Bug Out of date
What is the reasoning behind marking a bug out of date? Particularly when it is easily reproducible with the last test build by one click on the given URL. The bug in question was a serious one which caused NetSurf to use almost 100% of CPU, not just during rendering but after rendering had stopped, and even the window on that website had been closed. The only remedy being to kill the process. -- David J. Ruck email: dr...@druck.org.uk phone: +44(0)7974 108301
Re: Bug Out of date
On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 08:30 +, David J. Ruck wrote: What is the reasoning behind marking a bug out of date? Particularly when it is easily reproducible with the last test build by one click on the given URL. Simple: it was 4 years old and I couldn't reproduce it (and still can't fwiw) John.
Re: Bug Out of date
On 08/03/2011 08:38, John-Mark Bell wrote: On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 08:30 +, David J. Ruck wrote: What is the reasoning behind marking a bug out of date? Particularly when it is easily reproducible with the last test build by one click on the given URL. Simple: it was 4 years old and I couldn't reproduce it (and still can't fwiw) Well maybe someone else can. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=464312aid=3201428group_id=51719 -- David J. Ruck email: dr...@druck.org.uk phone: +44(0)7974 108301
Re: Bug Out of date
On 8 Mar 2011 David J. Ruck wrote: On 08/03/2011 08:38, John-Mark Bell wrote: On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 08:30 +, David J. Ruck wrote: What is the reasoning behind marking a bug out of date? Particularly when it is easily reproducible with the last test build by one click on the given URL. Simple: it was 4 years old and I couldn't reproduce it (and still can't fwiw) Well maybe someone else can. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=464312aid=3201428g roup_id=51719 It takes a long time converting 1379990 bytes, but then expands the navigation menu. It also takes a lot of processing time when you close the window. However I don't see the problem reported on the tracker. (r11931, KRPC 300MHz, 128MB, OS 6.16) -- Richard Porterhttp://www.minijem.plus.com/ mailto:r...@minijem.plus.com I don't want a user experience - I just want stuff that works.
Re: Bug Out of date
On Tue, March 8, 2011 3:32 pm, Daniel Silverstone wrote: On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 03:28:35PM +, Dr Peter Young wrote: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=464312aid=3201428g roup_id=51719 Yes, does exactly what druck describes here; r11927 and RISC OS 5.16. Gobbles up the memory, too. This bug is not reproducable on Linux/GTK and appears to be related to frames. Unfortunately it'll need to wait for one of the RISC OS enabled developers to have a gander. Unfortunately, despite following the instructions to the letter, this RISC OS enabled developer couldn't reproduce the problem on 5.16 either. A log file from an affected copy of NetSurf might help (although that's not a promise that anything will get fixed soon: it depends on what's wrong and what the fix entails). Don't post it to this list, though... ;-) -- Steve Fryatt - Leeds, England Wakefield Acorn RISC OS Show Saturday 16 April 2011 http://www.stevefryatt.org.uk/ http://www.wakefieldshow.org.uk/
Re: Bug Out of date
On 8 Mar, Dr Peter Young wrote: Yes, does exactly what druck describes here; r11927 and RISC OS 5.16. r11894 here - takes ages to expand the contents of the frame, but after it has expanded NetSurf shows as using 0% of CPU, according to TaskUsage. Gobbles up the memory, too. Yes, that does happen here. about 4MB in app space, and over 50MB in DA. -- Brian Howlett - Isn't it strange that the same people that laugh at gypsy fortune tellers take economists seriously?
Re: Bug Out of date
On 8 Mar 2011 Steve Fryatt li...@stevefryatt.org.uk wrote: On Tue, March 8, 2011 3:32 pm, Daniel Silverstone wrote: On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 03:28:35PM +, Dr Peter Young wrote: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=464312aid=3201428g roup_id=51719 Yes, does exactly what druck describes here; r11927 and RISC OS 5.16. Gobbles up the memory, too. This bug is not reproducable on Linux/GTK and appears to be related to frames. Unfortunately it'll need to wait for one of the RISC OS enabled developers to have a gander. Unfortunately, despite following the instructions to the letter, this RISC OS enabled developer couldn't reproduce the problem on 5.16 either. A log file from an affected copy of NetSurf might help (although that's not a promise that anything will get fixed soon: it depends on what's wrong and what the fix entails). Don't post it to this list, though... ;-) Tried to repeat it here, but it behaved this time, in spite of using large amounts of memory. I'll keep the logfile, though, in case it's of interest. With best wishes, Peter. -- Peter \ / zfc Lu \ Prestbury, Cheltenham, Glos. GL52 and \/ ____ \ England. family / / \ | | |\ | / _ \ http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk / \__/ \_/ | \| \__/ \__ pnyo...@ormail.co.uk
