Oh and I forgot to mention the obviously retarded "click here 17 times to accept this certificate" thing. I know of no about:config setting to turn that off.
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 01:58:25PM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote: > I disagree. > > We should have both versions available in packages; preferably both > would work on the same system too. > > I have been playing with FF3 and I'd have to say that minus the speedup > overall the browser took a step backwards. What particularly ticked me > off was: > * outlook like popup in the right-hand corner to notify that a > download completed (now there is some information one *has* to see) > Not only is that beyond irritating there is no obvious way to turn > off. I had to turn it off in about:config which brings me to the > second irritant. > > I'd like to therefore set > browser.download.manager.showAlertOnComplete = false > > * When one enter about:config a warning shows up that says: "if you > click here you can void your warranty. What warranty??? When I > launched the browser the first time I already had to accept a license > that explicitly says "no warranty"; wtf? > > To fix that we can set these by default: > general.warnOnAboutConfig = false > browser.EULA.3.accepted = true > > * While trying to make FF3 a better browser for OpenBSD we might as well > set plugin.default_plugin_disabled = false to remove the annoying > message that scrolls down your screen at snails pace asking if you > want to install a friggin non-existing plug-in. > > * I'd also like to get the old icons back. The new ones are not only > ugly they are fuzzy as well. I also liked them better before when > they were the right size. The new version the icons are basically > touching the frame they are in (like X on tabs) > > These are only a few things that I noticed in the new browser. I have > more but I'd like to get the debate going... > > /marco > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 01:54:42PM -0400, Brad wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 July 2008 13:42:19 Brandon Mercer wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > On 2008/07/15 13:07, Mike Erdely wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Edd wrote: > > > >> > Whats the status of firefox 3 on OpenBSD? > > > >> > > > > >> > I have been using a package (given to me from viq, which i assume is > > > >> > made from this patch), which has crashed once in about 3 days. Thats > > > >> > about normal for firefox in my experience. > > > >> > > > > >> > I do notice a fair speedup. > > > >> > > > >> Like others, I see a fair speed up and I have only seen crashes with > > > >> self-signed certificates. > > > > > > > > From some of the feedback I've heard, it doesn't entirely ready to > > > > replace 2.x yet. I also note that upstream are not yet suggesting it > > > > as an automatic upgrade for 2.x users. > > > > > > > > I wouldn't oppose having both versions in tree, but wouldn't be too > > > > happy having 3.0 as the only Firefox version for the coming release. > > > > > > Agreed, the proper course should be to have both until the time comes > > > to do away with 2.x > > > Brandon > > > > IMO this is not realistic. We either stick with 2.x or go with 3.x, but not > > create a mess with both. > > > > -- > > This message has been scanned for viruses and > > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > > believed to be clean. > > >
