Hi all
My reply concerns this link:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/10/msg00392.html
I could solve the problem for me (debian & Firefox) as follow:
1. Firefox-Settings
1.1.
Edit -> Preferences -> General -> Performance
- Disable «Use recommended performance settings»
- Disable «Use
On Wed 17 Oct 2018 at 20:52:21 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Wed 17 Oct 2018 at 14:27:41 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > On Wed 17 Oct 2018 at 13:53:45 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > > On Tue 16 Oct 2018 at 18:26:46 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > On Tue 16 Oct 2018 at 18:42:19 (-0400), Felix Miata wrote
On Wed 17 Oct 2018 at 14:27:41 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Wed 17 Oct 2018 at 13:53:45 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Tue 16 Oct 2018 at 18:26:46 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > On Tue 16 Oct 2018 at 18:42:19 (-0400), Felix Miata wrote:
> > > > David Wright composed on 2018-10-16 17:07 (UTC-050
On Wed 17 Oct 2018 at 13:53:45 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Tue 16 Oct 2018 at 18:26:46 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > On Tue 16 Oct 2018 at 18:42:19 (-0400), Felix Miata wrote:
> > > David Wright composed on 2018-10-16 17:07 (UTC-0500):
> > >
> > > > (Actually, it would be useful to know how to pri
On Tue 16 Oct 2018 at 18:26:46 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Tue 16 Oct 2018 at 18:42:19 (-0400), Felix Miata wrote:
> > David Wright composed on 2018-10-16 17:07 (UTC-0500):
> >
> > > (Actually, it would be useful to know how to print out the about:config
> > > page so tht it can be perused at
On Tue 16 Oct 2018 at 18:42:19 (-0400), Felix Miata wrote:
> David Wright composed on 2018-10-16 17:07 (UTC-0500):
>
> > (Actually, it would be useful to know how to print out the about:config
> > page so tht it can be perused at leisure.)
>
> prefs.js is a plain text file in the profile director
David Wright composed on 2018-10-16 17:07 (UTC-0500):
> (Actually, it would be useful to know how to print out the about:config
> page so tht it can be perused at leisure.)
prefs.js is a plain text file in the profile directory.
--
Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science.
On Sat 13 Oct 2018 at 21:48:11 (-0400), bw wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, David Wright wrote:
> > On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 21:04:58 (-0400), bw wrote:
> > > I would sure be interested in your method of running firefox on stretch,
> > > without using extensions or addons from outside the debian reposit
On Sat 13 Oct 2018 at 23:17:34 (-0400), bw wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, David Wright wrote:
> > On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 21:04:58 (-0400), bw wrote:
> > > > > I agree with this opinion, and also what Dan Ritter replied. Firefox
> > > > > is
> > > > > now unreliable on stretch and should be avoided
On Sat 13 Oct 2018 at 21:43:58 (-0400), bw wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, David Wright wrote:
> >
> > > My point
> > > was that is ff needs extensions to be "secure" or reliable, and if the
> > > only place to get them is from outside the debian repo, then logically,
> > > the pkg belongs in "co
On 14/10/2018 12.17, bw wrote:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, David Wright wrote:
On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 21:04:58 (-0400), bw wrote:
I agree with this opinion, and also what Dan Ritter replied. Firefox is
now unreliable on stretch and should be avoided. Security updates to a
browser that crashes with
On Friday, October 12, 2018 02:42:16 PM Dan Ritter wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 12:57:15PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> In the sense of "stable" as Debian "stable": for a period of
> around 2-3 years, the software at the beginning is about the
> same as the software at the end, modulo security
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 12:57:15PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 18:45:16 (-0400), Dan Ritter wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 06:15:06PM -0400, bw wrote:
> > > On Wed, 10 Oct 2018, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > running software that the Debian Project does not package, and I
> > wou
On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 18:45:16 (-0400), Dan Ritter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 06:15:06PM -0400, bw wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Oct 2018, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > > That's because Firefox is now multiprocess.
> > >
> > > The main Firefox process handles the user interface, fetching
> > > web pages, de
Le 10/10/2018 à 20:43, Sven Joachim a écrit :
> Try killing xfsettingsd, that helps according to
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=909818#15.
Thanks!
I can confirm killing xfsettingsd fixes the issue (but Xfce is not
really usable after that).
I have launch again xfsettings wit
On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 21:59:00 +0200
Pétùr wrote:
> Le 09/10/2018 à 02:04, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
> > First, Firefox is using 50% of your RAM. That's way too much unless
> > you have very little RAM to begin with. How much total RAM do you
> > have? My system has 8GB. Firefox Quantum only shows
On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 21:04:58 (-0400), bw wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018, David Wright wrote:
> > On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 19:11:46 (-0400), bw wrote:
> > > On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> > > > On 11/10/2018 11:36, bw wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> >
Le 10/10/2018 à 23:57, Dan Ritter a écrit :
I don't know what that is, exactly, but advertising and trackers
now take up 90% of most web processing time and space. Running a
good ad blocker like uBlock Origin will help a lot.
I use ublock origin (installed from firefox addons "store" not from
On 10/08, Pétùr wrote:
Le 08/10/2018 à 20:59, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 20:07:26 +0200
Pétùr wrote:
Hi,
I experience a very slow response time (and high cpu usage) for
firefox in debian sid these days.
I use the 62.0.3 version and the latency is particularly present at
the
On 10/10, bw wrote:
I would sure be interested in your method of running firefox on stretch,
without using extensions or addons from outside the debian repositories?
I never mentioned jessie, not sure what the reference is about? My point
was that is ff needs extensions to be "secure" or relia
On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 18:34:32 -0400 (EDT)
bw wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>
> > On 11/10/2018 11:15, bw wrote:
> > > How exactly do you think stretch users should run an adblocker when all
> > > the xul-ext-* extensions are now broken?
> >
> > Install an extension buil
On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 19:11:46 (-0400), bw wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>
> > On 11/10/2018 11:36, bw wrote:
> > > On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> > > > On 11/10/2018 11:15, bw wrote:
> > > > > How exactly do you think stretch users should run an a
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> On 11/10/2018 11:36, bw wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> > > On 11/10/2018 11:15, bw wrote:
> > > > How exactly do you think stretch users should run an adblocker when all
> > > > the xul-ext-* extensions are now broken
On 11/10/2018 11:36, bw wrote:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
On 11/10/2018 11:15, bw wrote:
How exactly do you think stretch users should run an adblocker when all
the xul-ext-* extensions are now broken?
I see that there is a webext-ublock-origin for sid but I have never used
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 06:15:06PM -0400, bw wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018, Dan Ritter wrote:
>
> > That's because Firefox is now multiprocess.
> >
> > The main Firefox process handles the user interface, fetching
> > web pages, decoding them, and some of the rendering work.
> >
> > The We
On 11/10/2018 11:15, bw wrote:
How exactly do you think stretch users should run an adblocker when all
the xul-ext-* extensions are now broken?
Install an extension built for webextensions such as Adblock Plus 3.0 or
later using Firefox Add-ons Manager?:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firef
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 09:59:00PM +0200, Pétùr wrote:
> Le 09/10/2018 à 02:04, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
> > First, Firefox is using 50% of your RAM. That's way too much unless
> > you have very little RAM to begin with. How much total RAM do you have?
> > My system has 8GB. Firefox Quantum only
Pétùr wrote:
...
> Are other users of sid experiencing the same behavior ?
not that i've noticed but i only use testing most of
the time and sid/experimental only for selected items...
songbird
Le 09/10/2018 à 02:04, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
First, Firefox is using 50% of your RAM. That's way too much unless
you have very little RAM to begin with. How much total RAM do you have?
My system has 8GB. Firefox Quantum only shows on average 3 to 4% RAM
usage even when streaming a video.
On 2018-10-08 22:06 +0200, Pétùr wrote:
> Top shows several threads with high cpu usage such as :
>
> PID USER PR NIVIRTRESSHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+
> COMMAND
>
> 12452 petur20 0 4030664 1,9g 67248 R 72,4 50,1 2:54.34
> firefox
> 12937 petur20 0 1830092 3810
Le 08/10/2018 à 23:31, Ben Caradoc-Davies a écrit :
I have slow startup and a brief hang during initial UI layout, but only
with Adblock Plus enabled.
Thanks for the report. I have the same behavior (and lag when creating
new tab) but even with all the modules (including ublock) disabled.
On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 22:06:18 +0200
Pétùr wrote:
> Le 08/10/2018 à 20:59, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
> > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 20:07:26 +0200
> > Pétùr wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I experience a very slow response time (and high cpu usage) for
> >> firefox in debian sid these days.
> >>
> >> I use
On 09/10/2018 07:07, Pétùr wrote:
I experience a very slow response time (and high cpu usage) for firefox
in debian sid these days.
I use the 62.0.3 version and the latency is particularly present at the
startup. I have to wait few seconds before being able to enter text in
the address bar.
I t
Le 08/10/2018 à 20:59, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 20:07:26 +0200
Pétùr wrote:
Hi,
I experience a very slow response time (and high cpu usage) for
firefox in debian sid these days.
I use the 62.0.3 version and the latency is particularly present at
the startup. I have to wait
On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 20:07:26 +0200
Pétùr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I experience a very slow response time (and high cpu usage) for
> firefox in debian sid these days.
>
> I use the 62.0.3 version and the latency is particularly present at
> the startup. I have to wait few seconds before being able to ent
Hi,
I experience a very slow response time (and high cpu usage) for firefox
in debian sid these days.
I use the 62.0.3 version and the latency is particularly present at the
startup. I have to wait few seconds before being able to enter text in
the address bar.
I tried to reset (install ne
On Sat, Apr 03, 2010 at 03:57:59PM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> I've recently noticed that Firefox redraw is *really* slow on
> my Debian testing machines.
> I'm not sure if it's only Firefox or if it also affects some
> other applications. It doesn't seem specific to a particular X driver
> (I
I've recently noticed that Firefox redraw is *really* slow on
my Debian testing machines.
I'm not sure if it's only Firefox or if it also affects some
other applications. It doesn't seem specific to a particular X driver
(I see it both with "nv" and with "radeon").
I almost get the impression tha
On 10/30/06, Jason Dunsmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
Firefox 1.5 for Linux is slow on modern processors as well (frequent
100% CPU usage). Give Seamonkey a try. It's not in Etch yet, but
just copy to /usr/local/ to install it.
Thanks, I'll give it a whirl.
Celejar
--
To UNSUBSCR
celejar wrote:
> My Firefox (1.5 on Sid) is really, really slow (startup, getting /
> rendering pages, and even things like displaying the prefs screen) and
> frequently (generally whenever it's doing anything interesting, as
> above) raises cpu usage to 100%,
I got a 1.6 GHz Intel Dothan and 1 GB
On 10/30/06, celejar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/30/06, Edward Guldemond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How much RAM do you have in your system? In my expreience, Firefox
> takes more memory than Opera does.
> --
> Ed
My Firefox (1.5 on Sid) is really, really slow (startup, getting /
renderi
On 10/30/06, Edward Guldemond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How much RAM do you have in your system? In my expreience, Firefox
takes more memory than Opera does.
--
Ed
My Firefox (1.5 on Sid) is really, really slow (startup, getting /
rendering pages, and even things like displaying the prefs scr
How much RAM do you have in your system? In my expreience, Firefox
takes more memory than Opera does.
--
Ed
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> That doesn't sound right. Try moving ~/.mozilla out of the way and start
> with a fresh profile.
It makes no difference.
> If that doesn't work, maybe you can try launching firefox with strace
> and see if you can spot something strange.
I'm not familiar with strace and w
On Sun, 2006-10-29 at 19:31 +0100, Lars Staun Knudsen wrote:
> I'm using the default firefox version (1.5) in Etch and it's so
> slow. I tried removing all extensions, using the "fasterfox"
> extension, but it's still slow. When i compare with Opera Firefox
> have a 20-40s load time! Am i the only
Hi
I'm using the default firefox version (1.5) in Etch and it's so
slow. I tried removing all extensions, using the "fasterfox"
extension, but it's still slow. When i compare with Opera Firefox
have a 20-40s load time! Am i the only one?
Best Regards
/Lars
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
on Sat, May 28, 2005 at 04:33:53PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez ([EMAIL
PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 12:03:21PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > I'm trying out Firefox again, and am dogged by slow performance,
> > particularly on startup and window/tab operations. The browser lags
>
On May 29 2005, Marty wrote:
> The FAQ on maclash.org says they use the slashdot.org blog software, called
> slashcode, so that explains the page resemblence. I have emailed the site
> maintainers to ask if they have made any changes to the code that could
> account for the slowdown.
Thanks for t
On May 29 2005, John Hasler wrote:
> Rogério Brito writes:
> > Don't you see the problem while scrolling www.macslash.org?
>
> I don't see it here either. Firefox 1.0.4-1, FVWM 2.4.15-1, XFree86
> 4.2.1-6, kernel 2.6.4, dual PIII-500 with 384M.
Hummm, perhaps its the dual thing that is doing the
On May 29 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 04:07 -0300, Rogério Brito wrote:
> > Don't you see the problem while scrolling www.macslash.org? What about
> > scrolling a page with many comments, in flat mode? And what about the same
> > thing done in slashdot.org? Do you see any d
On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 13:32 +0100, Lee Braiden wrote:
> On Sunday 29 May 2005 12:30, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
> > Well, I don't think it is the X only. Take Opera. On Linux it is much
> > faster than Firefox.
>
> Except that it lacks freedom, the main feature many of us are using Linux for
Of cour
Rogério Brito wrote:
Indeed. One thing that has puzzled me is that scrolling in www.macslash.org
is simply *slow* on my system while I am using Debian.
On the other hand, when I boot Windows 2000 SP4 on this very same machine,
I have no problems with slow scrolling on that site. I wouldn't eve
Rogério Brito wrote:
On May 28 2005, Marty wrote:
The difference is measurable, not subjective.
I don't even have to measure in my system to see that there's something
wrong: the difference is really drastic here. Slashdot, which you mention
as a similar-looking page, is fast, but I don't thin
Rogério Brito wrote:
On May 28 2005, Marty wrote:
The difference is measurable, not subjective.
I don't even have to measure in my system to see that there's something
wrong: the difference is really drastic here. Slashdot, which you mention
as a similar-looking page, is fast, but I don't thin
I wrote:
> I don't see it here either. Firefox 1.0.4-1, FVWM 2.4.15-1, XFree86
> 4.2.1-6, kernel 2.6.4, dual PIII-500 with 384M.
And a Matrox G400.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rogério Brito writes:
> Don't you see the problem while scrolling www.macslash.org?
I don't see it here either. Firefox 1.0.4-1, FVWM 2.4.15-1, XFree86
4.2.1-6, kernel 2.6.4, dual PIII-500 with 384M.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe"
Rather than a Debian build, have you compared speeds with Mozilla.org's
upstream? I've always run upstream and a few days ago tried Debian's
1.0.4 from Sarge and am noticing Firefox is much more sluggish. But
then, I need to compare it when running IceWM as I'm also playing with
KDE on this box f
On Sunday 29 May 2005 12:30, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
> Well, I don't think it is the X only. Take Opera. On Linux it is much
> faster than Firefox.
Except that it lacks freedom, the main feature many of us are using Linux for
in the first place. Konqueror is real fast, if you want a Firefox
alte
On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 04:07 -0300, Rogério Brito wrote:
> On May 28 2005, Josh Rehman wrote:
> > While I do not share this same problem,
>
> Don't you see the problem while scrolling www.macslash.org? What about
> scrolling a page with many comments, in flat mode? And what about the same
> thing d
On May 28 2005, Josh Rehman wrote:
> While I do not share this same problem,
Don't you see the problem while scrolling www.macslash.org? What about
scrolling a page with many comments, in flat mode? And what about the same
thing done in slashdot.org? Do you see any difference in speed?
Where is y
On May 28 2005, Carl Fink wrote:
> Suspicion: the version of X you're using isn't as accelerated as Windows
> XP's driver. I don't suppose you're about to install X.Org?
I'm using a Matrox G400 here. I suspect that there isn't much to optimize
for this card.
BTW, the version of Windows that I ha
On May 28 2005, Marty wrote:
> The difference is measurable, not subjective.
I don't even have to measure in my system to see that there's something
wrong: the difference is really drastic here. Slashdot, which you mention
as a similar-looking page, is fast, but I don't think that that's the right
On May 28 2005, Jacob S wrote:
> Yea, or even compare window managers.
My sistem is quite minimal here. I use fluxbox without any bells and
whistles (I use the Minimal Style, since, as I said, my box is not that
powerful).
--
Rogério Brito : [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito
Home
On May 28 2005, Jacob S wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2005 19:31:00 -0400
> Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Rogério Brito wrote:
> > > Indeed. One thing that has puzzled me is that scrolling in
> > > www.macslash.org
> > > is simply *slow* on my system while I am using Debian.
> >
> > I see it too.
Josh Rehman wrote:
While I do not share this same problem, I think this is an oppurtunity to
learn a little bit about application profiling under Debian, especially
desktop application profiling. When the obvious solutions fail (such as
doing a complete reinstall) I think it would be best to fi
While I do not share this same problem, I think this is an oppurtunity
to learn a little bit about application profiling under Debian,
especially desktop application profiling. When the obvious solutions
fail (such as doing a complete reinstall) I think it would be best to
find out exactly where th
On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 08:07:18PM -0400, Marty wrote:
> I should note, however, that Konqueror and Mozilla also seem slow on that
> page. I tried it with IE on WinXP (did't have Firefox there), on a slower
> machine, and it was *much* faster, so maybe X11 is part of the problem.
Suspicion: th
Jacob S wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2005 20:07:18 -0400
Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jacob S wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2005 19:31:00 -0400
> Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Rogério Brito wrote:
>> > On May 28 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
>> >> On the other hand, the windows versions of Fire
On Sat, 28 May 2005 20:07:18 -0400
Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jacob S wrote:
> > On Sat, 28 May 2005 19:31:00 -0400
> > Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Rogério Brito wrote:
> >> > On May 28 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
> >> >> On the other hand, the windows versions of Firefox a
Jacob S wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2005 19:31:00 -0400
Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rogério Brito wrote:
> On May 28 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
>> On the other hand, the windows versions of Firefox and Thunderbird
>are > amazingly fast. This is really said ...
>
> Indeed. One thing that has p
On Sat, 28 May 2005 19:31:00 -0400
Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rogério Brito wrote:
> > On May 28 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
> >> On the other hand, the windows versions of Firefox and Thunderbird
> >are > amazingly fast. This is really said ...
> >
> > Indeed. One thing that has puzzled
Rogério Brito wrote:
On May 28 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
On the other hand, the windows versions of Firefox and Thunderbird are
amazingly fast. This is really said ...
Indeed. One thing that has puzzled me is that scrolling in www.macslash.org
is simply *slow* on my system while I am using
On May 28 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
> On the other hand, the windows versions of Firefox and Thunderbird are
> amazingly fast. This is really said ...
Indeed. One thing that has puzzled me is that scrolling in www.macslash.org
is simply *slow* on my system while I am using Debian.
On the other
On Saturday 28 May 2005 21:15, Ionut Georgescu wrote:
> On the other hand, the windows versions of Firefox and Thunderbird are
> amazingly fast. This is really said ...
Some of the windows ports seem to leave linux versions in the dust due to the
higher number of users and developers on windows,
On Sat, 2005-05-28 at 16:33 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 12:03:21PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > I'm trying out Firefox again, and am dogged by slow performance,
> > particularly on startup and window/tab operations. The browser lags
> > noticeably, a feature it
On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 12:03:21PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> I'm trying out Firefox again, and am dogged by slow performance,
> particularly on startup and window/tab operations. The browser lags
> noticeably, a feature it shares with Mozilla and a couple other apps
> (most noticably OpenOff
Karsten M. Self wrote:
- Stock Firefox theme. Numerous extensions loaded. System load is
~0.5.
I've seen performance problems in the past when there were old versions
of extensions loaded (particularly tab preferences). I'd start by trying
a fresh install (or removing all extensions)
I'm trying out Firefox again, and am dogged by slow performance,
particularly on startup and window/tab operations. The browser lags
noticeably, a feature it shares with Mozilla and a couple other apps
(most noticably OpenOffice.org). All of them share the characteristic
of opening to an initial
78 matches
Mail list logo
