On Fri, 2003-07-18 at 17:18, Jyan-Min Fang wrote:
> On 18 Jul 2003, Piero Calucci wrote:
>
> > Upgrading to mozilla-1.0.2 broke completely galeon for me, and a lot of
> > plugins too. Anyone had the same problem?
> >
> > Piero
>
> same here. new mozilla
On 18 Jul 2003, Piero Calucci wrote:
> Upgrading to mozilla-1.0.2 broke completely galeon for me, and a lot of
> plugins too. Anyone had the same problem?
>
> Piero
same here. new mozilla broke many plugins. like java (1.4.1) plugin, even
though it shows up on about plug-ins page
Upgrading to mozilla-1.0.2 broke completely galeon for me, and a lot of
plugins too. Anyone had the same problem?
Piero
--
Psyche-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
website?
I ment the SRPM from redhat/rawhide. You said that rawhide didn't have
one of the packages you needed. Rawhide builds of mozilla will need
other stuff from rawhide. You should be able to build the SRPM from
rawhide, but it may still complain.
I don't know what the mozilla.o
at directory
rpm -Fvh glibc*2.3.2-4.80.6.*
Then reboot. Then I think you should be able to install the binary RPMs
for Mozilla from Rawhide. In any case, you can then try to build from the
SRPM.
>
>
> On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 01:14, Thomas Dodd wrote:
> > >
> >
Liu wrote:
> > glibc-2.3.2-48.i686.rpm
> > glibc-devel-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm
> > glibc-common-2.3.2-48.i386.rpm
>
> You should have matchingf version of each.
> I'm using the SRPM for mozilla, not rawhide.
> I rebuilt the SRPM, with out problems.
I am not qui
Stephen Liu wrote:
glibc-2.3.2-48.i686.rpm
glibc-devel-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm
glibc-common-2.3.2-48.i386.rpm
You should have matchingf version of each.
I'm using the SRPM for mozilla, not rawhide.
I rebuilt the SRPM, with out problems.
As to glibc, I have glibc, glibc-common, glibc-
On Sat, 15 Jun 2003, Stephen Liu wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> 1) move glibc-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm to another folder
>
> 2) tested many combination on following packages
> glibc-devel-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm
> glibc-common-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm
> glibc-2.3.2-48.i386.rpm
> glibc-2.3.2-48.i686.rpm
> glibc-devel-
Hi Matthew,
1) move glibc-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm to another folder
2) tested many combination on following packages
glibc-devel-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm
glibc-common-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm
glibc-2.3.2-48.i386.rpm
glibc-2.3.2-48.i686.rpm
glibc-devel-2.3.2-48.i386.rpm
glibc-common-2.3.2-48.i386.rpm
Only foun
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, Stephen Liu wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> I have Athlon. Now I have following packages downloaded
>
> glibc-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm
> glibc-devel-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm
> glibc-common-2.3.2-4.80.i386.rpm
>
> glibc-2.3.2-48.i386.rpm
> glibc-2.3.2-48.i686.rpm
> glibc-devel-2.3.2-48.i386.rp
o,
> >
> > I have downloaded all RPMs from the website to a folder and performed
> > following test;
> >
> > # rpm -Uvh --test mozilla*.*
> > error: Failed dependencies:
> > libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2) is needed by mozilla-nspr-1.4-1
> >
&
Hi Matthew,
On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 21:37, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> - snip -
>
> You just need to install all the Mozilla RPMs at once.
>
> # rpm -Fvh mozilla*-1.4-1.i386.rpm
>
> The -F option instead of -U means just replace currently-installed
> packages.
I trie
nonstandard prefix so pkg-config can find them.
>
> I seem to have gtk2 installed (gtk2-2.0.6-8), but not gtk+-2.0. Is
> there a difference?
Yes. But you need the gtk2-devel package to get
/usr/lib/pkgconfig/gtk+-2.0.pc.
>
>
> Also:
>
> I tried installing the Mozilla 1.4-4
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Stephen Liu wrote:
> Hi Antonio,
>
> I have downloaded all RPMs from the website to a folder and performed
> following test;
>
> # rpm -Uvh --test mozilla*.*
> error: Failed dependencies:
> libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2) is needed by mozilla-
e library name in the
error is incorrect. You need to install gtk2-devel (plus its
dependencies). After installing gtk2-devel and restarting rpmbuild you
will discover that libIDL-devel is also needed. This should allow the
build
to succeed.
Note that both mozilla 1.4-3 and 1.4-4 from rawhide le
equirements (gtk+-2.0 >= 1.3.7) not met; consider adjusting
the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable if your libraries are in a nonstandard prefix
so pkg-config can find them.
I seem to have gtk2 installed (gtk2-2.0.6-8), but not gtk+-2.0. Is
there a difference?
Also:
I tried installing t
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Stephen Liu wrote:
> Hi Antonio,
>
> I have test-installed "mozilla-1.4-1.i386.rpm" and met following
> problem;
>
> # rpm -Uvh --test mozilla-1.4-1.i386.rpm
>
> error: Failed dependencies:
> mozilla-nspr = 1.4-1 is needed by mozilla-1.
Stephen Liu wrote:
Hi Antonio,
I have downloaded all RPMs from the website to a folder and performed
following test;
# rpm -Uvh --test mozilla*.*
error: Failed dependencies:
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2) is needed by mozilla-nspr-1.4-1
# rpm -qa|grep glibc
glibc-common-2.2.93-5
glibc
Hi Antonio,
I have downloaded all RPMs from the website to a folder and performed
following test;
# rpm -Uvh --test mozilla*.*
error: Failed dependencies:
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2) is needed by mozilla-nspr-1.4-1
# rpm -qa|grep glibc
glibc-common-2.2.93-5
glibc-kernheaders-2.4-7.20
privacy stuff...I got the same from
the guy.And no technical content in it...
Regards
Antonio
--
Written with Mozilla 1.4RC1 on Linux RedHat 8.0
--
Psyche-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https
Hi folks,
I received following email from Mengel. Unfortunately it is written in
German.
Could any folk on the list please translate it to English for me?
Thanks in advance.
B.Regards
Stephen
On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 19:11, Mengel, Holger, InfraServ Knapsack/DE
wrote:
>
>
>
> ***
Stephen Liu wrote:
Hi Antonio,
I have test-installed "mozilla-1.4-1.i386.rpm" and met following
problem;
# rpm -Uvh --test mozilla-1.4-1.i386.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
mozilla-nspr = 1.4-1 is needed by mozilla-1.4-1
mozilla = 1.0.1-26 is needed by (installed) mozilla-chat-1.0.1-
Hi Antonio,
I have test-installed "mozilla-1.4-1.i386.rpm" and met following
problem;
# rpm -Uvh --test mozilla-1.4-1.i386.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
mozilla-nspr = 1.4-1 is needed by mozilla-1.4-1
mozilla = 1.0.1-26 is needed by (installed) mozilla-chat-1.0.1-26
mozilla = 1
Stephen Liu wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for your advice.
I tried "rpm -Uvh --test package" and found that if I need to run this
latest version of mozilla on RH 8.0 I have to upgrade many packages.
Which shall be the latest version of mozilla which can run on RH 8.0. I
am now running Mo
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for your advice.
I tried "rpm -Uvh --test package" and found that if I need to run this
latest version of mozilla on RH 8.0 I have to upgrade many packages.
Which shall be the latest version of mozilla which can run on RH 8.0. I
am now running Mozill 1.0.1
B.Regar
packages
would not work.
Guy
Thomas Dodd wrote:
Charles Curley wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 09:49:15AM -0500, John Mathey wrote:
www.mozilla.org is where I get mine.
I can find tarball packages (http://www.mozilla.org/releases/#1.3.1);
but not RPMs.
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly
Charles Curley wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 09:49:15AM -0500, John Mathey wrote:
www.mozilla.org is where I get mine.
I can find tarball packages (http://www.mozilla.org/releases/#1.3.1);
but not RPMs.
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/experimental/gtk2/1.4rc1/i386/
If you want
Stephen Liu wrote:
Hi folks,
Kindly advise what are following packages used for;
mozilla-dom-inspector-1.4-1.i386.rpm
Used for developing chrome (skins) and complex web pages.
Related to CSS.
mozilla-js-debugger-1.4-1.i386.rpm
debuger for JavaScript. Again mostly for web developers.
mozilla
On 10 Jun 2003, Stephen Liu wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Kindly advise what are following packages used for;
>
> mozilla-dom-inspector-1.4-1.i386.rpm
> mozilla-js-debugger-1.4-1.i386.rpm
> mozilla-nspr-1.4-1.i386.rpm
> mozilla-nss-1.4-1.i386.rpm
> mozilla-psm-1.4-1.i38
Hi folks,
Kindly advise what are following packages used for;
mozilla-dom-inspector-1.4-1.i386.rpm
mozilla-js-debugger-1.4-1.i386.rpm
mozilla-nspr-1.4-1.i386.rpm
mozilla-nss-1.4-1.i386.rpm
mozilla-psm-1.4-1.i386.rpm
Thanks in advance.
B.Regards
Stephen Liu
On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 05:08
ine.
Thanks, I found RPMs there
(http://rawhide.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/rawhide/i386/RedHat/). Now
to see if I can install them. :-)
> >
> >
> >I can find tarball packages (http://www.mozilla.org/releases/#1.3.1);
> >but not RPMs.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>At
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 08:54:14AM -0600, Charles Curley wrote:
> Where doe sone get recent (1.3+) Mozilla RPMs? I gather I need a
> recent jre; where cna I get that as an RPM? Are there other packages I
> need for Mozilla?
Dunno. Depends which build you choose. My guess is no thoug
wrote:
Where doe sone get recent (1.3+) Mozilla RPMs? I gather I need a
recent jre; where cna I get that as an RPM? Are there other packages I
need for Mozilla?
Thanks in advance
--
Charles Curley /"\ASCII Ribbon Campaign
Looking for fine software \ /Respec
Try this link:
http://www.rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/search.php?query=mozilla
If it doesn't take you directly there, go to www.rpmfind.net and plug in
mozilla.
hth
john
At 10:17 AM 6/9/2003 -0600, you wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 09:49:15AM -0500, John Mathey wrote:
> www.mozilla.org
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 09:49:15AM -0500, John Mathey wrote:
> www.mozilla.org is where I get mine.
I can find tarball packages (http://www.mozilla.org/releases/#1.3.1);
but not RPMs.
>
>
> At 08:54 AM 6/9/2003 -0600, you wrote:
> >Where doe sone get recent (1.3+) Mozilla RPM
www.mozilla.org is where I get mine.
At 08:54 AM 6/9/2003 -0600, you wrote:
Where doe sone get recent (1.3+) Mozilla RPMs? I gather I need a
recent jre; where cna I get that as an RPM? Are there other packages I
need for Mozilla?
Thanks in advance
--
Charles Curley /"\
Where doe sone get recent (1.3+) Mozilla RPMs? I gather I need a
recent jre; where cna I get that as an RPM? Are there other packages I
need for Mozilla?
Thanks in advance
--
Charles Curley /"\ASCII Ribbon Campaign
Looking for fine software \ /Respect for
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Vanecek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Mon, March 31, 2003 8:43 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Mozilla 1.3 and Java j2sdk-1.4.1_02-fcs
>
>
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 09:34:53 +0200, Pavel Rozenboim wrote
>
> &g
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 09:34:53 +0200, Pavel Rozenboim wrote
> Hmm, actually I have both java 1.4.1_02 from Sun and blackdown.org
> and the plugin works fine. I haven't done any special steps to make
> it work. I just unpacked the blackdown.org jre to /usr/java/ dir and
> made a symbolic link to a
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Vanecek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sun, March 30, 2003 8:01 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Mozilla 1.3 and Java j2sdk-1.4.1_02-fcs
>
>
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 14:16:46 +0200, Pavel Rozenboim wrote
>
>
On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 14:16:46 +0200, Pavel Rozenboim wrote
>
> Did you copy the plugin file to mozilla plugins dir? I think it is important
> to create a symbolic link to a plugin and not to copy the file. Also
> do you use a plugin from mozilla directory or netscape4 directory?
Y
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Vanecek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sat, March 29, 2003 5:22 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Mozilla 1.3 and Java j2sdk-1.4.1_02-fcs
>
>
> On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 21:34:08 -0500, Michael Fratoni wrote
> >
ever, the blackstone is for j2sdk-1.4.1-01.
> > Installation details shown below. The java plugin shows up in Mozilla,
> > but if I link to something that uses java Mozilla hangs.
> >
> > Do you see anything I missed?
> >
> > I guess I either wait for a g
va plugin shows up in Mozilla,
> but if I link to something that uses java Mozilla hangs.
>
> Do you see anything I missed?
>
> I guess I either wait for a gcc 3.2 from sun or I rpm -e the sun
> version and install the blackstone version.
>
> Sun version of java installed:
>
On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:38:52 -0500, Michael Fratoni wrote
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wednesday 26 March 2003 05:01 pm, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> > Mozilla 1.3 release notes say that it is only compatible with java
> > compiled with GCC 3.2 whi
e "spell"
icon. I'm running Mozilla 1.3. Did anyone get this working?
-regards
steve
I encountered the same problem. I saw a closed bug (
http://mozdev.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3395 )which has the solution -
install the spellchecker while running mozilla as root. After doing
Stephen Mah wrote:
I just installed a spellchecker from http://spellchecker.mozdev.org, but
I don't think it properly installed. I don't see the "spell" icon. I'm
running Mozilla 1.3. Did anyone get this working?
-regards
steve
I encountered the same problem. I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 26 March 2003 05:01 pm, Mike Vanecek wrote:
> Mozilla 1.3 release notes say that it is only compatible with java
> compiled with GCC 3.2 which is available from the Blackdown project.
>
> However, they also say a version wit
Mozilla 1.3 release notes say that it is only compatible with java compiled
with GCC 3.2 which is available from the Blackdown project.
However, they also say a version with GCC 3.2 is also rumored to be available
from Sun sometime soon.
I have j2sdk-1.4.1_02-fcs installed. I have looked at the
I just installed a spellchecker from http://spellchecker.mozdev.org, but
I don't think it properly installed. I don't see the "spell" icon. I'm
running Mozilla 1.3. Did anyone get this working?
-regards
steve
--
Psyche-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://l
Mozilla 1.3_gtk2 was compiled with gcc 3.2, causing it not to recognize
plugins compiled with previous gcc versions. This includes java plugin (you
can download jre compiled with gcc 3.2 from blackdown.org) and some others.
Pavel.
> -Original Message-
> From: Antonio Montagnani [
Y Makki wrote:
Hello
I have the exact same problem after installing Mozilla-1.3-0_rh8_gtk2.
Another problem I started seeing after upgrading Mozilla is
mplayer-plugin leaves the video on top even after the video ends or is
closed, only way is to close all open Mozilla windows.
On Mon, 2003-03
Hello
I have the exact same problem after installing Mozilla-1.3-0_rh8_gtk2.
Another problem I started seeing after upgrading Mozilla is
mplayer-plugin leaves the video on top even after the video ends or is
closed, only way is to close all open Mozilla windows.
On Mon, 2003-03-24 at 16:36
I have just installed Mozilla 1.3 with GTK2 support.
My mozilla doesn't recognize Realplayer plugin (i.e. the file rpnp.so
file that is /usr/lib/Mozilla-1.3/plugins) even if I use the About
plugins: button.
And the plugin was working in 1.3b before upgrading. Shall I blame
myself for upgr
Thanks Thomas,
>> For mozilla at leats it would be 1.3a, 1.3b, 1.3rc4, then 1.3 but I
don't rember seeing and rc's :) <<
I don't know of any mozilla rc's either. My mistake, perhaps, for mixing
examples. I didn't want to confuse the thread. I'd hop
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Thomas Dodd wrote:
>
>
> Charles wrote:
> > James Jones wrote:
> >> package mozilla-nspr-1.3b-0_xft (which is newer than
> >> mozilla-nspr-1.3-0_rh8_xft) is already installed
>
> >> I expect I'll just rpm -e the 1.3b version
Charles wrote:
James Jones wrote:
package mozilla-nspr-1.3b-0_xft (which is newer than
mozilla-nspr-1.3-0_rh8_xft) is already installed
I expect I'll just rpm -e the 1.3b versions and then just rpm -i the
new stuff, but I'm curious. Has anyone else run into this?
rpm -Uvh --for
Cliff Kent wrote:
I'd bet that the real chronology is:
1.3rc3
1.3
1.3a
1.3b
For mozilla at leats it would be 1.3a, 1.3b, 1.3rc4, then 1.3
but I don't rember seeing and rc's :)
For other software your order is more likely correct.
-Thomas
--
Psyche-list mailing list
[EMAIL P
Thanks Greg,
>> Did you try uninstalling the older package? ... <<
No not yet. I'm not actually sure which is older.
I'll try again, but as I said before "further experiments will be on a
test box not the one on my desk"... What?... Me chicken?... YES!
But, seriously...
I have a long standin
EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: problem upgrading to Mozilla 1.3
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> Strictly guessing <<
>
> Me too. But, I had an install problem the other day (not mozilla) and
> I'd like to add a line to your example.
>
> >
>> Strictly guessing <<
Me too. But, I had an install problem the other day (not mozilla) and
I'd like to add a line to your example.
>> Looking at the following list of files,
>> 1.3
>> 1.3a
>> 1.3b
OK, but what should I think if the list is:
1.3
1.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 15 March 2003 05:42 pm, James Jones wrote:
> I have Mozilla 1.3b, and found out today that Mozilla 1.3 is available
> for downloading. I cheer to myself, ftp the RPMs over, and do the
> appropriate rpm -U... and get th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 15 March 2003 06:58 pm, Michael Fratoni wrote:
> On Saturday 15 March 2003 06:44 pm, Charles wrote:
> > James Jones wrote:
> > > I have Mozilla 1.3b, and found out today that Mozilla 1.3 is
> > > available f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 15 March 2003 06:44 pm, Charles wrote:
> James Jones wrote:
> > I have Mozilla 1.3b, and found out today that Mozilla 1.3 is
> > available for downloading. I cheer to myself, ftp the RPMs over, and
> > do the appropri
James Jones wrote:
I have Mozilla 1.3b, and found out today that Mozilla 1.3 is available
for downloading. I cheer to myself, ftp the RPMs over, and do the
appropriate rpm -U... and get the message
package mozilla-nspr-1.3b-0_xft (which is newer than
mozilla-nspr-1.3-0_rh8_xft) is already
I have Mozilla 1.3b, and found out today that Mozilla 1.3 is available
for downloading. I cheer to myself, ftp the RPMs over, and do the
appropriate rpm -U... and get the message
package mozilla-nspr-1.3b-0_xft (which is newer than
mozilla-nspr-1.3-0_rh8_xft) is already installed
followed by
Around about 13/03/2003 14:46, Jason Dale typed ...
You can get many types of MUA's of which Mozilla can be one,
and you also get other programs like evolution, etc.
Eh? One of us is confused :-) Where does sendmail mbox file format
come into it?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# rm -f .sign
You can get many types of MUA's of which Mozilla can be one,
and you also get other programs like evolution, etc.
I have done some reading up, and I am wondering if the
${HOME}/.mozilla/default/*/Mail/hostname/inbox file is built
and mainted the same way sendmail builds the mail queue in
Around about 13/03/2003 12:30, Alessandro Oliveira typed ...
I know that this is not psyche specific, but I have a user that has an
address book corrupted, is there any way to recover at least part of it ?
The .mab files /are/ text, but not exactly friendly! Your best bet
is probably the moz n
Hi guys,
I know that this is not psyche specific, but I have a user that has an
address book corrupted, is there any way to recover at least part of it ?
Thanks for any thoughts,
Alessandro Oliveira
--
Psyche-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psy
What type of mail user agent program are you using?
Jason
- Original Message -
From: "Alessandro Oliveira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 2:30 PM
Subject: Mozilla Personal Address Book Corrupted
> Hi guys,
>
>
Kevin Farmer wrote:
Hi All.
I am fairly new to Linux. I have my modem configured and working but I
cannot figure out how to get Mozilla to automatically activate the modem
when it is launched. Right now I have to activate and deactivate the
modem by going to: System Tools --> Netw
On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Kevin Farmer wrote:
>Hi All.
>
>I am fairly new to Linux. I have my modem configured and working but I
>cannot figure out how to get Mozilla to automatically activate the modem
>when it is launched. Right now I have to activate and deactivate the
>
Hi All.
I am fairly new to Linux. I have my modem configured and working but I
cannot figure out how to get Mozilla to automatically activate the modem
when it is launched. Right now I have to activate and deactivate the
modem by going to: System Tools --> Network Device Control. A
hi jay
yes i can see the realplayer plugin in the list.
quadir.
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Jay Turner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 01:49:43PM -0700, Kareemullah Quadir wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am using RH 8 with Mozilla 1.3b. I downloaded RealPlayer8 rpm and
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 01:49:43PM -0700, Kareemullah Quadir wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am using RH 8 with Mozilla 1.3b. I downloaded RealPlayer8 rpm and
> installed it. I copied the rpnp.so and raclass.zip to my
> /usr/local/mozilla/plugins directory. when i try to play st
Hi all,
I am using RH 8 with Mozilla 1.3b. I downloaded RealPlayer8 rpm and
installed it. I copied the rpnp.so and raclass.zip to my
/usr/local/mozilla/plugins directory. when i try to play streaming audio
in mozilla, it still does not work. does anybody have any
suggestions? thanks in advance
>Message: 3
>Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 08:36:59 -0600
>From: Aaron Konstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Mozilla or Netscape?
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 06:33:02PM -0800, Ilona wrote:
>> I'm a newb
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 06:33:02PM -0800, Ilona wrote:
> I'm a newbie to Linux and was wondering what people prefered and
> advantages disadvantges to Netscape and Mozilla and if mozilla wich
> version to use 1.0.2 or 1.2? From what I could see it seemed that they
> had two s
> -Original Message-
> From: Ilona [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tue, February 11, 2003 4:33 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Mozilla or Netscape?
>
>
> I'm a newbie to Linux and was wondering what people prefered and
> advantages disadvantge
Ilona wrote:
I'm a newbie to Linux and was wondering what people prefered and
advantages disadvantges to Netscape and Mozilla
As you know, Netscape 7.x and Mozilla 1.x use the same rendering engine.
But there are key things that make Mozilla the best choice for me.
First, Mozilla inc
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 06:33:02PM -0800, Ilona wrote:
> I'm a newbie to Linux and was wondering what people prefered and
> advantages disadvantges to Netscape and Mozilla and if mozilla wich
> version to use 1.0.2 or 1.2? From what I could see it seemed that they
> had two s
I found mozilla to be more sluggish that netscape 4.x. Otherwise mozilla
would be a great choice.
On 10 Feb 2003, Ilona wrote:
> I'm a newbie to Linux and was wondering what people prefered and
> advantages disadvantges to Netscape and Mozilla and if mozilla wich
> version to us
> advantages disadvantges to Netscape and Mozilla
Mozilla is my choice by far. The recent Netscape builds have been based
on the Mozilla core code.
> which version to use 1.0.2 or 1.2? From what I could see it seemed
that they had two separate numbering schemes going so i couldn't
I'm a newbie to Linux and was wondering what people prefered and
advantages disadvantges to Netscape and Mozilla and if mozilla wich
version to use 1.0.2 or 1.2? From what I could see it seemed that they
had two separate numbering schemes going so i couldn't figure out the
most rece
On Mon, 2003-02-10 at 10:09, Kevin McConnell wrote:
>
> --- Y Makki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Has anyone tried these versions, specifically from
> > this location?
> > Thanks.
>
> I've tried the mozilla version 1.3a, but I w
--- Y Makki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Has anyone tried these versions, specifically from
> this location?
> Thanks.
I've tried the mozilla version 1.3a, but I wouldn't
trust them anywhere except from mozilla.org (I'm
currently using 1.3a co
Has anyone tried these versions, specifically from this location?
Thanks.
http://people.ecsc.co.uk/~matt/downloads/rpms/mozilla/1.3a/RPMS/
http://people.ecsc.co.uk/~matt/downloads/rpms/galeon/1.3.1/RPMS/
--
Psyche-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman
Hallo list,
I assign 2 smtps in mozilla -- maybe it's even 3 because one of that
also send my mail to newsgroup.
The problem is: Mozilla always fails to send a message from the
non-default smtp. I thought it was my isp problem, but after I tried it
in evolution, that non-default smtp works
-- Original Message ---
From: "Buck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:29:25 -0500
Subject: linksys and mozilla
> My Linksys router is accessed by through my web browser. When I go to
> the router and select: DHC
, looked at all settings, I have released and renewed
the dhcp settings to the ISP, I have cleared all the private port
filters and changed the DMZ (not to the Linux computer, dmz is being
bombarded by port 137 attacks). Everything seems to work, but that one
feature and only in mozilla.
I am not sure
>
> > Any advice?
>
> I have the Linksys wireless router/switch (model BEFW11S4), and all
> popup windows work fine in Mozilla 1.0.1 and 1.2.1 for Linux. Someone
> else pointed out that you might have JavaScript popup windows disabled,
> but that is only for unrequested win
9:48 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: linksys and mozilla
>
>
>I'll sound off here on a few things.
>
>First of all, Mozilla has the ability to supress
>pop-up windows. I would
>bet that you have that preference checked. It
>isn't a matter that
>Moz
no problem. Things happen.
Shaun
-Original Message-
From: Craig White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 11:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: linksys and mozilla
thanks, this was a very recent change (within the last week or two)
because I have checked it
On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 09:00, Carter, Shaun G wrote:
> Hate to sound like a d*ck, but if you're going to deride someone for not
> doing enough research, you may as well check your own statements to make
> sure they are correct.
>
> http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html is no longer t
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Shaun
-Original Message-
From: Craig White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 10:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: linksys and mozilla
I'll sound off here on a few things.
First of all, Mozilla has the ability
I'll sound off here on a few things.
First of all, Mozilla has the ability to supress pop-up windows. I would
bet that you have that preference checked. It isn't a matter that
Mozilla doesn't work with the Linksys routers configuration panel, it
does and I have used Mozilla to co
On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Buck wrote:
> perhaps I didn't explain it well, but I assumed that if
> someone were using a Linksys and Linux, they would have an answer and
> understand how it works.
It works for me with Mozilla and 7.3. Perhaps updating the firmware
on your link
Subject: Re: linksys and mozilla
On Sun, 2003-01-26 at 21:29, Buck wrote:
> My Linksys router is accessed by through my web browser. When I go to
> the router and select: DHCP Clients Table, it fails to popup the window
> of dhcp clients.
>
> The popup windows work well for t
>
> Any advice?
I have the Linksys wireless router/switch (model BEFW11S4), and all
popup windows work fine in Mozilla 1.0.1 and 1.2.1 for Linux. Someone
else pointed out that you might have JavaScript popup windows disabled,
but that is only for unrequested windows, which does not apply her
1 - 100 of 431 matches
Mail list logo
