FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-15-2008, 06:44 PM
MHR
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 10:39 AM, sbeam <sbeam@onsetcorps.net> wrote:
>
> Well I need my plugins to get work done so I installed the binary from
> mozilla.org in /opt/ and symlinked to that, seems to be better so far. This
> is what I used to do to get the latest version anyway, so if it works will
> just stay this way. If not I'll get on bugzilla and pursue that.
>

Now that's interesting.

I've been having the same problem with Seamonkey (the integrated
Mozilla suite), and I have less trouble in general when I build my own
and install it in /opt. (The AR and SWF plugins don't work there, for
some reason, but all the others do.) It never occurred to me that the
installation location would be involved - I'll have to try that and
see how it works.

Thanks!

mhr
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-16-2008, 08:47 AM
"Marcelo M. Garcia"
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

sbeam wrote:

does anyone else have major probs with Firefox as installed on CentOS5?

ever since the RPM for FF3 came out it has been crashing daily. Usually when I
use Save As... or Browse... or anything else that brings up the Gnome file
picker. After the crash I re-start then the file picker works for a while.

Sometimes it just takes scrolling or click+drag an image or some other random
action. BANG your'e dead. Very frustrating.


Now today it is just crashing randomly, I am not even touching it. Maybe one
of my plugins, I know. I guess I will run it with debugger/strace. but does
anyone else see this?


$ rpm -qa firefox
firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos
$ cat /etc/redhat-release
CentOS release 5.2 (Final)
$ rpm -qa kdebase
kdebase-3.5.4-18.el5.centos

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Hi

Sorry to hear this, but I use Firefox 3.0.2 daily and I don't have any
of these problems. For me works fine.


Regards

Marcelo

Centos 5.2 (2.6.18-92.1.13.el5)
firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-16-2008, 10:15 AM
"William L. Maltby"
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 09:47 +0100, Marcelo M. Garcia wrote:
> sbeam wrote:
> > does anyone else have major probs with Firefox as installed on CentOS5?
> >
> > ever since the RPM for FF3 came out it has been crashing daily. Usually when I
> ><snip>

> Sorry to hear this, but I use Firefox 3.0.2 daily and I don't have any
> of these problems. For me works fine.
>
> Regards
>
> Marcelo
>
> Centos 5.2 (2.6.18-92.1.13.el5)
> firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos

Ditto here. Have you run an "rpm --verify" to see if you have corruption
problems? Have you mixed installs from (possibly conflicting) repos? I
suspect one of those two. Have you checked your hardware (memtest,
etc.)? If the system is haeavily loaded, have you checked to see if it's
a heat related problem?

> <snip sig stuff>

--
Bill

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-16-2008, 11:26 AM
"Michael Simpson"
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

On 10/16/08, William L. Maltby <CentOS4Bill@triad.rr.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 09:47 +0100, Marcelo M. Garcia wrote:
> > sbeam wrote:
> > > does anyone else have major probs with Firefox as installed on CentOS5?
> > >
> > > ever since the RPM for FF3 came out it has been crashing daily. Usually when I
> > ><snip>
>
> > Sorry to hear this, but I use Firefox 3.0.2 daily and I don't have any
> > of these problems. For me works fine.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Marcelo
> >
> > Centos 5.2 (2.6.18-92.1.13.el5)
> > firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos
>
> Ditto here. Have you run an "rpm --verify" to see if you have corruption
> problems? Have you mixed installs from (possibly conflicting) repos? I
> suspect one of those two. Have you checked your hardware (memtest,
> etc.)? If the system is haeavily loaded, have you checked to see if it's
> a heat related problem?
>
> > <snip sig stuff>

I run FF3 on CentOS 5.2 on a 9yr old laptop (256MB ram p3 processor
16GB SSD) with no problems whatsoever (other than my partners orange
webmail maxing out the cpu with their ads)

mike
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-16-2008, 12:07 PM
sbeam
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

On Thursday 16 October 2008 07:26, Michael Simpson wrote:
> > Ditto here. Have you run an "rpm --verify" to see if you have corruption
> > problems? Have you mixed installs from (possibly conflicting) repos? I
> > suspect one of those two. Have you checked your hardware (memtest,
> > etc.)? If the system is haeavily loaded, have you checked to see if it's
> > a heat related problem?

ok thanks guys, the firefox RPM was normal and the system is solid 64bit, it's
just Firefox that has problems.

In the past crashes could be triggered just by simple UI interaction,
scrolling or click/drag, etc. Seemed like any time it would use GTK widgets
it was on thin ice. I run KDE so I wondered if any other KDE users have this
problem.

But I am running the mozilla.org binary now, so I can get crashreporter to
work - but it doesn't...
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=460254

anyway this is not a CentOS issue it seems. But thanks for letting me know.

Sam

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-16-2008, 03:49 PM
Robert
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

Marcelo M. Garcia wrote:

sbeam wrote:

does anyone else have major probs with Firefox as installed on CentOS5?

<snip>


Hi

Sorry to hear this, but I use Firefox 3.0.2 daily and I don't have any
of these problems. For me works fine.


Regards

Marcelo

Centos 5.2 (2.6.18-92.1.13.el5)
firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos

Same here, Marcello. Firefox has been running several days, currently
with an insane 47 tabs.



_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-16-2008, 04:08 PM
"bruce"
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

hey....

when you're saying "crashing", what exactly do you mean?.. is it the app
that crashes.. is it that your mouse/keyboard no longer works?, is your
system still running (you can ssh into it), but you can't move your mouse???

thanks



-----Original Message-----
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org]On
Behalf Of Marcelo M. Garcia
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 1:47 AM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] firefox is incredibly unstable


sbeam wrote:
> does anyone else have major probs with Firefox as installed on CentOS5?
>
> ever since the RPM for FF3 came out it has been crashing daily. Usually
when I
> use Save As... or Browse... or anything else that brings up the Gnome file
> picker. After the crash I re-start then the file picker works for a while.
>
> Sometimes it just takes scrolling or click+drag an image or some other
random
> action. BANG your'e dead. Very frustrating.
>
> Now today it is just crashing randomly, I am not even touching it. Maybe
one
> of my plugins, I know. I guess I will run it with debugger/strace. but
does
> anyone else see this?
>
> $ rpm -qa firefox
> firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos
> $ cat /etc/redhat-release
> CentOS release 5.2 (Final)
> $ rpm -qa kdebase
> kdebase-3.5.4-18.el5.centos
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hi

Sorry to hear this, but I use Firefox 3.0.2 daily and I don't have any
of these problems. For me works fine.

Regards

Marcelo

Centos 5.2 (2.6.18-92.1.13.el5)
firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-20-2008, 04:13 AM
Ted Miller
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

sbeam wrote:

does anyone else have major probs with Firefox as installed on CentOS5?

ever since the RPM for FF3 came out it has been crashing daily. Usually when I
use Save As... or Browse... or anything else that brings up the Gnome file
picker. After the crash I re-start then the file picker works for a while.


Sometimes it just takes scrolling or click+drag an image or some other random
action. BANG your'e dead. Very frustrating.


Now today it is just crashing randomly, I am not even touching it. Maybe one
of my plugins, I know.


I use KDE (which may change my results). I was having problems with
Firefox crashing (exiting w/o warning) on most advertiser-supported pages.
Page would start loading, then FF would just be gone. FF worked great on
clean pages (like CentOS.org).


Tracked this back to the Flash player from Adobe. Disabled it, and problem
went away.


Ted Miller

> I guess I will run it with debugger/strace. but does

anyone else see this?

$ rpm -qa firefox
firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos
$ cat /etc/redhat-release
CentOS release 5.2 (Final)
$ rpm -qa kdebase
kdebase-3.5.4-18.el5.centos

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-24-2008, 11:38 AM
Johnny Hughes
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

sbeam wrote:
> On Thursday 16 October 2008 07:26, Michael Simpson wrote:
>>> Ditto here. Have you run an "rpm --verify" to see if you have corruption
>>> problems? Have you mixed installs from (possibly conflicting) repos? I
>>> suspect one of those two. Have you checked your hardware (memtest,
>>> etc.)? If the system is haeavily loaded, have you checked to see if it's
>>> a heat related problem?
>
> ok thanks guys, the firefox RPM was normal and the system is solid 64bit, it's
> just Firefox that has problems.
>
> In the past crashes could be triggered just by simple UI interaction,
> scrolling or click/drag, etc. Seemed like any time it would use GTK widgets
> it was on thin ice. I run KDE so I wondered if any other KDE users have this
> problem.
>
> But I am running the mozilla.org binary now, so I can get crashreporter to
> work - but it doesn't...
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=460254
>
> anyway this is not a CentOS issue it seems. But thanks for letting me know.
>
> Sam

Sam,

Most people responding are probably running the 32bit (i386) version of
CentOS. If you are running the x86_64 arch and also running the
Mozilla.org firefox then you are PROBABLY doing so via the 32bit
compatibility libs.

It has been my experience that this is far less stable (32bit
compatibility libs on x86_64) for many things, not just firefox.

I have never personally recommended running the x86_64 arch on a desktop
workstation ... and in fact, I have several 64bit capable machines that
I personally use as workstations where I install the 32bit (i386
version) of CentOS.

I know everyone THINKS that they want/need the x86_64 arch ... however,
the rest of the world outside the base OS are really not quite ready for
that.

I personally only use x86_64 on servers where I can remove all the
i[3,4,5,6]86 RPMS and go "x86_64 only" ... where it works great.

This is, of course, one man's opinion

Also, there are newer versions of Adobe Reader
(AdobeReader_enu-8.1.2_SU1) and Adobe Flash
(flash-plugin-10.0.12.36-release) that are a bit more stable than the
earlier ones. Specifically, the SU1 version of Adobe Reader is better
than the standard 8.1.2 version.

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-24-2008, 05:08 PM
MHR
 
Default firefox is incredibly unstable

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 4:38 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny@centos.org> wrote:
>
> Sam,
>
> Most people responding are probably running the 32bit (i386) version of
> CentOS. If you are running the x86_64 arch and also running the
> Mozilla.org firefox then you are PROBABLY doing so via the 32bit
> compatibility libs.
>
I have the same stability problems with Seamonkey on both my 32-bit
workstation at work and my 64-bit desktop at home. In fact, they have
grown worse since SM 1.10 a couple of months ago (they're up to 1.12
and it's more unstable than ever, with the same problems and worse).

> It has been my experience that this is far less stable (32bit
> compatibility libs on x86_64) for many things, not just firefox.
>
Actually, I have almost no stability problems other than SM on my
64-bit machine at home. However, I should add the caveat that I don't
use every single newfangled, shiny app that comes out just because
it's there. I have a strong preference for proven, stable apps, so
that could be a part of it. I also tend to prefer 64-bit apps where
possible/available because they tend to run better than their 32-bit
counterparts (on a 64-bit OS). My personal, big exception: OOo,
because I like the newer version (2.4.1) a lot better than the distro
version (2.3.0), which is just ok.

> I have never personally recommended running the x86_64 arch on a desktop
> workstation ... and in fact, I have several 64bit capable machines that
> I personally use as workstations where I install the 32bit (i386
> version) of CentOS.
>
I'd say it's a matter of personal taste and experience - if your
experience with 64-bits on your desktop is not as good as your
experiences with 32, chances are you'll feel that way. If you run
gobs of 32-bit apps that are not available in 64-bit versions and they
tend to be a bit flaky on the 64-bit platform, that's also a good
reason to stick to 32.

> I know everyone THINKS that they want/need the x86_64 arch ... however,
> the rest of the world outside the base OS are really not quite ready for
> that.
>
> I personally only use x86_64 on servers where I can remove all the
> i[3,4,5,6]86 RPMS and go "x86_64 only" ... where it works great.
>
> This is, of course, one man's opinion
>
YMMV.

> Also, there are newer versions of Adobe Reader
> (AdobeReader_enu-8.1.2_SU1) and Adobe Flash
> (flash-plugin-10.0.12.36-release) that are a bit more stable than the
> earlier ones. Specifically, the SU1 version of Adobe Reader is better
> than the standard 8.1.2 version.
>
This certainly seems to be true for the 32-bit versions, at least of
AR (I don't think I have the 10.x version of flash yet...). On my
home desktop, I run AR 7.9 because the 8.x versions don't print
landscape PDFs properly at all, and they also have fewer options for
printing, like scaling that works. This could be a 64-bit issue, but
I run the 32-bit plugins with nspluginwrapper, and although MOST
plugins run just fine that way, nppdf and flash do not. Sometimes I
think Adobe just doesn't like 64-bits yet.

And...

That's just _my_ $0.02 ($4 in today's money...).

mhr
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:36 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org