Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 05:28:33PM +0200, Sebastien Marie wrote: > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:21:25PM +0900, Bryan Linton wrote: > > On 2017-04-29 15:48:51, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > > > > > Chris Bennett wrote on Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 07:10:05AM -0500: > > > > > >> Firefox

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

Just wanted to mention the firefox extension umatrix. I find it much better than noscript for controlling page speed. That said I only *notice* slowness compared to like xombrero on older machines.

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

> On Thu, 8 Sep 2016 17:53:24 +0200 > "Jens A. Griepentrog" wrote: > ... > I have been using OpenBSD for six years on my desktop > without any problems. Everything works fine on my > ASUS P7F-M WS mainboard including its audio daughterboard; > also graphics hardware

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

Am 30.04.2017 00:07 schrieb Mihai Popescu: Do you know a method like this to disable kernel panic screen, too? Also something for hidding the dmesg scroll on boot will be nice. Maybe something to show a nice picture with a text like "sit back and relax while your OS is loading ..." - the last

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Sat, April 29, 2017 6:07 pm, Mihai Popescu wrote: > Do not forget to use (activate) uBlock Origin too, there is in Add-Ons > for Firefox. > > Teh guy with 134 opened tabs at once in firefox was funny. How many > monitors is firefox windows spreading across? > > Thanks. > It's tabs. You only

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 12:07 AM, Mihai Popescu wrote: > Do you know a method like this to disable kernel panic screen, too? > Also something for hidding the dmesg scroll on boot will be nice. > > Maybe something to show a nice picture with a text like "sit back and > relax

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

Do not forget to use (activate) uBlock Origin too, there is in Add-Ons for Firefox. And one more thing, from this thread: > If you want to disable core dump for a program, you could (should ?) > configure your RLIMIT_CORE to 0. > > $ ulimit -c 0 > $ firefox > > Ah, yes. That's a much better

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On 2017-04-29 17:28:33, Sebastien Marie wrote: > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:21:25PM +0900, Bryan Linton wrote: > > > > One hack I've done when I don't care about actually getting or > > using a corefile from large programs is to do the following: > > > > # rm

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:21:25PM +0900, Bryan Linton wrote: > On 2017-04-29 15:48:51, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > > > Chris Bennett wrote on Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 07:10:05AM -0500: > > > >> Firefox [...] takes a long period to actually finish crashing > > > > It dumps core.

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

Hi, On 28/04/2017 14:18, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: which is properly coded, very stable and secure, but (when it comes to a "normal" user or even an experienced sysadmin) utterly useless when it comes to doing the stuff everyone does these days -- browsing the net. Yes, I know many of you

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On 2017-04-29 15:48:51, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > Chris Bennett wrote on Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 07:10:05AM -0500: > >> Firefox [...] takes a long period to actually finish crashing > > It dumps core. That takes a long time because firefox tends > to waste huge amounts of memory

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

Hi Chris, Chris Bennett wrote on Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 07:10:05AM -0500: > Firefox [...] takes a long period to actually finish crashing It dumps core. That takes a long time because firefox tends to waste huge amounts of memory, and it's favourite pretext for crashing is ENOMEM, see errno(2),

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

Hi Jyri, would you mind sharing a dmesg with us, or at least any sort of general info in what environment you're experiencing these kinds of problems? Of course running a current chrome on an old iMac won't yield the same performance as running chrome on a laptop fresh out of the box, but the OS

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 04:32:49PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 28/04/17(Fri) 16:20, Anders Andersson wrote: > > [...] > > From what I read, it seems as if the problems are mostly from when you > > try websites which are heavy on javascript. > > If javascript was the problem others OSes

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On 04/28/17 09:43, trondd wrote: On Fri, April 28, 2017 10:17 am, Fred wrote: I have to agree with David - here I used chrome on a daily basis with a minimum of two chrome windows with at least 4 tabs in each I don't want to get into the conversation, but I thought this was funny. I am a

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On 2017-04-28 16:09, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: Have you properly configured your user? As far as I know, raising the ulimit and being in the staff class can not possibly be the solution. Ulimit has to be raised unless one wants the browser(s) to constantly crash due to memory exhaustion, and

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

Here are the details, from my everyday setup with no problems in browsing. I use Firefox, Chromium gives me constant core files and looks chopped at interface. I tested many sites, Falsebook and Youtube included, no problems yet. OpenBSD 6.1 (GENERIC.MP) #17: Thu Mar 30 21:37:57 MDT 2017

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

Whats your hardware? Are you running openbsd 6.1? I had alot of problems with my firefox and chrome a couple of months ago. (OpenBSD 6.0). I couldnt play videos on firefox. Not even youtube. I could play videos on iridium but i had to clear browsing data etc almost every day otherwise the browser

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On 04/28/17 09:00, David Coppa wrote: On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: Dear everyone, With the above disclaimer said, and still knowing the potential for a war, I must say this: There is not much hope for OpenBSD to ever become a desktop (or

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Fri, April 28, 2017 10:17 am, Fred wrote: > I have to agree with David - here I used chrome on a daily basis with a > minimum of two chrome windows with at least 4 tabs in each I don't want to get into the conversation, but I thought this was funny. I am a heavy tabs user. I currently have

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

"Jyri Hovila [iki.fi]" writes: > Exactly. Which is why I'm asking -- not expecting anyone to give a full > answer. I want to know what people who have been working on this issue > have already found out. I assume there is at least some basic > understanding of why browsers

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Fri, 28 Apr 2017, Anders Andersson wrote: > From what I read, it seems as if the problems are mostly from when you > try websites which are heavy on javascript. Let me butt in as a grumpy > not-so-old man and point out that there's nothing even remotely > "secure by

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On 28/04/17(Fri) 16:20, Anders Andersson wrote: > [...] > From what I read, it seems as if the problems are mostly from when you > try websites which are heavy on javascript. If javascript was the problem others OSes would suffer as well. > Let me

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: > >> Have you properly configured your user? > > As far as I know, raising the ulimit and being in the staff class can > not possibly be the solution. Ulimit has to be raised unless one wants > the browser(s) to

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Karel Gardas wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] > wrote: >>> You ask for peace but your whole post is highly explosive. >> >> No, it is not. >> >> I'm just expressing myself directly -- as us

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On 04/28/17 14:00, David Coppa wrote: On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: Dear everyone, With the above disclaimer said, and still knowing the potential for a war, I must say this: There is not much hope for OpenBSD to ever become a desktop (or

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: >> You ask for peace but your whole post is highly explosive. > > No, it is not. > > I'm just expressing myself directly -- as us aspergers often do. > Then as a real asperger come with hard evidence supporting your

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On 28/04/17(Fri) 14:03, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: > > If you can answer this question you've already done 50% of the work. > > Exactly. Which is why I'm asking -- not expecting anyone to give a full > answer. I want to know what people who have been working on this issue > have already found

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

> Have you properly configured your user? As far as I know, raising the ulimit and being in the staff class can not possibly be the solution. Ulimit has to be raised unless one wants the browser(s) to constantly crash due to memory exhaustion, and that I havedone. But really: adding a normal

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

> If you can answer this question you've already done 50% of the work. Exactly. Which is why I'm asking -- not expecting anyone to give a full answer. I want to know what people who have been working on this issue have already found out. I assume there is at least some basic understanding of why

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

> You ask for peace but your whole post is highly explosive. No, it is not. I'm just expressing myself directly -- as us aspergers often do. Should I keep smiling after every sentence and how would that change the actual fact, that using a web browser in OpenBSD is and has for a very long time

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: > Dear everyone, > With the above disclaimer said, and still knowing the potential for a > war, I must say this: There is not much hope for OpenBSD to ever become > a desktop (or laptop) OS if the nightmarish

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On 28/04/17(Fri) 12:18, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: > [...] > Now, can anyone provide a relatively clear description of what it is > that make the same browsers (Firefox, Seamonkey, Chrome) that work > fine in Linux, Windows and OS X so ridiculously slow when they are > being run on OpenBSD? If

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

For testing I would also recommend you to make sure both OSes provide browser with the same amount of RAM (i.e. unlimit your limits in /etc/login.conf) and I would also browse ports email list probably and search for patch limiting amount of RAM which is allocated for firefox javascript engine. I

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

I use OpenBSD because it reliably breaks my code when I have done something wrong. Browsers, meanwhile, seem to do a lot of things wrong (look at what is needed to compile the things, or how people compare browser functionality). I suspect you would be better off getting a $100..$200 chromebook

Re: Etnernal & infernal browser woes

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Jyri Hovila [iki.fi] wrote: > Now, can anyone provide a relatively clear description of what it is > that make the same browsers (Firefox, Seamonkey, Chrome) that work > fine in Linux, Windows and OS X so ridiculously slow when they are > being

Etnernal & infernal browser woes

Dear everyone, I'm well aware of the bashing potential this message contains, and kindly ask you not to resort to the usual "offence is the best defence" strategy. I've been in the scene for a long time (you'll find my first e-mails to this list almost two decades ago) and I'm well aware of how