Jump to content

RetroZilla: An updated version of Mozilla for Windows 95 and NT4 [2.2 RELEASED]


rn10950
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Nomen said:

Regarding Retrozilla-2.1 (Firefox Community edition) - is it just me, or has the DOM inspector been removed?

 

for some reason, it doesn't build correctly, so it is removed from bundling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't think it can be added.  From what I read, FF2 was the last version to have built-in DOM inspector.  FF3+ has it via add-on - the oldest version I can find says it's for FF3 and higher.  I add it anyways, but it doesn't appear to work (it comes up, but it's empty).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nomen said:

I don't think it can be added.  From what I read, FF2 was the last version to have built-in DOM inspector.  FF3+ has it via add-on - the oldest version I can find says it's for FF3 and higher.  I add it anyways, but it doesn't appear to work (it comes up, but it's empty).

 

you may try extracting this archive to extensions folder

http://o.rths.cf/gpc/files1.rt/inspector@mozilla.org-fx2.7z

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
On 10/22/2017 at 1:41 AM, roytam1 said:

That will be super hard as mozilla moves towards to google-ish usage of C/C++ language style, which makes compiling with old MSVC compiler hard/impossible.

Is it not possible to compile it with MinGW? I can compile C++14 programs with gcc and have them run on Windows 95.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, CamTron said:

Is it not possible to compile it with MinGW? I can compile C++14 programs with gcc and have them run on Windows 95.

using mingw to compile old firefox is totally untested, things may badly broken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Linux and OS X builds are compiled with gcc, so I'd think the vast majority of the code except for the Windows-specific platform code should be compatible with it. The major roadblock is getting the build system to work with it. I'm currently trying to build Pale Moon with MinGW.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

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

Edited by rn10950
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

im curious to know if what this newer retrozilla 2.2 with tsl 1.2 version "20190223" has vs retrozilla 2.2 with tls 1.2 version "20180708". i currently have the version "20180708" that works in my windows 95 systems so i wanted to see if this newer version will work on windows 95 and what specific changes were made, because the change log makes it seem like it's the first version and i'm not seeing what really stands out as a major change. also i was wondering if it's better to use the .exe or zip version of the program, i just wanted to know what advantages or disadvantages there would be generally speaking, lastly, i was wondering if someone can explain to me why i can't download youtube videos from "https://youtubemp4.to" on retrozilla 2.2 with tls 1.2 20180708. it would be nice to be able to download videos in 720p hd that is offered from this site, but i've only got it to work properly on firefox 3.6.28 or newer ( i think that was the oldest web browser i tested for that youtube to mp4 site ). 

update - so i went and tried that youtube site i mentioned on the newer 20190223 build of retrozilla on my windows 7 system, but it fails to do the download portion and give options on what quality you want, it just doesn't do anything. i was wondering why this would be the case?

Edited by cov3rt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...