MozillaZine

Mozilla 1.3 Released

Thursday March 13th, 2003

Mozilla 1.3 is now available for download. This release features many Mail & Newsgroups enhancements, including Bayesian spam classification, message views and more sophisticated filtering options. Also new is automatic image resizing, which shrinks large images so that they fit on screen, and you can now switch profiles without restarting (Tools > Switch Profile...). In addition, Mozilla 1.3 offers an initial implementation of Midas, an API that provides rich text editing controls for documents. There's also almost 2,000 other bug fixes. Check out the Release Notes for more information and grab a build from the mozilla.org Releases Page or FTP site.


#1 Updater

by linderdm

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:19 PM

Reply to this message

Is the Mozilla team ever going to create an updater so that you don't have to uninstall then reinstall everything every time? Is this a bug? This would be one of the best new features to implement.

#5 Re: Updater

by Sander

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:40 PM

Reply to this message

As far as I've heard so many files are changed between releases (in the order of 80%) that such an update functionality would be nearly pointless, as the size of the download would nearly equal that of a full install. That leaves the point of no longer needing to uninstall the older version - I think nowadays you don't really have to anymore anyway; we already do lots of clean up of old files that cause problems. The problem is that it's nearly impossible to guarantee that there won't be any problems if you don't uninstall first, due to the huge amount of possible combinations of leftover files... and that doesn't seem to be a problem likely to go away or get any better anytime soon.

#23 Re: Re: Updater

by jilles

Thursday March 13th, 2003 3:23 PM

Reply to this message

At a least a profile migration tool would be handy. The annoying thing about installing a new mozilla is that you have to manually copy and install all your addons, settings and plugins. Automating this should be straightforward. Admittedly, some mozdev stuff probably breaks but stuff like cookies, plugin dlls, mail, passwords, bookmarks, etc should be relatively easy to migrate. Everytime I install mozilla it costs me half an hour to get it in the state I want it to be. As a consequence, I hardly ever bother with nightlies because it takes too much time to set everything up.

#26 Re: Re: Re: Updater

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Thursday March 13th, 2003 3:35 PM

Reply to this message

Mozilla XUL extension developers can now install xul extensions to the profile dir where they won't get overwritten. It's up to the extension developer to do that. You can already keep plugins in the profile. Cookies, bookmarks, prefs, form data, etc. is by default stored in the profile and won't be touched by a new install.

--Asa

#51 Still 1.3 blockers open?

by NilsE

Friday March 14th, 2003 2:47 AM

Reply to this message

If you look at <http://bugzilla.mozilla.o…value0-0-0=blocking1.3%2B> you'll see that there are still 1.3 blockers open (7 right now). What's the rationale behind this? Shouldn't a "blocker" block something? ;-)

Nils

#68 Re: Still 1.3 blockers open?

by gadeiros <Harald@Henkel.DAH.UUnet.DE>

Friday March 14th, 2003 10:52 AM

Reply to this message

Look here this select <http://bugzilla.mozilla.o…value0-0-0=blocking1.3%2B>

Of the 7 bugs, 5 carry the Fixed1.3 in the Status Summary (Whiteboard). They seem to not be closed, mainly because the fixes haven't been applied to the the Trunk (1.4).

The Mac bug is left open, because the problem doesn't seem to happen often.

And the other one, due to the proposed fact, that this feature is almost not used at all by Web-authors yet.

No reason, not to release 1.3, I think.

Harald

#71 Re: Still 1.3 blockers open?

by BjarneDM <mozilla@mathiesen.info>

Friday March 14th, 2003 12:03 PM

Reply to this message

Well , the Mac issue was serious enough to block the ability to install *any* xpi and theme in 1.3final :-( This issue is mentioned as the first things in the release notes about new issues : <http://www.mozilla.org/re…es/mozilla1.3/#new-issues>

See here for my comments on this : <http://www.mozillazine.or…essage=17&state=reply>

#80 Re: Still 1.3 blockers open?

by gadeiros <Harald@Henkel.DAH.UUnet.DE>

Saturday March 15th, 2003 5:31 AM

Reply to this message

Look here this select <http://bugzilla.mozilla.o…value0-0-0=blocking1.3%2B>

Of the 7 bugs, 5 carry the Fixed1.3 in the Status Summary (Whiteboard). They seem to not be closed, mainly because the fixes haven't been applied to the the Trunk (1.4).

The Mac bug is left open, because the problem doesn't seem to happen often.

And the other one, due to the proposed fact, that this feature is almost not used at all by Web-authors yet.

No reason, not to release 1.3, I think.

Harald

#43 I never had to do that

by ecarlson

Thursday March 13th, 2003 8:02 PM

Reply to this message

I just uninstall the old, then rename the application directory and install the new. I never lost any profile settings like e-mail or bookmarks or cookies or passwords, but since I rename the program directory (which probably isn't necessary), I do have to move my flash plugin to the new program directory after install, but that's only one DLL file. I also have to reinstall the spell checker, but that's only a few clicks away.

But maybe only the Windows version is that easy.

- Eric, InvisibleRobot.com <http://www.InvisibleRobot.com/>

#28 Re: Re: Updater

by robbtreborus

Thursday March 13th, 2003 3:59 PM

Reply to this message

couldn't the use diff & patch to update only the parts, of each file, that have changed? but then again that would only work if they knew what version you were updating from.

#30 Re: Re: Re: Updater

by bzbarsky

Thursday March 13th, 2003 4:12 PM

Reply to this message

diff and patch don't work too hot on binary files. In fact, they don't work at all, pretty much.

#55 Not much binary.

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Friday March 14th, 2003 6:37 AM

Reply to this message

Not much of mozilla is binary actually, its mostly script html xul and css files with many jpgs and pings, both of which I doupt change very often.

#56 png not ping sorry

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Friday March 14th, 2003 6:39 AM

Reply to this message

png I meant not pings hahaha

#69 Re: Not much binary.

by bzbarsky

Friday March 14th, 2003 11:05 AM

Reply to this message

Um... That's the _UI_. The UI takes up very little space. The core layout DLL is about 3MB; adding in a couple of other core DLLs brings up the size to about 8-9MB on Windows, 10MB on Linux. All of those are _very_ binary and I assure you that they change pretty often.

#7 Re: Updater

by bzbarsky

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:43 PM

Reply to this message

Yes, that's a bug on "installer".

#2 what about bug 185169?

by thegoldenear

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:33 PM

Reply to this message

bug 185169 seems an important regression - 'server-side imagemap replaces URL query rather than appending'... from that bug: "This seems to have missed the 1.3 train. Perhaps for 1.3.1, though, if we do such a thing." "Leaving open for 1.3.1"

anyone know what is likely to happen?

#6 Re: what about bug 185169?

by bzbarsky

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:41 PM

Reply to this message

The number of server-side imagemaps out in the world is approximately 0 (notice how long it took to even notice the bug existed -- over 3 months). 1.3.1 would mean that something was badly wrong with 1.3, so I think we can all hope that won't happen.

#9 marvellous

by thegoldenear

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:52 PM

Reply to this message

thats good to hear. I'm rolling this out soon and got a bit worried. thanks

#38 approximately 1

by thelem

Thursday March 13th, 2003 7:23 PM

Reply to this message

Treeloot uses one - <http://www.treeloot.com/>

#73 Re: approximately 1

by unclebob <bradleyjquinn@hotmail.com>

Friday March 14th, 2003 2:03 PM

Reply to this message

Just make sure you have popup blocking turned on before you go there ;)

#3 New Address Bar Behavior

by fishbert

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:38 PM

Reply to this message

Hey all, I immediatly noticed that with Mozilla 1.3 double-clicking in the address bar no longer selects the whole address -- just a single word. And that triple-clicking does nothing (typical - at least in windows - triple clicking behavior is 'select all' when double clicking selects a word). Now, I understand that clicking on the icon in the address bar selects the whole address, but I'm wondering if there is any way to make Mozilla behave the way it used to as I've described (perhaps with a user.js line or something). Yeah, I know I'm picky. =)

#4 Re: New Address Bar Behavior

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:40 PM

Reply to this message

"And that triple-clicking does nothing (typical - at least in windows - triple clicking behavior is 'select all' when double clicking selects a word)."

Works for me.

"I'm wondering if there is any way to make Mozilla behave the way it used to as I've described (perhaps with a user.js line or something)."

I think there is.

Alex

#49 Re: Re: New Address Bar Behavior

by jolmy

Thursday March 13th, 2003 9:00 PM

Reply to this message

you may also click ONCE, on the address, & it will select All. However, do this when the cursor on the address bar isn't visible.

#8 Re: New Address Bar Behavior

by bzbarsky

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:44 PM

Reply to this message

Triple-clicking should be selecting the whole url...

But in any case, user_pref("layout.word_select.stop_at_punctuation", false); will do what you want.

#10 Danke

by fishbert

Thursday March 13th, 2003 1:53 PM

Reply to this message

Ok, triple-clicking works for me too..... I think it was a case of me shooting my mouth off before checking with the latest 1.3 build (it didn't for the 2nd release candidate. In any case, thanks for the user_pref line!

#11 Umm...

by durbacher

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:13 PM

Reply to this message

I have this pref set and I don't think it works as it should. I assume it should make that double-click already selects the whole URL and you don't have to do a triple-click. According to the description of bug 193025 this regressed January 14th (and I can confirm that I noticed it around that time). But as it seems only on Windows. There are several comments by Jason about it in the bug (although the bug is not about this problem).

#78 Re: Umm...

by fishbert

Friday March 14th, 2003 6:17 PM

Reply to this message

Yeah.... I just tried setting that pref in my user.js file, and it doesn't change a thing. (on WinXP Pro) So I guess I'm stuck triple-clicking for a while. I hope they get that pref working again soon.

#20 what about a single click?

by i5mast

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:51 PM

Reply to this message

just clicking once selects the whole url for me. running win2k

#33 specifically, the first single click

by thegrommit

Thursday March 13th, 2003 5:50 PM

Reply to this message

It used to be that the first click in the address bar would select the entire URL. This is no longer the case (at least under Win2K SP3). Clicking on the icon is fine and dandy, but the default one seems to have a small active target. Is there a preference to restore the "first click" behaviour?

#34 specifically, the first single click

by thegrommit

Thursday March 13th, 2003 5:52 PM

Reply to this message

Oops - this was meant as a reply to the "new address bar behaviour" thread.

#36 never mind

by thegrommit

Thursday March 13th, 2003 6:15 PM

Reply to this message

first clicking in the url selects the entire url, first clicking at the end no longer does so

#53 just use CTRL L

by bandido

Friday March 14th, 2003 5:20 AM

Reply to this message

Pressing CTRL L is alot more convenient and does the same thing without the single/double or triplie clicking.

#64 no! just use Alt+D

by Tar

Friday March 14th, 2003 8:49 AM

Reply to this message

Pressing Alt+D is alot more convenient and does the same thing without using two hands or doing some finger acrobatics.

#94 Re: Composer change

by paulGI

Wednesday March 19th, 2003 3:32 PM

Reply to this message

Since I've just switched from Netscape 7.02 to Mozilla 1.3 I don't know if this is changed behaviour in Mozilla. But in the composer I now have to tripple click rather than double click text that contains "\" to select the whole thing. I for one don't like it.

#12 Example of Midas?

by robdogg

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:19 PM

Reply to this message

Any links?

#15 Re: Example of Midas?

by vgendler

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:36 PM

Reply to this message

Search <http://www.mozilla.org> for the key word "Midas" (omit quotes) and you will find something. Among them Midas Demo: <http://www.mozilla.org/editor/midasdemo>.

#18 Re: Re: Example of Midas?

by vgendler

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:44 PM

Reply to this message

Corrections of links

Search Mozilla.org <http://www.mozilla.org> for the key word "Midas" (omit quotes) and you will find something. Among them Midas Demo: <http://www.mozilla.org/editor/midasdemo> .

#61 Midas with images

by wroxbox

Friday March 14th, 2003 8:34 AM

Reply to this message

Is there any implementation of midas with inserting image?

Is midas going to have any form manipulation or table editing?

roadmap for midas?

#66 Re: Midas with images

by WillyWonka

Friday March 14th, 2003 9:19 AM

Reply to this message

In the example I looked at yesterday, I could insert a table no problem.

#58 Re: Example of Midas?

by kaldari

Friday March 14th, 2003 8:06 AM

Reply to this message

Check out sitemason.com, we have full support for Midas editing in our Page Builder tool. There's a press release about it on our press page:

<http://www.sitemason.com/about/press.html>

#13 XPInstall on MacOS X completely hosed

by BjarneDM <mozilla@mathiesen.info>

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:26 PM

Reply to this message

developers has noticed that many *.xpi's makes Mozilla crash on install. Thus, XPInstall has been swithed off in 1.3final for MacOS X (bug 186959) which of course makes 1.3final un-usable for most advanced users. see bug 197105 for meta-information. This feature-lack alone ought to be enough for a 1.3.1 release. There was a little discussion on irc / mozilla as to whether this justified a 1.3.1 release

Personally, I've obeserver the crash with leech (and filed a bug on it) but MultiZilla , Googlebox , BannerBlind and AdBlock worked perfectly for me.

#77 Re: XPInstall on MacOS X completely hosed

by styk

Friday March 14th, 2003 3:58 PM

Reply to this message

So what is the fix. I can't install themes or anything. Which is total crap! It is nice to see that the Mac OS X version of 1.3 now has the Apple way of doing programs instead of a folder with everything in it.

#81 Re: XPInstall on MacOS X completely hosed

by BjarneDM <mozilla@mathiesen.info>

Saturday March 15th, 2003 5:44 AM

Reply to this message

the temporary fix is to downgrade to 1.3rc2 and await the release of 1.3.1 !-) based on bug 197105 <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197105> there'll be a 1.3.1 (hopefully shortly)

Now, this is a list of mozdev project I know to install properly (not exhustive - just the ones I happen to use): MultiZilla , Googlebox , BannerBlind , AdBlock , EnigMail (two xpi's)

And this one fails: leech 1.1.0

#14 Advanced Searching of Messages

by vgendler

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:27 PM

Reply to this message

There was a convenient and often needed pushbutton on the Mail & Newsgroups window for Advanced Searching. There is a lot of real estate on this window. It would be good to put it back there and may be for several other menu selections.

#16 Linux Xft version?

by brettporter

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:39 PM

Reply to this message

Are these builds trying to be discouraged? The betas stopped showing them in the release notes, and now the build isn't even available... anyone know when they might turn up? Someone said there were a large number of bugs filed against it, but it looks great to me, and works as well as the other version. I don't think I can go back! :)

#59 Re: Linux Xft version?

by jmoraragweed

Friday March 14th, 2003 8:15 AM

Reply to this message

No 1.3 Xft builds means I stay with 1.2.1. Kind of a shame. Perhaps I'll put some together. Assuming nothing's broken..

#83 There are XFT builds on the ftp

by mariuz

Saturday March 15th, 2003 8:09 AM

Reply to this message

There are XFT builds on the ftp now I have tried the gtk2 rpms and it seems good , But now i have installed the xft rpm and mozilla is real fast :)

#17 XPInstall on MacOS X completely hosed

by BjarneDM <mozilla@mathiesen.info>

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:40 PM

Reply to this message

developers has noticed that many *.xpi's makes Mozilla crash on install. Thus, XPInstall has been swithed off in 1.3final for MacOS X (bug 186959) which of course makes 1.3final un-usable for most advanced users. see bug 197105 for meta-information. This feature-lack alone ought to be enough for a 1.3.1 release. There was a little discussion on irc / mozilla as to whether this justified a 1.3.1 release

Personally, I've obeserver the crash with leech (and filed a bug on it) but MultiZilla , Googlebox , BannerBlind and AdBlock worked perfectly for me.

#32 Re: XPInstall on MacOS X completely hosed

by Mayfoev

Thursday March 13th, 2003 4:32 PM

Reply to this message

#19 Netscape

by jdakula

Thursday March 13th, 2003 2:50 PM

Reply to this message

Will AOL be releasing a new version of Netscape based on 1.3?

#21 Re: Netscape

by Racer

Thursday March 13th, 2003 3:01 PM

Reply to this message

Its very doubtful that Netscape will be based on 1.3. They never released a Netscape based on 1.1 or 1.2.1, so I'd expect 1.3 to be ignored as well. There are multiple bug fixes and security enhancements from 1.1+ that have been used in 1.0x (which is the base for Netscape 7.0x), but the meat of features added to Mozilla since 1.1 will not show up in Netscape any time soon.

I expect that once 1.5 (or perhaps 1.6) is released, Netscape will release a new Netscape 8 project based on the new Mozilla. It is also possible that this new Mozilla will get the name Mozilla 2.0 and things will mirror how they were done with Mozilla 1.0x and Netscape 7. Of course, this is purely conjecture so don't chastize me if I'm wrong.

#37 I hope not

by rtvkuijk

Thursday March 13th, 2003 6:30 PM

Reply to this message

So much has improved that I hope the release a 7.1 or so based on Mozilla 1.3

#39 1.4

by thelem

Thursday March 13th, 2003 7:43 PM

Reply to this message

I've heard in a few places that Netscape are planning a release based on Mozilla 1.4 (codenamed buffy, I think)

Based on IE's current number, and what Netscape have done in the past I expect this will be called Netscape 7.5

See <http://www.mozillazine.or…articles/article2933.html> (especially the line "1.4 is short-ish customers making releases.") and <http://www.mozillazine.or…le=2933&message=19#19>

#57 Wishlist for next release Netscape

by ccapeng

Friday March 14th, 2003 7:49 AM

Reply to this message

Please add rich text editing in webpages to next Netscape release. Without this feature, I am telling customers to use Windos/IE. I believe the cross platform Midas is better solution.

#22 Mozilla Mail Not Working

by VM_100

Thursday March 13th, 2003 3:20 PM

Reply to this message

Hello everyone, I downloaded Mozilla 1.3 today but I cannot send any mail from it. I was using 1.2.1 before and the mail worked fine. I tested using different settings such as authentication but nothing works. I can receive mail but cannot send any. When I push the Send button, the progress bar is busy for 1 minute and then says Sending of Message failed. I tried the same settings in Outlook Express and both sending and receiving mail works fine in it so its not my account problem. Can any of you offer any suggestions? Thank you very much.

#24 Never Mind, Problem Fixed.

by VM_100

Thursday March 13th, 2003 3:24 PM

Reply to this message

I figured out the problem. Some how, Mozilla Mail was using an incorrectly stored username and password and it must have tried to authenticate that against the mail server several times until it gave up. I deleted it using the Password Manager and now everything works fine.

#25 Imported IE Favorites

by krausedw <mozilla@davidkrause.com>

Thursday March 13th, 2003 3:24 PM

Reply to this message

Since switching to a new computer, my Imported IE Favorites in the Bookmarks has always been empty. I have IE bookmarks but they aren't showing up. My guess is that it is looking in the wrong place. How do I fix it? I just upgraded to Mozilla 1.3 and blew away my profile beforehand, but they still aren't there.

#29 Re: Imported IE Favorites

by Down8 <down8@yahoo.com>

Thursday March 13th, 2003 4:07 PM

Reply to this message

The "Imported IE Favorites" is actually just a pointer to "X:\Documents and Settings\_login_\Favorites\" or whereever it is that your system places you defalut Favorites. So, if you keep your in a custom place, Moz might not be picking that up.

-bZj

#45 Re: Imported IE Favorites

by schapel

Thursday March 13th, 2003 8:26 PM

Reply to this message

Bug 176715 causes IE Favorites not to be imported.

#27 installer for OS X?

by wtmcgee

Thursday March 13th, 2003 3:51 PM

Reply to this message

are we ever going to see an 'installer' for os x? i dont use mail or chatzilla, and don't really want to download ~15 megs every time i get a nightly or full release. not a HUGE thing, but i do wish this would be implemented if possible.

#31 Re: Advanced Searching of Messages

by Ascaris <ascaris1@att.net>

Thursday March 13th, 2003 4:27 PM

Reply to this message

To get the advanced button back, add this to your userchrome.css:

#advancedButton { visibility: visible !important; }

If you also want to get rid of message views, to go back to the way the search bar was before, add this too:

#viewPickerBox { visibility: collapse; }

Frank

#40 Stop Button

by thelem

Thursday March 13th, 2003 7:46 PM

Reply to this message

Great. Is there a similar rule for the Stop and Next buttons in MailNews? I used to use these alot (Stop is particularly useful when you are deleting a piece of HTML spam over IMAP, something I do far too often).

#44 Re: Stop Button

by stu42j

Thursday March 13th, 2003 8:13 PM

Reply to this message

Speaking of which, I have often wished there was a way to delete a message without opening it first (or is there?).

#46 Re: Re: Stop Button

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Thursday March 13th, 2003 8:26 PM

Reply to this message

sure. context click and delete doesn't load the message.

--Asa

#47 Re: Stop Button

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Thursday March 13th, 2003 8:42 PM

Reply to this message

"Is there a similar rule for the Stop and Next buttons in MailNews?"

Probably. Or you could just go into the Preferences and enable them there. :-)

Alex

#48 Doh!

by thelem

Thursday March 13th, 2003 8:51 PM

Reply to this message

Now why didn't I think of that?

And I'm sure context-click on a message used to load it in the message pane, I sometimes used to hide the message pane if I didn't want to load the message.

#65 Yes, it did

by Schnacki

Friday March 14th, 2003 9:07 AM

Reply to this message

But that behavior was changed I think with Mozilla 1.1, maybe earlier

#50 Re: Re: Advanced Searching of Messages

by vgendler

Thursday March 13th, 2003 10:21 PM

Reply to this message

Thank you very much for your response Frank. For some reasons it did not work for me. I found files userChrome-example.css and userContent-example.css. I saved them as userChrome.css and userContent.css in my MozillaProfiles\[...]\US\chrome directory. Put the additions you suggested, restart Mozilla but nothing happened. Could you please advice me what I mosed.

#54 Re: Advanced Searching of Messages

by thelem

Friday March 14th, 2003 5:56 AM

Reply to this message

Was Mozilla closed before you started? Was quicklaunch active?

Make sure Mozilla is totally closed and try again.

#63 Re: Advanced Searching of Messages

by vgendler

Friday March 14th, 2003 8:49 AM

Reply to this message

Thank you very much. It helped. We can see pretty often that such kind of settings helps to solve many problems. As far as I can understand some of them can be set in the preferences but many cannot. Do you know where such parameters are documented?

#35 Wonderfull

by CerthasIM

Thursday March 13th, 2003 5:56 PM

Reply to this message

Fantastic release! Fast like never, now... how do I turn off this atrocious Splash Screen?

#41 mozilla.bmp

by thelem

Thursday March 13th, 2003 7:50 PM

Reply to this message

Just put an image called mozilla.bmp in your main mozilla directory. There is also a comand line option to stop the splashscreen totally, I think it was --disable-splash

<http://www.lemnet.com/mozilla/> is a good place to start looking for alternative splashscreens, but please don't email me any more - the drivers will commission a new splashscreen when they want to and are unlikely to use one randomly submitted.

#52 Re: mozilla.bmp

by rajbhaskar

Friday March 14th, 2003 3:14 AM

Reply to this message

Er, shouldn't that command line option be -nosplash, rather than --disable-splash (at least for Win32)?

#92 i wanna keep me old one

by skeeter

Tuesday March 18th, 2003 11:15 AM

Reply to this message

my puter starts mozzi to fast, can't grab a screen shot of the old splash screen. where is it located and what is it called, please?

idea is to rename it mozilla.bmp and put it in the main folder as mentioned above.

tkz

#42 Re: Wonderfull

by wowtip

Thursday March 13th, 2003 7:58 PM

Reply to this message

Just place an empty image file, named "mozilla.bmp" in your \mozilla\ directory if you are using windows.

<http://www.lotekk.net/ind…ge=moz&sub=splashrank>

...is a good place to find new splash screens, if you just want a better looking splash screen instead of none at all.

#60 Mozille 1.3 Splash

by jmoraragweed

Friday March 14th, 2003 8:22 AM

Reply to this message

I put one together specifically for the 1.3 release.. <http://phoenix.ragweed.net/download>

(screenshot) <http://www.sitemason.com/…iles/d/d6Ixuo/mozilla.jpg>

#62 Re: Wonderfull

by mbokil

Friday March 14th, 2003 8:39 AM

Reply to this message

I also agree, version 1.3 is working out excellent for me. I have been using/testing Mozilla since 0.92 came out and is sure has come a long way. When I work on a computer that only has IE 5,6 and I don't have admin. privledges I get annoyed that I can't browse the web with Mozilla. Tab browsing, type ahead find, precise javascript controls such as killing popups, overriding CSS on sites I hate, disabling flash with custom settings.... the list goes on and on. Things are slowling changing. Most of the developer friends I know have switched to Mozilla at least 50% of the time.

#67 java plugin

by mccann

Friday March 14th, 2003 10:26 AM

Reply to this message

Is anyone else having a problem registering the j2sdk1.4.1_02 plugin with the 1.3 gtk2 build for RH8? Other plugins, like flash, are registered fine.

#70 Re: java plugin

by mccann

Friday March 14th, 2003 11:12 AM

Reply to this message

% mozilla -debug LoadPlugin: failed to initialize shared library /usr/java/j2sdk1.4.1_02/jre/plugin/i386/ns610/libjavaplugin_oji.so [/usr/java/j2sdk1.4.1_02/jre/plugin/i386/ns610/libjavaplugin_oji.so: undefined symbol: GetGlobalServiceManager__16nsServiceManagerPP17nsIServiceManager]

#75 Re: Re: java plugin

by andmar

Friday March 14th, 2003 2:19 PM

Reply to this message

Same problem here, but with /usr/java/j2re1.4.1_01

So.. Somebody f... up ?

#76 blackdown plugin

by dvd <dvd@textflex.com>

Friday March 14th, 2003 2:24 PM

Reply to this message

The release notes' compatibility info for Linux has a line reading:

"If you are using the Red Hat 8.x RPMS and you have the Java plugin installed, you must have a version that is also compiled with GCC 3.2. There is a version available from the blackdown project. Make sure you download the GCC 3.2 version! A version with GCC 3.2 is also rumored to be available from Sun sometime soon."

#89 Re: java plugin

by rkl

Sunday March 16th, 2003 6:43 PM

Reply to this message

Yes, but as someone else noted in this thread, the release notes do tell you what to do.

Note here - you have to download and install the full JRE or SDK from Blackdown - just unpacking and copying the Java Plugin .so file from Blackdown into Sun's release won't do the trick (yes, I tried that).

Of course, you probably already know the "soft-link trick" you have to do (this assumes you installed Blackdown into /usr/java/j2re1.4.1) - all on one line:

ln -s -f /usr/java/j2re1.4.1/plugin/i386/mozilla/javaplugin_oji.so /usr/lib/mozilla-1.3/plugins/libjavaplugin_oji.so

It's quite annoying that Sun's Java no longer works with the current stable release of Mozilla - let's hope the release notes are true and they'll release a version that does indeed work with it.

BTW, it was the first time I'd actually downloaded a Blackdown release and they have the same sort of license agreement shell wrapper around the software that Sun's release does.

One final note - is it just me or is activating Java in Mozilla a lot harder than it should be ? :-)

#95 Re: Re: java plugin

by plaus <paulo@generalpublic.org>

Friday September 5th, 2003 4:49 PM

Reply to this message

> One final note - is it just me or is activating Java in Mozilla a lot harder than it should be ? :-)

I know you were being rhetorical, but I have to wonder why Sun/Netscape don't seem the least bit concerned. They're kind of doing Microsoft's anti-Java job for them. I'm a long-time Unix and Java developer, but I still recognize when an installation process is broken WRT the masses. Sun seems to've given up on Java everywhere but the server, sadly.

PS. when searching on google for this, a Deutsche forum came up, called Java-Horror. Sadly, have to agree- the skills needed to solve this problem aren't part of Computer Literacy 101.

#72 The Return of the Toolbar Grippy...

by zontar

Friday March 14th, 2003 12:48 PM

Reply to this message

...made me quite the happy camper.

#74 Re: The Return of the Toolbar Grippy...

by Racer

Friday March 14th, 2003 2:05 PM

Reply to this message

Is there a pref to turn the grippy off? I wouldn't mind them except for the fact that all the grippy's look the same so if more than one toolbar is collapsed, you don't know which is which...making them almost worthless.

#79 Re: Re: The Return of the Toolbar Grippy...

by WillyWonka

Friday March 14th, 2003 8:01 PM

Reply to this message

You can probably put something in one of the css files (userContent.css?) and set them to display: none;

#90 the return of the grippy

by coda

Monday March 17th, 2003 1:28 AM

Reply to this message

Aah so that's what they're called :) Looks like I'll have to add them back into the theme I am developing! Cool.

#82 Re: Re: The Return of the Toolbar Grippy...

by james

Saturday March 15th, 2003 6:00 AM

Reply to this message

Create a chrome/userChrome.css file in your profile and add the following rule:

toolbargrippy { display: none !important; }

That will get rid of all grippies.

#84 A favorite feature is back!

by 1qwertyu

Saturday March 15th, 2003 12:06 PM

Reply to this message

The right click option of "close other tabs" is back!

#91 Re: A favorite feature is back!

by an_mo

Monday March 17th, 2003 9:44 AM

Reply to this message

just get multizilla from mozdev and you'll experience tabbed browsing like never before

#85 A favorite feature is back!

by 1qwertyu

Saturday March 15th, 2003 12:07 PM

Reply to this message

The right click option of "close other tabs" is back!

#86 Re: A favorite feature is back!

by 1qwertyu

Saturday March 15th, 2003 12:08 PM

Reply to this message

sorry for the dublicate

#87 how to suppress the onUnload JavaScript event?

by h_yum

Saturday March 15th, 2003 10:17 PM

Reply to this message

can someone help me and tell me if there is a way to suppress the onUnload JavaScript event (i.e., suppress pop-up windows after closing a browser window). thanks in advance.

#93 Re: how to suppress the onUnload JavaScript event?

by mbokil

Wednesday March 19th, 2003 9:40 AM

Reply to this message

Yes it is possible to suppress this. Find the directory <somtheing.slt> in your mozilla application folder. There should be a file called prefs.js there. Create a new file called user.js there and paste the following code into user.js and restart mozilla: user_pref("capability.policy.default.Window.onunload", "noAccess");

#88 A classic release

by timothyr <tim@richardson.net>

Sunday March 16th, 2003 6:14 AM

Reply to this message

After using it for a few days, I have confidently formed the opinion that this is a classic release. Definitely the best Mozilla yet. A big leap from 1.2.1 in terms of stability, speed and features. Thanks guys. This release I will evangelise far and wide because I think it is worth the time and effort for normal IE users to move to this.