Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet

Mozilla 1.1 Beta Out And About 438

Posted by timothy from the versus-mothra dept.
asa writes: "Today mozilla.org released Mozilla 1.1 Beta. New to this release are full-screen mode for Linux, BiDi Hebrew improvements, Arabic shaping improvements for Linux, and significant improvements to Venkman, the best cross-platform JavaScript debugger on the planet. Binaries and release notes available at http://www.mozilla.org/releases/. You can read more about this release at mozilla.org and mozillazine.org and if you want to see how this release fits into the overall 1.1 development cycle there's a pretty picture available at the Mozilla Development Roadmap."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla 1.1 Beta Out And About More

Mozilla 1.1 Beta Out And About

Comments Filter:

  • Mozilla (Score:3, Interesting)

    by blackula ( 584329 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:09PM (#3935070)
    Could 1.1 be the version that AOL integrates with their client software?

    • I've said it before and I'll say it again, AOL will never bundle nor integrate Mozilla with their client.

      However, there's a fairly good chance they might bundle or integrate Netscape 6.x, which is based on Mozilla but is not (as many here will attest to) Mozilla itself.

      • No, they *will* use Gecko in their client but its a matter of when rather than if. The technology is already there as witnessed by the AOL 8.0 betas which contain it and on OS X and in the shipping Compuserve client. It is also by all accounts very reliable too.

        The problem they now face is how to ship it, how to get their partners to use it, how to get their content and top 100 sites to render properly with it. Hopefully by chipping away by using it in Compuserve (which is nearly the same codebase as the AOL client), AOL on OS X and set top boxes then most of these issues will iron themselves out over time.


        • Exactly. I meant to imply that parts of technology developed as part of the Mozilla project are probably going to be integrated into AOL, but Mozilla, as the browser suite we know it, will not. Netscape 6.x is a far more likely candidate.

  • I thought you all would like this (Score:5, Funny)

    by dcstimm ( 556797 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:18PM (#3935108) Homepage
    Mozilla Pic [darylstimm.com]

  • yipee...but (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tanveer1979 ( 530624 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:21PM (#3935126) Homepage Journal
    I would like to see better flash support, a better java, and more speed(i dunno aout linux but on my solaris it is slow :-( ). But overall a good package and if we iron out the rough edges it is the best browser there is. :-).

    • Re:yipee...but (Score:4, Informative)

      by asa ( 33102 ) <asa@mozilla.com> on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:46PM (#3935245) Homepage
      Mozilla flash support comes from Macromedia's Flash plugin. The latest Flash plugin just released in recent days supports scripting in Mozilla so the support is coming along well (real is also now scriptable in Mozilla).

      --Asa

    • Re:yipee...but (Score:2, Interesting)

      by x-dj ( 460217 )
      Well as a designer I would really love for mozilla to rid themselves of the (netscape created) embed tag, it has been removed from XHTML 1.0 specs. The problem is for Mozilla users to view a flash movie the embed tag needs to be there.

      There are ways around this such as creating your own DTD, but the w3c validator does not do custom DTD's. or using this hideous workaround. http://www.outofthetrees.co.uk/resources/flash_ver sus_standards.php

      Please Mozilla spare us from the embed tag.

  • So far, so good ... (Score:2, Informative)

    by deek ( 22697 )
    Saw the slashdot article and immediately downloaded the beta.

    So far it's working like a charm. They've fixed up the bugs from the alpha, like the one which caused word overlapping on some sentences.

    This browser just keeps on moving from strength to strength! Thanks, Mozilla team!

  • mirrors by country... (Score:4, Informative)

    by neo8750 ( 566137 ) <{ten.ikspez} {ta} {ikspez}> on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:21PM (#3935135) Homepage
    lets be nice to the main site! .at .au .be .bg .ca .ch .com/.net/.org/.edu .cz .de .dk .ee .es .fi .fr .gr .hk .hu .ie .il .jp .kr .no .pl .pt .ru .se .sg .sk .tw .uk

  • Aighty then... (Score:5, Troll)

    by SuperDuG ( 134989 ) <[be] [at] [eclec.tk]> on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:21PM (#3935136) Homepage Journal
    Okay I like mozilla and I like what they're all about and I like just about everything about what they're doing. But I think if everyone is interested in the latest greatest opensource software releases that they can easily hop on over to freshmeat, you know a slashdot affiliate?

    Here's my little soapbox and I'm a "highly modded" poster so I get the whole plus 2 before I'm modded as a troll some more. Mozilla may be a very capable browser, but shaping the article to play more into the fact that it has better language support than IE and still holds 99% of the functionality of IE would be a better story than just announcing every release and a brief summary of the changelog. The last thing I would like to see is a list of mirrors for software, I don't like having to wait 3 days because the only place I know to get the software is the link that slashdot posted that is far out of date. While this doesn't apply to distros and software like mozilla, it does apply to projects not hosted on sourceforge or that have a lot of bandwidth to spare.

    I am very pleased to see that Mozilla is doing what some seemed would never happen and that's to make a browser that is not only free, but open source, runs on more platforms than I can name, and to top it all off, is actively developed on. I couldn't be happier with the way mozilla is working out, my main beef is that if /. wants to post PR articles or PR announcements at least say why the project is slashdot worthy, and moreso why the project is a benifit to all of us.

    I use mozilla all the time, you know why? Because no matter what computer I'm on, I can run it. That's what I like about mozilla. I don't care if it isn't as fast as IE in page rendering, or if it eats up a lot of memory, or if someone thinks opera is better. I like mozilla and I think slashdot is really doing them an injustice by explaining that a new version is out and not the benifits of the project itself.

  • Netscape profile-trashing bug still present (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:24PM (#3935153) Homepage
    The infamous profile-trashing between versions bug [mozilla.org] is still present. Comments indicate that it has to be fixed before Mozilla 1.x goes out as Netscape, or Netscape won't coexist with itself.
    • Well you can always use the "turbo" feature, there's a bug^H^H^H feature in it that might delete your profile. ;-)

    • Saving a file appends the mime type extension, all those nice larlar.tgz.gz's or larlar.tgz.txt's

      The name mangeling problem
      lar lar.tgz turns into lar%20lar.tgz

  • I'm impressed (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I've been using Mozilla for a while now, both under linux and windows, and have been very impressed. 1.1 is even more impressive than 1.0, and some bug's that i've been having under linux are now fixed. Hooray to the Mozilla team, they're doing an excellent job.

  • Bug in favorite feature (Score:5, Informative)

    by palme999 ( 82528 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:27PM (#3935168)
    "Use of Mozilla's "quicklaunch" (AKA "turbo") mode may cause the deletion of user preferences. It is recommended that you do not run quicklaunch until this bug is fixed."

    Checking bugilla shows a patch in the queue, here's hoping it makes it to one of the nightly's.
    • Bugzilla ref? Just that QL is what makes Moz a suitable work replacement for IE as I can launch and kill windows at liberty without having to leave one alive.

      At home (with multiple profiles...) it's not a problem because the mail client's always open but at work I need QL working or Moz gets painful.

  • Great on OS X (Score:5, Informative)

    by d3xt3r ( 527989 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:31PM (#3935186)
    Posting now using Moz 1.1 Beta on OS X. There are significant speed improvements to the interface and the Aqua fonts look great.

    Mozilla has become so much better than IE lately that there is never a need to switch back and forth. Thanks Mozilla team, keep up the great work!

    • Re:Great on OS X (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Cowrad ( 571322 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:41PM (#3935225)
      Yeah, but there's no way I can see to disable font smoothing. I understand that most people thing font smoothing is the best thing since gravy fries, but I can't stand it in a browser.

      Oh, well, back to 1.0.

      Yes, I am too stupid to fill out a bug report.

      • Re:Great on OS X (Score:3, Informative)

        by umm qasr ( 72190 )
        Why don't you just change this line
        pref("font.size.nav4rounding", true);
        to this:
        pref("font.size.nav4rounding", false);
        in your prefs.js file?

        Seems logical to me =)

      • get tinkertool (search versiontracker.com for it). install it, then tell it to disable antialiasing for fonts smaller than, say 10 pts. then come back to the 1.1b promised land!

      • Re:Great on OS X (Score:2, Informative)

        by bhamm ( 553532 )
        Apple is listening regarding the antialiasing. The upcoming 10.2 has 4 levels of smoothing (at least it does in the build i have). Here's how they're listed in system prefs:

        Standard - best for CRT
        Light
        Medium - best for flat panel
        Strong

        Then, there's also 'turn off smoothing for sizes smaller than [popup]'

        I've got my Powerbook on 'light' and it looks great. 10.1 had too much in my opinion didn't look good on my LCD screen.
    • I'm glad that it works great on OS X, but on Windows boxes it's still important to use Internet Explorer for a few things. Note: a few. A very few, but there's still a need, unfortunately. A few examples: 1) Banking/ultrasecure sites often make multiple browser checks that compatibility modes don't always overcome. Chase Online Banking, for one, croaks on Mozilla. I wouldn't patronize them, but a family member needs it so when he uses the computer IE goes up. Then IE goes down. Family member swears. I laugh. 2) Some flash sites croak. Newgrounds.com, for one, refuses to display some flash movies to me- despite their use of PHP, which seems to indicate open source-friendliness, the implimentation of Flash for Mozilla doesn't seem to agree with them. 3) Certain sites with embedded music don't like Mozilla- even though they're going beyond the standards and making the site less accessible, if one wants to fully experience the site IE is still necessary. 4) Certain programs will embed links into their programs in such a way that only IE comes up. The headaches are numerous, especially when several Mozilla windows are open. Memory usage doubles as the most inefficient browser in the world awakes and thrashes about. Poor Mozilla, so accomodating to other programs, can't take the strain. Mozilla and IE both go down. A good example is RuneScape, available from www.runescape.com. When their ads are clicked IE opens. I don't click ads. Sucks for them. Still, it would be great if Mozilla could emulate IE well enough to redirect requests and calls from this program away from IE. This is a small list, but in the interest of expanding Mozilla's usability for IE users interested in switching, I propose a Compatibility Module for Mozilla. When installed, it would provide support for some of the bad HTML IE loves so much, certain IE-only plugins, and hopefully would insert tags and emulate behavior that would allow Mozilla users to fully access IE-only sites. For all intents and purposes, Mozilla would become Internet Explorer 6.0 (or 5.5, or whatever) in the eyes of the web. Downsides? There are several. Patent issues, legal issues, more coding headaches, and important for the advocacy team, statistics issues. With these browsers identifying themselves as Internet Explorer, site owners would have little incentive to respect Web standards and code away from IE's idiosyncracies. This last issue is why I propose that there be a compatibility module, not patch. It needs to be loadable and unloadable as needed or wanted, preferably according to the needs of a particular site. Mozilla still has some hurdles it needs to overcome. To be honest, it's still somewhat slow and rather leaky, and the widely touted QuickLaunch has caused a rather serious bug that trashes preferences, at least in recent builds. It also gives up too much to other programs memory wise- many open windows can cause absolute disaster. It's coming along great, and I like it infinitely more than IE. It just needs a little more to push it over the edge and into exponential growth.

      • Re:Great on OS X (Score:2, Informative)

        by sahala ( 105682 )
        When installed, it would provide support for some of the bad HTML IE loves so much.

        I understand that IE has a history of supporting shite HTML, but IE's support of W3C standards is rather good. Also keep in mind that Mozilla still supports some of Netscape's "bad" tags and has some pretty kludgy support of the current DOM recommendation.

        The nice thing about Mozilla, however, is how it handles this backwards compatibility by looking at the document type (html version, etc.). Old versions get rendered with "classic" (flawed) Netscape ways, and new versions get the latest and greatest rendering implementation.

        Despite quirks on either side of the fence, it's almost gotten to the point that web developers can now work toward the common DOM standard.


        • I understand that IE has a history of supporting shite HTML, but IE's support of W3C standards is rather good.

          Um, don't forget that HTML is a W3C standard! :P

          However, though my own tests, I've found that IE's standards compliance is lacking at best. The most particularly harmful oversight is the somewhat narrow subset of CSS2 that IE supports. I wish I could remember an example or two off the top of my head, but some of the neat things that CSS2 do to make web pages easy to maintain or look good don't seem to be supported in IE.

          The second "misfeature" of IE, in my opinion, is lack of PNG alpha support. One can do some pretty ingenious stuff with HTML 4.0, CSS 2, and transparent/translucent PNG images.

          Just not in IE.
      • "A very few, but there's still a need, unfortunately. A few examples: 1) Banking/ultrasecure sites often make multiple browser checks that compatibility modes don't always overcome. Chase Online Banking, for one, croaks on Mozilla. I wouldn't patronize them, but a family member needs it so when he uses the computer IE goes up. Then IE goes down. Family member swears."

        I hear you and I hate this. But if you are in Canada, this may be of interest: All of the online components of President's Choice Financial banking (don't laugh, it is run by the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and you can only get it in Canada) work quite nicely with Mozilla. I can actually pay my visa from linux. It is a joy.

      • I use Chase Online Banking with Mozilla ALL THE TIME. Works great.
    • I am an exchange admin and it works much better on Outlook web access, both with certificate exchange, ease of use for end-users, and render speed (by about 3 times over a 768 upload link). We offer a link right on the front page for end-users...

      How ironic.

  • Hebrew Support? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Erwos ( 553607 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:33PM (#3935197)
    Actually, I've had really good luck with Hebrew support in Linux, much more so than Windows. I don't visit all too many Hebrew sites, but it seems to me everything's been rendering fine for a while now. The spacing is a little dodgy, though, and that could be what was fixed. That'd be nice.

    In case any of you are paticularly interested in seeing an example (even if ya can't read it), check out:
    http://www.haaretz.co.il

    Conversely, a good check of Arabic support is at:
    http://www.wafa.pna.net/AraText/arabic.htm

    I can see that using Moz 1.0rc1, some of that Arabic is _definitely_ not rendering correctly. I'm not a speaker of the language, but it's pretty obvious some stuff is being rendered incorrectly.

    I linked both an Israeli web site and a Palestinian web site to keep accusations of political bias away. It seems there's always _someone_ who would complain if I just gave an Israeli website in both Arabic and Hebrew. Everyone happy?

    -Erwos
  • What's next, CrossTheStreams ?
    These guys sure loved Ghostbusters :-)

    Seriously, I run 'zilla 1.1a on all my machines... (linux router, home machine, all my work machines) What does 1.1b have to offer? Stability? Features? Hmmm..?

    btw,
    1) does anyone how I can unload plugins? Flash 5 is driving me up the wall.
    2) where I can find benefical plugins (like the jre) that work?

  • Tips for searching Bugzilla (Score:5, Informative)

    by jesser ( 77961 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:39PM (#3935217) Homepage Journal

    Mozilla.org gets a lot of duplicate bug reports: 40-50% of a sample of bugs from April 2002 are dups. If you know how to search Bugzilla, you can get that down to 15-20%. (Knowing some jargon helps too, of course.) Unfortunately, the most widely advertised Bugzilla search tool, the query builder [mozilla.org], is so complicated that many testers give up before finding their bug and report a duplicate.

    There's a well-hidden search box on the Bugzilla [mozilla.org] front page that works a lot like Google. You can almost use it like Google, but there are several differences you should be aware of:

    • Each word is matched as a substring of the summary (and several other fields). A search for 'auto compl' will match "auto-complete", "auto complete", and "autocompletion".
    • Like in Google, you can use | to create disjunctions. For example, a search for 'address|location|url bar|field focus' will match "focus does not move when clicking outside of location bar". While "or" is usually unnecessary for general web searches, it is indispensible when searching for a specific bug report.
    • By default, Bugzilla only searches for open bugs. If you're looking for a bug that has been reported several times, it may help to include duplicates in the search. One way to do this is to prefix the search with 'ALL ' in all caps. For example, 'ALL rename exe' will lead you to an often-reported bug (120327) that I should be helping bz to fix instead of posting this comment, while 'rename exe' will not find anything.
    • If you know that the bug you're searching for is visible and popular, try adding 'votes:2' to your search. For example, 'ALL votes:2 context menu back' will find the newest flamewar-bug about the back command in the context menu among the 42 bugs that match 'ALL context menu back'. Searches that use votes:2 are several times faster than searches that include all bugs because bugzilla can start the search with an integer comparison.
    • The search includes several fields, not just the bug summary (title). For example, in a search for 'mail compos focus', the word "mail" can appear in either the product name (MailNews) or the bug summary, and "compos" can appear either in a component name (Composition) or in the summary (compose, composing, etc). To restrict a search term to the summary, use '+term'.

    Other useful tools for avoiding reporting duplicates include the frequently reported bugs list [mozilla.org] and #mozillazine on irc.mozilla.org. If you find yourself working in Bugzilla a lot, you can use the collect buglinks [squarefree.com] bookmarklet to get a list of bugs mentioned in a given bug report, which is useful because many bug reports include links to related bugs.

    • than sufficient. It won't work in all cases, but I wanted to know if any other Mac users thought that the "Find in this page" dialog ought to be modeless...sure enough- there were at least two reports already. The search terms: "mac find". A little common sense here will go a long way toward helping the development team. I realize that this simplicity won't work in all cases, but it probably will work more than people realize.
  • I just want to be on the record to say, kudo's to the Mozilla developers/contributers. I've been using it on my linux server and windows laptop since the 1.0 release. Being able to remove pop-ups is an excellent feature (aintitcool is finally readable again, even if Harry's opinions often suck), it is extremely stable (jokes aside), and the email client is much less problematic than Outlook. This is such an improvement over netscape 4.6 for unix. No more ridiculous crashes and far less of the lets take all the cpu just for the hell of it.

    Very nice, I can't wait to upgrade.

    -Sean

  • Mozilla Status Reports (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RedSynapse ( 90206 ) on Monday July 22, 2002 @11:48PM (#3935252)
    It's always bothered me that the "What's New" section of the Release Notes is always so sparse. There are 8 listed improvements for 1.1 Beta and they look a bit underwhelming for most users (better arabic shaping, yay!). I think this leads many people to think "You've worked a month and a half to come up with this???" Au Contraire. For a better picture of what's really going on "Behind the scenes" you can check out the Weekly Status Updates [mozilla.org]. This is where the developers report their accomplishments and problems. Why just a couple weeks ago a 3-4% start-up time improvement was contributed [mozilla.org] and you don't see that in any release notes.

    Mozillazine [mozillazine.org] also periodically features Independent [mozillazine.org] Status [mozillazine.org] Reports [mozillazine.org] that report on all the work being done on various browser plugins.

  • First, let me assure you this is not a troll. I have been using Mozilla as my main browser for more than a year now, both under Linux and Windows. Nowadays it is my sole browser, and I open IE only when I need to test an application or check a page design.

    Venkman may well become a good debugger one day, but the version that comes with Mozilla 1.0 is a little more than a toy, a nice menu entry to have under "Web Development". It is absolutely unusable under real world situations. And the traditional lack of real documentation only adds to it uselessness.

    So, calling Venkman "the best" anything is just streching reality a little too far, even for people like me who gain their living mostly developing under/for/with Free Software.

    • Re:The best debugger until you have to use it (Score:4, Informative)

      by asa ( 33102 ) <asa@mozilla.com> on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @12:17AM (#3935351) Homepage
      Point me to a cross-platform JavaScript debugger that beats Venkman from 1.1alpha (crossing at least Mac, Windows and Linux would be a good start, throwing in a dozen additional platforms would be impressive).

      If you're talking about the venkman that shipped with 1.0 then you're talking about a completely different beast. Seems kind of odd that you'd post about Venkman getting better one day than mozilla1.0 and we're telling you about one day having arrived with 1.1alpha.

      Get current, (this venkman is many months worth of development improved from the one that shipped with 1.0) read the how-to/FAQ at http://www.hacksrus.com/~ginda/venkman/faq/venkman -faq.html and then follow-up to this post pointing me to a better cross-platform JavaScript debugger and don't point me to one that doesn't do JS performance profiling because I require that.

      --Asa
    • They have a new version, available seperately or with the beta which purportedly is considerably more complete.

      "Mozilla 1.0 comes with Venkman version 0.8.5. Venkman has made much progress since then with the 0.9.x series. If you are running Mozilla 1.0 and would like to upgrade to Venkman 0.9.x, please visit the development page. The revisions provided there are usually suitable as daily debuggers. If you do find a problem, please report a bug."

      http://www.mozilla.org/projects/venkman/

      I suggest you give it a try.

  • New bookmarklets for Mozilla (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jesser ( 77961 ) on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @12:14AM (#3935343) Homepage Journal

    Bookmarklets are bookmarks containing javascript code. Instead of taking you to another page, bookmarklets do things with/to the current page. Here are some bookmarklets for Mozilla that I have added since Mozilla 1.0:

    "Fixing" annoying web sites [squarefree.com]:
    • Zap event handlers: removes event handlers, including those responsible for blind links and exit pop-up ads.
    • Zap embeds: removes java, flash, background music, and iframes from a page.
    • Zap colors: makes text black on a white background, and makes links blue and purple.
    • Zap: combines "zap embeds", "zap colors", and "zap event handlers".
    • Test styles: type in CSS rules to experiment or to create a temporary user style sheet.
    Web development [squarefree.com]:
    • View Style Sheets
    • View Scripts
    • View Script Variables
    Other:
    • Toggle checkboxes
    • Transfer cookies: creates a bookmarklet you can use to move cookies from one browser to another.
    • Number rows in each HTML table

    Several of these bookmarklets also work in IE 5.5, to the extent that IE supports DOM Level 2 and doesn't make me go too far out of my way to accommodate its quirks.


    • Once in a while, a small gem will appear on slashdot and remind me why I still shop here. :)

      I went through and added those groovy little zap-embeds and they are GREAT. I have been trying for weeks to get the crapy flash to turn off and now I can do it.

      Kudo's to all involved with those little bad-boys.

      Cheers
  • Maricopa Community Colleges in Arizona is soon to be moving from Netscape 4.x to Internet Explorer as it's supported official browser. Much to my frustration, cited reasons for the move are things like "there has been no indication of a Netscape Communicator 5.0 release. AOL has dropped support for LDAP in 'Netscape Navigator 6.x' which is not as robust as the communicator product was. Overall lack of development and support"

    I think Netscape shot itself in the foot when it released Netscape 6.0 w/o LDAP support. The clueless leaders haven't even heard of Mozilla, and they don't know LDAP support has returned, and that roaming profile support is in development. So now they are back in Microsoft's pocket, going to Outlook w/ Exchange to replace the LDAP features they think are missing in Netscape (Navigator?) 6.x. Yeah, they don't even realize it is just "Netscape" now, and should be called "Communicator" if anything else.

  • No SVG! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by oever ( 233119 ) on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @01:54AM (#3935600) Homepage
    Now that MathML is in Mozilla, we're all waiting for SVG. Too bad it's not in the beta.

    There is a SVG enabled build for Windows, but not for Linux )-;

  • XFT and new Mozilla versions? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by thesolo ( 131008 ) <slap@fighttheriaa.org> on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @05:00AM (#3935989) Homepage
    I'm currently running Mozilla 1.0 with XFT (Available here: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/experim ental/xft/Red_Hat_7x_RPMS/1.0/SRPMS/ [mozilla.org]), and it is just excellent. The font smoothing provided by XFT makes Mozilla look just amazing. (if you've never seen it, there is a nice screenshot available here [astrolinux.com]) So, here is my question:

    Is there anyway to upgrade Mozilla while still keeping the XFT core?? I think even doing a rpm -Uvh will overwrite the XFT portion and give me a nice, new 1.1b with crumbly looking fonts again, which I don't want to do. If anyone has any idea on how I can do this, please let me know. Thanks!!

  • The easy way (Score:3, Informative)

    by mnordstr ( 472213 ) on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @06:12AM (#3936136) Journal
    $ cat /etc/cron.weekly/mozilla-nightly
    wall "Updating Mozilla..."
    cd /usr/local/mozilla-nightly
    rm -fr /usr/local/mozilla-nightly/*
    ncftpget -V ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/latest/m ozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.gz
    tar -zxf mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.gz
    rm -f mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.gz
    wall "Mozilla has been updated."

    I have last weeks work every saturday morning. Was running 1.1 beta since saturday... No user interaction required =)
  • Anyone else curious why this is the first Mozilla release I've seen in awhile that didn't have a source tarball in the release directory somewhere?
  • Passport and Hotmail are still broken, courtesy of Microsoft:

    http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=141279 [mozilla.org]

    Reproducible: Always
    Steps to Reproduce:
    1.go to hotmail
    2.choose create new account
    3.

    Actual Results: unable to sign up

    Expected Results: message telling me to use netscape 4.0 or higher or IE

  • I like the Mozilla Windows email client enough to use it day-to-day, despite its many problems. Except that it still has those damn memory leaks! I like to leave it running for the new-mail-notify feature, but after a couple hours it gets totally slugish-thrashy and has to be restarted. You'd think this problem would get a higher priority!
  • On Windows I try to always run Talkback builds so I can at least report crashes...

    But on OS X there is no option to download a talkback build. Does anyone know why that would be?

  • I've been running Mozilla 1.0 under Windows 98SE, and although the system is rather stable under IE 6 and Opera 5, Mozilla 1.0 tends to crash alot. This is on a system with 256 megs of memory, 1.13Ghz Athlon Processor, and a 40 gig primary drive.

    Other open source software (apache, the Gimp, OpenOffice) runs fine on the system, but Mozilla keeps crashing on 'simple' web pages, even when I'm browsing offline! Does anyone who use win32 and Moz 1.1Beta have some feedback on the stability?

  • Mail and News issues (Score:3, Informative)

    by ShadowDrgn ( 114114 ) <jbentley@char t e r . n et> on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @03:50PM (#3939879)
    I have some various problems with Mozilla, but for the most part I like it a lot better than IE. Unfortunately, the Mail and News part is either lacking basic functionality or is just plain buggy. Maybe these issues are already in bugzilla, or I'm just too stupid to figure out a simple feature.

    Mail and News passwords:
    I've never been able to log onto a news server with Mozilla. Supposedly it's supposed to ask you for a username/password when you create the news account, but what if it doesn't? There's no place in the account options to set one. With mail accounts, if you change the password on the account (by other means), Mozilla just chokes when you try and log on with the old one and gives you no option to provide the correct password. There's no "wrong password, please enter correct one" dialogue, it just doesn't do anything. The account options area has a spot for a username, but not one for a password. I guess I could delete the account from Mozilla and recreate it every time I change my password, but that's stupid. Outlook Express will prompt for the correct user/pass if you don't log on properly, is it too much to ask for Mozilla to do that?

    Am I missing something very simple to solve these issues? I'd really appreciate some help if so.
  • I hope this still is read, but dies anybody know if it's possible to tweak the right-mouse-button-menu?
    I noticed that the options 'open in new tab' and 'open in new window' are switched, but I liked the 1.0 order (tab first) and I really want to undo the newer order.

    No, no, no, I don't want to downgrade to the 1.0 version ;)
  • ....this is one thing I haven't seen mentioned, and yet it's there. This is a godsend for those of us still cursed with narrowband.

Slashdot Top Deals

"There are things that are so serious that you can only joke about them" - Heisenberg

Close