Jump to content

Mathwiz

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,827

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    50

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    United States

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Mathwiz

  1. Mathwiz
    If one finds this problem particularly vexing, I think it makes sense to report it to MCP again. If the same problem keeps getting reported, it might get bumped up in priority. Heck, I even identified a probable fix, although porting it to UXP may be tough: ... followed by a rather long digression on just what "upstream" means in the context of UXP....
  2. Mathwiz
    I think the phrase you intended is "the end is nigh" (sort of archaic English - even native speakers may not be familiar with it) It's fine to post Serpent bug reports here, and this is the correct place for them. It's just that we have no answer for you yet. For the most part, @roytam1 is mainly taking browsers written for Win 7 and making them work with Win XP and Vista. "Upstream" for Serpent is @basilisk-dev, but even he is "downstream" from the UXP project, the browser engine behind Serpent, Basilisk, New Moon 28, Pale Moon, IceApe and others. For what you're asking for, you probably need a UXP fix, which would have to come from Moonchild's team. Moonchild has made it abundantly clear that users of @roytam1's builds are unwelcome in his forums. So to even report the problem, you'd need to: Get your hands on a Win 7 or greater system Reproduce the problem with the latest version of Pale Moon on that system Report the problem on the Pale Moon forum, making no mention of @roytam1, New Moon, Serpent, Win XP, or Vista Be patient because yours is only one of scores of Internet compatibility problems created by the Google/Microsoft/Mozilla goalpost-moving triopoly (and probably not the biggest one).
  3. Mathwiz
    @Dave-H I think you can just report your own post to have things like that taken care of.
  4. Mathwiz
    The pixai issue looks like a longstanding Firefox bug, finally fixed in Mo 93. CreateImageBitmap is supposed to take 1, 2, 5, or 6 parameters, but the 2-parameter case throws this error. This appears to be the fix: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/426b58b5faa1. Not sure if it can be backported to UXP; we may need to wait on an upstream fix.
  5. Mathwiz
    Fixed!! AVSForum renders correctly again. I haven't tried it, but suspect that the wrestling forum will be fixed too. Techradar.com is still screwed up though. Clearly a separate issue.
  6. Mathwiz
    I know this was asked and answered on @roytam1's thread but it makes sense to post that problem and the workaround in this thread too, since others may have the same question and his thread is cluttered with so many unrelated things. So, here's the backspace key fix:
  7. Mathwiz
    ... or it could be "Modern Firefox" (as distinct from FF versions <= 56) ... or even "Molybdenum" (right below Chromium in the periodic table, so it's similar, but heavier) That's why I left off the z. For me, it has more associations that way. (I like yours too!)
  8. Mathwiz
    OK, this is off-topic, but things are getting weirder.... There is something on my system blocking me from launching any application named "firefox.exe." I have to rename Firefox to, say, firefoxx.exe for it to run! If I don't rename it, when I try to launch it, it says it doesn't exist! Anyone ever heard of such a thing? Edit 3: OK I found that problem. At one point I was experimenting with trying to run Mo versions >115 with VxKex (a Win 7 kernel extender). I had no luck, so I uninstalled VxKex. Unfortunately, the uninstall did not revert a registry key, so anytime I tried to run firefox.exe, Windows tried to load VxKex and of course, couldn't find it. That was the real missing file. Deleting the registry key fixed it. That said, I can confirm that Mo 68.9 ESR does not render AVSForum correctly. Same bug as Serpent. Clean profile. Edit: OK, getting closer. Mo 78.9 ESR does render AVSForum correctly. So Mozilla's fix was between 68 and 78 (and presumably backported to MyPal). Edit 2: OK, got it. Mo 68.9 ESR doesn't work, but Mo 69 does work. So Mozilla's fix landed in version 69. The date of the fix appears to be circa Oct. 2019. At least, that's the date on all the files in the Mozilla Firefox folder. Hmm.... Perhaps this? The SVG geometry attributes (such as width and height) can now also be defined as CSS properties (Firefox bug 1383650). Edit 4: The fix appears to have landed in official Pale Moon somewhat later: version 29.1.1, dated 26-Mar-2021. Version 29.1.0, dated 1-Mar-2021, does not render AVSForum.com correctly. So I have it narrowed down to one month. Edit 5: On a hunch, I checked @roytam1's St 52 build from March 2021. And sure enough, that same CSS fix landed in the last week of that month. So, I downloaded the St 52 build - and it does render AVSForum correctly! (Well, not quite; as feared, there are other issues, but at least those giant graphics aren't present.) So, it's a regression: been fixed, but somewhere along the line, it broke again. It's getting awfully late here, though. I'm going to bed now.
  9. Mathwiz
    Well, I tried to narrow it down on the Mozilla side by downloading FF 60 Portable from PortableApps - but I couldn't even get it to start up! I'll keep trying but I'm afraid I'm going to need some help with this.
  10. Mathwiz
    Well, how about that? I guess it's a recent change on these sites that just started triggering the old bug. But at least now, we have someplace to start looking. So Mozilla must have fixed it somewhere between FFs 53 and 68, and (assuming MyPal 29.3 was based on PM 29.3) it appears MCP incorporated the fix long ago as well; yet somehow the fix still hasn't make it into any of @roytam1's browsers (well, to be fair, no one has tried NM 27 yet). Does that seem reasonable, and does it help us find the issue?
  11. Mathwiz
    I frequent AVSForum.com, and they made a change today that's resulting in insanity on St 55. See attachment. (There's also a link you can use for testing at the bottom of the image.) That used to be a tiny icon in each post. Now it's giant sized and overlays the post text, making it unreadable. (I already tried a clean profile. No difference.) I've seen this on a few other sites and assume it's some newly-popular CSS Googlism. Anyone know of a workaround, other than "switch to the latest Chrome version?"
  12. Mathwiz
    The only reason I knew about it is that it came up a few months ago when St started doing it in single-process as well as multiprocess mode, and someone came up with that setting as a workaround and posted it in this thread. I guess St was fixed later on, but the fix only works in single-process mode? Edit: It was actually in the previous "generation" of this thread: https://msfn.org/board/topic/184051-my-browser-builds-part-4/?do=findComment&comment=1228833
  13. Mathwiz
    There's a fix for that. Set dom.keyboardevent.keypress.dispatch_non_printable_in_content to true in about:config.
  14. Mathwiz
    Google brought me to that page even before you did, but I swear I tried disabling everything that the article said "safe mode" disabled, and I still couldn't get it to work! BTW there's a contradiction between the St 52 dialog box and the Mozillazine article: The dialog box says custom settings are disabled, the Mozillazine article says they are not. My experience tells me the Mozillazine article is correct, at least for St 55. (Don't know if MCP changed that in UXP.) At any rate, I just gave up. I copied my St 55 profile from work to my home PC with the help of a thumb drive. That fixed several of my problems; e.g., M$'s Windows Update Catalog works again. Chase.com is very cantankerous, but can be made to work with enough patience (although TBH, I usually just go to Edge for that site now). I'll probably never figure out the core issue. I can only tell you it isn't multiprocess mode, nor is it most of my add-ons.
  15. Mathwiz
    I must admit, this one has me baffled. If I go to about:profiles and click "Restart with Add-Ons Disabled," the Windows Update Catalog loads fine. But if I disable every add-on manually and restart, the site still hangs at the "loading" state. I even tried switching back to the default theme, on the off-chance that it was causing the issue, but it didn't help either. Clearly, "Restart with Add-Ons Disabled" is doing more than disabling all add-ons and custom themes, but it's not at all clear to me what to try next.
  16. Mathwiz
    WTF now, M$? Github.com comes up fine in Edge or even 360EE. Edit: For information, the following pref is at its default value: network.http.accept-encoding;gzip, deflate, vary Edit 2: Hmm.... Works in St 52, not St 55. Could it be a profile issue? BRB.... Edit 3: Yep, it's a profile issue. Works in a clean profile, or even in my default profile with add-ons disabled. So, I just have to figure out which of my many add-ons is causing this Edit 4: Found it! It was Palefill 1.28, which, ironically, I don't think we even need any more! (I've instead been injecting polyfills with Violentmonkey as needed.) Unfortunately, disabling Palefill 1.28 didn't fix the other M$ site that no longer loads in Serpent: the Windows Update Catalog. I'll keep working on that.
  17. Mathwiz
    The number of open issues probably has a lot to do with how long each browser has been available. R3dfox has only been around for about 2 months. (This thread is only 4 pages long so far.) So it hasn't had much time to accumulate issue reports. Also, I think it's harder to modify modern browsers to work on XP/Vista, at least without "help" from OCAPI or the Vista extended kernel, than it is to modify them to run on 7/8/8.1. Support for the latter was removed only recently, so there's not as much code to change - thus, not as much opportunity for Murphy.... Edit: Speaking of XP/Vista, I saw on the R3dfox author's Github page a project called R3dfox Classic, a fork of Waterfox Classic. No work has been done on it AFAICS, but the readme says it'll be an XP/Vista version, I assume using techniques similar to what @feodor2 does to make MyPal 68 work on XP. Waterfox Classic was forked from FF 56, so if this comes to pass it'll probably look and act a lot like @roytam1's Serpent. The bad news, though, is that Waterfox Classic hasn't been updated since Nov. 2022, so there's a lot of catching up to do beyond making it XP compatible.
  18. Mathwiz
    Getting back on topic, I think all this confusion was due to using the word "real" in the thread title and first post: I'm more familiar with Ungoogled Chromium than Brave, but in either case, I read "real" as meaning "developed by the same authors." So "real" Ungoogled Chromium would have to be developed by the Ungoogled Chromium team. @win32 could develop Ungoogled Supermium, but it wouldn't be "real" Ungoogled Chromium. If that's what the OP means, then the answer is most likely no. AIUI, the last version of Ungoogled Chromium compatible with Win 7/8/8.1 was version 109 (same as the "Googled" version). The Ungoogled Chromium team has shown no interest in backporting newer versions to older OSes. "Ungoogling" Chromium is hard enough work!
  19. Mathwiz
    Probably not. I'm pretty sure there are applications where AVX instructions can offer considerable performance improvement. It's just that those applications aren't browsers and email clients. Well, at least, not yet. I'm sure Google is working on new CSS transitions or something that will be dog-slow without AVX. One can never waste use enough CPU/GPU cycles on flashy graphics!
  20. Mathwiz
    Probably because if you're a Windows programmer, then you're probably running Windows 11, or at least 10, anyhow; so you see no need for one. Folks like @roytam1 who have modern equipment but still care about supporting older OSes are a rare breed. You're right - but it's because the software we're trying to backport was changed to require the latest OS versions, often intentionally. No one is forcing Google or Mozilla to call functions only available in Win 10+. For that matter, no one is forcing MCP to call functions only available in Win 7+. That was a choice they all made. I realize that said choice was often made implicitly, by moving to the latest (C/Rust/whatever) compilers, which by default, target the latest OSes. But it was still a choice to move to the latest compilers, and it was also a choice not to configure them to support older OSes. This is often done in the name of "performance," but (as with some hardware improvements like AVX) the performance gains are minimal - unless the idea is to force users to buy new hardware to run the new OS required to run the latest browsers. Of course your browser will run faster if you make all your users go out and buy new PCs!
  21. Mathwiz
    True enough. As I said, it's a judgement call. But I don't think we need to get lost in the weeds of exactly what constitutes a "knock-off." From the thread title it's clear to me that the OP is looking for a recent version of Ungoogled Chromium and/or Brave ported to Windows <10. I suspect many other MSFN members are looking for the same. In theory it doesn't sound hard to do. Start with, say, Supermium/Thorium source, apply the Ungoogled Chromium patches, and build. But you have to know how to build Chromium, what to do if it doesn't compile or doesn't work - and of course you need compilers that can target your desired OS version and hardware to run them on. Not many of us have the needed hardware, software, and expertise - not to mention interest in tackling the project. I know I don't. I suspect that's why it hasn't been done yet.
  22. Mathwiz
    I understood the term to refer to "name-brand" or "well-known" browsers (Firefox,Chromium/Chrome/Edge,IE) vs. Mozilla/Chromium forks intended to remove possibly unwanted features (Ungoogled Chromium) and/or to extend support to older OSes (R3dfox,Supermium/Thorium) That makes it a bit of a judgement call. Is Brave a "name-brand" browser, or is it a "knock-off" of Chromium? The OP seems to consider it name-brand, but others may differ. Maybe others are reading it differently. So far I'm the only one who's voted in favor of "knock-offs."
  23. Mathwiz
    Sounds a lot like mine! Mine has a faster clock but otherwise very similar. It's about 10 years old but it still runs Serpent quite smoothly (at least in multiprocess mode, which isn't available in PM/NM/Basilisk). Switching topics, I think the problem with Serpent's fill login not working at Chase.com is due to Chase recently implementing custom elements on their login screen. They don't have <input> tags any more. Custom element support was added to UXP (& 55 by Roytam) but I don't think the fill login function was updated to work with custom elements.
  24. Mathwiz
    The irony is, the original idea behind Pale Moon, waaay back before XP even, at least as I understood it, was that it was supposed to just be Firefox optimized for Windows, so it was supposed to be (and seemed to be, on my ancient Win 98 PC) faster than vanilla Firefox. No new or different features, just better performance. This was like PM 3.6 or so, but it sure seems like they went astray somewhere along the line. And enabling AVX or whatever in 64-bit builds isn't going to make up for it. I tried disabling multiprocess mode on St 55 on Win 7 and had a similar experience. Couldn't even type a post on MSFN at 10-20 seconds per letter, with one CPU core maxed out! So, even with a single core, you might have had better luck with e10s forced on. It's my opinion that the OS version makes little difference in performance, assuming the application (browser or whatever) will run on both OSes. The app might be faster if optimized for a newer version, but in that case it's unlikely to run on the older version at all. It's mostly the hardware, rather than the OS, that provides good performance.
  25. Mathwiz
    I'm not sure that's true. Maybe it's true of some, but I often read what's going on "over there" when @VistaLover or @UCyborg links to a thread about a technical issue that affects UXP browsers (and "UXP-like" browsers such as St 55) generally. That said, there's often an arrogance "over there" that their decisions are the only "correct" decisions. It's not merely hating on MCP to recognize that there's still a lot of unnecessary tension between them and @roytam1 (not to mention @feodor2). It's important to recognize where we stand. I'm perfectly happy with MCP and @basilisk-dev refusing to support Vista and older OSes. You have to draw the line somewhere. But that doesn't make it the correct decision for everyone on the planet! Some folks prefer to stick with XP, some Vista, etc. I happen to prefer Windows 7 without Aero, which many folks think is weird because it makes it look like Win 98! But I think it's best to adopt a "live and let live" attitude, and not try to force my preferences on anyone else. Everyone is trying to make the best decision for themselves, and I think it's better to support whatever folks are trying to do than to belittle them because they made a different choice than I might have.
×
×
  • Create New...