Mozilla 1.0 Release Candidate 3 Status UpdateSunday May 19th, 2002On Friday, Chris Hofmann, acting on behalf of drivers@mozilla.org, posted an RC3 status update to netscape.public.mozilla.seamonkey. The update contains details about the progress so far and information on how you can help make RC3 not suck. that RC3 is the last release candidate... I'd rather see RC3, RC4, RC5 or whatever it takes rather than rush it and be filled with bugs. I'm crossing my fingers that this very visible bug gets fixed soon: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26882 >> I'd rather see RC3, RC4, RC5 or whatever it takes rather than rush it and be filled with bugs. What he said. Has anybody considered fixing the known bugs before calling it a release candidate? tell me of a single application that has no known bugs? i'm not talking about nasa control programs, but real world end user applications. here, i'll save you the trouble: it doesn't exist. Is it possible to make Mozilla not suck, in few weeks? Or this is going to take more time than a weeks? They're nearly there, check <a title="make rc3 not suck" href="http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=143200">this page</a> for bugs yet to be fixed to make rc3 not suck. As opposed to...? IE6 has currently 12 known security holes http://jscript.dk/unpatched/ after all 12 or 20 or something patches have been applied. I guess it does, if wear a black hat. As opposed to...? IE6 has currently 12 known security holes http://jscript.dk/unpatched/ after all 12 or 20 or something patches have been applied. I guess it does, if wear a black hat. I can't believe that mozilla is going to 1.0 with the disappearing tab border bug (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116394) - I'd gotten used to it in the nightlies, so why isn't it fixed in 1.0? This makes mozilla look broken, if this isn't fixed I will not be using 1.0 and I won't be able to recommend it to other people. "if this isn't fixed I will not be using 1.0 and I won't be able to recommend it to other people" are you serious!? you wouldn't use or recommend a production release of a web browser because of this slight cosmetic user interface problem? I wonder how many people you'll deter from moving to the browser atall because of your inadvertant teaching by example; I bet ther'll be a few. if those doing the coding on Mozilla took heed of such extreme opinions as this then the application would never ever reach its 1.0 It was enough for me to stop using Classic, instead putting up with Modern (I use GrayModern now, which is nice - not so much blue). A slight cosmetic interface problem can get really annoying when you see it all day long. Modern has similar problem - when you have tabs always open, even when there is only one (not default settings), opening the second one "jumps" tabs one or two pixels. There's a bug for it already... Obviously, I'll just get them to use a decent nightly build instead. I would hope that after three years the goal of RC3 would be a little higher than "not sucks". sPh I use RC2 on WinNT with QuickLaunch on, so Mozilla is always running. I use IE as well. I do View Source on IE - it brings up the source in Notepad. I save the file with an .htm extention on the desktop. A while later (like 10-15 minutes) I try to delete it and it says that there has been a sharing violation (i.e. some other program is using file). I used Handle by Sysinternals to find out which program has the file and it reports that Mozilla does. Somewhat stunned (since this file was not downloaded by Moz), I close Mozilla and voila - I can delete the file. Can anyone explain this? I just figured it out - and it is a pretty major bug. I forgot that I subsequently used web-based email in Moz and attached this file. It appears that Moz takes control of every file that is browsed and placed into <input type=File... Here is the output of Handle program that lists files locked by Mozilla. (I attached rbcheck.htm and tt.log) Handle v2.0 Copyright (C) 1997-2001 Mark Russinovich Sysinternals - www.sysinternals.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ mozilla.exe pid: 235 DBG\RGELB 4: Section C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\mozilla.exe 70: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\component.reg b4: Section \BaseNamedObjects\spiral_persistent_counter_shared_memoryNetscapeGecko1.0Win322002051008 11c: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\default\hppn8pz9.slt\history.dat 150: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\modern.jar 154: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\en-US.jar 158: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\default\hppn8pz9.slt\cert7.db 15c: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\comm.jar 164: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\toolkit.jar 170: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\en-win.jar 194: Section \BaseNamedObjects\RotHintTable 1b0: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\US.jar 1b4: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\help.jar 1b8: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\messenger.jar 1bc: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\default\hppn8pz9.slt\Cache\_CACHE_003_ 1c0: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\inspector.jar 1c4: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\default\hppn8pz9.slt\Cache\_CACHE_002_ 1cc: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\default\hppn8pz9.slt\Cache\25FFD300d01 1d0: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\venkman.jar 1d8: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\chatzilla.jar 1f8: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\default\hppn8pz9.slt\key3.db 210: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\default\hppn8pz9.slt\Cache\_CACHE_MAP_ 214: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Application Data\Mozilla\Profiles\default\hppn8pz9.slt\Cache\_CACHE_001_ 29c: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Desktop\rbcheck.htm 2e0: File C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\chrome\pippki.jar 314: File C:\WINNT\Profiles\rgelb.000\Desktop\tt.log 328: File C:\Business\Netscape\Program\Plugins On Windows, a lot programs do that -- one of the text editors I used where I used to work had a tendency to keep handles to files open until I opened a new one. Try the process again, but instead of closing Mozilla open another local file (like bookmarks.html) and see if Moz releases the original file. I'm not sure if this is a bug in Moz or a bug in Windows itself. Anyone who knows about the Win32 system care to comment? I submitted a bug, and it was marked a duplicate of 126829, which is verified fixed as of Friday. So I guess, we can call it resolved. As far as the Win32, it works with files in the same manner as unix or mac or whatever. When you open a file, you are given a handle by the system. After the program is done with it, it is supposed to close the handle. As mentioned in the notes for the bug, the file wasn't being closed. I was looking at the "make RC3 not suck" bug http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=143200 and one of the bugs is protected: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=143200. I wonder what it is? You mean bug 127702 http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127702 ? It's probably 'security sensitive'. Alex That second link should have been http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127702 Mozilla didn't seem to be doing the "copy link location" thing correctly :( the checkin says: for security purposes, only allow imap urls originating from external sources - perform a limited set of actions. Currently the allowed set includes: 1) folder selection 2) message fetch 3) message part fetch The checked in code just makes sure that the action is one of the allowed actions before it launches the external url I find the "Copy Link Location does no X copy" bug http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93308 rather annoying on Linux. It's not that uncommon to want to paste an URL from browser to somewhere else, so I'd think that this will annoy lots of people on Linux if left unfixed. (Yes, I've voted for this already) 1) That's not the bug you are seeing 2) The bug you are seeing (<http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=143607>) is fixed Is there any hope that in the future Mozilla could be faster? Or is just too big bug to fix? It starts slowly and even a bit exotic or bigger sites seems to be hard for Moz. Can't be true that IE is most optimized browser. |