Dave-H Posted March 8 Posted March 8 If it's any diagnostic help, this page is one of the ones that's completely blank for me if those options are enabled. https://www.britishgas.co.uk/identity/
D.Draker Posted March 8 Posted March 8 On 3/7/2025 at 9:35 AM, NotHereToPlayGames said: Keyword is "suggested". VistaLover would have to stop back in and tell us if he is or is not enabling/disabling. Until then, we should not be "guessing" VistaLover's configuration. Chrome at default would have a "default" setting for that flag. I'm pretty sure I saw Vistalover wrote many times about that flags and advised to try them. Something tells me Dave listened to VistaLover and turned that experimental flag on. Let's tag him, probably he's just shy or ignores. @VistaLover 2
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 9 Posted March 9 (edited) On 3/7/2025 at 7:02 PM, Dave-H said: If it's any diagnostic help, this page is one of the ones that's completely blank for me if those options are enabled. https://www.britishgas.co.uk/identity/ Supermium R6 and higher is BROKEN. Users should consider R5 as the most-recent working version of Supermium. Creator should be brought to this attention at GitHub (will not be by me!). Out of the box, no changes, R5 works (for cited web site) in XP and in 10. Out of the box, no changes, R6 does not work (for cited web site) in XP or in 10. R5 and R6 are both v126's and I cannot find any other Chrome/Chromium v126's to not work for the cited web site. This is a Supermium R6 and higher issue ONLY. It's not going to "go away" in new releases without the creator addressing whatever he introduced in R6 and is carrying over to everything newer. That's the best I can gather, at least. I really strongly and wholeheartedly feel this needs addressed at GitHub (again, will not be by me!). Edited March 9 by NotHereToPlayGames 2
Dave-H Posted March 9 Posted March 9 Thanks. Does anyone have the 'normal' Google Chrome browser installed? I don't have it installed now, and I would be interested to know if it has the same problem. I will feed this back to the developer on GitHub, because something is obviously amiss here, certainly with Supermium, especially as I gather that the preview 132 version has the same issue. 1
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 9 Posted March 9 (edited) I have 'normal' Chrome v122 and 'normal' Edge at work. Both of them display the identity page correctly. Unknown version of Edge (company IT updates it often). I can prevent company IT from updating my Chrome v122. I also can *not* run any Ungoogled at work. I can only run Official Chrome or Official Edge. But have more control over which version of Official Chrome. I've tried over a DOZEN different forks of Chrome/Chromium v126, ungoogled and normal, clienthints enabled/disabled, different useragents, comparing flags/command switches - this really is something that is *ONLY* happening in Supermium R6 and higher. It is not flag-related, it is not client hints, it is not user agent, it is something in Supermium R6 and higher that DOES NOT EXIST in any other v126. It would be one thing if a flag or command switch solved this in OTHER v126's also, but again, this is something that is happening *ONLY* in Supermium R6 and higher (requiring a flag to fix). Again, it would be one thing if Browser X v126 was effected and it required the flag *AND* Supermium R6 v126 was effected and it required the flag. THERE ARE NO OTHER v126's THAT NEED THIS FLAG TO RENDER THAT PAGE. NO OTHER CHROME FORKS ARE EFFECTED. NONE! Okay, none that I can find (there are a LOT of forks!), and I spent all weekend HUNTING. This is something *ISOLATED* to Supermium R6 and higher. Edited March 9 by NotHereToPlayGames 3
Klemper Posted March 10 Posted March 10 22 hours ago, Dave-H said: Thanks. Does anyone have the 'normal' Google Chrome browser installed? I have, but old. I can't install a higher version on my 8.1 notebook. With version 110 it shows an improperly formatted basic HTML page. https://www.britishgas.co.uk/identity/ 22 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: NO OTHER CHROME FORKS ARE EFFECTED. NONE! Not true. 2
Klemper Posted March 10 Posted March 10 22 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: THERE ARE NO OTHER v126's THAT NEED THIS FLAG TO RENDER THAT PAGE. You're confused. @Monolithik actually suggested to turn it OFF, whereas @VistaLover suggested to keep it ON. 2
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 10 Posted March 10 (edited) This thread is nothing more than a bunch of know-it-all's (myself included, lol) talking in circles because, well, because we know it all. There is now a REAL followup to this at GitHub (which I have been requesting all along) - https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/1229 And this **IS** a Supermium issue! No other Chrome Forks changed the name of the flag and its default state, only Supermium did this, no others! "Your subjectivity has biased your objectivity." Edited March 10 by NotHereToPlayGames 1
D.Draker Posted March 10 Posted March 10 13 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/1229 Could you please answer in two words, what was the reason? I'm not gonna read @VistaLover's usual A4 size spreadsheets. Thank you in advance!
D.Draker Posted March 10 Posted March 10 On 3/9/2025 at 2:40 PM, Dave-H said: Does anyone have the 'normal' Google Chrome browser installed? Well, Dave, CentBrowser is a normal Chrome, it's not Ungoogled. The only difference is the added Chinorussian telemetry and some stunts to make it work on older OS. The version based on 118 renders everything just fine,
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 10 Posted March 10 22 minutes ago, D.Draker said: what was the reason? Supermium author changed the naming of an internal flag and also changed its default state. This is only in Supermium v126 R6 and higher. So all Supermium versions beginning with v126 R6 behave *DIFFERENTLY* than all other v126 and higher for *ALL OTHER* Chrome/Chromium forks. This causes *great confusion* for anybody UPGRADING and keeping a profile from R5 or older. Especially if that profile sets/unsets this flag. The UPGRADED profile now has this flag doing the OPPOSITE of why the user set/unset it in the first place. Most importantly - this is Supermium Only. Users that set flags now have to comb through all of their flags to see if the Supermium Author now has it doing the OPPOSITE of all other Chrome/Chromium Forks "on the planet". Unless, of course, those forks don't fork from upstream but fork from Supermium directly (I have not checked nor tried any forks of Supermium, if they do exist). 2
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 10 Posted March 10 Okay, that was more than "two words". But come on, you cannot fully answer your question in "two words". Oh, wait, I CAN answer in TWO WORDS == SUPERMIUM ONLY. 1
Dave-H Posted March 10 Posted March 10 Thanks again everyone. I reported the problem on GitHub, as you've seen, and I'm still trying to get my head around the response from Vangelis66 there! Whatever the ramifications are from changing the default status of that flag, surely the fundamental problem is that something when enabled by that flag is causing the British Gas site to break. Whatever it is, I hope it's addressed as if one site breaks, surely others will as well. 1
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 10 Posted March 10 (edited) It's bigger than that! The "problem" is that the author set a flag to ENABLE EXPERIMENTAL features to make v126 compatible with web sites requiring v13x. But then KEPT that EXPERIMENTAL flag ENABLED in v132 (enabling EXPERIMENTAL features that will not become stable/vetted/good until v135, or v138, or v140, etc). THIS IS A PROBLEM for folks thinking their browser is "secure" because these EXPERIMENTAL features are designated as EXPERIMENTAL for a reason! Edited March 10 by NotHereToPlayGames 2
Dave-H Posted March 10 Posted March 10 Indeed so, but if an 'experimental' feature is actually breaking sites, I do hope that gets addressed! 3
Recommended Posts