Mozilla 1.7 Release Candidate 2 AvailableMonday May 17th, 2004The Mozilla Foundation has made Mozilla 1.7 Release Candidate 2 available for download. Like the first release candidate, which came out last month, this build is designed to ensure that there are no major bugs remaining before the final release of Mozilla 1.7. The Mac OS X version of RC 2 now includes the Quality Feedback Agent (Talkback) crash reporting tool, bringing it in to line with Windows and Linux and making it much easier for developers to pinpoint the causes of crashes. 1.7 RC 2 will probably be followed by a further release candidate before the final launch of Mozilla 1.7. After the milestone ships, the 1.7 branch will replace the 1.4 branch as the stable development baseline, with Mozilla Firefox 1.0 and the next major version of Netscape expected to be built from it. More information about this latest release candidate can be found in the Mozilla 1.7 RC 2 Release Notes and builds are available from the Releases page or the mozilla1.7rc2 directory on ftp.mozilla.org. First, congratulation on releasing a new rc build for the best Mozilla version ever. I have just downloaded and installed 1.7rc2 on my Linux box. When installation is completed, I encountered this error message: "nsNativeComponentLoader: SelfRegisterDll(libnegotiateauth.so) Load FAILED with error: libcom_err.so.3: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory" Is there anything wrong with this? Otherwise, browsing the web so far everything is OK. Hmm. I can't reproduce that error on linux with 1.7rc2. I am using Fedora Core 1. Possibly you need to remove your preference files under the directory .mozilla and try running it again. While I still follow the old suite builds I feel like there is so little new stuff going on in them. I just want to know when the next release of Firefox is coming. Now that is interesting news. -Mark The next suite release is directly tied to the next Firefox release. Firefox will branch into pre-0.9 when the Mozilla 1.7 code goes final, since Firefox is intended to be based on the final Mozilla 1.7 stable code. Mozilla 0.9 will be "feature-complete", then 1.0 will basically just entail the tidying up. Actually that's technically not quite right (and neither is the article I guess). A branch has just been created for Firefox and Thunderbird so that 0.9 development isn't held up waiting for 1.7 final to happen. So Firefox 0.9 will be based on 1.7RC2, although fixes that go onto the 1.7 branch from now should get applied to the "Aviary 1.0" branch as well, so there shouldn't be too much difference in practice. I can reproduce the error with SuSE Linux 8.0: # ./mozilla-installer nsNativeComponentLoader: SelfRegisterDll(talkback.so) Load FAILED with error: libstdc++.so.5: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory nsNativeComponentLoader: SelfRegisterDll(libnegotiateauth.so) Load FAILED with error: libgssapi_krb5.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory nsNativeComponentLoader: SelfRegisterDll(talkback.so) Load FAILED with error: libstdc++.so.5: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory nsNativeComponentLoader: SelfRegisterDll(libnegotiateauth.so) Load FAILED with error: libgssapi_krb5.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory nsNativeComponentLoader: SelfRegisterDll(talkback.so) Load FAILED with error: libstdc++.so.5: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory nsNativeComponentLoader: SelfRegisterDll(libnegotiateauth.so) Load FAILED with error: libgssapi_krb5.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory and when i start mozilla, i get this message: $ mozilla (QFA)Talkback error: Can't initialize. I even get the same error mesg. Any fix for this. Thanks in advance, Ravi ravi@atc.tcs.co.in I get the same error too when i launch mozilla form a standard user account, but it's run perfectly when i launch it as root... What's wrong? Any body have an idea? > Re: Linux gtk1 build anyway who in 2004 is using mozilla on a gtk1 system? INHO just drop gtk1 in favor of gtk2... 1. I have no current GTK2 libraries on my SuSE 8.0 system, an I do not have the desire to install them. 2. The GTK1 build are the official releases of mozilla.org 3. There is no current GTK2-build of Mozilla 1.7rc2 available: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/releases/mozilla1.7rc2/ The last time I tried this (six months back), I decided that the gtk2 builds were just too buggy (crashy, mostly, at the time). Since then, I've seen little incentive to invest the time I'd need to invest to switch. What are the benefits for me of using a GTK2 build, other than buzzword-compliance? (Assuming I tell you up front that I don't care much about gnome-vfs integration and GTK theming, of course.) > anyway who in 2004 is using mozilla on a gtk1 system? When you want to browse in non-AA mode without altering the rest of the system or XFree86/X11 setting. You can do that with the gtk2/Xft build as well. Just create another fontconfig config file and set the FONTCONFIG_FILE environment variable to point at it, then start mozilla. Your new fontconfig config file could just include /etc/fonts/fonts.conf and then turn off antialiasing. See the fonts-conf(5) man page for details. afaik, that isn't a problem. It means certain authentication mechanisms (kerberos related) won't be available. Likely, you don't even need them. So, as long as mozilla works fine, don't worry. Excuse me, but Mozilla is now an End User Product. It is not okay for end user products to spit out meaningless warning or error messages. Either it is a bug that is causing the messages or it is a bug that the messages are being spit out with no cause. In either case, these are precisely the reason for having release candidate builds. However, Mozillazine is not a substitute for Bugzilla. If you are having problems, open a bugzilla bug and add a note to the message thread on Mozillazine with the bug number (so interested readers can follow up without having to waste time searching bugzilla). right side of mozillazine page is: FORUMS -- http://forums.mozillazine.org/ is another good place to post problems, or ask questions, though start with bugzilla :) My understanding is that Mozilla does consider it to be a problem, and so the message wouldn't be a bug. mvl is just saying that the fact that it is broken probably won't affect normal usage. If you want a user-support type answer, then it's probably something like "your system doesn't meet the minimum requirements for Mozilla - we can't help with that, you need to fix your system". But saying that is probably less helpful than advising that the message can be safely ignored in 99.99% of cases. In my limited experience, it's not all that unusual for programs on Linux to spit out messages which can be ignored. This is nothing to be alarmed by. It means that your Linux system does not have the system libraries required to support the negotiate authentication protocol. You'd know if that was important to you. The code is behaving as designed; however, the error message probably does not belong in a release build. We have optional logging facilities that should probably be enabled instead. Also, this should only occur after the first launch. Can you confirm that that is indeed the case? Another Linux gtk1 specific problem is that <apostrophe> symbol is shown as <box> in Mozilla 1.7 rc1, rc2. This problem is registered as bug 232026. Hopefully it can be fixed before releasing 1.7 final. Note that this problem does not exist in Mozilla 1.6. Apostrophes on some web site show up as squares: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=232026 In Moz 1.7 RC1, FTP upload isn't included but the FTP upload code had been checked into the 1.7 branch a while ago. So, is it now included in 1.7 RC2 or not yet??? Zook What next major Netscape release? I thought NS releases were now history. Then again, it can't take much effort to slap their icons in etc... http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=4544 http://mozillanews.org/?article_date=2004-04-21+10-36-22 but how will it run on my old 233Mhz compaq laptop? I installed Sarge on a partition and on both the Win98, and the Sarge (Kernel 2.6.5-1) systems, Opera 7.50 came out twice as fast (at least in startup) as FireFox. I am hesitant to install Mozilla 1.7 and would rather wait for the new FireFox to come out. I would like to mention that on Win, Opera 6.06 is twice as fast as their 7.50 version! Runs great on my old 381 Mhz Compaq laptop. 233 Mhz should be enough. If it's slow, add RAM. Max it out. Wouldn't hurt to put in a new hard drive either (more disk space = lower seek time = faster swap file = faster virtual memory). I have a Compaq Presario 1681 233Mhz pentium (not even pentium II). with 96MB RAM (Max possible) and 96MB SWAP. The hard disk is a Fujitsu 3.2-GB 2.5-Inch Hard-Disk Drive (MHA2032AT) 4000 rpm with only 128KB cache (the only link is to a dell site): http://support.ap.dell.com/docs/storage/86135/Specs.htm hdparm resulted in mild improvement (Timing buffer-cache reads: ~90MB & Timing buffered disk reads: increased (only) from ~380KB to ~960KB on average). On "hdparm -i /dev/hda", the cache still reads 0. The hard disk parameters look pathetic. I am wondering if it is worth getting a new hard disk, which brand, and if it would be easy for me to replace it. Thanks The real question is how much free space is on the disk. If it is more than 50% free, that should be good. A new drive would probably keep the machine useful for a longer period of time. To upgrade, I would drop in at your local computer technie shop (locally owned, not big box corporate) and inquire about it. Unless you are prepared to spend a lot of time (days, weeks) in the upgrade process, it's better to spend a few extra bucks and let the pros take care of a hard drive upgrade. Without an extra IDE I/O card, the system might not be able to access all of a new hard drive. It seems a hassle to go thru that. The Win98 part works fine and I can still use the Desktop at home. I was wondering whether I made a mistake by installing the 2.6.5 kernel instead of the 2.4.26 (or even the 2.4.22 as in "DamnSmallLinux") on the laptop. The 2.6.5 on the Desktop is working fine and FireFox is as snappy as ever. > Opera 6.06 is twice as fast as their 7.50 version! And 7.50 does a lot more than 6.06. Of course Firefox does a lot more than Opera 7.50 in many areas (XML support, DOM, etc). So it's a matter of how much functionality you want -- the more you want the program to do, the more code it will take, and the longer it will take to load that code into memory at startup. Is anybody else struck by performance issues in this release? Running on a 450MHZ P3 Windows 2000 system with 384 MB. RC1 was nice and snappy. RC2 is middle click, get an Untitled tab, wait about 3 seconds, and THEN it starts to load the page. Closing a tab takes 2 seconds. Switching tabs seems to be slow as well. Yeah, I know, slow PC, but I didn't have this with RC1. I also got caught in popup hell, and I'll be posting a bug for that. with 1.6mhz p3 w98se 512M i find rc2 at least as snappy as rc1 was, if not a sneeze better. prolly the same, but without the worries about the "download error" false positive warning when saving image from web page to disk. Yes, there were some performance regressions between RC1 and RC2. There were? Can't say I've noticed any myself, or seen any bugs. Are there bugs filed for whatever regressions you're talking about? http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=242823 http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=242856 See also the dependencies on each bug. Please look at bonsai before making claims like that. Those bugs are due to a checkin that never landed on the 1.7 branch, so they aren't in RC2. Well, that's good. RC2 still seems slow. Well if you can pin down something that's definitely slower, file a bug about it :) Perceptions of things that "seem" slow don't help much. Could be down to some small difference on a computer, a difference in performance somewhere on the internet, a difference in server loads, a difference in what happens to be in the cache, a difference in how the user is feeling, the weather, or just about anything else. The numbers say that RC1 and RC2 are the same in performance terms, and my own perception is that that would be right, but... small changes in perceived speeds with new version... could it be due to a hard disk that was defragmented after previous version installed; then used for a while.. disk gets fragmented... then new version installed on a fragmented disk. new one will seem to run a bit slower (at least load slower, and any time it reads disk will be a little less efficient). this could make small difference in perceived performance ? Hello, here I go again : ) Still can't find a way to reopen the eml files I save from MozillaMail. the bug was somehow patched in thunderbird 0.6, but it's really not something to be taken seriously.....you can only view a prevously saved message, one at a time, and you can't even save it in mail folders : ( What's expected is good'ol drag and drop. Drag the eml on your thunderbird/MozillaMail folder and have it copied there. Or else REMOVE the "save as file" command, which looks like a joke when one realizes you can't import your messages back into the program that saved them in the first place. I thought the UI for multiple identities per account was checked in as well, but I guess that was in de 1.8a branch. Can anyone confirm that? In Moz 1.7 RC1, FTP upload isn't included but the FTP upload code had been checked into the 1.7 branch a while ago. So, is it now included in 1.7 RC2 or not yet??? Zook It's included. I tried it and it works. Go to a ftp site and go to File -> Upload File... But unfortunatelly no drag and drop support yet and no support for multiple files or directories. So one file at a time. "When compared to Mozilla 1.6, Mozilla 1.7 RC 1 is 7% faster at startup, is 8% faster at window open time, has 9% faster pageloading times, and is 5% smaller in binary size." See also: http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla1.7rc2/README.html#new Are you asking about the numbers? They're the same for RC1 as for RC2. If you mean the page should be fixed, you may want to mail the page's maintainer.... It's fixed in thunderbird but still no pasting of clipboard images into email. Outlook has it, netscape 4 had it even thunderbird has it but no mozilla mail.. Four years of waiting, promises of money to no avail. Still nothing. http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47838 Netscape?!?!?!!?! I thought Netscape was dead and 7.1 was to be the last version. |