Jump to content
MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. ×

My Browser Builds (Part 3)


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, adata said:

Is version 20211012 not compatible with the win XP? Version 20210130 works without a problem in the XP 64bit, but version 20211012 does not start at win XP 64bit. Is the version 20210130 last for Windows XP? There is nothing newer?

No newer version, but 20211012 starts fine on XP 32-bit. Please provide a screen shot of the error you get trying to start it on XP 64-bit. ArcticFox is a 32-bit program; I can't imagine why it would work on XP 32-bit but not 64-bit, but stranger things have happened....

@IXOYE was having trouble accessing msfn.org with ArcticFox version 20211012. I couldn't reproduce; msfn.org came up fine in it for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 11/8/2021 at 6:10 PM, InterLinked said:

Well, we are 2 for 2 now. Just crashed again, and with the same Yandex account.

I still say that's coincidence, but that is one of the lesser used accounts so seems odd.

Usually, it doesn't crash twice in the same day.

All right, just crashed again.

So it seems we're rolling about once per week, ish, give or take.

Different email account this time, but also a Yandex account.

So we're 3 for 3 on Yandex accounts causing MailNews to crash at the moment...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, InterLinked said:

All right, just crashed again.

So it seems we're rolling about once per week, ish, give or take.

Different email account this time, but also a Yandex account.

So we're 3 for 3 on Yandex accounts causing MailNews to crash at the moment...

does a newly created yandex account crash mailnews?

please give me a test account for debugging in private.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, roytam1 said:

does a newly created yandex account crash mailnews?

please give me a test account for debugging in private.

I'm not sure, all mine are at least a couple years old or so, but you should be able to sign up for free at yandex.com. I use Yandex only because they're the only provider I know of that still lets you do free custom domain hosting. Unlimited domains, unlimited accounts, unlimited storage. I guess the Russians might be mining your mail, but can't win everything :(

Personally, I'm not positive that I can pin it on Yandex accounts exclusively yet. Let me monitor this for a few more weeks and see - I'll post here with any updates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, baluw said:

You might want to change the download links on your blogspot page from https to http. While certainly not the safest, IE8 on XP has problems connecting to the server hosting the files over HTTPS, yet easily downloads them over HTTP.

You can also use the authorized mirror on my website (-> soggi.org - tools) - if you have no success via HTTPS, it also supports HTTP (intentionally for old browsers and/or OSes which don't support latest HTTPS/TLS).

kind regards
soggi

Edited by soggi
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, soggi said:

You can also use the authorized mirror on my website (-> soggi.org - tools) - if you have no success via HTTPS, it also supports HTTP (intentionally for old browsers and/or OSes which don't support latest HTTPS/TLS).

kind regards
soggi

Sure will - good to know such a website exists - it's been 10 minutes since I've seen this and I've already found some old-but-gold software that I didn't know I needed yet... :D

 

@roytam1 - about Serpent 52.9 - while I'm not exactly sure this is a bug, I believe it to be one - I don't really think it's normal that (sometimes, because of course I am now unable to provide screens...) the warnings about a file being downloaded from the internet built into XP don't close even after you allow a file to run. Happens only with .exe's as far as I'm aware. Weird.

Also, this one certainly is - when trying to add more search engines to select, the user is redirected to basilisk's website. That is certainly intended behaviour, however trying to install, for example, Google by clicking on its link results in this error:

image.png.f65c48b9edd9be017541769d385c5e2d.png

 

Nothing I can do I'm aware, and I really don't want to use Bing (or DDG for that matter, as both of them manage to always hide the most important search results for a phrase...)

 

EDIT: Caught the first bug (?) that I describe in this post. Here is a screenshot:

image.thumb.png.78d05c8b95ff451eca0ecea61df7aa31.png

As it probably isn't quite obvious, Spotify is already installed and running fine, while this "Open file - warning about security" (rough translation, forgive me if I'm way off on this one) dialog box still stays. :thumbdown

Edited by baluw
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2021 at 11:35 PM, dencorso said:

It won't go back to the XP forum. It was past time it got it's own forum. "Older NT-OSes" denote those which have sub-forums in the "Older NT-OSes" forum. 7 isn't there yet (it still has too many users and too many software support for that). Nor is 8.0, because it's discussed in the same forum as 8.1, which isn't yet EoS. 

That's a big mistake IMHO. Logically find everything for XP in XP subforum. I would not guess in year that for browsers for old OS was created new special subforum. It is illogical.

As usual in last years we see that almost every change in modern digital world is for worse. Youtube and Twitter interface, Browsers degradation, Android, Media players, Text programs, etc. Everything going down the old rusty barrel...:( Now you, Den, with your new "subforum" nobody asked for. People now will not find this browsers and will conclude that Vista and XP is completely dead. People find roytam brosers mainly using google search that direct them to XP subforum and now this will not work as before. Because everything is over-complicated on MSFN now.:( I humbly ask you to return XP browsers topic in XP subforum. Please, you, throwing in disarray your own forum, that's change make no sense. It is overthinked and over-complicated decision - let all XP stuff be in XP subforum. Please, Den Corso.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I submit that some will disagree with "change" for no other reason than it is "change".

I googled (had to Google that out of curiosity, the "past tense verb" is not supposed to be capitalized) for XP Browser and MSFN.org shows up on Page 1 of the results.

I googled for Vista Browser and MSFN.org shows up on Page 2 of the results.

These will promote higher on the results pages because of how Google's algorithm works.

The more ACTIVE these threads become the HIGHER they rank in ANY search engine list of results, not just Google, at least that's how I understand search engine algorithms.

The web browsers discussed here are not really limited to XP.

There is a large number of active users in the XP threads that don't even run XP.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, baluw said:

Also, this one certainly is - when trying to add more search engines to select, the user is redirected to basilisk's website. That is certainly intended behaviour, however trying to install, for example, Google by clicking on its link results in this error:

image.png.f65c48b9edd9be017541769d385c5e2d.png

Have you tried changing the useragent for

addons.basilisk-browser.org

in 'about:config'?

New string:
 

general.useragent.override.addons.basilisk-browser.org

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Goanna/4.8 Firefox/68.0 Basilisk/52.9.2021.07.19

That allows you to install extensions from there as well (or at least download them and then edit 'instal.rdf' with the appropriate min and max version).

Edited by nicolaasjan
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, nicolaasjan said:

Have you tried changing the useragent for

addons.basilisk-browser.org

in 'about:config'?

New string:
 

general.useragent.override.addons.basilisk-browser.org

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Goanna/4.8 Firefox/68.0 Basilisk/52.9.2021.07.19

That allows you to install extensions from there as well (or at least download them and then edit 'instal.rdf' with the appropriate min and max version).

 

Well, guess what has just fixed my issue? :D Big thanks, I now consider my XP install feature-complete, hahah.

Maybe this should be included as one of the default about:config strings? I see that there are other useragent overrides for webpages such as YouTube or WhatsApp and I certainly haven't set them myself.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rod Steel said:

Logically find everything for XP in XP subforum. I would not guess in year that for browsers for old OS was created new special subforum. It is illogical.

This is my solution: https://msfn.org/board/topic/183118-browsers-working-on-older-nt-family-oses/?tab=comments#comment-1207753

Ben.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, roytam1 said:

thank you @RainyShadow handing me a test account, but I can NOT get it crash here. (IMAP + SMTP setup)

It crashes every now and then immediately after an email is sent. The email gets sent successfully, but MailNews immediately crashes.

It's maybe 1 in every 50 sent emails, sometimes it is a week or more between crashes. But this has been happening for at least 2 years now, as long as I have been using MailNews.

I might add that I only use Windows 7 and Windows 10 regularly, mostly Windows 7. I do not use Windows XP, but I remember this also happened in a similar way with Windows 2000. So it doesn't seem OS-related.

Edited by InterLinked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2021 at 6:06 AM, Mathwiz said:

does that mean "official" PM/Basilisk used to support Macs and no longer does?
Or were Macs never supported and this is just cleaning up leftover code?

-- Disclaimer --

Those questions in themselves can be regarded (by some) as off-topic here, so providing answers to them might be also construed as derailing the thread :whistle:; however, since they were asked by an esteemed member of this community (who has, in the past, also contributed code to these roytam1 browsers), I kindly ask those few "allergic" to off-topic content to move along and ignore this... Now that's been settled :):

Yes, both official UXP browsers (Pale Moon, Basilisk) could be compiled for MacOS (aka Darwin) with some slight tinkering, because the platform did contain that support; those third-party (beta) builds were never fully endorsed by MCP, but, let's just say, existed on their sufferance ;). ...

The MacOS user community had been mostly active on PM (beta) builds, e.g.
https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/62312/pale-moon
And Moonchild was also "generous" enough to accommodate a subforum for Mac users (now locked in oblivion):
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewforum.php?f=41
But the leading dev duo (MC+MAT) was never really satisfied with the "efforts" put by the MacOS build maintainers, giving them hard time if/when even slightly deviating from the duo's "vision" of how things should be "properly" handled... All too familiar here by the way they treated feodor's/roytam1's XP forks...

Then, Apple gave them the perfect excuse they wanted :(: last March, the die was cast :(:

End of Macintosh support

https://www.palemoon.org/roadmap.shtml

Quote

Platform (operating system) support

Pale Moon is originally a Microsoft Windows product.
Our roadmap considerations for specific platforms to support in addition to Windows:

Mac OS -- Discontinued. Beta on Intel only. This never progressed past unofficial support due to unreliability of community developers for Mac. Due to the lack of commitment from the Mac crowd and the decision from Apple to move entirely to ARM SoC it's not realistic anymore to expect any support for Mac in the future.

This would leave existing users of "macPM" on Intel CPU Macs without future support, a situation reminiscent of XP+Vista users (on older H/W) and MCP's obstinate refusal to support their code/apps on older WinOses...

The last macPM release was v29.1.0; the Mac build maintainer (now banned in the PM forums) expressed his intentions to continue releasing Mac builds (by restoring code MCP remove - does it sound familiar?) and, as you'd expect, that caused both MAT+MC to burn fuses...

The macPM build was rebranded to White Star since v29.1.1, the author had to evacuate PM forum and move on to his own site ...

Another party has rebranded official Basilisk to Silver and offers Mac builds of it, too...

https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=26686

https://github.com/siggi90/NoobSilver

https://dbsoft.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=54

@Mathwiz, I hope I covered your queries somehow... :P

Edited by VistaLover
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, baluw said:

Caught the first bug (?) that I describe in this post. Here is a screenshot:

image.thumb.png.78d05c8b95ff451eca0ecea61df7aa31.png

As it probably isn't quite obvious, Spotify is already installed and running fine, while this "Open file - warning about security" (rough translation, forgive me if I'm way off on this one) dialog box still stays. :thumbdown

it may because it tries to detect a custom URL scheme with javascript to see if there is a program can deal with spotify "URL" and give a spotify download if there is none, and the mechanism it use may be blocked by latest security patches.

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...