Alexander Mai wrote:
>
> Well, I guess all those 0.* releases are beta, so why don't make them
> more verbose by default?
Launch problems have become relatively rare and the vast majority are
no-brainers (overwriting a previous installation, have some other
version of xpcom.dll in LIBPATH etc.). Also, verbosity has been cleaned
up for nondebug builds so that now all that's left are a few lines at
component registration and BYE BYE BYE BYE from somewhere. I added this
verbosity after the fact (it's not in the original src) because Ralph's
problem had me stumped.
> Don't forget to add the URL to your version of the graphics libs in the
> README!
Right. This was my first PM release linked against the "system" graphics
libs
and that slipped my mind while doing the readme.
> You should add more of those generic hints (command line flags, ...)
> in the README.
Will do.
> BTW, generic rendering problems (some site looking strange and much different
> as compared to other browsers) should be reported here first?
They can go to Bugzilla (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/) though people
usually here first if anyone else is seeing the same thing.
> How can one know whether it's an OS/2 or generic problem?
For graphics rendering, you can compare the PM against another mainline
toolkit (GTK, Mac, Windows). In the case of the underdeveloped toolkits
(QT and Xlib), that comparison is unfair; a better one (and this applies
to GTK as well) would be against a mozilla built with that toolkit for
another OS. Looking at the HTML source is also a good idea. The
difference may be the result of the different ways different browsers
handle sloppy HTML.
h~
