SM 2.53.1 and SM 2.49.5
I have SM 2.49.5 32 bit on WXP and 64 bit on W7, and have been synching them by copying the Mozilla folders (C:\Documents and Settings\username\Mozilla on WXP, C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming \Mozilla on W7) to and fro, with no problems. If I put SM 2.53.1 64 bit on the W7 machine, will I still be able to do this? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Blocking/Allowing Cookies
Thank you for the link, FRG. I don't use the DM, nor the "Don't allow websites that set removed cookies to set future cookies", so I don't think the bug discussions apply. I did, however, figure out the answer to my second question - if I block all cookies, then allow them from e.g. https://aaa.bbb.ccc, cookies from https://bbb.ccc are blocked, but aaa.bbb.ccc can set cookies that say the domain is bbb.ccc - does that make sense? On 2018-09-14 10:49 AM, kakak wrote: For some more insight how the permission api operates these days: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1479347 FRG EE wrote: xxyyz wrote: On 2018-08-08 2:01 PM, EE wrote: xxyyz wrote: On 2018-08-04 2:32 PM, David E. Ross wrote: On 8/4/2018 10:09 AM, xxyyz wrote: If I block all cookies (Preferences/Privacy & Security\Cookies/ Block cookies), then allow session cookies from https://aaa.bbb (in chrome://communicator/content/permissions/cookieViewer.xul), are session cookies allowed from https://xxx.aaa.bbb? I use the following strategy. I do not block all cookies. Instead, I allow cookies only from the domain of the Web site I requested. I have also blocked cookies from selected Web sites, primarily advertising sites that might have cookies set by my select Web sites. The key is that I located the file cookies.sqlite in my profile and marked it as read-only. All the cookies that get set as I surf the Web are lost as soon as I terminate SeaMonkey. That is, all of those cookies are treated as session-only. Sometimes, however, I want to keep a cookie. Fortunately, that does not often happen because the process is somewhat cumbersome. To see my process, go to <http://www.rossde.com/internet/cookies.html#doabout>. Thank you for the response - but I'm asking a very basic question: Does allowing cookies from a specific site allow cookies from "subsidiary" sites? Same question when blocking cookies. If you allow cookies from the second level domain, then they would be allowed from one of its specific third level domains as well. Thank you. Does the reverse apply - i.e. if I allow cookies from a specific third level domain, are they allowed from the second level domain? No, not normally, unless you use a cookie handling extension that specifically allows that. For my part, there is no way I want that to happen with a big domain. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Blocking/Allowing Cookies
On 2018-08-09 2:28 PM, Lemuel Johnson wrote: On 8/8/2018 7:32 PM, xxyyz wrote: On 2018-08-08 2:10 PM, Lemuel Johnson wrote: On 8/7/2018 12:00 PM, xxyyz wrote: On 2018-08-04 2:32 PM, David E. Ross wrote: Thank you for the response - but I'm asking a very basic question: Does allowing cookies from a specific site allow cookies from "subsidiary" sites? Same question when blocking cookies. It depends on how the cookie is created. From https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Set-Cookie: Domain= Optional Specifies those hosts to which the cookie will be sent. If not specified, defaults to the host portion of the current document location (but not including subdomains). Contrary to earlier specifications, leading dots in domain names are ignored. If a domain is specified, subdomains are always included. If you allow cookies from yyy.zzz and a cookie is created without the optional "Domain" parameter cookies from xxx.yyy.zzz are not allowed. They ARE allowed if the Domain is specified. Lem Johnson Thank you. I think I understand this. Another question (sort of the previous one in reverse): If I block all cookies and allow cookies from https://aaa.xxx.yyy, are cookies from https://xxx.yyy allowed? I assumed not, but I've seen several cases where Cookie Manager lists cookies from the latter. Does this also depend on whether or not the Domain is specified in the cookie? A useful tool for evaluating the options: https://scripts.cmbuckley.co.uk/cookies.php Lem Johnson Thank you, but I must be getting old as I could not figure out how to use the tool. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Blocking/Allowing Cookies
On 2018-08-09 3:08 PM, EE wrote: xxyyz wrote: On 2018-08-08 2:01 PM, EE wrote: xxyyz wrote: On 2018-08-04 2:32 PM, David E. Ross wrote: On 8/4/2018 10:09 AM, xxyyz wrote: If I block all cookies (Preferences/Privacy & Security\Cookies/ Block cookies), then allow session cookies from https://aaa.bbb (in chrome://communicator/content/permissions/cookieViewer.xul), are session cookies allowed from https://xxx.aaa.bbb? I use the following strategy. I do not block all cookies. Instead, I allow cookies only from the domain of the Web site I requested. I have also blocked cookies from selected Web sites, primarily advertising sites that might have cookies set by my select Web sites. The key is that I located the file cookies.sqlite in my profile and marked it as read-only. All the cookies that get set as I surf the Web are lost as soon as I terminate SeaMonkey. That is, all of those cookies are treated as session-only. Sometimes, however, I want to keep a cookie. Fortunately, that does not often happen because the process is somewhat cumbersome. To see my process, go to <http://www.rossde.com/internet/cookies.html#doabout>. Thank you for the response - but I'm asking a very basic question: Does allowing cookies from a specific site allow cookies from "subsidiary" sites? Same question when blocking cookies. If you allow cookies from the second level domain, then they would be allowed from one of its specific third level domains as well. Thank you. Does the reverse apply - i.e. if I allow cookies from a specific third level domain, are they allowed from the second level domain? No, not normally, unless you use a cookie handling extension that specifically allows that. For my part, there is no way I want that to happen with a big domain. Thank you. That's what I thought, but (a) I have no extensions (except AB+) (b) I have all cookies blocked in preferences (c) I allow session cookies from accounts.google.com and mail.google.com (to occasionally access my one gmail account) in cookie manager (d) When I access the gmail account via webmail, cookie manager shows cookies from accounts.google.com and mail.google.com AND google.com?? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Blocking/Allowing Cookies
On 2018-08-08 2:10 PM, Lemuel Johnson wrote: On 8/7/2018 12:00 PM, xxyyz wrote: On 2018-08-04 2:32 PM, David E. Ross wrote: Thank you for the response - but I'm asking a very basic question: Does allowing cookies from a specific site allow cookies from "subsidiary" sites? Same question when blocking cookies. It depends on how the cookie is created. From https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Set-Cookie: Domain= Optional Specifies those hosts to which the cookie will be sent. If not specified, defaults to the host portion of the current document location (but not including subdomains). Contrary to earlier specifications, leading dots in domain names are ignored. If a domain is specified, subdomains are always included. If you allow cookies from yyy.zzz and a cookie is created without the optional "Domain" parameter cookies from xxx.yyy.zzz are not allowed. They ARE allowed if the Domain is specified. Lem Johnson Thank you. I think I understand this. Another question (sort of the previous one in reverse): If I block all cookies and allow cookies from https://aaa.xxx.yyy, are cookies from https://xxx.yyy allowed? I assumed not, but I've seen several cases where Cookie Manager lists cookies from the latter. Does this also depend on whether or not the Domain is specified in the cookie? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Blocking/Allowing Cookies
On 2018-08-08 2:01 PM, EE wrote: xxyyz wrote: On 2018-08-04 2:32 PM, David E. Ross wrote: On 8/4/2018 10:09 AM, xxyyz wrote: If I block all cookies (Preferences/Privacy & Security\Cookies/ Block cookies), then allow session cookies from https://aaa.bbb (in chrome://communicator/content/permissions/cookieViewer.xul), are session cookies allowed from https://xxx.aaa.bbb? I use the following strategy. I do not block all cookies. Instead, I allow cookies only from the domain of the Web site I requested. I have also blocked cookies from selected Web sites, primarily advertising sites that might have cookies set by my select Web sites. The key is that I located the file cookies.sqlite in my profile and marked it as read-only. All the cookies that get set as I surf the Web are lost as soon as I terminate SeaMonkey. That is, all of those cookies are treated as session-only. Sometimes, however, I want to keep a cookie. Fortunately, that does not often happen because the process is somewhat cumbersome. To see my process, go to <http://www.rossde.com/internet/cookies.html#doabout>. Thank you for the response - but I'm asking a very basic question: Does allowing cookies from a specific site allow cookies from "subsidiary" sites? Same question when blocking cookies. If you allow cookies from the second level domain, then they would be allowed from one of its specific third level domains as well. Thank you. Does the reverse apply - i.e. if I allow cookies from a specific third level domain, are they allowed from the second level domain? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Blocking/Allowing Cookies
On 2018-08-04 2:32 PM, David E. Ross wrote: On 8/4/2018 10:09 AM, xxyyz wrote: If I block all cookies (Preferences/Privacy & Security\Cookies/ Block cookies), then allow session cookies from https://aaa.bbb (in chrome://communicator/content/permissions/cookieViewer.xul), are session cookies allowed from https://xxx.aaa.bbb? I use the following strategy. I do not block all cookies. Instead, I allow cookies only from the domain of the Web site I requested. I have also blocked cookies from selected Web sites, primarily advertising sites that might have cookies set by my select Web sites. The key is that I located the file cookies.sqlite in my profile and marked it as read-only. All the cookies that get set as I surf the Web are lost as soon as I terminate SeaMonkey. That is, all of those cookies are treated as session-only. Sometimes, however, I want to keep a cookie. Fortunately, that does not often happen because the process is somewhat cumbersome. To see my process, go to <http://www.rossde.com/internet/cookies.html#doabout>. Thank you for the response - but I'm asking a very basic question: Does allowing cookies from a specific site allow cookies from "subsidiary" sites? Same question when blocking cookies. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Blocking/Allowing Cookies
If I block all cookies (Preferences/Privacy & Security\Cookies/ Block cookies), then allow session cookies from https://aaa.bbb (in chrome://communicator/content/permissions/cookieViewer.xul), are session cookies allowed from https://xxx.aaa.bbb? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SeaMonkey on Windows XP - [Solved]
On 2018-04-20 10:20 PM, xxyyz wrote: Is there anyone out there running SeaMonkey on Windows XP? If so, I would be grateful if they would try the National Zoo/Smithsonian panda cams on http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/WebCams/giant-panda.cfm and post the result. A fix for this problem has been posted at: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=40=3040639=02ba286e2717d9344a55e8e9e5d22445 It may be risky, and no guarantees it will work, but I have been running with it for 3 days (many power cycles, and many exit/run SM cycles) with no problems. Uninstalled Flash, and the pandacams work, as do all the vimeo videos, and various other videos that previously either would not work or required Flash. And it works in FireFox as well. Involves replacing two SeaMonkey files (mozavcodec.dll, mozavutil.dll) with Pale Moon versions, and adding a windows file, vcomp140.dll, if not already there. Maybe this could be included in the next SeaMonkey release? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: National Zoo Panda Cams
On 2018-04-25 3:14 PM, David E. Ross wrote: On 4/16/2018 9:47 PM, David E. Ross wrote: On 4/16/2018 7:45 PM, xxyyz wrote: SM 2.49.2, WXP - what do I need to change and/or add to get the Smithsonian panda cams at http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/WebCams/giant-panda.cfm to play? No problem here. I have both Flash and HTML5 Media enabled along with images from all domains. I tried this on my wife's Windows XP SP3 PC with SeaMonkey 2.49.2 and the same settings I indicate above. I could NOT view the video. I suspect that my wife might be missing a codec. Later, I will get a list of the codecs on both her PC and mine. If I see a deficiency in my wife's PC, I will attempt to install the missing codec there. Then I will again try to view the video. Thank you, David. I will be very interested to see the results of your investigation. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SeaMonkey on Windows XP
Thank you, Frank-Rainer. I am not looking for changes to SeaMonkey - I think you/ewong/et al have more than enough to do already. I was just hoping there is some S/W (codec or player or ... ) that would let me play the panda cams (and some other videos that don't currently work). I went through your link, and the strange thing is that the OP could see his videos on XP using FF, but not SM. The thread did not address this, but it did offer a link to get a plugin for FF: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/175591-enable-mp4-h264-aac-html5-video-in-firefox-on-windows-xp-without-flash/ So I installed FF 52.7.3esr - the panda cams did not work; I installed the plugin per the instructions in the link, and the panda cams worked! So I installed the plugin in SM (following the FF instructions) and it does not show up as a plugin and the panda cams still don't work. Is there something you have to do in SM (but not in FF) to get it to recognise and use a plugin? On 2018-04-22 5:09 AM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: The days of XP as a multimedia platform are long over. Probably a missing codec. http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=40=3034122 I am using XP on another PC with special hardware and also always test new SeaMonkey releases in a VM but anything multimedia or Flash related on this platform is probably a big wontfix. FRG Ray_Net wrote: Paul B. Gallagher wrote on 22-04-18 08:04: Paul in Houston, TX wrote: Thank you, Fred. So the panda cams work on every system in the world except Windows XP! I have w7/32 and (2) w7/64 comps, with FF, Seamonkey and IE11. None of the vids on that site work on any of my browsers or o/s's. WFM on Win7/64 Pro SP1, SM 2.49.2. The OP need a test with WINDOWS XP ! :-) Nobody on this group is still on windows XP ? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SeaMonkey on Windows XP
On 2018-04-22 4:06 AM, Ray_Net wrote: Paul B. Gallagher wrote on 22-04-18 08:04: Paul in Houston, TX wrote: Thank you, Fred. So the panda cams work on every system in the world except Windows XP! I have w7/32 and (2) w7/64 comps, with FF, Seamonkey and IE11. None of the vids on that site work on any of my browsers or o/s's. WFM on Win7/64 Pro SP1, SM 2.49.2. The OP need a test with WINDOWS XP ! :-) Nobody on this group is still on windows XP ? Thank you Ray_Net - you're right, but I did get one response from an XP user - Sjouke Burry - and he sees the same as I do. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SeaMonkey on Windows XP
On 2018-04-21 4:17 PM, FredW wrote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2018 22:13:50 +0200, FredW <fredw@ninmule.invalid> wrote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2018 14:44:57 -0400, xxyyz <xxyyz@nowhere.invalid> wrote: On 2018-04-21 10:12 AM, FredW wrote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2018 05:29:13 +0200, Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulf...@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote: On 21-4-2018 4:20, xxyyz wrote: Is there anyone out there running SeaMonkey on Windows XP? If so, I would be grateful if they would try the National Zoo/Smithsonian panda cams on http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/WebCams/giant-panda.cfm and post the result. "this live event has ended" So, no, it does not run. I am looking at a live eating Panda (Cam 1) And another eating Panda (Cam 2), bare bamboo ;-) Thank you for the response. Are you on Windows XP? Sorry, no. I am on Win7HP64SP2. I looked with Palemoon 27.9.0 and Vivaldi 1.14.1077.60 On Cam 2 the sleeping Panda just woke up and started eating again. On Cam 1 no Panda in sight. And working on Basilisk, version 2018.03.21 (64-bit) Thank you, Fred. So the panda cams work on every system in the world except Windows XP! ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SeaMonkey on Windows XP
On 2018-04-20 11:29 PM, Sjouke Burry wrote: On 21-4-2018 4:20, xxyyz wrote: Is there anyone out there running SeaMonkey on Windows XP? If so, I would be grateful if they would try the National Zoo/Smithsonian panda cams on http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/WebCams/giant-panda.cfm and post the result. "this live event has ended" So, no, it does not run. Thank you, Sjouke - that's what I get. At least I'm not alone. Strange that it does not work on XP, yet works on linux, macs, ipads, all versions of windows after XP, etc., etc. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SeaMonkey on Windows XP
On 2018-04-21 10:12 AM, FredW wrote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2018 05:29:13 +0200, Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulf...@ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote: On 21-4-2018 4:20, xxyyz wrote: Is there anyone out there running SeaMonkey on Windows XP? If so, I would be grateful if they would try the National Zoo/Smithsonian panda cams on http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/WebCams/giant-panda.cfm and post the result. "this live event has ended" So, no, it does not run. I am looking at a live eating Panda (Cam 1) And another eating Panda (Cam 2), bare bamboo ;-) Thank you for the response. Are you on Windows XP? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
SeaMonkey on Windows XP
Is there anyone out there running SeaMonkey on Windows XP? If so, I would be grateful if they would try the National Zoo/Smithsonian panda cams on http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/WebCams/giant-panda.cfm and post the result. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: National Zoo Panda Cams
On 2018-04-16 11:44 PM, Paul in Houston, TX wrote: xxyyz wrote: SM 2.49.2, WXP - what do I need to change and/or add to get the Smithsonian panda cams at http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/WebCams/giant-panda.cfm to play? I can't get any of the three cams (lion, panda, elephant) to work with SM or IE11. They all say "Stream Unavailable". Clicking on the start arrow does not send a packet, at least not for me anyways. Sounds to me like the cams are not working. Thank you, Paul. But all four work on the iPad - so is it Windows or SeaMonkey or a missing codec or ... ? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
National Zoo Panda Cams
SM 2.49.2, WXP - what do I need to change and/or add to get the Smithsonian panda cams at http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/WebCams/giant-panda.cfm to play? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Correcting a password entry error
When I make a mistake entering an e-mail password, SeaMonkey (2.38) used to offer a dialogue allowing me to enter the correct one. Now, no dialogue is offered, just a box saying "Error with account xx Sending of password for user xxx...@rogers.com did not succeed. Mail Server pop.broadband.rogers.com responded: Server error - Please try again later." I have to shut SeaMonkey down and run it again (putting in the correct password!) to get to my e-mail. I don't screw up the password very often, but it is a PITA when I do. Is there anything I can do to get back to the previous behaviour? Rogers uses Yahoo for e-mail, and I think this started when Yahoo recently made a number of security-related changes. No stored passwords. No add-ons. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.39 Data Manager
On 2015-12-20 6:19 AM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: You know the Cookie Manager works with the duplicate entries. Remove will just only remove one scheme so you need to do it twice. The easy fix I am thinking of is just to show the scheme and maybe the port so that you can distinguish them. Doing more would need a complete redesign of both Data Manager and the old Cookie Manager. I wouldn't hold my breath for that unless you plan to do it yourself :) My advice: Upgrade to 2.40 when it's ready. How often do you need to set site settings anyway? I activated 'Ask for each cookie' so over time the list becomes more or less static. I think there is some confusion. I don't want to remove entries from Data Manager or Cookie Manager, I want to add entries. In Preferences/Privacy & Security/Cookies, I set Block cookies. In chrome://communicator/content/permissions/cookieViewer.xul, Cookie Websites, I add a site, allowing Session Cookies. In SM 2.39, the site is not allowed to set cookies; in SM 2.38 (and many previous generations of SM), the site is allowed to set cookies. On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 14:47:36 -0500, xxyyz wrote: On 2015-12-19 7:47 AM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: It's a known issue. The entries are really different because they have different schemes eg. usually http and https. Data Manager needs to change and display it all. Check Bug 1188348 for further progress. Thank you for the info. I will keep using 2.38 until this is fixed (especially Cookie Manager). On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 00:15:52 -0500, xxyyz wrote: In SM 2.39, Data Manager seems to be broken - all entries are duplicated, and cookie manager (chrome://communicator/content/ permissions/cookieViewer.xul) doesn't work. For example: mozdev.org downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow mozilla.org addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow No problems in SM 2.38. Is this a known issue or am I doing something wrong? Regards Frank-Rainer Grahl Regards Frank-Rainer Grahl ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.39 Data Manager
On 2015-12-19 7:47 AM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: It's a known issue. The entries are really different because they have different schemes eg. usually http and https. Data Manager needs to change and display it all. Check Bug 1188348 for further progress. Thank you for the info. I will keep using 2.38 until this is fixed (especially Cookie Manager). On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 00:15:52 -0500, xxyyz wrote: In SM 2.39, Data Manager seems to be broken - all entries are duplicated, and cookie manager (chrome://communicator/content/ permissions/cookieViewer.xul) doesn't work. For example: mozdev.org downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow mozilla.org addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow No problems in SM 2.38. Is this a known issue or am I doing something wrong? Regards Frank-Rainer Grahl ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.39 Data Manager
On 2015-12-18 12:32 AM, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: xxyyz wrote: In SM 2.39, Data Manager seems to be broken - all entries are duplicated, and cookie manager (chrome://communicator/content/permissions/cookieViewer.xul) doesn't work. Define "doesn't work"? Adding a new site to the set of "website can set session cookies" does not allow the site to set cookies. Note that site permissions that were carried over from the previous SM version still seem to work. For example: mozdev.org downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow mozilla.org addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow No problems in SM 2.38. I don't see the duplications you describe, but I do see support.mozilla.org Apply Strict Transport Security to subdomains (•) Block support.mozilla.org Apply Strict Transport Security to subdomains (•) Block The point is that the entries are duplicated - as far as I can tell, ALL entries are duplicated. Surely this indicates the Data Manager is broken? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.39 Data Manager
On 2015-12-18 3:44 PM, EE wrote: xxyyz wrote: In SM 2.39, Data Manager seems to be broken - all entries are duplicated, and cookie manager (chrome://communicator/content/ permissions/cookieViewer.xul) doesn't work. For example: mozdev.org downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow mozilla.org addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow No problems in SM 2.38. Is this a known issue or am I doing something wrong? The SM cookie manager still works for me, though the site permission list has all but one site listing duplicated. I had to switch cookie managers, though, from CS Lite to Cookie Monster, because I was not able to set the cookie exceptions in CS Lite the way I want any more. I only use the SM cookie manager; in SM 2.39, adding a new site to the set of "website can set session cookies" does not allow the site to set cookies. In SM 2.38 and earlier, the new site is allowed to set cookies. Note that site permissions that were carried over from the previous SM version still seem to work. Surely the fact that the entries are duplicated indicates the Data Manager is broken? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
SM 2.39 Data Manager
In SM 2.39, Data Manager seems to be broken - all entries are duplicated, and cookie manager (chrome://communicator/content/ permissions/cookieViewer.xul) doesn't work. For example: mozdev.org downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow downloads.mozdev.org Install Add-onsx Allow mozilla.org addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow addons.mozilla.orgInstall Add-onsx Allow No problems in SM 2.38. Is this a known issue or am I doing something wrong? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Wrapping Header Lines
On 05/08/2015 1:00 AM, Barry Edwin Gilmour wrote: xxyyz wrote on 05/08/15 11:02: When a received SM email is displayed with All Headers, the header lines don't wrap. To see them all, you have to click on each line and move the cursor to the right. This is even more noticeable if there are Attachments, as the header lines stop at the left-hand edge of the Attachments box. The lines wrap properly when the e-mail is printed. How do I get the header lines to wrap when the e-mail is displayed? You could try View / Message _S_ource (Ctrl+U) displaying the entire message source, including headers. This scroll-behavior is a lot better than previously, when text simply was curtailed at the edge of the pane, and we could not scroll through to see the text on the latter part of the line. At least now, you can read it, without going to Message-Source. Thank you - a nice, clear explanation! ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Wrapping Header Lines
When a received SM email is displayed with All Headers, the header lines don't wrap. To see them all, you have to click on each line and move the cursor to the right. This is even more noticeable if there are Attachments, as the header lines stop at the left-hand edge of the Attachments box. The lines wrap properly when the e-mail is printed. How do I get the header lines to wrap when the e-mail is displayed? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
SM 2.5 and Router Access
Since updating from SM 2.1.4 to SM 2.5, I cannot access my SMC 7004 router web console. Everything still works fine with IE6 and SM 2.1.4. The problem is described far better than I could do in http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/questions/881885: cdgoldin 0 solutions 4 answers 1 week ago I have a similar problem that began with FF8 (or perhaps FF7). When I try to access my SMC 7400 router, I get the log-on screen (http://192.168.2.1/), but when I enter my log-on information, it goes to http://192.168.2.1:88/login.htm, and displays [html] [head] [meta http-equiv=refresh content='0; url=index.htm'] [end-head] [end-html] (where [ and ] have been substituted for the less-than and greater-than delimiters, and the word end- has been substituted for the oblique end delimiter, so I can actually post the information with this forum software) This is the only source code it shows for the page. Everything still works fine with IE8, so presumably FF8 cannot interpret some of the HTML code between the two screens properly. Modified November 18, 2011 7:29:19 AM PST by cdgoldin ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.5 and Router Access
Thank you for the reply. ctrl+f5 gives a pop-up saying: To display this page, the application must send information that will repeat any action (such as a search or order confirmation) that was performed earlier. Followed by two buttons: ResendCancel Clicking on the Resend button gives the same result. Clicking on Reload does the same thing. Justin Wood (Callek) wrote: Did you try ctrl+f5 to force reload the routers gateway page? as suggested on that support forum? ~Justin Wood (Callek) xxyyz wrote: Since updating from SM 2.1.4 to SM 2.5, I cannot access my SMC 7004 router web console. Everything still works fine with IE6 and SM 2.1.4. The problem is described far better than I could do in http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/questions/881885: cdgoldin 0 solutions 4 answers 1 week ago I have a similar problem that began with FF8 (or perhaps FF7). When I try to access my SMC 7400 router, I get the log-on screen (http://192.168.2.1/), but when I enter my log-on information, it goes to http://192.168.2.1:88/login.htm, and displays [html] [head] [meta http-equiv=refresh content='0; url=index.htm'] [end-head] [end-html] (where [ and ] have been substituted for the less-than and greater-than delimiters, and the word end- has been substituted for the oblique end delimiter, so I can actually post the information with this forum software) This is the only source code it shows for the page. Everything still works fine with IE8, so presumably FF8 cannot interpret some of the HTML code between the two screens properly. Modified November 18, 2011 7:29:19 AM PST by cdgoldin ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: SM 2.5 and Router Access
Rick Merrill wrote: MCBastos wrote: Interviewed by CNN on 27/11/2011 06:28, xxyyz told the world: Since updating from SM 2.1.4 to SM 2.5, I cannot access my SMC 7004 router web console. Everything still works fine with IE6 and SM 2.1.4. I have a similar problem with a Cisco Small Business RV042 router. For some reason, the web console displays totally messed up in Firefox, to the point of being impossible to use. SRWare Iron works fine, though. mmm, I wonder if 'web consoles' are checked against W3C? I don't know how to check the code against W3C - perhaps you could do that? I know very little about HTML5, but the meta refresh part seems to follow HTML5 specifications. Maybe putting a redirect between head tags is no longer acceptable, but I can't find anything in the HTML5 stuff saying this. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Slow SM 2.x News Groups
XP/SP3, all updates; SM 1.1.19/2.0.0/2.0.4, no add-ons apart from standard plugins. Compared to SM 1.x, SM 2.x news groups handling is very slow. It seems to be related to anti-virus? When MS Security Essentials is installed, Task Manager shows SM 2.x and MSSE alternately ramping up to 100% CPU (while the other ramps down) even when all SM is doing is re-checking for new messages and even when there ARE no new messages. For the news.mozilla.org server (others are similar), this process takes (typically) 90 seconds (sometimes several minutes) to check 14 groups. With MSSE uninstalled (replaced by Avira), the process takes around 45 seconds. With SM 1.x, the process takes from 0.1 to 5 seconds, with no observable AV interaction. Do others see this kind of behaviour? Am I doing something wrong? Is there anything I can do to change this? Is this a known problem that may get fixed in future SM updates? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
SM 2.x Newsgroups Behaviour
WinXP Home, SP3, all updates; SM 1.1.19, no add-ons apart from standard plugins (Default, QT, Acrobat, Flash, WMP, DRM). Have installed SM 2.x twice (2.0.0 and 2.0.4), but have uninstalled because of NG behaviour (Browser and Mail are fine). As far as possible, ALL settings in SM 2.x are the same as in SM 1.x. 1. Very slow - seems to be related to anti-virus? When MS Security Essentials is installed, Task Manager shows SM and MSSE alternately ramping up to 100% CPU (while the other ramps down) even when all SM is doing is re-checking for new messages and even when there ARE no new messages. For the news.mozilla.org server (others are similar), this process takes (typically) 90 seconds (sometimes several minutes) to check 14 groups. With MSSE uninstalled (replaced by Avira), the process takes around 45 seconds. With SM 1.x, the process takes from 0.1 to 5 seconds, with no observable AV interaction. 2. Two servers I subscribe to (Albasani and Datemas) require sign-in; in SM 2.x, two sign-ins are required (only one in SM 1.x). 3. The messages in the Status Bar (bottom right) do not compute: 3.1 There are no new messages on the server shows up before the server has been contacted, and goes away while the server is being checked - whether there are new messages or not. 3.2 SM 1.x shows, for example, Checking newsgroup N of 14 on news.mozilla.org for new messages (where N runs from 1 to 14); SM 2.x does not show this. 4. The Progress Bar (bottom right) does not compute; it takes up to 30 seconds for the space for the bar to show up, then after another 15 seconds or so, the moving-to-and-fro partial bar appears. The full bar, growing from left to right, never shows up at all. 5. About 40% of the time, all the lists of newsgroups under each server are expanded when I first click on the Mail Newsgroups icon; I always close them before I exit SM. Is there anything I can do to change any of this? Is any of the above a known problem that may get fixed in future SM updates? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
