FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
36 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Rich Walsh
My impression is that Firefox 4.0 GA is much less crash-prone than any
of the betas.  So far, the only crashes reported have been in TCPIP32.DLL.
While any crash is unfortunate, the number and variety of problems seem to
be significantly reduced.  Is this the case or is it just wishful thinking?

BTW... because of licensing issues, Exceptq couldn't be packaged with the
GA as it was with the betas.  If you want to help track where the remaining
problems are, please get Exceptq v7.1 and put its dlls in a directory on
your LIBPATH.  You can get it from:

  http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?&key=exceptq71.zip


--
== == almost usable email address:  Rich AT E-vertise DOT Com == ==

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Alan Beagley-2
On 04/20/11 11:24 pm, Rich Walsh wrote:

> My impression is that Firefox 4.0 GA is much less crash-prone than any
> of the betas.  So far, the only crashes reported have been in TCPIP32.DLL.
> While any crash is unfortunate, the number and variety of problems seem to
> be significantly reduced.  Is this the case or is it just wishful thinking?

I tried it again. New profile. Machine froze solid while I was reading a
page of text, and I had to hit the reset button. No trap information.

-=-
Alan
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Alfredo Fernández Díaz
In reply to this post by Rich Walsh
Rich Walsh escribió:
 > My impression is that Firefox 4.0 GA is much less crash-prone than any
 > of the betas.  So far, the only crashes reported have been in TCPIP32.DLL.
 > While any crash is unfortunate, the number and variety of problems seem to
 > be significantly reduced.  Is this the case or is it just wishful thinking?

Much more stable than 3.0.? and 3.6.?, non-betas. Sorry, but those were unstable
enough for me and I was scared off trying any more betas.

My impression so far:
-Faster than previous mozillas, and less bloated too, but that maybe something
else: installed anew, new non-shared profile, no plugins or extensions yet (some
of my favorites will take a while to be available).
-video performance is awesomely better, almost as it should be. A few refresh
glitches from time to time though (SNAP/se on IBM T42).
-Font handling is apparently much better. Earlier Mozillas froze solid as I
worked with Japanese or Russian fonts along Western ones, within minutes or even
seconds. I've been screwing around for 24 hours non-stop and all I got was again
a few glitches.

So, all in all, I can only say two things: excellent work!

 > BTW... because of licensing issues, Exceptq couldn't be packaged with the
 > GA as it was with the betas.  If you want to help track where the remaining
 > problems are, please get Exceptq v7.1 and put its dlls in a directory on
 > your LIBPATH.  You can get it from:
 >
 >   http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?&key=exceptq71.zip
 >

Thanks for the info, maybe I'll get to experimenting with Mozillas and reporting
stuff :)
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Dave Yeo-3
In reply to this post by Alan Beagley-2
Alan Beagley wrote:

> On 04/20/11 11:24 pm, Rich Walsh wrote:
>
>> My impression is that Firefox 4.0 GA is much less crash-prone than any
>> of the betas. So far, the only crashes reported have been in TCPIP32.DLL.
>> While any crash is unfortunate, the number and variety of problems
>> seem to
>> be significantly reduced. Is this the case or is it just wishful
>> thinking?
>
> I tried it again. New profile. Machine froze solid while I was reading a
> page of text, and I had to hit the reset button. No trap information.
>

Try adding set MOZ_NO_REMOTE=1 to your environment, eg in a command
window then launch SeaMonkey from the same command window or set it in
config.sys.
Dave

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Rich Walsh
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:25:57 UTC, Dave Yeo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Alan Beagley wrote:

> > I tried it again. New profile. Machine froze solid while I was reading a
> > page of text, and I had to hit the reset button. No trap information.
>
> Try adding set MOZ_NO_REMOTE=1 to your environment, eg in a command
> window then launch SeaMonkey from the same command window or set it in
> config.sys.

I'm not sure how MOZ_NO_REMOTE would figure in here.  It prevents a newly
started copy of the app from looking for copies that are already running.

Instead, the first thing I'd try is unchecking
  Tools->Options->Advanced->Use hardware acceleration when available
This would result in slightly slower but possibly more stable video.

BTW... using a new profile doesn't necessarily mean that your existing
plugins have been "forgotten" and aren't in use - particularly if you
have "MOZ_PLUGIN_PATH=xxxxx" set in your environment.  You may want to
check Tools->Addons->Plugins to see if any are active.  Any of the
Odin-based plugins (Flash, Acrobat) are suspect when you have stability
issues, as is the "OS/2 Multimedia Plugin Pack for Netscape" (despite
its support for 'macaw.avi', it should be ripped out at the roots and
burned!).


--
== == almost usable email address:  Rich AT E-vertise DOT Com == ==

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Dave Parsons
In reply to this post by Rich Walsh
On 21-04-11 05:24, Rich Walsh wrote:
> My impression is that Firefox 4.0 GA is much less crash-prone than any
> of the betas.  So far, the only crashes reported have been in TCPIP32.DLL.
> While any crash is unfortunate, the number and variety of problems seem to
> be significantly reduced.  Is this the case or is it just wishful thinking?

Yes, far better. The betas were ok on my Pentium 4 single core notebook
but unusable on my 4 core AMD desktop. The GA works for hours on the AMD
without crashing & it does also seem to be quicker. Just my impression
though, not measured in any way.

--
Dave
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Doug Bissett-2
In reply to this post by Rich Walsh
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 03:24:24 UTC, "Rich Walsh"
<spamyourself@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> My impression is that Firefox 4.0 GA is much less crash-prone than any
> of the betas.  So far, the only crashes reported have been in TCPIP32.DLL.
> While any crash is unfortunate, the number and variety of problems seem to
> be significantly reduced.  Is this the case or is it just wishful thinking?
>

So far, ff 4.0 GA seems to be great, but I am not a "power user". I
also had very few problems with the betas, although they did crash
every once in a while (no JAVA, and no FLASH).

FWIW, this is the first 4.0 version that will print to my Canon i960
(using the OMNI driver for the Canon i950). Well done, and THANK YOU!

--
From the eComStation of Doug Bissett
dougb007 at telus dot net
(Please make the obvious changes, to e-mail me)

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

James Moe-3
In reply to this post by Rich Walsh
On 04/20/2011 08:24 PM, Rich Walsh wrote:
> My impression is that Firefox 4.0 GA is much less crash-prone than any
> of the betas.  So far, the only crashes reported have been in TCPIP32.DLL.
> While any crash is unfortunate, the number and variety of problems seem to
> be significantly reduced.  Is this the case or is it just wishful thinking?
>
  os/2 v4.52 fp3. SNAP v3.1.8 (build 505).
  Firefox v4 does not start for me:
SYS1804: The system cannot find the file DIVE.
  Yes, "set moz_accelerated=0" is in place.
  Where can I find a DIVE distribution?

--
James Moe
jmm-list at sohnen-moe dot com
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Barbara Allen
In reply to this post by Doug Bissett-2
On Friday, April 22, 2011 10:32:48 AM UTC-6, Doug Bissett wrote:


> FWIW, this is the first 4.0 version that will print to my Canon i960
> (using the OMNI driver for the Canon i950). Well done, and THANK YOU!
>
Same here with my HP 2550L postscript Color Laserjet.  I almost fell
off my chair when it spit out a print of a google map which I need
frequently for my RV group.

Barbara

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Steve Wendt
In reply to this post by James Moe-3
On 4/22/2011 12:47 PM, James Moe wrote:

> SYS1804: The system cannot find the file DIVE.
>    Where can I find a DIVE distribution?

If it's not part of the base OS, it's probably part of MMOS2.  I'm very
surprised you don't have DIVE.  I'm almost positive it's included in the
FixPak.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Peter Brown-2
In reply to this post by James Moe-3
Hi James

James Moe wrote:

> On 04/20/2011 08:24 PM, Rich Walsh wrote:
>> My impression is that Firefox 4.0 GA is much less crash-prone than any
>> of the betas.  So far, the only crashes reported have been in TCPIP32.DLL.
>> While any crash is unfortunate, the number and variety of problems seem to
>> be significantly reduced.  Is this the case or is it just wishful thinking?
>>
>    os/2 v4.52 fp3. SNAP v3.1.8 (build 505).
>    Firefox v4 does not start for me:
> SYS1804: The system cannot find the file DIVE.
>    Yes, "set moz_accelerated=0" is in place.
>    Where can I find a DIVE distribution?
>


Does your system have the file \mmos2\dll\dive.dll ?

If "No" do you not have multimedia installed?

If "Yes" is \mmos2\dll in your LibPath in config.sys?


Regards

Pete
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Rich Walsh
In reply to this post by Barbara Allen
On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 20:05:14 UTC, Barbara Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Friday, April 22, 2011 10:32:48 AM UTC-6, Doug Bissett wrote:
>
> > FWIW, this is the first 4.0 version that will print to my Canon i960
> > (using the OMNI driver for the Canon i950). Well done, and THANK YOU!
> >
> Same here with my HP 2550L postscript Color Laserjet.  I almost fell
> off my chair when it spit out a print of a google map which I need
> frequently for my RV group.

I'm happy you're happy - but this is peculiar.  I haven't made any changes
in printing since the Feb 10th beta when I upped the dpi limit for native
drivers to 600dpi.  Perhaps "the halo effect" has kicked in...


--
== == almost usable email address:  Rich AT E-vertise DOT Com == ==

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Barbara-8
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 12:44:35 UTC, "Rich Walsh"
<spamyourself@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 20:05:14 UTC, Barbara Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Friday, April 22, 2011 10:32:48 AM UTC-6, Doug Bissett wrote:
> >
> > > FWIW, this is the first 4.0 version that will print to my Canon i960
> > > (using the OMNI driver for the Canon i950). Well done, and THANK YOU!
> > >
> > Same here with my HP 2550L postscript Color Laserjet.  I almost fell
> > off my chair when it spit out a print of a google map which I need
> > frequently for my RV group.
>
> I'm happy you're happy - but this is peculiar.  I haven't made any changes
> in printing since the Feb 10th beta when I upped the dpi limit for native
> drivers to 600dpi.  Perhaps "the halo effect" has kicked in...

Gremlins!  I tried all the betas, all printing suggestions with no
success, but believe I managed to mangle profiles by using the same
one for old FF version 2.0.0.22 and the beta.  I now use two separate
profiles for the old version (which prints consistently) and new FF
4.0 GA.

With 4.0, I can also view You Tube videos in HTML5 format.  I tried
about a dozen different videos last night and all worked perfectly.

OT:   Biggest problem now is I can't get my eCS 2.0 machine using
Pronews to post to this group.  Had to use Google Groups.  And I'm now
on my laptop running Pronews with eCS 1.2.    :(    Don't have a clue
what's wrong with Pronews.  It's set up exactly the same (server,
options) on both computers - I've unsubscribed, re-subscribed.  
Nothing works.  It pretends to send the post/reply, saves it and
nothing happens.  All other servers, (3) work perfectly.    


--
Barbara
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Doug Bissett-2
In reply to this post by Rich Walsh
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 12:44:35 UTC, "Rich Walsh"
<spamyourself@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 20:05:14 UTC, Barbara Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Friday, April 22, 2011 10:32:48 AM UTC-6, Doug Bissett wrote:
> >
> > > FWIW, this is the first 4.0 version that will print to my Canon i960
> > > (using the OMNI driver for the Canon i950). Well done, and THANK YOU!
> > >
> > Same here with my HP 2550L postscript Color Laserjet.  I almost fell
> > off my chair when it spit out a print of a google map which I need
> > frequently for my RV group.
>
> I'm happy you're happy - but this is peculiar.  I haven't made any changes
> in printing since the Feb 10th beta when I upped the dpi limit for native
> drivers to 600dpi.  Perhaps "the halo effect" has kicked in...

Something kicked in. When I tried the Feb. 10 beta, my printer would
wake up, but never moved paper. The output file dissappeared, with no
printing. It is working with the firefox 4.0 GA version.

--
From the eComStation of Doug Bissett
dougb007 at telus dot net
(Please make the obvious changes, to e-mail me)

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Trevor Hemsley-2
In reply to this post by Barbara-8
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 14:32:06 UTC in mozilla.dev.ports.os2, "Barbara"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I can't get my eCS 2.0 machine using
> Pronews to post to this group.

Sounds like a suitable topic to post to comp.os.os2.mail-news

You should be using server name: news.mozilla.org on port 119 with no
username/password

--
Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK
Trevor dot Hemsley at ntlworld dot com
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Barbara-8
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 19:12:00 UTC, "Trevor Hemsley"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 14:32:06 UTC in mozilla.dev.ports.os2, "Barbara"
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I can't get my eCS 2.0 machine using
> > Pronews to post to this group.
>
> Sounds like a suitable topic to post to comp.os.os2.mail-news
>
> You should be using server name: news.mozilla.org on port 119 with no
> username/password
>

Hi Trevor.  I did post this problem in comp.os.os2.mail-news on July
3, 2011 right after I started using this new computer with eCS 2.0.  
No one replied.  Titled "Pronews2:  Can't post to one group".

Server name and port ARE correct accurate on all computers.

--
Barbara
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Trevor Hemsley-2
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 23:52:18 UTC in mozilla.dev.ports.os2, "Barbara"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>  I did post this problem in comp.os.os2.mail-news on July
> 3, 2011 right after I started using this new computer with eCS 2.0.  
> No one replied.  Titled "Pronews2:  Can't post to one group".

I just reloaded co.o.mail-news and pulled down 2,400 articles. There were none
posted on July 3 2010 let alone 2011 :-) The latest that appears under your
current posting address is 2008-01-03.

I suspect that no-one except you has ever seen your unreplied post :-(

--
Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK
Trevor dot Hemsley at ntlworld dot com
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Barbara-8
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 01:52:37 UTC, "Trevor Hemsley"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 23:52:18 UTC in mozilla.dev.ports.os2, "Barbara"
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >  I did post this problem in comp.os.os2.mail-news on July
> > 3, 2011 right after I started using this new computer with eCS 2.0.  
> > No one replied.  Titled "Pronews2:  Can't post to one group".
>
> I just reloaded co.o.mail-news and pulled down 2,400 articles. There were none
> posted on July 3 2010 let alone 2011 :-) The latest that appears under your
> current posting address is 2008-01-03.
>
> I suspect that no-one except you has ever seen your unreplied post :-(

It did seem odd that you did not reply.  But I can read that post on
both my laptop and on my big computer.    :(     It was originally
posted from the mis-behaving big computer.  

What on earth am I doing?  I've used Pronews since it was a tot.  I
think Pronews on the laptop is working correctly and when I compare
that log file with the eCS 2.0 machine log file, they do look
different when accessing all servers.  They both connect, and I can
read all posts.

For now, I'll re-post that July 3 message using the laptop to
comp.os.os2.mail-news.  It really doesn't belong here.  But if you
don't see it in a day or two, reply here just to let me know.

--
Barbara
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

Dariusz Piatkowski
In reply to this post by Rich Walsh
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 03:24:24 UTC, "Rich Walsh" <spamyourself@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> My impression is that Firefox 4.0 GA is much less crash-prone than any
> of the betas.  So far, the only crashes reported have been in TCPIP32.DLL.
> While any crash is unfortunate, the number and variety of problems seem to
> be significantly reduced.  Is this the case or is it just wishful thinking?
>
> BTW... because of licensing issues, Exceptq couldn't be packaged with the
> GA as it was with the betas.  If you want to help track where the remaining
> problems are, please get Exceptq v7.1 and put its dlls in a directory on
> your LIBPATH.  You can get it from:
>
>   http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?&key=exceptq71.zip


Thanks for a fantastic piece of work.

So far I concur with all the other assessments. Firefox appears to be faster,
and less bloated...I have only been using it a few days though...so no real hard
'evidence' yet.

Now, I did have something strange happen though. I was d/ling some stuff off of
YouTube, using DownloadHelper, the file completed d/ling on my local machine, I
double clicked on it in the Firefox status bar and....the system completely
froze!!! Nothing could be done...no cursor movement, no keyboard
response...zippo....it's been a while since I've had one of these.

Anyways...I will keep on watching this and will d/l the Exception tracker as
well!
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF4 GA - Is It Stable For You?

James Moe-3
In reply to this post by Steve Wendt
On 04/22/2011 01:38 PM, Steve Wendt wrote:
>
>> SYS1804: The system cannot find the file DIVE.
>>    Where can I find a DIVE distribution?
>
> If it's not part of the base OS, it's probably part of MMOS2.  I'm very
> surprised you don't have DIVE.  I'm almost positive it's included in the
> FixPak.

  I (re-)discovered why <c:/mmos2/dll> is not in the LIBPATH: the WPS
hangs on startup; PMSHELL starts, WPS does not.
  I did get Firefox to work, though, by using Rich Walsh's most
excellent RUN! program. By adding the "e" option and an environment
setting to add the path to ENDLIBPATH, Firefox started right up.

--
James Moe
jmm-list at sohnen-moe dot com
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
12