Re: Mozilla 1.0? Shouldn't it be 5.0

JTK wrote: > Garth Wallace wrote: > >>"JTK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> >>>What I find rather odd is that while many here cry >>>"Mozilla isn't for users!", Netscape 6.x, which is no more than Mozilla >>>with an AOL sticker on it, is sup

Re: Netscape will not run on unpriviledged (unix) account

Marcel Dorenbos wrote: > Hi, > > a few days ago I have installed Netscape 6.1. Now I can only run this > application being root on Linux. As a normal user I see the following > error message: > > /usr/local/netscape/netscape > /usr/local/netscape/run-mozilla.sh /usr/local/netscape/mozilla-bin

Re: Netscape 6 Problem

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

Re: Next Milestone?

Thomas Gilfether and Jonathan Carver wrote: > Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote: > > >>Anyone have any info as to when the next milestone is going to be released? >> >>Thanks >> >>Gordon >> > > download the nightly build to get 0.9.4 The nightly builds show progress towards 0.9.4 (which is very cl

Re: Tab Browsing Update

Pratik wrote: >> (2) The confusing close box on the far right has been eliminated. >> Looking for ideas for a better solution (perhaps an X on the tab only >> when it is the active tab). > > > > I like the MultiZilla way of middle clicking on the tab to close it. That'd be no good on Linux

Re: MSN Passport & NS6.1 "data security issues"

Emlyn wrote: >>What "data security issues" are there in NS6.1 that are >>not there in NS4.08-4.82(<- HUH???)??? >> >>So this time it's not a "standards compliance" issue... >> >> > > If you point Mozilla to a .xul file (intentionally or not) then > someone else gains some measure of control over

Re: question: why do people continue to use ns4.x instead of ns6/mozilla?

Christopher Jahn wrote: > And it came to pass that Gregory Spath wrote: > > >>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christopher Jahn >>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> >>>And it came to pass that Schelstraete Bart wrote: >>> >>> --090503040007000902030100 Jay Garcia wrote: >Jo

Re: favicon

David Hyatt wrote: > Make sure you ban Konqueror too. :) And don't forget IE...! ian.

Re: Favicon spam

Greg Miller wrote: > Jonas Sicking wrote: > >> It would be really interesting to get some hard numbers on this. Just >> looking at the current logs will not really say anything since very few >> people browse with a mozilla with this pref turned on. So we need to >> come up >> with some way to

Re: Favicon spam

Ian Davey wrote: > > 1/(6*10*10) > > So that accounts to 1/6000 resource requests. If you can come up with > some numbers to fill in the above guesses then you'd get closer to the > actual figure. That should be 1/600 - it's too early in the morning :-) ian.

Re: Favicon spam

Greg Miller wrote: >>> Last I heard, the industry averages were supposed to be something >>> like 3:1 pageviews-to-users ratio and 50% repeat visitors. So the >>> number of favicon 404s would be approximately 1/6 of the total number >>> of pageviews. >> >> That would only be true if every site

Re: Favicon spam

Greg Miller wrote: > > That's not a terrible increase in bandwidth (the exact figures would > depend on protocol overhead and such), but web hosts have a nasty habit > of charging for disk space, which often includes the space for those log > files that shoot up by over 20% if everyone adopts

Re: "Time bomb version" message, what is it ?

David REY wrote: > Hello, > > Some of my customers (using Netscape) have a pop up windows when they > start Netscape. > > The window say this : > > "Time bomb version > This version has expired. You must download a newer version at > http://www.mozilla.org"; > > What should I do ? I really do

Re: images with width of zero in tables

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > it seems that Mozilla doesn't display images with a width of zero > but a height greater than zero in tables. Is this conform to the > standard? I think it should "display" an invisible line cosuming > vertical space. It sounds like its doing what it should. You can't

Re: Why does cut and paste work

John Fabiani wrote: >I only have a two button mouse. I gather there a way to use the keyboard >for the middle button? > Press both mouse buttons at the same time, ian.

Re: [PATCH] Still no indication that a download has failed.

JTK wrote: > Well, until you try to run/unizp whatever you downloaded and > Windows/Winzip tells you it's short. Here's an interim patch until > future civilizations rediscover the magic of ZMODEM and are able to > resume failed file transfers. You're more than welcome: > > if(DownloadFailed

Re: How's 1.0 look?

JTK wrote: >Jonathan Wilson wrote: > >>>download manager still needs to land. >>> >>Download manager? >> > >Read: Ad pump. > You're think SmartDownload. Have you read the spec for Download Manager? ian.

Re: What's wrong with this picture?

Gil wrote: >[Tacitus@localhost mozilla]$ gzip -dc >mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu-0.9.7-installer.tar.gz | tar -xvf >tar: option requires an argument -- f > Use a simpler method: tar zxvf mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu-0.9.7-installer.tar.gz ian.

Re: Fire Dave Hyatt

Damien Covey wrote: > Blake Ross wrote: > >> This is a petition to fire David Hyatt for his crimes against the >> World Wide Web, namely his implementation of automatic favicon >> retrieval. Sign your name here and I will pass this on to Steve Case. >> > Is this some joke that normal guys just

Re: Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?

Myself wrote: >> And besides, more often than not, html mail contains ugly >> fonts/colors and is spam. > > > Oh well then it must be true. What a terrific argument. > > Is there anyone that can state the case? > If you're really interested you can do a search on google groups, this argument ha

Re: Is there a way to read mail as text and not HTML?

Myself wrote: >> If you're really interested you can do a search on google groups, >> this argument has been beaten to death many times. It basically comes >> down to that fact that plain text is far more accessible to a large >> variety of email and usenet clients. You can't even ensure a web

Re: Mozilla on Linux - RPMs

John wrote: > Under windows the recommendation is to uninstall mozilla before > installing a new version (e.g. 0.9.6 to 0.9.7). Under Linux using RPMs > what is the procedure? Do you rpm -e current_mozilla first and then > rpm -ivh new_mozilla or is it ok to simply upgrade using rpm -U? > rpm

Re: UI problems

dman84 wrote: > Tom Hatta wrote: > >> I am having another problem. My menu, location bar, links bar, and >> status bar disappears, leaving only the tabs, and navigation buttons. >> Pressing Control-N to produce a new window doesn't help (same >> situation with the new window). My other user pr

Re: Speed and size

JTK wrote: >>Wordstar used to fly on old hardware too. Win 3.11 ran very well in a >>486 environment with 4megs yet Win 95 replaced it despite the fact it >>required a Pentium class CPU and at least 16 megs of RAM. >> > >Win95 was a hell of a lot better than Win3.11. Mozilla is a hell of a >lot

Re: Netscape 6.2.1 (and Mozilla) file save cache question

Chris wrote: > > I was hoping somebody can help me solve this problem I've been having > with Netscape and Mozilla. > My setup: > Windows 2000 > root partition (c: drive) about 200 megs free of a 2 gig partition > File server, z: drive about 40 gigs free > > I went to download Oracle 9i (abo

Re: Blocked doubleclick adds produce "not found" errors

Alex Farran wrote: > Hi, > > The place where I work has blocked access to doubleclick. Now every > time I go to a site with adverts on it I get a pop-up error telling me > that Mozilla can't find doubleclick. I preferred the adverts! Find your hosts file, under Windows NT its under: c:\winn

Re: Blocked doubleclick adds produce "not found" errors

michael lefevre wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ian Davey wrote: > >>Alex Farran wrote: >> >>>Hi, >>> >>>The place where I work has blocked access to doubleclick. Now every >>>time I go to a site with adverts on it

Re: NS 6 Does NOT Support Standards...

In article <3a27c8d5.93537650@news-server>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Netscape 6 does not support Internet standards in my opinion. If you >print a web page with an applet on it, the applet will not print. That has nothing to do with internet standards. This group is also about Mozilla (which i

Re: Recent Builds: Scrollbars

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Henning Schnoor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >in today's and yesterday's build, Scrollbars don't appear (using >Windows). The problem occurs both in Navigator and in MailNews (didn't >check anything else). > >You probably know about that, but I didn't see it mentione

Re: Changes to NS6.0 that would bring world peace

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gervase Markham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> layer support as it existed in version 4.7 and maybe even drop the BLINK >> tag wich is far more useless in my opinion. The BLINK tag is not even part >> of any standard so its a bit of a contradiction to say that you

Re: Does Netscape 6 support vbscript?

In article <90l0ua$s0o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tom Hesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Is is possible to view vbscript with netscape 6??? No. It's possible someone may attempt a project to implement it in the future, but I'd imagine it's quite tightly tied to IE's object model. ian. \ / (@_@) ht

Re: Why do they choose to require that much ressoures?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, kris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On my 64meg RAM, 400MHz Laptop, Mozilla is not usable, much patience >is needed when working with it, especially if other applics are open. I'm quite suprised at this, as I'm using it right now on a 233MHz 64MB desktop machine and

Re: About minimum platform requirements.

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stuart Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >By the way, keeping performance reasonable and memory usage low doesn't >only help people on low-end machines. It also helps those of us (MANY of >us, I'm sure, in this developer-oriented group) who multitask heavily >and

Re: Why do they choose to require that much ressoures?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The Mozilla nightlies are getting more resource hungry rather than >less, it seems :-( After yesterday's download, I discovered with some >dismay that it's already using 29Megs - without me having visited ANY Just to clarif

Re: Why do they choose to require that much ressoures?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >The Mozilla nightlies are getting more resource hungry rather than >less, it seems :-( After yesterday's download, I discovered with some >dismay that it's already using 29Megs - without me having visited ANY >pages (orthe

Re: Why do they choose to require that much ressoures?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Well, like I said - it just started bringing up Java by itself whenever >I start the browser. Although I don't typically visit Java sites, I >don't want to turn off Java completely via the Preferences - in case I >just happe

Re: Infinite loop detected... again !

In article <944e40$bv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jean-Denis Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hi! > >Mozilla 0.7 still comes with the "Infinite loop detected" bug, >apparently for people having a proxy/firewall (ie people at >work). Can you post a URL? I've only ever come across this on page with a g

Re: Infinite loop detected... again !

In article <94684v$is5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jean-Denis Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Can you post a URL? I've only ever come across this on page with a >> genuine infinite loop (a redirect to itself)? > >I can't post any URL since it happens nearly all the time. For example, >I've just u

Re: which files? (was Re: Thank you all)

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Daniel Veditz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Wrong files, under the WINNT folder you'll file "Profiles", and under that >you NT user profile directory, and under that "Application Data". Inside >that last one you'll find a Mozilla folder that needs to be nuked. I m

Re: How to turn off loading Netscape's news center at Messenger startup?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Karsten Wutzke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >This is annoying me!!! I takes longer, and it is only AMERICAN news. I >want to get rid of it. Is there a way? Edit --> Preferences --> Mail There's a preference there to choose the mail "start page". ian. \ / (@_@)

Re: How to turn off loading Netscape's news center at Messenger startup?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Karsten Wutzke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Huh? Not in my Messenger...! Can you tell me the EXACT button name or similar, > please? Which version of >Communicator do you have? These are the Mozilla newsgroups (Mozilla/Netscape 6), so I was talking about those rat

Re: Help! Netscape 6

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, mwe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I downloaded Netscape 6 (dumb of me). Among other things, it converted >every image file in my computer over to a Netscape file. And to open an >image, each time a new Netscape window opens, with an error message. I >tried to de-in

Re: [Newbie]Where is the address bar?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Diego Pietralunga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hello, >I've just installed Mozilla 0.7 (Win2000) either with the .exe installer >and with the .zip file. >When Mozilla starts, I CANNOT find the address bar!! >Where do I put the URL about where I want to go? Look at

Re: Fw: Why does SDL not work with some EXEs?

In article <959pii$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Alex Eagar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >List, > >I sent the following email to the appropriate person, but I have gotten >no reply. Do any of you happen to have the answer to my question, or know >where I should look for an answer to it? It applies to

Re: Fresh Installs of Nightlies - keeping profiles clean withoutreentering all info?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Daniel Veditz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >mozver.dat and mozregistry.dat don't need to be deleted. This is a myth >promulgated by the same folks who thump the side of their TV to fix the >reception. Mozilla will work just fine even if these files happen to be >co

Re: User stylesheet

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warren Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Can Mozilla have a user assignable stylesheet like IE and Opera? >Somthing where you can have your own rules to apply to every page you >visit. If not, do they plan on having somthing like this? Don't tell >me IE has this fe

Re: User stylesheet

In article <968vht$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jeffrey Yasskin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >By the way, this shouldn't be this difficult. There should be an >easy-to-find setting in preferences so that people other than Mozilla >developers can make their own stylesheet. I'm sure there will be, there ju

Re: netscape-6.01

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Zsolt Koppany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >a couple of weeks ago I tried netscape-6.0 under Linux. The software was >simple unusable. Should I try 6.01? I can hardly imagine that a lot of >bugs were fixed in a couple of weeks. Right now I use 4.76 and it is >stable.

Re: netscape-6.01

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, AhmetAA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >N6.5 is quite pesimistic.. 6.1 or 6.2 could be ok.. But 6.01 is yes, unusable. >From what I've heard it sounds like 6.5 will be the next release. If it does turn out to be 6.1, then I'd recommend that one (or whatever version o

Re: table rendering glitch?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob Hoopman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I've been looking at this, glancing at it from the corners of my eyes, >put it away for a few days, printed it an put it under my pillow at >night, chanting black/white and other magic at it, stared at it some >more and fin

Re: table rendering glitch?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rob Hoopman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The default is baseline and would explain the extra pixels you are seeing. >I thought this would not be an issue seeing that the td height attributes > exactly match the height of the images for that row. It's an issue bec

Re: [Why not?] Mozilla without Java: faster, smaller, no crashes...

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Carcarlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Many people asked for it in the last months but we never receive a >satisfactory reply. It already is available without Java, that is just an optional component. I've never run Mozilla with the Java plugin (I did try it out in

Re: Clients downloading .jar files

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tom Cole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I have a website where I want to allows visitors to download .jar files from >my site. With IE, I just create an anchor tag that points to the resource >and when the user clicks it, the file downloads. > >With Mozilla, when a

Re: Table first two rows display oddly

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Scott G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Interesting. I was not aware that Mozilla/NS6 were complete rewrites. >Beginning with which version? The rewrite started about two years ago, when the idea of trying to build on the NS4 codebase was dumped. Every version of

Re: Table first two rows display oddly

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Scott G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Thanks. I'll d/l it and try it on my home machine. What's this about >'nightlies' I see here? Are there new builds released every day? If so, why >aren't they called 'dailies'? A very good question, I think it's traditional,

Re: Win ME, moz starting/window opening hangs

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tony Shepps) wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Orrin Edenfield) wrote >>Have you tried deleting the file mozreg.dat, which is probably somewhere >>in your C:\Windows (maybe C:\Windows\System) folder? Search for it with >>Find All Files, and see what y

Re: What's Related

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > too >much of a privacy invasion. I went as far as to filter all requests for >alexa.com web sites from my local DNS server, but now I get pestered by mozilla >(two or three timer *per* web page) saying that it can't find alexa.com. Is >

Re: Error on Mozilla Install

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Neville Cobb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Installed mozilla 0.8.1 using mozilla-installer and experienced the >following error, but mozilla operates. > >Error [-621] An installation module (.xpi) failed to install. > >Curious as to what this may be or mean in respec

Re: Mozilla and flash player

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "r.e." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hi, >i have downloaded the last version o mozilla for linux, but how can i do >for view the shackwave animation? i have downloaded the flash player for >linux but it's for netscape... % tar zxvf shockwave_flash.tar.gz % cd shock

Re: Shockwave Flash Plugin

In article <0104051046170G.00233@Insanity>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I tried to install the shockwave flash plugin with mozilla ( Linux > Version), >butit does not seem to recongnize that it is there when I enter any of the >shockwave enabled pages...I followed the instructions for a Ne

Re: Can Netscape 4.7 and Mozilla 0.8.1 be installed on the same Linuxsystem?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andre G- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >If any issues, please mention them. >I have already noted than the ~/.netscape seems to be a problem. >What are the require so libaries? I've got no problems, Mozilla uses ~/.mozilla and it doesn't interfere at all. On my machi

Re: Why ? -> Mozilla core dump @startup

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Courtney Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Just installed [successfully as far as I can tell] Mozilla from the >FreeBSD port and get core dumped no matter how I try to start it. I think it still needs to write to the install directory the first time it runs, so y

Re: Happy 3rd Birthday Mozilla :-)

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >1. Why does Mozilla not need such control over the open/save dialog? >Why is this not skinnable like literally everything else is? Doesn't >that violate the whole design concept of "skinnability"? On Linux it is skinnable ;-) ian

Re: I want to help the Mozilla/SVG Effort

In article <9bh2fb$8t1uf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Well I have tried some SVG samples in my Netscape 4.7 and it works! >I don't know really how, but it works, I don't even need new 6 version. You're probably using the Abobe plugin... ian. \ / (@_@) http://www.ecli

Re: I would really like to give mozilla a chance, but.....

In article <3adc40d1$0$18686$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >After downloading and installing the binaries for Mozilla on my Linux >Mandrake 7.2 box, I tried running the program in a shell only to get after >the registering of plugins the following line; Did you ru

Re: I would really like to give mozilla a chance, but.....

In article <3adc44e5$0$18689$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Yes, I did. I also installed it as root, but that should not cause it to >fail to run, should it? Interestingly enough, I looked in the >"/usr/local/mozilla/run-mozilla.sh" file that is mentions and at the

Re: Mozilla start-up crash (Linux)

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Thomson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I regularly use the nightly builds of mozilla and update every week or >so. I've tried to install 2 builds out of the last weeks and both of >those crashed on startup with the following error: > >/home/scott/mozilla/run-mo

Re: Can my computer handle Mozilla?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mozilla is way too much of a pig for your machine. I have a >PIII/933/256MB here, and it's not really usable. That's strange, I'm using it on a PII/233/64MB machine and it is perfectly usable, in fact it's pretty nippy when it's up

Re: Can my computer handle Mozilla?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Well I'd hope so, given how much memory it hogs. Again, over 22MB *TO >DISPLAY A BLANK PAGE*. On what platform, on start up it's 14MB to display a blank page here (on WinNT at work). Not sure of the numbers at home on Linux. This

Re: Some thoughts about new modern theme

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, AhmetAA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Some of my humble thoughts, >General theme is much better than before. >1- The contrast is too much, the colors are too bright.it dazzles my >eyes I'd did prefer the slightly darker blue in the preview image. >2- The toolbar he

Re: Can my computer handle Mozilla?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Ian Davey wrote: >> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> >Well I'd hope so, given how much memory it hogs. Again, over 22MB *T

Re: Mozilla SUCKS!!!!!

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Betz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I have a problem with a form on my site, it's a textarea when you hit >submit it sends the content to my email adress. No problem with Netscape >old and IE, a warning msg appears that this msg will be sent via email >and it

Re: userContent.ss

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gervase Markham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> This worked however on some sites there are bakgrounds that will stay their >> original color, most of the time making reading the white fonts unreadable. > >I'm not sure if UserContent.css applies to documents where th

Re: cellpadding in netscape 6...?

In article , "Moose" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Netscape 6. Does cellpadding work or not?? Yes. ian. \ / (@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature) /(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art) | |

Re: Has this become a NS4 support forum?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Its not a matter of being lazy. It takes no more or less time to bottom >or top post. > >All you have to do is choose to set for one or the other. Top posting >is just more logical. The thread flows better. Then why is bottom posting the

Re: very slow

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (lamb liu) wrote: >I use netscape6.01A on Solaris8 (UltraStation10, UltraSparcII 260M , >Memory 128M), It is very slow though more stable than Netscape 4.7 >(which is an ugly stupid software) >who knows how to speed up it? Try Mozilla 0.9 instead.

Re: Mozilla 0.9.2 Crashing when not run as root

Crash Course wrote: > I installed the newest version of mozilla an our or so ago. > Everything seemed to run fine until I tried to run it as myself instead > of as root (I installed it as root of course though). > > Here is the dump I get when trying to run (by typing > "/usr/local/mozil

Re: bookmarks question

rob wrote: > > Hmmm ... just have a question about how the bookmarks are supposed to be > working these days. > > I test mozilla / NS builds at home and at work, and I've got some > different behavior happening depending on where i use it and what build > i'm using so i'm sorta wondering

Re: xhtml transitional

rob wrote: > Hello, > > It is my understanding that XHTML transitional documents are rendered in > standards mode. (please correct me if i'm wrong) > > We've been experimenting here with XHTML transitional code and we're > continually finding extra space around elements, particularly images

Re: AutoFill forms for Netscape

Jerry Watson wrote: > Does anyone know if Netscape ever plans to add a "forms AutoFill" feature > for easily completing forms on web pages. If this feature was in the > Netscape application I would walk away from other browsers in a second. > It may have been disabled in 6.0 but it's a featur

Re: Can't download .9.9 due to server bogged down? - alternativefast idea via mirror

Netscape Basher wrote: > ftp://sunsite.ualberta.ca/pub/Mirror/mozilla/mozilla/nightly/latest-0.9.9/ > > I suggest the mozilla-win32-installer-sea.exe download because if you > download mozilla-win32-installer.exe, it will attempt to download the > rest from ftp.mozilla.org which current is bein

Re: Whoops! Gecko, not Moz.

Garth Wallace wrote: > Glenn Miller wrote: > >> On 22 Mar 2002, Jay Garcia was seen to have posted this wee note into >> netscape.public.mozilla.general, to which I have responded as follows: >> >> >>> The build date is 03-14-2002 but that doesn't mean that it's using the >>> 0.9.9 Gecko engine.

Re: .9.9 contains bug# 125290 from .9.8

Peter Stein wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Pratik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>On 03/25/2002 06:17 PM, Peter Stein wrote: >> >>>Has anyone taken a look? Does anyone care? >> >>I just did. And I can't reproduce it. Try deleting your XUL.mfasl file. >>try it with XUL disabled/enable