Chocobo_greens wrote:
> can you show mw one person killed in the name of a Penguin?
> i can show you millions under the mozilla red star
ROFLMAO!!! :D
No, you can not :) The mozilla red star is the mozilla red star. It has
a black/orange/black border along it's outlines and depicts a dinosaur
Patrick Gallagher wrote:
> Adam Sjøgren wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 07 Dec 2001 23:06:15 -0500, Chocobo greens wrote:
>>
>>
>>> when something like this is presented, you dont have to be a
>>> "far-right hard-liner" to see what it means...
>>>
>>
>> No. You have to be a far-right hard-liner _not_ to see
Arjan de Vet wrote:
> I noticed today that I got the 'too small fonts' problem again with the
> FreeBSD/2001120507 nightly build.
>
> Last time I solved it by adding this to prefs.js:
>
> user_pref("font.minimum-size.x-western", 11);
>
> After starting/stopping mozilla a few times I noti
[]
> You need to try this out before it's usefullness becomes
> apparent. It's simply a small button which clears the urlbar, making it easier to
>type in an url because you don't
> have to remove the existing one. This is particularly a problem on *nix
> platforms because selecting text (the u
Juan Perez wrote:
> hey, what the hell have you done to my beloved netscape/mozilla little
> hand pointer, i want it back !! :(
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112916
JTK wrote:
[]
> Sheesh, I
> leave for a few days and the whole place goes to hell.
"Few days"? I thought you went down with the WTC.
I actually missed the local troll so WB - good to see things are
returning to normal :)
K.
mAineAc wrote:
>
>
>>
>> You haven't correctly entered the server:
>> For RECEIVING mail, it's POP.MAIL.YAHOO.COM
>> For SENDING mail, it's SMTP.MAIL.YAHOO.COM
>>
>>
>
> I am talking about on the website not in the email program. I can't log
> into the email page the link for sign in will not
Bernard Perrot wrote:
> Just installed mozilla 0.9.6 (linux box, RH7.1) : the fonts are not
> correct, and if I try the fonts setting in preferences menu, it refuse
> other setting than iso8859-3 ... (8 points) ??? This is completly new...
> (upgrading from 0.9.4)
>
> Any idea ?
>
There is
Duane Clark wrote:
> lal_truckee wrote:
>
>> Duane Clark wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote NS6.2/Moz9.5
>>>
>>> Other reasons for upgrading:
>>> Another preference allows me to set a minimum font size. Very handy
>>> for us old guys with weak eyes.
>>>
>>
>>
>> How? I don't see th
Jay Garcia wrote:
> R.K.Aa. wrote:
>
>> Mike Koenecke wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder what code causes this. If you go to http://www.fark.com (a
>>> site I really like), try a "Photoshop This Picture" link. Click on the
>>> Comments, where the m
Mike Koenecke wrote:
> I wonder what code causes this. If you go to http://www.fark.com (a
> site I really like), try a "Photoshop This Picture" link. Click on the
> Comments, where the modified pictures are posted. No pictures show up
> in Mozilla, but of course they do show up in Internet Explo
Hall Stevenson wrote:
>>I can't see any formatting problems on a current cvs build, Linux.
>>Screenshot at http://home.c2i.net/dark/msn.jpg (185k)
>>
>
> That shot looks very good. Almost exactly like it does with a MS browser
> (which I assume is the way they intend it to look right in).
Hall Stevenson wrote:
>>I can't see any formatting problems on a current cvs build, Linux.
>>Screenshot at http://home.c2i.net/dark/msn.jpg (185k)
>>
>
> That shot looks very good. Almost exactly like it does with a MS browser
> (which I assume is the way they intend it to look right in).
>
> F
Jerry Park wrote:
> Geraint Edwards wrote:
>
>> If anyone is curious - the formating problem appears to be the result
>> of the absence of a tag. Saving the file locally and
>> adding a standard "4.0 Transitional" tag makes the page nicely formatted.
>>
>>
>
> Right. The page is not compli
Peter Lairo wrote:
> Peter Lairo wrote:
>
>> for the past couple of days TABBED browsing seems to be *broken*.
>
>
>
> OK, I just created a new "TEST" profile and TABBED browsing still does
> *NOT* work.
>
> Any ideas, please?
>
Was bug 105995 - fix has been checked in
Steve Snyder wrote:
> I'm using Mozilla v0.9.3 on a Linux box. I find that setting the text size
> to 120% (View>>Text Size>>120%) is much more readable to my aging eyes than
> the default 100%. I've tried playing with the font sizes
> (Edit>>Preferences>Appearance>>Fonts) but haven't been a
JTK wrote:
> "R.K.Aa." wrote:
>
>>Actually I stumbled across that bug the other day and figured I was
>>doing the community a favor keeping him OUT of bugzilla
>>
>
> Another point I suspect Mr. Dotzler isn't considering ;-).
>
>
>>A
; you or point you to existing reports? So you think that R.K.Aa. should
> spend her time helping you find bugs rather than working on resolving bugs?
>
> --Asa
>
Actually I stumbled across that bug the other day and figured I was
doing the community a favor keeping him OUT of bugz
JTK wrote:
> Pratik wrote:
>
>>JTK wrote:
>>
>>>Why have I been getting this in the nightlies for the past week or so?
>>>
>>>
>>I get this too but I use the zip files so I guess I can't complain much.
>>But if you're using the installer then this shouldn't happen. Why don't
>>you file a bug?
>>
Yoda McAwips wrote:
> R.K.Aa. wrote:
>
>
>>Yoda McAwips wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Gavin Long wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Yoda McAwips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[
It looks fine on a current Linux CVS build, but you're probably seeing
bug http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=74313
(Transparent animated gifs have black background)
K.
Christopher Jahn wrote:
> And it came to pass that Dale & Nancy wrote:
>
>
>>Jay Garcia wrote:
>>
>>>dispatcher wr
Christopher Jahn wrote:
> And it came to pass that friday wrote:
>>
> Macromedia doesn't support Mozilla, the rotten bastards.
Shockwave Flash at least works fine with Mozilla on Linux. I'm sure it
works in Mozilla under MS OS'es as well.
No idea how to install it on Windows, but on Linux: If
See http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23679
As for whether v.1 is the target - not sure. See last comment in bug.
K.
Bryan Green wrote:
> Does anyone know if Mozilla will be supporting Microsoft's
> proprietary NTLM Proxy Authentication in the 1.0 release? I know that
> sound
There might be info of interest to you here:
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53970
Al \"Bear\" wrote:
> Greetings. I'm hoping someone can help here, as Netscape Support seem to be
> experiencing system problems at the current time, which mean my support
> request emails are getting
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58339
CyaNide wrote:
> Just thought I post this problem between XMMS and Mozilla 0.9, when XMMS
> is playing (listening to music) Mozilla would not start, it says something
> along the line of "unable to send signal". Mozilla would only starts when
>
Well the games have started. A next move from the cannibal bedfellow:
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,51243,00.asp
K.
ahmetaa wrote:
> Neil Fraser wrote:
>
>> Where is the best place to find a discussion about the recent news
>> that AOL won't be using Mozilla in its client? I kno
26 matches
Mail list logo
