mina7601 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 It also works in St55. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 I can confirm no problems to perform this challenge successfully in New Moon 28. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mina7601 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 1 hour ago, mina7601 said: It also works in St55. It also works in K-Meleon 76 Goanna. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicolaasjan Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 18 hours ago, UCyborg said: BTW, I couldn't open account on their repo, hcaptcha.com just refuses to work on Pale Moon, the dialog doesn't popup. Anyone here wants to check https://accounts.hcaptcha.com/demo? Works on Pale Moon here ("dirty" old profile). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anton12 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) https://accounts.hcaptcha.com/demo Hello UCyborg, It works with my latest NM28 on my oldest hardware because: I am human - that's what hcaptcha tells me. Are U human or a Cyborg ?? Maybe hcaptcha smells something is rotten. If you were really human you would have "Challenge Success!" (Just kidding!) Edited January 18 by anton12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mina7601 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 4 hours ago, anton12 said: Are U human or a Cyborg ?? Maybe hcaptcha smells something is rotten. Hey, you really didn't have to think at this point. 😂 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roytam1 Posted January 17 Author Share Posted January 17 On 1/16/2024 at 7:04 AM, VistaLover said: On 1/16/2024 at 4:57 AM, UCyborg said: I made a post on their forum https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=62&t=30769&p=247631 Many thanks! but it seems that no positive feedback there. as I said before, better test with theirs before creating something like this in their side. mentioning my things there is not a good idea as always. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) 2 hours ago, roytam1 said: but it seems that no positive feedback there. as I said before, better test with theirs before creating something like this in their side. mentioning my things there is not a good idea as always. I totally agree. Mentioning you or your forks is not really a good idea on the Pale Moon forum. I can literally feel and read the hostility, arrogance and aversion there. There is a lack of friendliness and respect in this forum. That's why I haven't posted there for a long time. Edited January 17 by AstroSkipper 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luweitest Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 F11 (full screen) key do not function in Serpent52 although menu view→Full screen works. Please confirm if it is a bug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mina7601 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) 2 hours ago, luweitest said: F11 (full screen) key do not function in Serpent52 although menu view→Full screen works. Please confirm if it is a bug. Cannot confirm, F11 key functions normally here in Serpent 52. Edited January 17 by mina7601 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j7n Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) F11 works in Serpent 52. Maybe the hotkey is being captured by another application. Although I have disabled most animations in New Moon 28. Full screen entry still does a gradual hiding of the bar at the top, which is laggy on heavy sites. Edited January 17 by j7n 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroSkipper Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) 4 hours ago, luweitest said: F11 (full screen) key do not function in Serpent52 although menu view→Full screen works. Please confirm if it is a bug. For checking ansd configuring your hotkeys, you can use Dorando keyconfig. It is very helpful. I agree with the opinion of @j7n and also believe that that the hotkey has been captured by another extension. Edited January 17 by AstroSkipper Update of content 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) On 1/17/2024 at 2:48 PM, roytam1 said: but it seems that no positive feedback there ... Er, that's just typical ol' Moonchild there , not surprised or impressed... That's why I specifically cited martok (the author of the code involved) as the person to be contacted, NOT MC... In any case, I don't feel guilty myself of proposing something "inappropriate", nor should @UCyborg apologise for his intervention (and his wording, in all of his posts in the linked PMForum thread, was very civil and to the point ) ... In fact, MC was ready to "wontfix" UXP#2452 (based solely on the unwarranted use of NoScript involved), so I just thought, out of genuine consideration in the broader term, that the case of "https://www.theregister.com", which never surfaced among the MCP discussions, be brought to martok's attention, too... Hang me in the town square, won't you? ... A simple yes or no, "thanks for letting us know", from their side would have sufficed... But, perhaps I'm being too naive... Any impartial by-standard will admit that "us" here act, in an indirect way, as α-testers of upstream's UXP master branch, as being the first to be more widely exposed to that code, despite "our" tree's divergence from "official" UXP; this view is, actually, shared/recognised by @dbsoft in this post ; mind you, MC had himself abolished PM's unstable branch/releases some years ago, because very little of his target audience actually used them and reported existing bugs ... And, FTR, I, personally, don't mind being "a guinea pig" ; no-one forces me to update every single weekend (I usually just update once a month or when important webcompat fixes arrive), and before ever updating, I always take a back-up of my current "dirty" profile, in case things break (extremely rarely); going back to a previous build is "a piece of cake" under that scenario ... On 1/17/2024 at 2:48 PM, roytam1 said: better test with theirs before creating something like this in their side. ... I have always suggested that (even very recently, read this regarding the "dropbox" UXP bug, still "a thing" with official apps, too), but it was NOT feasible in this case because martok's code wasn't present in the latest official "stable" binary releases - I, and I suppose most here (excluding you ), wouldn't be able to compile that "upstream" sourcecode and test that URL on the resulting binaries... Focusing on just "the issue itself", martok responded here that he's unable to reproduce; so, was, in the end, the "www.theregister.com" induced crash in xul.dll (before the fix) particular to "our own" tree? In any case, martok has now prepared UXP#2459 and MC is probably OK to merge it, so all this discussion will become moot... On 1/17/2024 at 2:48 PM, roytam1 said: mentioning my things there is not a good idea as always. ... Pardon me for asking, but do you think there will ever come a time when some bridges could be built between the two "communities"? We now have @basilisk-dev gracing us with his presence here (but, strictly speaking, not a member of MCP ), plus at least two MCP members are now members here (with different usernames), with at least another one silently following this thread (by his own admission) ... I'm not sure if it was just pretense, but MC seems to still have a beef because: Quote and even when finding genuine solutions to genuine problems never bother to offer anything upstream to us. Does this leave a small ray of light come through? Would MC ever accept one "genuine solution" by you for official UXP if you were ever inclined in the future to offer it (rhetorical question, probably...) ? Before anyone here accuses me of old-age-caused dementia , yes, I was here ALL along during the many dramas of the past, but I'd like to see a glass half-full rather than half-empty ; frankly, all this toxicity that existed/still exists between MCP and "us" burdens my soul and if mutual compromises between the two "parties" have to be made at some point, I'd be the first one to welcome them... Just my own humble opinion, though ... Best regards, always extremely thankful PS: December 2023 is well behind us now - any development regarding the "Glory to Hong Kong" song judicial saga (you're still with us here, your repo and blog are still alive, so I suppose things are calmer now?) ? Edited January 18 by VistaLover 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roytam1 Posted January 18 Author Share Posted January 18 2 hours ago, VistaLover said: PS: December 2023 is well behind us now - any development regarding the "Free Hong Kong" song judicial saga (you're still with us here, your repo and blog are still alive, so I suppose things are calmer now?) ? legal action is still ongoing. https://hongkongfp.com/2024/01/01/explainer-hong-kongs-national-security-crackdown-month-42/#h-glory-to-hong-kong-appeal I think situation is becoming worse slowly, and article 23 is yet to come(soon). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClassicNick Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 48 minutes ago, VistaLover said: Any impartial by-standard will admit that "us" here act, in an indirect way, as α-testers of upstream's UXP master branch, as being the first to be more widely exposed to that code, despite "our" tree's divergence from "official" UXP; this view is, actually, shared/recognised by @dbsoft in this post ; mind you, MC had himself abolished PM's unstable branch/releases some years ago, because very little of his target audience actually used them and reported existing bugs ... And, FTR, I, personally, don't mind being "a guinea pig" ; no-one forces me to update every single weekend (I usually just update once a month or when important webcompat fixes arrive), and before ever updating, I always take a back-up of my current "dirty" profile, in case things break (extremely rarely); going back to a previous build is "a piece of cake" under that scenario ... I, and I suppose most here (excluding you ), wouldn't be able to compile that "upstream" sourcecode and test that URL on the resulting binaries... I love this comment because if I have learned anything during the time I have been trying to make Firefox 3.0 compile targeting the Windows GFX toolkit, Visual C++ 6.0, and now, Windows 95, it is that alpha software is typically stable enough for use, and sometimes, works better than the official "stable" release. Due to that, I/we shouldn't mind running software just because it is "alpha" or "beta". Your second point is going to repeat like a broken record, because I work with source code as old as I do because that is all my hardware is compatible with. I did try compiling official UXP on Linux Mint 19.3 in ~September 2020, but it took 6 hours with 2 CPU cores enabled, and 2x that time with 1 CPU core enabled. I can compile roytam1's fork of Pale Moon 26.5.0 in ~3-4 hours with 2 CPU cores enabled, and 6-7 hours with 1 CPU core enabled, along with ~1.2 GiB RAM usage. With 1 CPU core enabled, I can compile RetroZilla in less than 1 hour, while using ~100 MiB RAM with Visual C++ 6.0 SP5. The Mozilla 1.9.0 codebase does not seem to have increased build times than the Mozilla 1.8.1 codebase, although 1.9.1 and 1.9.2 do come with ~15% increased build times, along with ~150-300 MiB RAM usage on Visual C++ 2003, which uses 40% more RAM than Visual C++ 6.0. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts