MozillaZine

Mozilla 0.7 is here!

Tuesday January 9th, 2001

Mozilla.org today released Mozilla 0.7, which is the beginning of the march to 1.0. See the roadmap for more information on Mozilla 1.0. Grab it, and check out the release notes!


#1 FIRST POST!!!

by pepperxn

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 5:23 PM

Reply to this message

I just got Mozilla 0.7.

#2 This is the one I've been waiting for

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 5:49 PM

Reply to this message

I've been using the nightly builds on Linux from late December through the present and they are very nice.

There has been an annoying bug with links lately, though.

Anyone know what day this was branched on?

#3 I disagree w/ Build Bar today

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 6:01 PM

Reply to this message

All of today's builds have a "thumbs up" and an "exclamation mark", even. And they work great, as long as you don't click on any links. There is a bug that has recently appeared that makes many links un-clickable.

I don't know about you, but I click on a lot of links with my web browser, and this bug REALLY hinders that.

I know this has been asked before, but what factors are the recomendations based on anyways?

#11 Re: I disagree w/ Build Bar today

by gerbilpower <gerbil@ucdavis.edu>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 7:05 PM

Reply to this message

Links don't work under certain conditions, which I've rarely encountered. Something like this could be fixed by tomorrow's builds, but Asa probably marked this as a good build because him and other testers who provided him feedback rarely encountered the bug as well.

Alex <:3)~~ <http://www.gerbilbox.com/newzilla/>

#8 Re: This is the one I've been waiting for

by asjo

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 6:52 PM

Reply to this message

> Anyone know what day this was branched on?

The titlebar on my GNU/Linux-box says 2001010517.

Best regards,

Adam.

#10 Re: This is the one I've been waiting for

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 7:00 PM

Reply to this message

2001010517 should be a good one. 20010106 is the one I'm using now. More recent ones have some strange bugs.

#13 we branched from 12/26

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 8:52 PM

Reply to this message

the 0.7 build is from a short branch from 12/26 with changes to back out the flash crasher, fix context menus in mailnews and fix the quirks.css problems (context and quirks both landed in the trunk since then) plus the UI changes like start page and Help menu item link updates. That's about it (I think).

--Asa

#4 I disagree w/ Build Bar today

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 6:04 PM

Reply to this message

All of today's builds have a "thumbs up" and an "exclamation mark", even. And they work great, as long as you don't click on any links. There is a bug that has recently appeared that makes many links un-clickable. I don't know about you, but I click on a lot of links with my web browser, and this bug REALLY hinders that.

I know this has been asked before, but what factors are the recomendations based on anyways?

#5 Re: I disagree w/ Build Bar today

by kerz <jason@mozillazine.org>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 6:33 PM

Reply to this message

Hi Damian, the bug you were talking about <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64622> has a patch attached, and will hopefully go in in the next few days. It was mentioned on the build comments page today, but some don't go to look at that.

Jason - MozAdmin2

#7 thanks

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 6:42 PM

Reply to this message

thanks and sorry for bitching. I really appreciate the build comments page, it's prevented me from wasting time downloading broken builds in the past. It just struck me as odd that such a widespread and critical bug didn't affect your recomendation.

#6 so make it better

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 6:39 PM

Reply to this message

damian, a couple of things

If you read the comments you will usually see some sort of justification for the thumb's direction that day. If you had read the comments before downloading then you would have seen the link to that bug today and could have made a more informed decision about downloading the build. If no one's reading those comments I can stop posting them. I do this for you all, not for myself.

If you get 3 to 6 builds tested before me (or even one for that matter) and would like to contribute to the buildbar then you're welcome to do so on irc.mozill.org #mozillazine. I'm almost always available there and more than willing to add your comments to the buildbar. This is a resource that I provide to the Mozilla QA and Testing community and if you would like to help improve the service your help is welcome.

-Asa

#9 thanks Asa

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 6:57 PM

Reply to this message

sorry for bitching. really i was just venting and being silly. i do appreciate the build comments, as they have saved me from wasting time downloading broken builds in the past.

Thanks for all that you have contributed to the community, Asa. I am in your debt.

#12 image/gif and image/jpeg helpers don't work?

by sbergman2 <steve@uhura.netplus.net>

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 7:37 PM

Reply to this message

Hi,

I am finding that if I create a helper entry for image/gif or image/jpeg (extensions gif and jpg respectively) it just gets ignored. If I create,say, audio/x-pn-realaudio, it works fine. Mozilla *always* wants to handle gifs and jpegs. Is this a bug or just a *braino* on my part?

Thanks, Steve Bergman

#14 Bugzilla!

by jelwell

Tuesday January 9th, 2001 10:03 PM

Reply to this message

#15 0.7 Crashes on Startup

by PhiSch

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 12:29 AM

Reply to this message

I just installed the 0.7 Version on my SuSE Linux 7.0 / Kernel 2.2.16. There was no other version of Mozilla on my System before installation and there is no .mozilla dir in my homedir.

When I start mozilla out of an xterm I get ; \"/opt/mozilla07/package/run-mozilla.sh: line 72: 20668 Speicherzugriffsfehler $prog ${1+\"$@\"}\"

Can anyone reproduce this?

have a great day!

.phisch

#19 Re: 0.7 Crashes on Startup

by unapersson

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 4:15 AM

Reply to this message

The only seg faults I've had for Mozilla under Linux have occurred when I haven't run it as root *before* running it as a user.

An alternative is to make sure the user has write access to its install directory.

#22 Re: 0.7 Crashes on Startup

by PhiSch

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 4:30 AM

Reply to this message

I'll give that a try.

It looks like, there is a problem with the Profile Manager. I run todays nightly and it created a .mozilla in my homedir. since then, Mozilla 0.7 works fine, too.

have a great day

phisch

#16 Infinite loop again...

by hfoucher

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 1:30 AM

Reply to this message

I love Mozilla but I can't eveb browse 2 pages without having this anoying message ("Infinite loop detected") when folllowing a link.

#27 Re: Infinite loop again...

by fab

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 6:09 AM

Reply to this message

I'm guessing you are using some kind of proxy/firewall.

#87 Re: Re: Infinite loop again...

by hfoucher

Monday January 15th, 2001 2:53 AM

Reply to this message

Yes, and so... ? Why doesn't it work ?

#49 What Link? Re: Infinite loop again...

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Thursday January 11th, 2001 12:22 AM

Reply to this message

what link?

basic

#53 Re: What Link? Re: Infinite loop again...

by unapersson

Thursday January 11th, 2001 4:07 AM

Reply to this message

This only time I encountered this has been when a page had a redirect to itself. Mozilla came up with an "infinite loop detected" while IE got itself merrily caught in the reloading loop (resulting in a permanently flashing screen.

#88 Re: What Link? Re: Infinite loop again...

by hfoucher

Monday January 15th, 2001 2:55 AM

Reply to this message

Any link. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't... randomly...

#17 Right click pop-ip menu is slower.

by parallel

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 1:36 AM

Reply to this message

N/T

#18 Right click pop-up menu is slower.

by parallel

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 1:37 AM

Reply to this message

typo above.

#20 Won't even start

by jahebe

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 4:28 AM

Reply to this message

Right! This is on Windows NT 4 SP5:

I had 0.6 installed and downloaded 0.7. Installed 0.7 (the installation program was told to delete the old 0.6 nstallation). Now when the mozilla.exe is executed it shows the splash screen, eats between 13 and 16 megs and then just sist there with zero percent cpu usage. (Rebooting does not help either)

Uninstalled 0.7 and re-installed 0.6 - which now behaves in exactly the same manner.

Ideas anyone?

#28 Re: Won't even start

by fab

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 6:16 AM

Reply to this message

It is more than likely that this is a profile compatibility issue. Please remove your profile directory (dunno where you put it, it's a dir with your profile name). Please also remove mozregistry.dat in your winnt directory. Then restart mozilla and it should pop up with the profile manager. Create a new profile, it should magically work :-) Good day, Fabian.

#29 Re: Re: Won't even start

by jahebe

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 7:11 AM

Reply to this message

Yeah, right you are! Thanks

#33 Re: Won\'t even start

by Figment

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 9:31 AM

Reply to this message

I had the same issue in Win98, the issue was that i had another Chrome running on 0.6 when I installed 0.7. Restoring my old chrome directory took care of it. I\\\'m sure other have had the same issue.

#35 Re: Won\'t even start

by Figment

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 9:49 AM

Reply to this message

I had the same issue in Win98, the issue was that i had another Chrome running on 0.6 when I installed 0.7. Restoring my old chrome directory took care of it. I\\\'m sure other have had the same issue.

#51 Re: Won't even start

by akayser

Thursday January 11th, 2001 2:55 AM

Reply to this message

More precise than replacing the 'chrome' directory with the old one, or removing your complete 'profile', its to just reset your 'chrome' configuration. Because of the new install, your installed chromes (from x.themes.org) are removed, but the 'chrome' dir in your profile stills points these chromes. This causes mozilla to start up, but to fail in opening windows... So: workaround is: After install of a new version using the installer (or when deleting the old 'bin' or 'seamonkey'), also delete the 'chrome' directory in your profile. This way you keep your settings, cache, but only need to re-install the chromes... P.s. is this allready reported as a bug in Bugzilla?

#52 Re: Won't even start

by akayser

Thursday January 11th, 2001 3:36 AM

Reply to this message

Just added my comments to (allready existing) bug 64939.

#91 Re: Won't even start-SOLUTION

by janbenes <janbenes@usa.net>

Saturday February 3rd, 2001 12:17 PM

Reply to this message

I have the same problem and cause for me was custom skin. If I reset to default skin and then reinstall Mozilla, it works fine. I am also able to keep previous settings by backing up the REGISTRY.DAT file and directory where PREFS.JS file is and restoring it after installation. Jan

#21 Won't even start

by jahebe

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 4:29 AM

Reply to this message

Right! This is on Windows NT 4 SP5:

I had 0.6 installed and downloaded 0.7. Installed 0.7 (the installation program was told to delete the old 0.6 nstallation). Now when the mozilla.exe is executed it shows the splash screen, eats between 13 and 16 megs and then just sist there with zero percent cpu usage. (Rebooting does not help either)

Uninstalled 0.7 and re-installed 0.6 - which now behaves in exactly the same manner.

Ideas anyone?

#23 Won't even start

by jahebe

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 4:30 AM

Reply to this message

Right! This is on Windows NT 4 SP5:

I had 0.6 installed and downloaded 0.7. Installed 0.7 (the installation program was told to delete the old 0.6 nstallation). Now when the mozilla.exe is executed it shows the splash screen, eats between 13 and 16 megs and then just sist there with zero percent cpu usage. (Rebooting does not help either)

Uninstalled 0.7 and re-installed 0.6 - which now behaves in exactly the same manner.

Ideas anyone?

#24 Won't even start

by jahebe

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 4:43 AM

Reply to this message

Right! This is on Windows NT 4 SP5:

I had 0.6 installed and downloaded 0.7. Installed 0.7 (the installation program was told to delete the old 0.6 nstallation). Now when the mozilla.exe is executed it shows the splash screen, eats between 13 and 16 megs and then just sist there with zero percent cpu usage. (Rebooting does not help either)

Uninstalled 0.7 and re-installed 0.6 - which now behaves in exactly the same manner.

Ideas anyone?

#25 Oops.. Sorry 'bout that

by jahebe

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 4:48 AM

Reply to this message

Old netscape here - The form appeared empty..

*blush*

#26 Talkback builds

by dave532

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 5:58 AM

Reply to this message

Why do the releases not come with talkback builds anymore?

#36 Re: Talkback builds

by leaf

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 9:50 AM

Reply to this message

mozilla milestones were once upon a time linked with netscape internal milestones... this led to the production of a netscape commercial build for testing, and consequently, the production of a talkback xpi. Netscape allows mozilla.org to use these xpis when they are available (since they work with mozilla builds as well as the commercial netscape builds).

The milestones for mozilla.org have diverged from the milestone path taken by netscape; as a consequence, the branch builds done for mozilla are not produced with corresponding talkback packages.

The daily builds still have talkback, and that\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s probably where talkback is most useful, since problems are constantly being corrected.

#30 Only one thing keeping me from using Moz .7 24/7

by JoeCool <joel@sysopt.com>

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 8:20 AM

Reply to this message

The thing that I have always disliked about Mozilla is that it always opens a new window right over the top of the old window. Is there any way to change that so that it cascades like basically every other browser (every previous version of Netscape and IE both cascade)? The new window over old window has gotten quite annoying to deal with.

Thanks.

#32 Re: Only one thing keeping me from using Moz .7 24

by Figment

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 9:27 AM

Reply to this message

I agree, I end up habitually moving the windows in place for usability. Anybody w/ plans to look at this?

#34 Re: Only one thing keeping me from using Moz .7 24

by KaiRo <KaiRo@KaiRo.at>

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 9:35 AM

Reply to this message

Hmm, that sounds like an interesting issue. Did you Query BugZilla <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/> is this bug is already reported there and file a new bug if it's not? Would be good to have that issue tracked there.

#37 Re: Only one thing keeping me from using Moz .7

by JoeCool <joel@sysopt.com>

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 10:38 AM

Reply to this message

Well, I'm not exactly good at using the BugZilla Query feature. I don't trust myself to know whether or not the bug has actually been filed.

All I know is that it has not been part of Moz since I've been using Mozilla builds (all the way from Milestone 7), and I have always wanted it. If one of those in the 10-bug-reports-a-minute crowd would report, I'd be much obliged. :)

#38 Bug has been logged for a long time

by theuiguy

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 11:00 AM

Reply to this message

It's also a frequent duplicate. Hopefully someone will fix it soon.

<http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25455>

#39 Vote for this bug

by JoeCool <joel@sysopt.com>

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 11:22 AM

Reply to this message

might as well start promoting it to be fixed. :)

#42 Vote for this bug

by JoeCool <joel@sysopt.com>

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 1:31 PM

Reply to this message

might as well start promoting it to be fixed. :)

#31 Java doesn't install on Linux

by sbaums

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 8:44 AM

Reply to this message

The Sun Java plugin installs fine on Windows Mozilla 0.7, but on Linux (Debian 2.2) installation fails with the following:

Java 2 Plug-in for Linux: Download was unsuccessful. Please try again. The Java Plug-in is 7.6Mb and will take you 37 minutes to fully download with a 28.8 modem or 19 minutes with a 56K modem. Alternatively, you can download this plug-in directly from our FTP site at <ftp://ftp.netscape.com/pu…32/smartupdate/jre13i.exe> for Windows. Please e-mail <ftp-plugins@netscape.com> if you continue to have problems. Error encountered -- -235

First I thought this has to do with insufficient disk space, but after deleting some stuff, surely 34M is enough for the plugin?

Stefan

#40 Re: Java doesn't install on Linux

by sbaums

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 11:34 AM

Reply to this message

Well, as it turns out, 34M is _not_ enough for the Java plugin: 81M is what it takes. Which I think is excessive.

Stefan

#41 Re : Java on linux

by fab

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 12:35 PM

Reply to this message

I doubt it needs that much really.. This seems very strange, it's the first time I've heard such a thing. Error 225 is either not enough disk space or you lack write-permission to the directory...

#43 Re: Re : Java on linux

by sbaums

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 1:49 PM

Reply to this message

No really, it does:

/home/stefan> du -s /usr/local/mozilla/plugins/java2/ 80816 /usr/local/mozilla/plugins/java2

There are many things coming with the plugin that appear somehat peripheral to my uninitiated eyes (TrueType fonts, audio files, localization data, etc.).

Will it be possible anytime soon to use a Java implementation different from Sun's with Mozilla?

Stefan

#44 Re: Re: Re : Java on linux

by sbaums

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 1:57 PM

Reply to this message

Oops, make that 39 megabytes: my 'du' is using 512 byte blocks by default.

/home/stefan> du -hs /usr/local/mozilla/plugins/java2/

39M /usr/local/mozilla/plugins/java2/

It still seems a lot...

Stefan

#47 Re: Java slowness on Linux

by damian <daemonc@netscape.net>

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 10:12 PM

Reply to this message

Furthermore, why does the Java plugin need to load during startup? I don't use Java that much, and would prefer to go back to the old way of loading the plugin when needed. Recently it has been taking a minute or more to start Mozilla.

#63 Re: Java doesn't install on Linux

by chinlj4

Thursday January 11th, 2001 6:51 PM

Reply to this message

Java plugin installed successfully and works fine immediately after the installation. However, after exiting the browser, it can never be started again with the error

**************** SERVER ERROR ************** gethostbyname() failed, errno = 2 **************** ************ ************** # # An unexpected exception has been detected in native code outside the VM.# Program counter=0x48c1b523 # # Problematic Thread: prio=1 tid=0x8054708 nid=0x2f2 runnable #

It happens on Netscape 6 and every Mozilla builds/releases. Is this due to the API changes as mention in the OJI project web site?

I am running RedHat Linux 6.2, glibc 2.1 with a custom made kernel 2.2.18 and 2.4.0.

#45 Odd Mail behavior

by n_half

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 3:23 PM

Reply to this message

Upgraded 0.6 to 0.7 yesterday, and have been having problems with mail attachments ever since. emails received with attachments no longer show that anything is attached - the paperclip is gone, and i can't save out the attachments. the data is still there, as verified by the size of the messages, it's just inaccessible. this is on a win2k box. anyone having similar problems?

#46 0.7 doesn't support input type image

by kaldari

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 4:42 PM

Reply to this message

It looks like Mozilla 0.7 doesn't support inputs of type 'image' (at least on Mac). This is a pretty huge bug which renders many sites unusable. What's the deal yo?

#48 http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63846

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Wednesday January 10th, 2001 10:46 PM

Reply to this message

<http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63846>

You are right, this is a pretty huge bug, this is mac only and this does indeed render many sites unusable. There were a lot of big bugs that shipped with 0.7 and this was one of them. I hope it is fixed for 0.8

--Asa

#50 -chrome

by basic <_basic@yahoo.com>

Thursday January 11th, 2001 12:26 AM

Reply to this message

Has anyone had trouble with the mozilla -chrome chrome://foo.xul option? I can't seem to get it to work on recent nightly and 0.7 (Win32). Just wondering if anyone knows anything.

Basic

#54 seems much snappier on FreeBSD

by pvanheus

Thursday January 11th, 2001 7:37 AM

Reply to this message

Hi Mozilla-heads

I\\\'ve just compiled 0.7 on FreeBSD 4-STABLE, and it seems much snappier than previous builds (my previous build was M18). Great!

Peter

#55 WON'T START

by Nacheeze

Thursday January 11th, 2001 9:16 AM

Reply to this message

Hi I was using mozilla 0.6 fine.. downloaded 0.7. Deleted the 0.6 and ran the 0.7. WOn't WORK!!!! just gives the splash screen... but gets stuck on that. Any ideas??????????

#56 Re: WON'T START

by Nacheeze

Thursday January 11th, 2001 9:18 AM

Reply to this message

me again... I AM USING... WIN2000. AThlon 900. 512MB RAM.. system.

Any idea why it won't work??? anyone?

#57 Try....

by FrodoB

Thursday January 11th, 2001 9:29 AM

Reply to this message

Delete your chrome directory. This is probably the "won't start if the theme used in a profile is no longer present" bug. <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56581> has some of this discussion.

#80 Profile issues

by fab

Friday January 12th, 2001 2:21 PM

Reply to this message

This is a profile compatibility issue between 0.6 and 0.7. Please remove your profile directory (the dir with your profile name) and create a new one with the profilemanager ("mozilla -profilemanager"). Importing ns4 profiles will also work, but netscape 6 profiles will NOT work. Please restart Mozilla with this fresh profile, this should fix your problem. (the reason is the profile format was modified between 0.6 and 0.7, sorry for any inconvenience)

#58 what the heck

by kolar

Thursday January 11th, 2001 11:43 AM

Reply to this message

How come CSS still doesn\'t effect HR tags??

Bla

#59 Re: what the heck

by tny

Thursday January 11th, 2001 12:15 PM

Reply to this message

Funny, this works fine:

hr {border-top-color: red; border-top-style: solid; border-top-size: 1px; border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-bottom-style: none;}

#61 doh!!

by kolar

Thursday January 11th, 2001 2:14 PM

Reply to this message

I should have said that the color: aspect of CSS 1 doesn't effect it.

Bla

#72 Coloured <hr>s Re: doh!!

by adrake

Friday January 12th, 2001 12:34 AM

Reply to this message

Actually, it does, but since color: 's applied to text, it only affects borders. If you want a solid hr, set background: to whichever colour you wanted, or perhaps a tint lighter. They've a rather nice grooved effect in Mozilla, but look flat in Opera.

Alex

#74 proper way

by kolar

Friday January 12th, 2001 9:32 AM

Reply to this message

is thatthe proper CSS was to do it??

bla

#79 Re: proper way

by adrake

Friday January 12th, 2001 2:07 PM

Reply to this message

Looks like it to me. According to the CSS1 spec, color: "describes the text color of an element" and hr's are empty, so it'd be the same as styling a blank table cell. If you're interested, the CSS Pointers group (<http://www.css.nu>) has a link to someone's page where he describes replacing an hr with a separator graphic, and iirc, he goes into more detail on styling hr's in general.

#82 Correct link Re: proper way

by adrake

Friday January 12th, 2001 2:33 PM

Reply to this message

Sorry, forgot that urls autoconvert. The CSSPG links are at <http://www.css.nu/pointers/> and Alan Flavell's page is at <http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.u…Eflavell/www/hrstyle.html> .

Alex

#85 hmmm

by kolar

Friday January 12th, 2001 10:16 PM

Reply to this message

it figures that I would think IE was doing it right.

bla

#60 MHO

by Sparkster

Thursday January 11th, 2001 12:21 PM

Reply to this message

hello. mozilla 0.7 is neat. there are still a lot of bugs, but it seems that mozilla becomes more and more accepted by the crowd. beside of usual bugfixing and performance improvements, i would suggest the following issues to be looked into for a next release:

themes. why don't you put two or three of the great new themes into the bundle? maybe this is senseless for mozilla as a developer-targeted product, but maybe beonex should do so? are you listening beonex? :) at least the skin alfredo as an alternative mozilla skin and native.windows as a native look for win users and thinice as a native look for unix users (maybe a mac theme, too). this would be great and new users wouldn't be scared if they don't like modern or the old and ugly classic look. aphrodite would be a great example too, especially because it shows what is possible with mozilla.

than... why is the forms manager not working with mozillazine.org ??? it always saves the title as username, so that it asks if it should save the new username everytime i write a new posting. this is really stupid. please change either the forms manager or the mozillazine.org code.

at last there is this ugly table-border rendering bug, but i already stressed that and i'm sure you are aware of it. ;)

keep up the unbelievable great work.

#64 Form manager works fine here (N/T)

by arnoudb <arnoudb@dds.nl>

Thursday January 11th, 2001 6:54 PM

Reply to this message

NT

#66 hm

by Sparkster

Thursday January 11th, 2001 7:22 PM

Reply to this message

ah yes, of course it works, but it always saves the title as username. this wouldn\'t be much of a problem, but everytime i do a new post it asks me if it should save the new \"user\". also the last used title is always entered automagically into the form. it\'s just acting weird. ;) maybe there is no chance to change this in mozilla, but it could be changed on mozillazine.org to make it more mozilla compatible... ;)

#68 I notice the same problem

by JoeCool <joel@sysopt.com>

Thursday January 11th, 2001 10:13 PM

Reply to this message

I've found that little bug rather annoying. I probably have 5 or 6 saved passwords for this single login simply because I didn't understand what was going on... that Mozilla was saving the post title (as the username) for each post I've made. Not only that, but I'm prompted by the username on EACH PAGE I click on in the Mozillazine.org forums.

#69

by Sparkster

Thursday January 11th, 2001 11:36 PM

Reply to this message

tasks -> privacy & security -> password manager -> view stored passwords. at least you can delete your them. :) but i still think, it should be changed...

#70 oops

by Sparkster

Thursday January 11th, 2001 11:37 PM

Reply to this message

s/delete your them/delete them/

#81 For Kerz - Chris : fix the comments forms!

by fab

Friday January 12th, 2001 2:24 PM

Reply to this message

I agree this is annoying. Kerz, Chris, do you think it would be possible to do anything about it on the mozillazine.org side?

#62 I wonder though...

by arnoudb <arnoudb@dds.nl>

Thursday January 11th, 2001 6:50 PM

Reply to this message

...where did the syntax highlighting in View Source ever go?? I think it worked way back in like M14 or something, but where is it now, and when if ever will it return? I've missed it and couldn't find a bug # on it, but I can hardly believe something this obvious hasn't been filed before... Anyone know what's going on here?

Also, why doesn't Win32 moz display the status while loading in the splash screen like NS4.x and Moz on Mac?

#75 a pref!

by NikoP

Friday January 12th, 2001 9:44 AM

Reply to this message

you need to insert the following pref into your prefs.js (since there's no ui for it) to turn it on: user_pref("browser.view_source.syntax_highlight", true);

it was turned off by default because of performance reasons.

#65 help... :)

by Sparkster

Thursday January 11th, 2001 7:16 PM

Reply to this message

urks... i just tried to start mozilla 0.7 and it stops with the following error: Registering plugin 0 for: "*","All types",".*" XML Error in file 'chrome://navigator/content/navigator.xul', Line Number: 40, Col Number: 0, Description: undefined entity Source Line: <window id="main-window" xmlns:html="<http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml>" i already removed my .mozilla dir but nothing happend (without that it created a new profile). the last theme i used was "alfred". any ideas?

#71 Re: help... :)

by Sparkster

Thursday January 11th, 2001 11:39 PM

Reply to this message

never mind, i solved it by simply reinstallig mozilla. i guess one of the themes was foobared. there should be a way to recover mozilla, if a theme is broken...

#67 Mozilla 0.7 and SSL

by javaman67 <javaman67@acd.net>

Thursday January 11th, 2001 7:38 PM

Reply to this message

I had SSL and java working just fine in 0.6, but now can't get either to work in 0.7 and with this new release SSL is supposed to be already included. Any ideas?

#73 Re: Mozilla 0.7 and SSL

by gwooledge <greg@wooledge.org>

Friday January 12th, 2001 7:48 AM

Reply to this message

I've been trying to figure out how to make SSL work for about a week now. I've been completely unable to find any documentation.

System is i386 running Debian GNU/Linux.

I've got mozilla source code, from CVS. When I run ./configure --help I don't see any mention of security, or SSL, or PSM at all. There's a security/psm directory, but typing 'make' in there doesn't do anything magical.

The Debug|Install PSM menu option leads me to iplanet.com and gives me an option to install PSM for Linux. This goes smoothly, generates a success message, populates the dist/bin directory with some shared objects... and then utterly fails to work when I type https://.... (And why is one of the shared objects for the SPARC arch, anyway?)

I'm currently configuring with "../mozilla/configure --with-jpeg --with-zlib --with-png --enable-nspr-autoconf --with-nspr --disable-mailnews --disable-debug --enable-optimize", using a separate directory for the build. (The security directory is not being created in the build directory, which I think is a symptom of the problem....)

Is there any documentation on building mozilla with SSL yet? I'm probably overlooking something fairly simple....

#78 http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60912

by afranke

Friday January 12th, 2001 12:57 PM

Reply to this message

It's a bug... :)

#84 Re: Mozilla 0.7 and SSL

by javaman67 <javaman67@acd.net>

Friday January 12th, 2001 7:25 PM

Reply to this message

I recieved the answer in a newsgroup....I had to install 0.7 in my home directory and not in /usr/local. Now SSL works fine. I'm not sure why, but I'm not arguing either.

#76 Where\\\\\\\'s MATHML-SVG-XSLT?

by skeeterow <skeetersrow@netscape.net>

Friday January 12th, 2001 10:57 AM

Reply to this message

Hi Looks like (road map) there won\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t be anymore M 19, M20 ect. Okay, no biggy. However before there has always been a browser with MATHML-SVG-XSLT enabled a week or so after a M release. With M 0.6 this did not happen of course. It is shown in the road map as being on the NS 6 branch. The M 0.7 is shown as on the trunk. Is Mozilla dumping its more advanced Browser? Yes, Jerry Baker is still supplying an enabled browser however it doesn\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t contain an email or news program. Just a raw browser almost like back in the days of M 5, well not quite so. Those were the days. But to regrade a bit, Hey Mozilla, where\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s the beef?

steve SVG for Mozilla <http://www.skeeter-s.com/svg>

#86 Re: Wheres MATHML-SVG-XSLT?

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Sunday January 14th, 2001 11:39 AM

Reply to this message

skeeterow, those were builds contributed to mozila.org by jerry baker. mozilla.org has not changed it's process we just haven't received the contribution.

#77 What About Mozilla 0.7 for BeOS?

by jck2000

Friday January 12th, 2001 12:06 PM

Reply to this message

I thought I would see more prominent mention of the mozilla.org headline story announcing the availability of a Mozilla 0.7 binary for BeOS. It is still very much an alpha release (I feel lucky when I can get in 10 minutes of browsing before a crash), but it is great to see the tremendous progress that has been made.

#83 next Netscape release

by pepperxn

Friday January 12th, 2001 3:02 PM

Reply to this message

Does anyone know when the next Netscape release(6.01 etc.)will be and what Mozilla Build(0.8,0.9,1.0,etc.)it would be based on?

#89 another bug on mozillazine.org

by Sparkster

Monday January 15th, 2001 5:14 AM

Reply to this message

the indentation of the answers renders the forumssystem almost useless. but i'm sure this is an already often reported bug. here is a screenshot: <http://home.wtal.de/borgmann/mozillaindent.png> shot with mozilla 0.7

#90 how to get SSL to work

by pvanheus

Wednesday January 24th, 2001 2:05 AM

Reply to this message

From the release notes I thought that SSL was included in this release, yet it doesn't seem to be compiled and installed by default. What do I have to do for SSL to work?