![]() py", line 1249, in _execute_childĮxception AttributeError: "'ProcessHandler' object has no attribute 'proc'" in > ignoredįile "/usr/local/bin/mozregression", line 9, in py", line 679, in _init_įile "/usr/lib/ python2. ![]() Universal_ newlines, startupinfo, creationflags)įile "/usr/lib/ python2. 7/dist- packages/ mozprocess/ processhandler. Self.proc = self.Process( self.cmd, **args)įile "/usr/local/ lib/python2. run(timeout, outputTimeout)įile "/usr/local/ lib/python2. py", line 141, in startįile "/usr/local/ lib/python2. 7/dist- packages/ mozregression/ runnightly. profile, self.addons, self.cmdargs):įile "/usr/local/ lib/python2. py", line 108, in bisectįile "/usr/local/ lib/python2. 7/dist- packages/ mozregression/ regression. bad_date) )įile "/usr/local/ lib/python2. Load_ entry_point( 'mozregression=0.6.4', 'console_scripts', 'mozregression')()įile "/usr/local/ lib/python2. When trying a bisect I get:įile "/usr/local/ bin/mozregressi on", line 9, in mozilla_backup", started ff and confirmed the blu images. UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install) RelatedPackageV ersions: icedtea-7-plugin 1.3-1ubuntu1.1 Plugins: IcedTea-Web Plugin (using IcedTea-Web 1.3 (1.3-1ubuntu1.1)) - /usr/lib/ jvm/java- 7-openjdk- powerpc/ jre/lib/ ppc/IcedTeaPlug in.so (icedtea-7-plugin) Package: firefox 18.0.2+ build1- 0ubuntu0. If you already have enough of a browsing history, open a new tab and observe that the screenshots of your most visited pages also look too blue.ĭowngrading back to version 18.2 makes the problem go away, although using an outdated browser is not much of a workaround. Note that some images have a blue tint.ģ. ![]() Navigate to an image-heavy website (Flickr, for instance). uBlock is the same, all the work is on the new Firefox/Chrome extension API.Firefox 19.0 on Xubuntu 12.10 on a Late 2005 Apple Mac mini.Ģ. For example you need a modified version of GreaseMonkey and it's old, and now basically unmaintained as the upstream project drops support for the codebase. PaleMoon always had poor compatibility with extensions and now that Firefox is ditching the old ones it will only get worse. The most recent update fixed a problem with images not loading (!) but it still has problems. A while back an update deleted a lot of people's bookmarks too. Whatever the add-on update mechanism is seems to be broken too. Sometimes when you update it forgets your settings and uninstalls your add-ons. PaleMoon is okay but a couple of things piss me off about it. The new add-on system, improved security/performance and especially the built in privacy enhancements make it worth using again. On the contrary, I'm actually going back to Firefox after being on PaleMoon for years. Either Firefox itself is quite badly broken for the past couple of versions, or one of the much more limited number of extensions I now have installed is destabilising it, but wasn't the point of the new architecture that crippled all those extensions that at least they would be fast and reliable now?įirefox is no longer my default browser for everyday use as a direct result of this farce, but since I still have to use all the major browsers professionally, it would be nice if they could at least undo some of the damage. To add insult to injury, my previously 100% stable for years Firefox probably crashes out on startup every third or fourth time I load it, then does some half-baked restore of the tabs from the previous session that apparently closed down properly, then needs restarting again. I'm still waiting for a tab tree extension that actually works properly. Being able to save files directly to places outside the downloads directory, customising parts of the UI like the bookmark dropdown so they're bigger than postage stamps, disabling things like JS or animated GIFs without reloading the whole page. There have been five major releases with WebExtensions now, and after the first two, not a single thing I missed from before has been fixed. The main advantage of using Firefox, other than not using Google's browser with its questionable privacy implications, was how customisable it was. There seems to be little evidence that they made any serious attempt at this at all, beyond the top N very high visibility extensions. Were they lying or have they just not finished yet? The Mozilla people promised they would match the old functionality wherever there was a clear need.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |