL would be pointless,
since the MPL allows everything the LGPL allows and more
But IMO the MPL does not allow including Mozilla code in an LGPLed
library and
Ian Hickson wrote:
Why do we care about LGPL projects and not, say, projects using the
original BSD license, the Apache license, the Zope license, the IBM public
license, the Qt public license, the Sun Industry Standards Source License,
etc, etc, etc?
Because nobody has ever claimed that the
Frank, I don't know, if I misunderstood you (late here), so please
excuse possible misunderstandings.
Frank Hecker wrote:
[MPL incompatible with GPL - MPL incompatible with LGPL]
I do not see how it could be compatible with the LGPL; what is
different about the LGPL and the GPL in this
Frank Hecker wrote:
IMO Section 3 was intended for a specific case, a case explicitly
addressed in Section 3: This option [i.e., changing the license
notices] is useful when you wish to copy part of the code of the Library
into a program that is not a library. But IMO it's not a
Gervase Markham wrote:
I personally don't see any reason one could not combine code under the
GPL with code under the LGPL, leaving all license notices intact, and
then distribute the resulting work as a whole under GPL terms. To
claim otherwise would seem to imply that doing this
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Ben Bucksch wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
The LGPL would also prevent anyone from building Mozilla using MSVC++,
since the MSVC++ redistributables license disallows reverse
engineering, and the LGPL requires that that be allowed.
There're tons of (L)GPLed projects using
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Ben Bucksch wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Ben Bucksch wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
Is there a need (real or perceived) for Mozilla code to be
distributable as an LGPL library?
Yes, for the same reason as to use it under GPL terms: In order to use
it
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Frank Hecker wrote:
Actually I should have said, the LGPL does not allow The MPL
clearly allows MPLed code to be combined with other code and the product
as a whole distributed under non-MPL terms.
This is different than relicensing the code. Both the MPL and the
Ben Bucksch wrote:
My personal opinion is that the GPL was poorly designed, because I think
that this very discussion should never have to happen. The GPL is, IMO,
not as free as other licenses.
Ssshh! The zealots might hear you!
Using the word free in conjunction with the GPL is sure
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Frank Hecker wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
Why do we care about LGPL projects and not, say, projects using the
original BSD license, the Apache license, the Zope license, the IBM public
license, the Qt public license, the Sun Industry Standards Source License,
etc, etc,
35 matches
Mail list logo
