Author Topic: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions  (Read 28848 times)

Joop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 56
  • Posts: 543
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #15 on: July 25, 2015, 03:36:45 pm »
I'm having a trouble interpreting your posts
??Trouble on what part?

No EXCEPTQ report anywhere on the system.

You can also try testing if the expected behavior is congruent with the actual behavior on other platforms to establish the fact that the problem is with the port, not the upstream code.
This is not an option, sorry, if I have to run an other operating system just for checking, then its over for OS/2-eCS. OS/2-eCS is my daily system. Furthermore, other platforms do have their own issues.

Boris

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 11
  • -Receive: 16
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #16 on: July 25, 2015, 04:10:55 pm »
Just whatever.
LIABILITY DISCLAIMER: this is how I understand and what I know, I may be highly inaccurate, or even completely wrong! There are no claims, promises, or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of my posts. Think on your own!

Dave Yeo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 11
  • -Receive: 169
  • Posts: 2434
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #17 on: July 25, 2015, 06:16:30 pm »
Hi Joop,  for the language pack problem, the only other test I can think of is to try installing a different language in case your nl.xpi is somehow broken. And then you will have to register at Github and open an issue describing steps to reproduce. Your crash when downloading should be a different ticket.
Strange if no trp or popup error which will make it harder to debug.

Joop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 56
  • Posts: 543
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #18 on: July 25, 2015, 06:35:37 pm »
Thanks Dave,

Hi Joop,  for the language pack problem, the only other test I can think of is to try installing a different language in case your nl.xpi is somehow broken.
Tried it in two ways. The first download the xpi file and open it in the browser and the other is with options, there is a notification that an update is available, this is a download straight from the source. Both fail. Of course the possibility of a broken file stays. Ticket raised.

Your crash when downloading should be a different ticket.
Strange if no trp or popup error which will make it harder to debug.
Raised another ticket, but got mail back he can't reproduce. Tried again with fresh profile, so nothing, and did the test again. As its still in English the locale can't be blamed. Download nr 3 and exit hard way. I'm out of options. If it has to do with some dll I need to know the filename.

regards

Eirik Romstad

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 19
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
    • Eirik's homepage
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #19 on: July 28, 2015, 12:42:49 pm »
Trying to install it, but several dll's are missing (running v24 currently).  Would it be possible to have a non-yum-rpm package for installing the dll's?  Seem to remember that for some of the earlier installations (18 or 24?), somebody had created a collection of the required dll's that made it possible for a non-techie like me to install the (at the time) most recent version of FireFox.

Keep up the good work :-)

Moritz

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #20 on: July 28, 2015, 05:45:49 pm »
Hi Eirik,

did you try this? http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/h-search.php?key=firefox-31.8.0.en-us.os2.beta_5-wpi

I had the same issue using the zip file but with the wpi from hobbes it worked (installed in the same directory)

Mo

Doug Bissett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 53
  • Posts: 1313
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #21 on: July 28, 2015, 05:50:47 pm »
Trying to install it, but several dll's are missing (running v24 currently).  Would it be possible to have a non-yum-rpm package for installing the dll's?  Seem to remember that for some of the earlier installations (18 or 24?), somebody had created a collection of the required dll's that made it possible for a non-techie like me to install the (at the time) most recent version of FireFox.

Keep up the good work :-)

I have been looking at ways to do that, but it doesn't seem to be possible to tell exactly which version of a RPM DLL is actually installed (size and dates are unreliable, and there is no bldlevel information in them). It would seem that the only way to do it is to use RPM/YUM (which will be much easier when Arca Noae gets their package manager finished), or package the whole collection, with WarpIn, every time something changes (possible, if it can be automated somehow - I need to look closer at that). The other option is to simply follow the directions, and download each package individually. It may be possible to get WarpIn to use a bit of REXX to download, and install, individual DLLs, but I haven't had the time to figure that out. Please let me know if somebody has some REXX to download files (preferably using standard REXX support).

FWIW, the only new package that I needed after FF 24.8.1 was the Libkai package, but that may have been plain luck.

I will also comment that FF 31.8.0 beta 5 has been simply closing when I start it. That happens about one in three tries. It is a program crash that does not produce a *.TRP file. About one in 10 tries, it crashes the whole system.

Eirik Romstad

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 19
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
    • Eirik's homepage
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #22 on: July 28, 2015, 06:10:11 pm »
@Moritz: as a non-techie person, I installed using the wpi link you refer to.  By chance (?) you had the required files installed on your computer, while they were not present on mine.  Doug's comment on my suggestion of having a moz_required supports this hypothesis.

@Doug: thanks for updating my (and others) knowledge.  I am eagerly awaiting a more user friendly rpm-yum scheme.  Just hope it is as nice as Warpin in terms of providing an overview of the changes that has taken place on a system.

Boris

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 11
  • -Receive: 16
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #23 on: July 28, 2015, 08:31:27 pm »
Well, if you use eComStation 2.2 beta II, then the Netlabs RPM environment is already installed and configured, so that is merely of running an update followed by a command to install all the needed packages, which (the command) is very likely just to be present in the readme file as it is.

If you do not use the latest eComStation version (or eComStation at all) and insist on that (which is not bad per se), then I suppose you have reasons (which is good), and therefore the "non-techie-ness" does not apply to you.

Regards. ;)
« Last Edit: July 28, 2015, 08:36:03 pm by Boris »
LIABILITY DISCLAIMER: this is how I understand and what I know, I may be highly inaccurate, or even completely wrong! There are no claims, promises, or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of my posts. Think on your own!

ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2
  • -Receive: 38
  • Posts: 1130
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #24 on: July 28, 2015, 09:30:57 pm »
The problem with that approach is that RPM/YUM is not certified for use on OS/2 and as far as I know neither on eCS.  While that is of no interest to the home/hobby user it is a deal stopper in industry.

I have mentioned it to some of our clients and one sysadmin asked, 'why are you thinking of using a system that all the main Linux distributions are giving up because it is too cumbersome and relies on a WAN connection to operate?' Unfortunately, I don't have an answer to that, especially since a lot of industrial equipment is either stand alone or connected to the secure internal network. 

Why do we need a WAN connection to install something that should be installable from a CD/DVD or USB stick?

Eirik Romstad

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 19
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
    • Eirik's homepage
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #25 on: July 28, 2015, 11:24:01 pm »
@Boris: I use eCS 2.1.  As a non-techie I do not feel comfortable making my own install CDs for the beta version of eCS 2.2.  Apart from a few quirks (like no pre-configured rpm-yum) my system is very stable.  With the reviews of FireFox 31.8 (beta 6), however, I was willing to risk installing a beta version of that program using WarpIn.  It would then be easy to deinstall if it did not work.

In general, I think the success of eCS partly depends on attracting more users.  Volume in usage provides more resources for development.  In another posting on these pages today I point to concerns regarding the privacy of Win10 (see Win10 and privacy on these pages).  I observe that Boris does not share my optimism here, and I do see his point that attracting completely unskilled users is not the route to go.  But there are other categories of users who do not qualify as techies, but who are not completely blank either.  A bit like me :-)  [but this post probably falls a bit outside this string, but please bear with me this one time]

Doug Bissett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 53
  • Posts: 1313
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #26 on: July 29, 2015, 02:02:26 am »
Quote
Well, if you use eComStation 2.2 beta II, then the Netlabs RPM environment is already installed and configured, so that is merely of running an update followed by a command to install all the needed packages, which (the command) is very likely just to be present in the readme file as it is.

RPM/YUM is only installed if you let it install it. If it is installed it is important to make sure that you always do updates that way, when possible. It is also important to be aware if you used some other method to install something that gets added to RPM/YUM, you need to remove the original install before using RPM/YUM to install it.

The other way to install RPM/YUM is to use the available WarpIn installer. If you do that, it is very important to UNINSTALL the WarpIn installer, using WarpIn, after you do the YUM part of the install. That removes the YUM console, which is only good for doing the initial RPM/YUM install. If you attempt to use the console after that, you will be using the down level code that was used to get the initial install done. You must use a normal command line to run the proper YUM stuff. As I noted above, you MUST manage what gets installed, and it is necessary to remove all down level duplicate files, or you will end up trying to use down level code, which will cause problems. It is not necessary for those files to be in LIBPATH for some program to attempt to use them.

Quote
@Doug: thanks for updating my (and others) knowledge.  I am eagerly awaiting a more user friendly rpm-yum scheme.  Just hope it is as nice as Warpin in terms of providing an overview of the changes that has taken place on a system.

Unfortunately, the package manager (currently called Yumie) needs to use YUM. All it does is put a GUI front end on it. Yumie is working well (and yes, the overview is quite good), but gets into a lot of trouble when YUM itself screws up (which it does, far too often). If the maintainers of RPM/YUM can keep their act together, Yumie should make using RPM/YUM a LOT easier (when it screws up, the user will probably need help to recover, but that is true when using RPM/YUM anyway). It is also planned to use Yumie as a front end to WarpIn, so the user will have a common interface to work with. That part is still under development.

Quote
Why do we need a WAN connection to install something that should be installable from a CD/DVD or USB stick?

You don't. Apparently, there is a way to make your own repository (which could be on a LAN, or on local/removable media), and use that. It does take some work to do it, but it shouldn't be too difficult once you figure out how (TIP: it is a RPM or YUM command - sorry I haven't figured it out yet).

Dariusz Piatkowski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 14
  • -Receive: 16
  • Posts: 710
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #27 on: July 29, 2015, 04:41:14 am »
Folks...anyone here have the STDCPP6.DLL file?

I installed B5 as the WPI installer, added some missing DLLs and well, turns out that I have an older DLL after all. I logged ticket # 124 -  Firefox 31.8 crashes with SYS2070 #124 and got a quick response.

But as I had actually previously downloaded the required RPM file I could not extract the DLL since my ArcView actually fails.

Greggory Shaw

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 39
  • -Receive: 19
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #28 on: July 29, 2015, 07:56:00 am »
Folks...anyone here have the STDCPP6.DLL file?

I installed B5 as the WPI installer, added some missing DLLs and well, turns out that I have an older DLL after all. I logged ticket # 124 -  Firefox 31.8 crashes with SYS2070 #124 and got a quick response.

But as I had actually previously downloaded the required RPM file I could not extract the DLL since my ArcView actually fails.


Here's a universal installer for Firefox, Thunderbird & Seamonkey !


See - http://www.os2world.com/forum/index.php?topic=807.msg7720#msg7720
« Last Edit: July 29, 2015, 08:15:19 am by Greggory Shaw »

Boris

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 11
  • -Receive: 16
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
Re: Firefox 31.8.0 Beta 5 - First Impressions
« Reply #29 on: July 29, 2015, 09:37:31 am »
Folks...anyone here have the STDCPP6.DLL file?

I installed B5 as the WPI installer, added some missing DLLs and well, turns out that I have an older DLL after all. I logged ticket # 124 -  Firefox 31.8 crashes with SYS2070 #124 and got a quick response.

But as I had actually previously downloaded the required RPM file I could not extract the DLL since my ArcView actually fails.

Older DLL? WTF DLL hell is absolutely insane in 2015. Compatibility break — new module name.

http://dbanet.org/libs/files/stdcpp6.dll/1
LIABILITY DISCLAIMER: this is how I understand and what I know, I may be highly inaccurate, or even completely wrong! There are no claims, promises, or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of my posts. Think on your own!