Jump to content

rn10950

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    254

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    United States

rn10950 last won the day on February 23 2019

rn10950 had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About rn10950

Profile Information

  • OS
    XP Pro x64

Recent Profile Visitors

4,736 profile views

rn10950's Achievements

118

Reputation

  1. BengalEmpire767 started following rn10950
  2. BengalEmpire767

    .

  3. rn10950
    This is my first release of RetroZilla 2.2, any other build is unofficial. This release, as with all RetroZilla releases, is tested on both Windows 95 and Windows NT 4.0. The changelog appears like it's the first release on the GitHub link because it is only showing the latest release. You can view all the releases, with their associated changelogs here, as well as about:changelog from within RetroZilla. The only differences between the exe and zip versions is the exe is a graphical installer. (i.e. installs into \Program Files, adds shortcuts, etc) Regarding youtubemp4.to, from what it looks like, the JavaScript code used is too new to work in RetroZilla at this time. It may work in a future release.
  4. rn10950
    2.2 is out! https://github.com/rn10950/RetroZilla/releases/tag/2.2 Edit: It turns out that Github is refusing connections from RetroZilla 2.1, so it is impossible to download RetroZilla 2.2 using RetroZilla 2.1 (and I assume any official Mozilla release for 9x and NT4 as well as IE6). This issue will only affect 2.1 and below, as the security suite was updated in 2.2 (thanks @roytam1). I will look further to see if there is a way to access github using HTTP, or find an alternative host for the 2.2 binaries. There will be no way to change this in existing 2.1 installations, so consider the updater for 2.1 a notifier. Edit 2: Link that works in RetroZilla 2.1: http://www.filedropper.com/retrozilla-22en-uswin32installer
  5. rn10950
    It's finally fixed. After almost a year of a major bug that prevented me from shipping, I finally got a working build! Expect 2.2 in the coming days, possibly even tonight.
  6. rn10950
    Oh, my mistake, I realized that myself before I posted that and forgot to change the link. Here's the correct log: https://dpaste.de/0HrR/raw Yes, I will review them now.
  7. rn10950
    Would a Firefox 52ESR language pack work with Basilisk with slight modification?
  8. rn10950
    @roytam1 I have ran into more build errors. This one seems to be with ffvpx. Is there an external library I need or a special mozconfig flag I need to set? All media patches applied cleanly. https://dpaste.de/KRuN/raw
  9. rn10950
    @roytam1 Patches applied somewhat successfully, there were a few errors but tried building anyway. I ran into an error during the build process that purplexes me, as the patch that contains the modification where the error is present seemed to have applied OK. Here is the patch log, with the build error attached at the end: https://dpaste.de/Kajx
  10. rn10950
    I just wasn't thinking straight, turns out I ran the command from UXP's parent folder. SMH. However, there are a bunch of errors. https://dpaste.de/UFGQ
  11. rn10950
    error: can't open patch '*.diff': Invalid argument
  12. rn10950
    @roytam1 Do you have updated patches or a complete source tarball? Would you be opposed to uploading your PM28 source directory to a GitHub repo? PM27 is getting harder to use by the day. (I need to work out a crasher that appeared between 27 and 28 that also affects 52ESR and derivatives, it only seems to affect this one specific PC that I have)
  13. rn10950
    @roytam1 Do you have the complete source of NM28 online somewhere? I need to fix a problem specific to my CPU that is keeping me on 27. (For some reason NM28, or any 52.x-based browser for that matter, doesn't like my dual-Xeon setup too much. I tried git-applying the patches, but they don't want to apply.
  14. rn10950
    @roytam1 Have you run into certificate issues? I checked the Mozilla CA file in NSS and there are no root certificates in that file that are not in ours. I get this issue in both Win98 and my Win2k dev machine, both with BlackWingCat's root certificate update for 2018 installed. Do not have an XP+ machine with RZ to test on, but I don't think that will matter, as I have a semi-recent version of SeaMonkey working on Win2k with the updated kernel with no certificate issues.
  15. rn10950
    Yes. The version of Mozilla that Classilla is forked from is older than ours.
  16. rn10950
    Has anyone tried running that custom Pale Moon over on the XP forum with KEX? And yes, some of the changes could be backported. Right now, one of the major problems on RZ (at least in my experience using it while not developing it) is some security/cert issues. I have been getting errors and warnings a lot more lately, that's probably the next big thing to be fixed. I'm still thinking of the best way to do rendering. The Mozilla graphics rendering engine switched between 2.x and 3.x, so I have to think about how to go about it. CSS/HTML shims are a possibility going forward, as well as possibly including NoScript and enabling it by default.
×
×
  • Create New...