> If I might butt inI have to agree. I have tried everything from
> changing this preference to that preference and still can't get DUN to
> work properly. It will only dial for Microsft products only. There is
> an after-taste in my mouth and it's bitter.
There could be 2 seperate issues
I'm looking into using Mozilla as our default mail/web package, and I'm
wondering if it's possible to do the following:
- store user profiles in a user's home directory on a network, and have
Mozilla look there by default (mapped network drive)
- automate the process of creating an account.
Just a short question. Isn't it possible to disable the two dashes (--)
which are automatically added in top of every signature (Mozilla 0.9.6)?
Best Regards,
Thomas
Am 20.12.2001 09:34 schrieb TJH folgendes:
> Just a short question. Isn't it possible to disable the two dashes (--)
> which are automatically added in top of every signature (Mozilla 0.9.6)?
No. And it's "-- ", not just "--".
This is the standard signature delimeter according to son-of-rfc-10
I demand that flacco may or may not have written...
> - home page set to our intranet employee home page;
You can set the default home page and many other preferences by editing
the .js files in bin/defaults/pref
> But should it be this way? Should focus automatically go into the URL
> bar?
Yes. I _love_ this.
> Or should Ctrl-W function the same there as in the rest of
> display panes?
Yes. This should also work.
Gerv
Pratik wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Is there anyone else seeing this bug? I go to cnn.com all the time and I
> haven't seen it.
Do you have the same cache setting? Same OS (Why2K)?
> The HTTP headers from cnn.com say
>
> HTTP/1.1 200 OKCRLF
> Server: Netscape-Enterprise/4.1CRLF
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ra
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>But should it be this way? Should focus automatically go into the URL
>bar? Or should Ctrl-W function the same there as in the rest of
>display panes?
Focus should certainly go into the URL bar as most people open a new
window in or
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 03:58:07 -0600,
JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:Go to CNN one day, go to it a few days later and you'll see the exact
:same page until you hit the reload button. Few days being say over the
:weekend. Nothing more to it.
Are you going through a proxy? If not, are you sure
Holger,
I Keep learning everyday! In my private E-mail I use a HTML sig file
with a table to make it look a bit better. With what you just discribed,
does this mean that my private signature (not displayed here) is actualy
"not done" ?
On 20-12-2001 10:10, Holger Metzger made an attempt to wri
Am 20.12.2001 12:16 schrieb Arthur folgendes:
> Holger,
> I Keep learning everyday! In my private E-mail I use a HTML sig file
> with a table to make it look a bit better. With what you just discribed,
> does this mean that my private signature (not displayed here) is actualy
> "not done" ?
W
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (lambliu) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> when I try to sign in after typed name and password ,
> the browser report :
> login.yahoo.com could not be found, please check the name and try again
> but I can sign in use IE, what's the matter?
I'm having the same prob
Christopher Jahn wrote:
> > Mmmm...I did not describe it clearly.
> > Please try to save files from WebPage or save attachment in
> > Netscape Mail, and rename files except ext. filename. After
> > that you will see that the files lost ext. filename. :-(
>
> I see what you're doing - instead of
Hello,
is there a hidden preference to switch of background images? I don't
want to change the color of the page, but I use mozilla over the network
and pages with brackground images are damn slow.
Regards,
Helge
Peter Trudelle wrote:
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
Post in text/plain only, please?
/Jonas
Johnny Yen wrote:
>> > One benefit is that users can tell, at a glance, the current site, and
>> > which site such bookmarks came from, much faster than they could ever
>> > read the URL. They can thus browse faster and with fewer errors.
>>
>>Absolutely. Site/page icons is a great feature. But a
shevek wrote:
> Someone please implement this:
>
> I would like to be able to elect to have formatted text wrapped
> to fit in the window.
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16909
I worked a little on this, but need some help to finish off the feature.
> Also please put TEXT S
JTK wrote:
> Pratik wrote:
>>The HTTP headers from cnn.com say
>>
>>HTTP/1.1 200 OKCRLF
>>Server: Netscape-Enterprise/4.1CRLF
>>Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:28:30 GMTCRLF
>>Last-modified: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:28:31 GMTCRLF
>>Expires: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:29:31 GMTCRLF
>>Cache-control: private,max-age=
Hi there.
In my code, I do:
...
main.document.open(), main is a frame
...
main.document.write("
main.document.close();
After this I call a funcion that does:
main.document.t.value="hello";
...
But it doesn't work on Mozilla.
It works on IE, and Netscape.
Thanks for your help.
Fred
On 12/20/01 04:58 AM, JTK wrote:
>
> Pratik wrote:
>
>
> [snip]
>
>
>>Is there anyone else seeing this bug? I go to cnn.com all the time and I
>>haven't seen it.
>>
>
> Do you have the same cache setting? Same OS (Why2K)?
Same cache setting on Linux.
>
>>The HTTP headers from cnn.com
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
This sentence:
> That is just as nice for people who visit than auto-requesting them.
Should have been:
> That is just as nice for people who visit as auto-requesting them is.
> is there a hidden preference to switch of background images?
Put:
* { background-image: none !important}
in the userContent.css file in the chrome/ directory in your profile
Boris
-
617-864-9910
-
"Why can one call the time component of the preceding 4-vector
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christian Biesinger wrote:
> JTK wrote:
>
>> Pratik wrote:
>>>The HTTP headers from cnn.com say
>>>
>>>HTTP/1.1 200 OKCRLF
>>>Server: Netscape-Enterprise/4.1CRLF
>>>Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:28:30 GMTCRLF
>>>Last-modified: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:28:31 GMTCRLF
>>>Expir
DeMoN LaG wrote:
>
> "Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 19 Dec 2001:
>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > Okay . Here's another. Light Blue background, Letter is Black
>
David Gerard wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 03:58:07 -0600,
> JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> :Go to CNN one day, go to it a few days later and you'll see the exact
> :same page until you hit the reload button. Few days being say over the
> :weekend. Nothing more to it.
>
>
> Are you goin
Pratik wrote:
>> Do you have the same cache setting? Same OS (Why2K)?
>
>
>
> Same cache setting on Linux.
>
>
A, that's bolstering my CR/LF WAG.
>> Let me make a WAG: it's the CR/LF line ends.
>
>
>
> Nope. Thats just the way websniffer displays it
> (http://webtools.mozilla.o
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
> Pratik wrote:
>>
>> Nope. Thats just the way websniffer displays it
>> (http://webtools.mozilla.org/web-sniffer/). Thats not the fault.
>>
>
>
> Is the cache and specifically the headers written thereto plaintext? If
> so, I upgrade my WAG to a WA
Fred Figueiredo wrote:
> After this I call a funcion that does:
>
> main.document.t.value="hello";
> ...
Is t an element (ie using document.all)? If so, you should be doing
main.document.getElementById('t').value="hello";
Ian
Fred Figueiredo wrote:
> After this I call a funcion that does:
>
> main.document.t.value="hello";
> ...
Is t an element (ie using document.all)? If so, you should be doing
main.document.getElementById('t').value="hello";
Ian
Ian Thomas wrote:
> Fred Figueiredo wrote:
>
>> After this I call a funcion that does:
>>
>> main.document.t.value="hello";
>> ...
>
>
> Is t an element (ie using document.all)? If so, you should be doing
> main.document.getElementById('t').value="hello";
>
> Ian
>
He didn't give the
Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
>
> As most Mozilla users you'll never use this shortcut, but Mozilla won't
> care about that someday when you press thinking that you are in
> the textarea, but loosing all your carefuly thought Slashdot message,
> because you weren't in the textarea.
>
Huh?!? I
Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
>> Wrong. The point is that this is a convienient way for IE users to
>> get a feel for our product. Just because IE does it doesn't make it
>> bad. I myself will never use it, as I've grown up on alt left/right
>> arrow.
>
>
>
> As most Mozilla users you'll nev
Sören Kuklau wrote:
> Thanks, the shot looks neat. I partly still prefer the old Modern chrome -
> sorry - to the new one... it was a bit _more_ "different". Maybe not
> convenient enough or so though...
>
> The way you arranged the menu bar is interesting. So we have both IE _and_
> Mozilla men
Peter Mutsaers wrote:
>> As most Mozilla users you'll never use this shortcut, but Mozilla
>> won't care about that someday when you press thinking that you
>> are in the textarea, but loosing all your carefuly thought Slashdot
>> message, because you weren't in the textarea.
>
> Huh?!? If I
"Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 20 Dec 2001:
>
> Let me ask a "really Dumb question" it hasn't stopped me before.
> Please explain why a person that is using a strictly text only
> reader such as Newswatcher (for mac) is posti
I've turned off "Show Web Site Icons", so I no longer get favicon.ico,
or whatever, showing when I navigate to a site - BUT the icon for
whatever search engine I'm using appears in the URL section of the
navigation toolbar whenever I start to type in an address. Is there
any way of turning this o
Holger Metzger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 20 Dec 2001:
> it to mangling and makes it rather less conspicuous. A standard
> delimiter line makes it possible for reading agents to handle
> signatures specially if desired. (This is unfortunately hampe
Peter Mutsaers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on
20 Dec 2001:
> Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
>
>
>>
>> As most Mozilla users you'll never use this shortcut, but Mozilla
>> won't care about that someday when you press thinking that
>> you are in the texta
Has anyone downloaded todays build? If so, how does it look? Anything
major changed? How's the stability looking? I've been using Build ID:
2001121508 and loving it.
--
Wayne Alligood/Amelia Island, Florida
Compaq Computer running Windows XP/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Words rightly spoken ar
I didn't fully today's build, but it seems that there may be a crash problem
when switching theme on some sites. Yesterday's build is wonderful hovever,
with a big performance increase.
WDA wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">
Subject:
Today's Build
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
DeMoN LaG wrote:
> Holger Metzger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > it to mangling and makes it rather less conspicuous. A standard
> > delimiter line makes it possible for reading agents to handle
> > signatures specially if desired. (This is unfortunately hamp
I'm running builds of 0.9.6 on Win98. I can't get Flash player to work.
It appears in the list from about:plugins (npswf32.dll), and the same
plugin works fine on NS6.2.1 on the same system. Right-clicking on a
Flash animation gives a context menu with "About Macromedia flash Player
5" plu
Dan Howard wrote:
> I'm running builds of 0.9.6 on Win98. I can't get Flash player to work.
> It appears in the list from about:plugins (npswf32.dll), and the same
> plugin works fine on NS6.2.1 on the same system. Right-clicking on a
> Flash animation gives a context menu with "About Macro
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
>
> DeMoN LaG wrote:
>
>>Kill the HTML. It looks horrible in text only readers. Don't post
>>binaries to non binary newsgroups, it's rude
>
> Let me ask a "really Dumb question" it hasn't stopped me before. Please
> explain why a person that is using a strictl
DeMoN LaG wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Andrea Monni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 19 Dec 2001:
>>
>>
>> We should go for a Mozilla version without symbols... like text
>> only...
>
> Text could be offensive too, how ab
I tryed it and it still doesn't work.
I think the problem, is after da instruction:
main.document.close();
When I trie to access main.document.getElementById('t').value, it doesnt
exists yet.
I've put an alert before this last instuction.
On IE, Netscape and Opera all the HTML is written (and v
Jason Bassford wrote:
> I've turned off "Show Web Site Icons", so I no longer get favicon.ico,
> or whatever, showing when I navigate to a site - BUT the icon for
> whatever search engine I'm using appears in the URL section of the
> navigation toolbar whenever I start to type in an address. Is
Peter Annema wrote:
> So I upgraded and now I'm stuck in _MRJPlugin.mcp, in the MRJPlugin.jar target.
> Trying to build that gives me this error:
>
> Link Error: Could not initialize Java VM. Make sure the JDK is installed
> properly.
>
> Am I supposed to have a JDK installed?
If you're buil
Mike Pinkerton wrote:
> In the meantime, you have two options for adding/removing files to the mac build:
>
> 1) Find someone with a mac, get them to make changes and export the XML
> project for you to include in your patch
>
> 2) Edit the XML file yourself.
>
> Note that (2), while being t
Johnny Yen wrote:
>
> Here again, it's a helluva lot easier to throw a favicon into the root
> rather than ad to hundreds and hundreds of pages just to
> get the same effect.
So how do you add the same background to all of your pages? favbg.ico?
--
Mike Gratton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lead
On 21 Dec 2001 00:20:41 GMT,
Magnus W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:DeMoN LaG wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
:> Andrea Monni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
:> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 19 Dec 2001:
:>> We should go for a Mozilla version without symbols...
On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:28:01 +0100, "Sören Kuklau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>1st it's December 17th, not 14th.
>
>2nd I have no clue what you're talking about, probably because I'm not from
>the U.S.
I _AM_ from the US, and I think that posted has obviously lost his mind. :-)
Erik Harris
Chris Hoess wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
> > Pratik wrote:
> >>
> >> Nope. Thats just the way websniffer displays it
> >> (http://webtools.mozilla.org/web-sniffer/). Thats not the fault.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Is the cache and specifically the headers written thereto plaintext?
Andrea Monni wrote:
>
>
> basic wrote:
>
>> should be possible with xslt,css and/or xbl
>
>
>
> May you elaborate please? :)
>
> Andrea
Open office files are, i beleive, zipped xml. they need to be unzipped
before viewing with mozilla
On 12/20/2001 11:47 PM, JTK wrote:
>Well again, I run IE through the same exact Proxomitron, and view the
>exact same CNN, and get two different behaviors. Either two programs
>are broken in such a way that the errors cancel each other out, or one
>program has a broken cache.
>
>
The question
Pratik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 21 Dec 2001:
> The question still stands. Did you try out what the bug suggests?
> Yes or No? And did that solve your problem? Yes or No?
My guesses:
No
N/A
--
ICQ: N/A (temporarily)
AIM: FlyersR1 9
email: [EMAIL
0.8, I think.
"Ian Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Sören Kuklau wrote:
>
> > Thanks, the shot looks neat. I partly still prefer the old Modern
chrome -
> > sorry - to the new one... it was a bit _more_ "different". Maybe not
> > co
Daniel Veditz wrote:
>Sören Kuklau wrote:
>
>>Well makes me wonder what's about all those MachV new features though then.
>>Will they be in Mozilla?! Doesn't this disagree to the Mozilla 1.0 Manifest?
>>
>Yes, it does.
>
Well, nothing like airing dirty laundry, eh Dan? ;-)
In fact, when you guys
I can't believe something as stupid as this issue has received this much
attention. IE has use the damn backspace key as a shorcut to
history.back for ages. Yet the serious bug with cache control is totally
ignored.
Just about everything to do with caching in Mozilla is completely
fubared, an
Gervase Markham wrote:
>> But should it be this way? Should focus automatically go into the URL
>> bar?
>
> Yes. I _love_ this.
This has been discussed in the UI newsgroup. You may love it, but it is
almost always a defect. When a new window has content loaded, the
content should be focused
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
> Chris Hoess wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK wrote:
>> > Pratik wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Nope. Thats just the way websniffer displays it
>> >> (http://webtools.mozilla.org/web-sniffer/). Thats not the fault.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > Is the cache
61 matches
Mail list logo
