Try Firebug > Firebug Icon menu (upper left) > Options > reset all Firebug options. Now only open Firebug on sites you want to debug; push the Off button for sites you don't. Don't use either "On for all web page" or "Off for all web pages".
Does it work? jjb On Aug 27, 12:46 am, "Pali.Madra" <[email protected]> wrote: > I have installed 1.5X.0a21. Using Firefox 3.5.2. > > I still cannot get Firebug to always work on some sites and not on > others. I have tried everything like minimizing and turning it on. > > Please help. > > Thanks , > > Pali Madra > > On Aug 19, 8:37 am, johnjbarton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Aug 18, 12:34 pm, Bob Hassinger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > "I have a browser crashing > > > issue. When I open certain sites like Gmail and Meebo, Firefox slows > > > to a crawl and crashes" > > > > Watching all this discussion go by for many months, it seems a key > > > root is "the Gmail problem". Do I recall correctly that back around > > > 1.2-1.3 that there were a lot of complaints about conflicts between FB > > > and sites like Gmail, and a lot of the attention to activation schemes > > > flowed from there? > > > I wish it were so simple. > > > In FF 2.0, gmail + firebug meant crashes. Eventually we learned that > > the problem was much worse: google's pageads code crashed firefox > > because of a combo of JS debugging and GC. Fixed in FF3.0 > > > Issues for FF3.0 are all around resources. (I discount the "crashes" > > in the report above, they may not mean the same thing I do, it may not > > be Firebug, etc). Gmail is a common reason for folks to want a > > browser that is both a debugger and user tool. But it's not the only > > reason. > > > > Likewise, as the above quote reflects a lot of the current concern > > > would go away if there was not a need to be off/inactive/whatever for > > > Gmail and maybe some fairly limited set of other sites. > > > I don't agree for two reasons. > > > First controlling the resource requirements of Firebug will always be > > needed. It is not specific to gmail or even to trying to combine > > debugging and other web activity. A serious debug tool will be applied > > to serious applications and they will stress the limits of resources. > > We need to be able to control Firebug. > > > Second, its not really gmail and a limited set of sites. Rather gmail > > and similar sites are just the vanguard of applications that will > > continue to roll out. We can't cut and run, we have to learn how to > > defeat these problems. > > > > My question is how well "the Gmail problem" is understood and what > > > prospects and barriers might exist to address it? > > > Yes, generally the problem with gmail, and similar AJAX applications, > > is that firefox is not designed for debugging dynamic code and these > > applications compile a lot of code dynamically. I wrote a lot of > > Javascript that does some wacky stuff to make up the gap. It works > > but it is slow. > > > > That subject seems pretty obvious so I would assume it is a hard > > > problem for some reason. Otherwise it would have been fixed long > > > ago. But whatever is going on to cause it would seem to be a > > > fundimentsl flaw. To be effective and solid FB should be able to work > > > on all sites without needing to worry. It would seem Gmail is doing > > > something legitimate that FB can not deal with effectively in the > > > current design. > > > Yes your analysis is quite correct. > > > > Do the new tools in other browsers that have been mentioned have > > > similar problems? If not, why? > > > I don't know. Prior to my work with Firebug I don't believe that there > > was any way to debug these applications. However, new Firebug-like > > debuggers are now out in IE8 and Opera; V8 is coming along. I like to > > know how well they work. > > > > This issue seems significant enough to even justify getting support or > > > changes in FF itself if that is where it has to come from. > > > I've been working on this and making steady progress. There are two > > aspects. > > > First, what technical solution makes sense? Here we don't have much to > > work with. I'm the expert on the firebug side, there is no one on the > > Firefox side. There are experts deeper into the Javascript engine. > > > Second, who can do the work? I have a learned enough to create C++ > > code for making some improvements, but this work is quite time > > consuming. Fortunately Firefox team has expressed a lot of support for > > Firebug work. We've agreed to first focus on adding Firebug to nightly > > tests of Firefox then put it on the Firefox "you must pass this test > > before you move one" list. At that point we can work on Firebug on > > Firefox trunk and on Firefox trunk with Firebug installed. > > > (To be sure there are a lot of other opportunities to exploit if we > > get this done). > > > > Just think how much more time the FB developers would have to do > > > useful work if the problem and the endless discussion about it could > > > go away ;-) > > > I share your concern that resources we put into activation prevent us > > from working on other problems. However in a lot of ways the 1.4 work > > was a great investment. Without setting out to do so, we plowed > > through many obscure corners of Firebug and rewrote some complex code > > we did not understand before. Perhaps it will take 1.5 to iron out all > > of the wrinkles, but at least we know how many pockets the shirt > > has ... > > > jjb > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
