* Don Alexander ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Eric Dorland wrote: > > > >Very odd. Have you tried moving your profile directory out of the way? > >Any extensions installed? > >
You didn't answer my second question, any extension installed (in the profile dir or as a debian package)? > I did one better, I created a new user just for the purpose of testing > firefox, a virgin profile if you will. Still the same, though the > official release from mozilla > > (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050225 > Firefox/1.0.1) > > appears not to have any of these problems. I tried supplanting the > components dir of the broken-firefox content with the offical one but > that seemed not to fix anything. The only real difference between the > two binaries must therefore reside in the compiled libs that reside in > the firefox dir. > > libmozjs.so > libnssckbi.so > libsmime3.so > libssl3.so > libxpistub.so > libnspr4.so > libplc4.so > libsoftokn3.chk > libxpcom_compat.so > libnss3.so > libplds4.so > libsoftokn3.so > libxpcom.so > > ok a bit of supposition I know, but if I knew which lib was responsible > for input editing and history lists I'd put money on that being flawed > in some way. And no, I have not browsed too closely at the source tree, > I was hoping someone else had already had more intimate knowledge than > myself. > > Let me know if this is helping or hindering things? ;) > > Cheers, > > Don. -- Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ G e h! r- y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
