Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet Bug

Is Firefox 1.0 Less Stable than Firefox PR1.0? 758

An anonymous reader wonders: "I had Firefox 1.0PR running smoothly on three different machines and it hardly ever crashed. After upgrading to 1.0, I seem to have at least one annoying crash a day. On one of the machines, using the 'self update' feature caused Firefox to crash in middle of the upgrade and left it in a completely unusable state. Eventually, I had to uninstall it and resort to using IE to download the full installer, again. Is it just me, or are other heavy Firefox users noticing this sort of behavior?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is Firefox 1.0 Less Stable than Firefox PR1.0?

Comments Filter:
  • by aws910 ( 671068 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:37PM (#10877277)
    Why don't you try posting on the Mozilla.org forums?
  • Probs before PR (Score:2, Informative)

    by TFGeditor ( 737839 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:39PM (#10877300) Homepage
    My PR Firefox version Firefox/0.9.3 has always had the annoying problem of causing the entire system to "lock up" if left running overnight. (Win XP SP2.)
  • Running smoothly (Score:2, Informative)

    by th3d0ct0r ( 707205 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:40PM (#10877315)
    Up until now, under windows xp sp2, firefox 1.0 final is running very smoothly, no crashes, im using it all the time.
    Under linux also, there are no issues, exept maybe with the mplayer-embedded plugin, but that is the plugins fault actually, experiencing the same problem with epiphany, konqueror and opera. So no, from my point of view firefox is as good as it gets!
  • Nein (Score:3, Informative)

    by MC Negro ( 780194 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:42PM (#10877352) Journal
    No problems whatsoever. The search function finally works and updates are a breeze. On my Windows and Mac machines. HOWEVER, my Linux box was not quite as rosey. I upgraded my source-built FireFox 1.0PR to FireFox 1.0 binary. I unmerged the 1.0PR and downloaded the binary from the FireFox website, installed it, and rebooted. At first, things were smooth sailing, but after an hour or two of usage, FireFox would become unusable and eventually crash. Same problem under SuSE. I uninstalled the binary and emerged FireFox 1.0 from source and everything was great.
  • Uninstall first! (Score:5, Informative)

    by hazed ( 699134 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:43PM (#10877358) Homepage
    Make sure you uninstall any old versions before installing the new version. Its in the faq.. well hidden, but i've had no problems when uninstalling then re-installing. Make sure to back up, but your savings should be saved as they are not held in the same area as the executeables and whatnot. I have had problems just upgrading, but i've been problemless since i've done the above.
  • CNN will crash it (Score:5, Informative)

    by r00t ( 33219 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:46PM (#10877386) Journal
    Go to CNN. View a few stories. **CRASH**

    This is:

    Linux 2.6, GNOME, 32-bit ppc, libswf installed,
    multiple windows open, Debian-unstable, the tab
    preferences extension installed so I can go back
    to the old pre-tab Mozilla ways...

    This really, really, sucks. I was one of those
    people that would keep a browser running for
    several weeks at a time. I'd let it sit on one
    virtual desktop with two dozen windows open.
  • Re:Probs before PR (Score:5, Informative)

    by bigberk ( 547360 ) <bigberk@users.pc9.org> on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:51PM (#10877435)
    My PR Firefox version Firefox/0.9.3 has always had the annoying problem of causing the entire system to "lock up" if left running overnight.
    Without exception, a regular (userland) application that leads to global locking up is the operating system's fault, not the application's. The goal of a modern multi-user, multi-process, virtual memory OS (BSD, Linux, WinNT) is to keep each process separate on the system. A single application should crash, or run slowly but it should never crash the entire operating system or use up all the operating system's resources. Such a situation indicates the failure of the OS to manage resources, and maintain control over separate processes.
  • by MTO_B. ( 814477 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:52PM (#10877447) Homepage
    This is something that instead of being asked here should be asked at the Mozilla Firefox forums [mozillazine.org]. There are lots of people who will be happy to help you.

    If you believe you have found a bug, you should search if anyone has reported that bug, and if not report it here [mozilla.org].


    Sorry, but its almost offensive to see this at slashdot.
  • by bigberk ( 547360 ) <bigberk@users.pc9.org> on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:53PM (#10877458)
    Isn't there some kind of firefox mailing list for this kind of stuff?
    Yes, and there is even a web based support forum [mozillazine.org]
  • by pawnIII ( 821440 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @07:56PM (#10877474)
    That could possibly be the situation. I know I uninstalled all the extensions which were not compatiable with 1.0. PR1 crashed a whole lot more than 1.0. Actually, I don't think its crashed yet.

    Also, something you might want to do is to create a new agent. Just make sure you save your bookmarks.
  • by dmaxwell ( 43234 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:01PM (#10877517)
    It is a well known bug. The fix is in the current gecko devel tree. The quick workaround is to hit ctrl- followed by ctrl+. The shrinks then expands the text on the screen. It also causes the text to reflow correctly.
  • by Feztaa ( 633745 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:03PM (#10877532) Homepage
    I much prefer to hold down CTRL and then scroll the mouse wheel up, then down. Does the exact same thing, just easier than taking my hand off the mouse ;)
  • Re:Really? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:06PM (#10877549)
    Ditto, 1.0pr had a very annoying habit of crashing when I was using multiple tabs or when I opened a pdf in a new tab.
  • FireFox and Java (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:10PM (#10877579)
    FireFox only crashes on me when I've been using Java for awhile. It has always happened with all the Mozilla products. I upgraded to Java 1.5 thinking this Java issue would stop crashing my browser, but it keeps doing it.
  • Re:Probs before PR (Score:5, Informative)

    by bigberk ( 547360 ) <bigberk@users.pc9.org> on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:17PM (#10877634)
    Interpreting how much memory an application is using is somewhat difficult. Modern virtual memory operating systems page memory into both physical RAM and disk storage (swap, pagefile, whatever). Next, there are operating system features that try to preserve actual memory by not allocating real chunks of memory on an application's request, until that memory is really made use of. Finally, using some system GUI widgets etc can "increase" the amount of memory use as shown in Task Manager etc where really the memory use is within the OS, not the app.

    What this comes down to is: the figure you generally see for memory use of an app is not physical RAM use. It might not even reflect the actual amount of physical+disk memory in use! Finally, memory usage might be overstated due to transient external allocations (e.g. win32 API dialog boxes) that deceivingly appear as memory used by an application.

    What you have to look for is how that memory usage figure changes over time. In most cases, it grows until it hits a ceiling - even at that point, it is way overstated (a conservative measure, so to speak). What is bad is if it regularly grows by 50 MB per day, without limit. Then there is a leak :)
  • Re:Cheesey Creezey!! (Score:3, Informative)

    by digitallife ( 805599 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:20PM (#10877660)
    I must agree. I have had many different identities and have been around since very close to the beginning (damn master passwords - always make me lose passwords!). As far back as I can remember people have been complaining about this very issue. Actually /. has stayed relatively the same over the years IMHO, other than a few joke evolutions :)
  • Re:CNN will crash it (Score:5, Informative)

    by prockcore ( 543967 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:24PM (#10877680)
    Linux 2.6, GNOME, 32-bit ppc, libswf installed,

    I have an idea on why your browser is crashing.

    You're trying to open flashMX movies in a flash3 library that was abandoned over 5 years ago.

    Try removing libswf and I bet CNN won't crash at all.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:32PM (#10877724)
    I am running SuSE 9.1 (frehsly installed) and did run firefox pre for quite some while. The only problem I ever had with it was the "auto find as you type" - it would always kick in when you type a "/" in a input box (which is annyoing in webchats!). I already did disable it, set the timeout to really low etc, but 10pre would always open the "find" bar when I started with a "/" - annoying!

    Then I installed v1.0 - the "find-as-you-type" bug is gone - yeah!

    Unfortunately, about once a day I manage to crash firefox - something which almost never happened with 1.0pre.

    So, yes, 1.0 is less stable. However, it didn't occur to me to whine somewhere about it, because that is not going to help.

    Tels
  • by Schreckgestalt ( 692027 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:34PM (#10877738)
    Same here, no issues... Except for the 'download flash player plugin' thingy that kept failing. But crashes? No.

    I've done several upgrades of Phoenix, Firebird and now Firefox on different machines, and I have grown accustomed to letting the new version create a new profile and then copy the stuff you still want back into it. I normally delete "C:\Docs and Settings\MYNAME\Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox", then copy the old bookmarks.html into my profile again.

    Did so with PR1 -> 1.0, and have had no issues on several machines.

  • Re:Probs before PR (Score:5, Informative)

    by prockcore ( 543967 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:39PM (#10877767)
    it's been open for about 5 days straight, running on Win2KPro. It's using 104MB of RAM.

    Even worse, there's this System Idle process that's taking up 99% of my CPU time!

    Sheesh. It's called memory caching. That's why TOP differentiates between RSIZE, VSIZE and RSHRD.

    RSIZE is the amount of ram being actively used by a process. I doubt RSIZE is 104megs.
  • by daveb ( 4522 ) <davebremer.gmail@com> on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:41PM (#10877776) Homepage
    Well for some reason i can't reliably display slashdot pages in mozilla. Really - I'm not trying to troll or anything.

    For some reason many times the page is not rendered in a way I can read. the columns in slashdot often overlap, and are really weird. in IE all is fine

    yes I do see the irony

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:42PM (#10877785)
    well, i had an opposite problem. 0.9 and 1.0PR were crashing all the time, 1.0 is rock solid. i use Mac OS X 10.3.6.
  • by gad_zuki! ( 70830 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:43PM (#10877792)
    1.0PR had a javascript pop-up crash bug that drove me crazy. 1.0 fixed that.

    Some things to consider:

    1. How did you install 1.0? Did you do an overwrite? If so, do a clean install.

    2. What extensions are you using? Have you disabled the extension version check?

    >On one of the machines, using the 'self update' feature caused Firefox to crash in middle of the upgrade

    When was this? Do you have DNS/network/firewall issues which could be causing this?

    Lastly, to get some real answers from the experts people should asking here. [mozillazine.org]
  • by MMMDI ( 815272 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @08:45PM (#10877801) Homepage
    Another problem that it could be (one that I had, anywho) is preferences for an extension that had been previously uninstalled.

    Example: I installed an extension during the PR release. I found that I didn't really like it, so I uninstalled it and carried on without a problem. 1.0 is released, downloaded it, installed... FF now crashes every 30 minutes or so.

    Skip over a large chunk of trying to figure out what the hell is going on, and I found some leftover files and preferences (prefs.js) from the aforementioned extension in my profile folder. Deleted those and everything was back to being peachy.
  • by cbiltcliffe ( 186293 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @09:24PM (#10877992) Homepage Journal
    The quick workaround is to hit ctrl- followed by ctrl+.
    Or, you could install the slashfix extension:

    http://www.hardgrok.org/blog/item/slashfix-firefox -extension.html [hardgrok.org]

    Isn't open source great?!
  • by pikine ( 771084 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @09:30PM (#10878024) Journal
    do you leave firefox in a page with flash animations? nowadays many of the animated figures in a web page are flash and not animated gifs anymore. a badly made flash can take up tons of CPU even when you leave it there. also, are you viewing web sites with automatic page refreshing? it will eat up the CPU everytime the page refreshes.

    if that bothers you, you can always use the task manager to set the process's priority to either "below normal" or "low".

    however, games are memory intensive. so as a browser, which uses memory caching to be fast. when real memory is used up, "thrashing" occurs (to swap some memory pages to the disk). even adjusting task priority won't help here, since thrashing is inherently slow. whenever a web page that you leave in the background refreshes itself, the OS has to swap out a few pages of game memory and swap in memory pages for the browser. as the game continues, it needs the memory back, and the OS has to juggle around memory pages again.

    if you see a periodic frame loss, then self-refreshing web pages are definitely the culprit.
  • Re:Probs before PR (Score:5, Informative)

    by meanfriend ( 704312 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @09:38PM (#10878061)
    I'm currently using FireFox PR1.0, it's been open for about 5 days straight, running on Win2KPro. It's using 104MB of RAM. Why I don't know...I only have 4 tabs open at the moment and no flash or java running, and no third party plugins...

    I'm going to guess that over the five days, you have opened and closed a whole bunch of tabs (probably dozens). It's a known issue in Firefox that when you close tabs, it doesnt release the memory.

    See the bugzilla: bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=131456

    I've had FF running for a week straight and using upwards of 200MB and only one tab open :). The only remedy is to restart FF. This has been an issue for over two years now. Dont expect it change anytime soon though, if it was a simple fix, I supppose it would have been done by now.

  • by Anonymous Writer ( 746272 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @10:00PM (#10878163)

    I think all computers should have at least two nipples

    There are two keyboard nipples. That's what the little bumps on the "F" and "J" keys are. They are there so you can position your fingers on the keyboard for typing without looking. I think the grandparent poster was referring to a trackpoint [wikipedia.org] mistakenly as a keyboard nipple.

  • Suggestion anyway (Score:5, Informative)

    by Corwyn_123 ( 828115 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @10:34PM (#10878336)
    Try uninstalling Firefox 1.0PR, don't worry the profile will be left intact, then install Firefox 1.0, this works just fine, and Firefox 1.0 is completely stable.
  • A few suggestions (Score:2, Informative)

    by Captain DaFt ( 755254 ) <captain_daft@gmail. c o m> on Saturday November 20, 2004 @10:36PM (#10878344) Journal
    I had similar problems back with the last 0.9.whatever release. After I thought about it a bit, I ran Ad-aware and Spybot. BINGO! Three new spywares detected! (I may have gotten a tad over enthusiastic looking for new plug-ins.)
    Seems that they expected IE, and bollixed Firefox trying to do their dirty deeds.
    Lessons learned:
    1) Only accept plugins from known safe sources. (https://update.mozilla.org/extension)
    2) Firefox is a great browser, but it ain't idiot proof! (And Even I can be an idiot if I don't think first!) };-)
    3) The number of people that'll yell at you when you ask an honest question, instead of offering help, is discouragingly high.
  • by jesser ( 77961 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @10:47PM (#10878404) Homepage Journal
    Don't label him as an enemy just because he claims to experience more crashes than you. It's entirely possible that he's telling the truth -- many crash bugs (not just system problems) affect some users more than others. Maybe his Firefox installation or Firefox profile somehow became corrupted. Maybe the sites he visits trigger crashes in Firefox more than the sites we visit. Maybe the extensions he uses are buggy (in which case he should blame the extension).

    It's ok to tell him that his experience doesn't match yours, but at least give him a FAQ item that might help him work around or report the crashes [squarefree.com] rather than attacking him.
  • by berzerke ( 319205 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @11:01PM (#10878466) Homepage

    ..."Have you done any OS updates between the two versions?" It would not surprise me in the least if MSFT was busy making patches to interfere with the FireFox application...

    It's not just any OS updates. Mozilla and Firefox lockup quite regularly on my Linux system starting very recently. I doubt this particular problem is an M$ conspiracy since I don't do M$ updates to my linux box.

    That said, I think the problem lies with the flash plugin more than Firefox. I updated today and the same links that locked Mozilla (and Firefox) before don't do it anymore. Of course, you may have a different problem...

  • by jp10558 ( 748604 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @11:01PM (#10878468)
    Well, the validation works fine from Opera. I get 227 errors on that page, and something about it not being valid HTML 3.2.

    Some of the errors are:

    Line 8, column 14: there is no attribute "TYPE"

    Line 38, column 11: there is no attribute "TOPMARGIN"

    Line 38, column 26: there is no attribute "LEFTMARGIN"

    Line 39, column 13: there is no attribute "MARGINWIDTH"

    Line 39, column 30: there is no attribute "MARGINHEIGHT"

    Line 43, column 8: there is no attribute "BGCOLOR"

    It goes on...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 20, 2004 @11:04PM (#10878480)
    I had this problem previously with a much earlier release of firefox. What I did to fix the problem was back up my bookmarks, go into the application settings hidden folder under the user name you are logged in as, and find the folder for firefox and delete it. Then open the browser again, and the browser will create a new temporary settings folder. Then just restore your bookmarks and you will have it working again without problems. Firefox 1.0 runs great for me.
  • My experience... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Junta ( 36770 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @11:08PM (#10878504)
    Firefox 1.0 initially acted like a giant steaming pile... I then blew away my profile from pre 1.0 (saving bookmarks), and started over, and it has been great ever since... Not necessarily what you want to have to do, but I'll accept it since it was technicall 'pre-release' until now.
  • Re:My experiance (Score:4, Informative)

    by AstroDrabb ( 534369 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @11:11PM (#10878514)
    The best Firefox so far for me has been 0.9
    So go to the Mozilla ftp server and download 0.9.3 [207.200.85.49], (this is one of the Mozilla mirrors). When the next version/update to Firefox comes out, try that one to see if your problems are fixed. I personally have had no issues with Firefox 1.0 on 4 different computers I have (2 WinXP and 2 Linux-Fedora Core 3).
  • by binarybum ( 468664 ) on Saturday November 20, 2004 @11:47PM (#10878682) Homepage
    uhh, try mozilla 1.7.3 - works fine.
  • by GoRK ( 10018 ) on Sunday November 21, 2004 @12:02AM (#10878740) Homepage Journal
    Actually it's a synaptics touchpad hardware/driver feature. The touchpad normally emulates a PS2 mouse; however, there is a 'raw' mode that you can put the hardware into that basically returns the position of the user's finger on the pad. This allows you to do a lot of different things in software such as simulate a scroll wheel when the user tracks up and down the right edge, horizontally scroll when the user tracks on the bottom edge, perform browsing back/forward actions on the top edge, simulate extra mouse buttons with corner taps, etc.

    A really really good implementation of a raw-mode synaptics driver is available for MacOS as SideTrack [ragingmenace.com]. It used to be free while it was in beta. Now it is $15 and a heck of a good deal. It fixes the powerbooks' problem of lacking a right mousebutton and scroll wheel while giving all sorts of extra enhancements that really make that one button mouse a lot more usable.
  • Re:Probs before PR (Score:3, Informative)

    by prockcore ( 543967 ) on Sunday November 21, 2004 @12:43AM (#10878920)
    What are RSIZE, VSIZE and RSHRD? Which one does "Memory Usage" in WinXP correspond to?

    VSIZE (also displayed as "virt" and "VSZ") is the virtual size of the process. File mappings, video mappings, disk cache, swapped-to-disk ram is all included in this. For example, under Linux, X11 has a very large vsize because all of your videoram is included in this VSIZE.

    RSIZE (aka "res" and "RSS") is the amount of physical ram your process, and your process alone, is using. This is the best indicator of ram usage.

    RSHRD (aka "SHR") is the amount of shared ram your process is using. This is the space taken up by any shared libraries your process uses. This isn't necessarily in physical ram either.

    Let's look at an example:
    My firefox has been running for 5 days, it has a VSIZE of 165megs, RSIZE of 61 megs, and RSHRD of 35 megs.

    VSIZE is what WinXP would report, 165 megs of ram used, never mind that more than half of that ram is stuff like disk cache allocated by the OS.

    firefox-bin is using 65 megs of physical ram (that's still quite a lot).

    RSHRD is the memory taken up by GTK, and libX11.so, and all the other shared libraries that are used by firefox. Closing firefox won't free this ram because it's *shared*, other apps running use that same libX11.so, etc.

    Hope this helps. I don't know how to display this detail under XP, but I'm sure there are 3rd party tools to do it if system profiler can't.
  • by penteren ( 793643 ) on Sunday November 21, 2004 @01:29AM (#10879103)
    ...I had a problem when using the auto-updater. But with a few quick Google searches I was able to simply delete a few profile-related files (not my profile itself) which fixed the problem (and the files were recreated automagically by FF). Overall, 1.0 has been much more stable for me than 1.0PR. When I upgraded from 0.9 to 1.0PR, I suddenly started having crashes on an average of 2-3 times a day. Since going to 1.0, I don't think I've had a single crash.
  • by benow ( 671946 ) on Sunday November 21, 2004 @04:59AM (#10879771) Homepage Journal
    If it's a display issue, the excellend AdBlock extension may help out.
  • by Ctrl-Z ( 28806 ) <tim&timcoleman,com> on Sunday November 21, 2004 @09:47PM (#10884345) Homepage Journal
    Since I know that technically, nipples on the keyboard refer to the bumps on the F and J (D and K for Mac users), I accept "clitoris" as the appropriate term for that bump.

    I've never understood why the bumps on the F and J are referred to as nipples. They're so much smaller.
  • by Fnkmaster ( 89084 ) * on Monday November 22, 2004 @04:52AM (#10886279)
    Slashfix has been downloaded by over 5000 people in the last week. I've received dozens of messages of thanks and 3 or 4 people have complained that it didn't work. I've already explained several times that this is pretty much impossible - the fix consists of about 10 lines of Javascript. This isn't some magical complex app, it's either gonna work or not, and for 99.9% of people it works, so I must assume the problem isn't in the code.

    Most likely FF is hanging on pageloads or something - are you actually waiting for the page to finish loading? Are you loading tabs in the background? Because my site already documents the limitations to the fix (it runs only when the pageload event is triggered, namely when a page finishes loading, and tabs loaded in the background never trigger a pageload). I am of course perfectly open to suggestions or enhancements. If the limitations annoy you, feel free to work around them, it's perfectly possible, just takes some effort and toiling with the Firefox extension API stuff. Maybe you should get off your butt and help instead of whining?

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...