Hi All,
OK this got fixed now with tonight update. I can see some gir1.2-webkit2-
4.0, gir1.2-javascriptcoregtk-4.0, libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37, libjavascriptcoregtk-
4.0-18 updated, but I don't feel checking one by one which is the responsible.
Thanks Kent for answering my previous mails and good luck
Hi Kent and All,
On Fri, 2016-08-26 at 16:01 -0500, Kent West wrote:
>
>
> > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 2:51 AM, Abou Al Montacir
wrote:
> > Hi Kent,
> > Thanks for testing. On my side I have:
> > > > > > > > > > > > # aptitude show epiphany-browserPackage: epiphany-
browserVersi
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 2:51 AM, Abou Al Montacir
wrote:
> Hi Kent,
>
> Thanks for testing. On my side I have:
>
> # aptitude show epiphany-browser
>
> Package: epiphany-browser
>
> Version: 3.20.3-2
>
> State: installed
>
> Automatically installed: no
>
> Priority: optional
>
> Section: gnome
>
Hi Kent,
Thanks for testing. On my side I have:
# aptitude show epiphany-browser
Package: epiphany-browser
Version: 3.20.3-2
State: installed
Automatically installed: no
Priority: optional
Section: gnome
Maintainer: Debian GNOME Maintainers
Architecture: amd64
Uncompressed Size:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 3:56 AM, Abou Al Montacir
wrote:
>
> I'm using epiphany browser fro long time and was generally happy despite
> some missing features.
> However since few weeks it become very slowly and almost non usable.
> Browsing sites like http://ddg.gg became so painful that I start
On 2/7/15, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
>
> For me epiphany 3.14.1 opens up normally under normal user account.
> With root account, I see the following display error.
>
> rajulocal@hogwarts ~/learning % su
> Password:
> root@hogwarts:/home/rajulocal/learning# epiphany
> No protocol specified
>
> **
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Ethan Rosenberg
wrote:
> Dear List -
>
> I installed Epiphany with the package manager and receive a segmentation
> fault message if I try to run from the command line. It will not run at all
> from the desktop. The permissions are 777, and it is owned by me.
>
>
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:04:01 +0100, Andreas Koehler wrote:
> does anybody know what happended with the page-info extension? I cannot
> find it in epiphany-extensions 2.30.2-1 (squeeze).
Hum... yep, it seems missing :-?
Upstream package has indeed that extension bundled:
http://ftp.gnome.org/pub
> Stephen Powell :
> Why did they switch from gecko to webkit anyway? It was working so
> well.
I use Epiphany because they switched to Webkit.
On Ubuntu Lucid, it's working very well, I even use it to play youtube
HTML5 videos.
--
Architecte Informatique chez Blueline/Gulfsat:
Admi
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 15:43:51 -0400 (EDT), Andrew Malcolmson wrote:
>
> To the OP: to workaround the save file bug you're getting, you could
> right click on the file, do 'copy link address', then on the command
> line hit Shift+Insert to paste the URL as the argument to wget. I do
> all my file d
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 10:04:57AM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:22:54 -0400 (EDT), Freeman wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:11:46AM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
> >> ...
> >> I got a new laptop for my birthday a few days ago.
> >> ...
> >
> > O.
> >
> > But you d
On Apr 22, 2010, at 8:04 AM, Stephen Powell wrote:
> It currently has some version of Windows on it, probably XP. But it won't
> for long. I'm going to install Debian on it, of course. Probably Squeeze.
Oh dear! It has Microsoft bits in it. Better run it through an autoclave first
:-)
--
G
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:22:54 -0400 (EDT), Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:11:46AM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
>> ...
>> I got a new laptop for my birthday a few days ago.
>> ...
>
> O.
>
> But you don't say what kind of birthday equipment you received or what you
> installed/are
On 2010-04-21 15:43:51 -0400, Andrew Malcolmson wrote:
> To the OP: to workaround the save file bug you're getting, you could
> right click on the file, do 'copy link address', then on the command
> line hit Shift+Insert to paste the URL as the argument to wget. I do
> all my file downloads that w
On 2010-04-19 21:47:45 -0500, Mark Allums wrote:
> Webkit 2.0 is imminent. Perhaps they are considering moving to it.
> According to various sources, it is the bee's knees.
Webkit-gtk is broken. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34063
I haven't heard that this bug would be fixed in webkit
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Kevin Ross wrote:
[snip]
>> Well, I could be hallucinating, but FYI I tested this by comparing the
>> two Epiphany versions side by side. Version 2.29 was running in a Sid
>> chroot (schroot -p). The new version looked brighter and a wee bit
>> clearer. I first
worse)
Reply-To:
In-Reply-To:
<1391349987.168491.1271772706833.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com>
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:11:46AM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:39:27 -0400 (EDT), Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On 2010-04-20 08:24, Lisi wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 20 April 2010 03:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:51:47 -0400 (EDT), Andrew Malcolmson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Stephen Powell wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:01:41 -0400 (EDT), Andrew Malcolmson wrote:
>>> Couldn't say why they switched, but I find pages in Epiphany 2.29 in
>>> Squeeze look vivid compared
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Stephen Powell wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:01:41 -0400 (EDT), Andrew Malcolmson wrote:
>> Couldn't say why they switched, but I find pages in Epiphany 2.29 in
>> Squeeze look vivid compared with the Gecko version.
>
> I have switched back and forth between epi
On 2010-04-20 17:12, Mark Allums wrote:
On 4/20/2010 4:18 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
[snip]
Even though I'm an official Grumpy Old Man, the know the reasons for
"2.0". It's just that now I know that most of them are screaming piles
of horse manure.
That won't stop them from moving to it.
Be
On 4/20/2010 4:18 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-04-20 10:41, Mark Allums wrote:
On 4/19/2010 11:24 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
On 4/19/2010 10:20 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-04-19 21:47, Mark Allums wrote:
[snip]
Webkit 2.0 is imminent. Perhaps they are considering moving to it.
According to
On 2010-04-20 10:41, Mark Allums wrote:
On 4/19/2010 11:24 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
On 4/19/2010 10:20 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-04-19 21:47, Mark Allums wrote:
[snip]
Webkit 2.0 is imminent. Perhaps they are considering moving to it.
According to various sources, it is the bee's knees.
On 4/19/2010 11:24 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
On 4/19/2010 10:20 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-04-19 21:47, Mark Allums wrote:
[snip]
Webkit 2.0 is imminent. Perhaps they are considering moving to it.
According to various sources, it is the bee's knees.
Beyond crude process separation, what ar
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:39:27 -0400 (EDT), Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 2010-04-20 08:24, Lisi wrote:
>> On Tuesday 20 April 2010 03:21:52 Ron Johnson wrote:
>>> Why do women buy new clothes every year when their existing clothes
>>> are completely functional?
>>
>> A lot of us don't. And I don't fix t
On 2010-04-20 08:24, Lisi wrote:
On Tuesday 20 April 2010 03:21:52 Ron Johnson wrote:
Why do women buy new clothes every year when their existing clothes
are completely functional?
A lot of us don't. And I don't fix things that aren't broken either.
(I _knew_ I'd get an email or two like t
On Tuesday 20 April 2010 03:21:52 Ron Johnson wrote:
> Why do women buy new clothes every year when their existing clothes
> are completely functional?
A lot of us don't. And I don't fix things that aren't broken either.
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
w
On 4/19/2010 10:20 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-04-19 21:47, Mark Allums wrote:
[snip]
Webkit 2.0 is imminent. Perhaps they are considering moving to it.
According to various sources, it is the bee's knees.
Beyond crude process separation, what are it's benefits over v1?
I don't know.
On 2010-04-19 21:47, Mark Allums wrote:
[snip]
Webkit 2.0 is imminent. Perhaps they are considering moving to it.
According to various sources, it is the bee's knees.
Beyond crude process separation, what are it's benefits over v1?
--
Dissent is patriotic, remember?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, e
On 4/19/2010 9:46 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
On 4/19/2010 9:00 PM, Stephen Powell wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:01:41 -0400 (EDT), Andrew Malcolmson wrote:
Couldn't say why they switched, but I find pages in Epiphany 2.29 in
Squeeze look vivid compared with the Gecko version.
I have switched back
On 4/19/2010 7:53 PM, Stephen Powell wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:59:29 -0400 (EDT), Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-04-17 21:32, Stephen Powell wrote:
Why did they switch from gecko to webkit anyway? It was working so well.
I still use it in Lenny. But not in Squeeze. Not anymore.
http://en.
On 4/19/2010 9:00 PM, Stephen Powell wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:01:41 -0400 (EDT), Andrew Malcolmson wrote:
Couldn't say why they switched, but I find pages in Epiphany 2.29 in
Squeeze look vivid compared with the Gecko version.
I have switched back and forth between epiphany and iceweasel
On 2010-04-19 20:40, Stephen Powell wrote:
[snip]
Hmm. Well, if they were going to design a brand new browser from scratch
today, you make a good case for webkit. But they already had a browser
that was working well with gecko. Why switch now? It's a lot of pain
for very little gain, it seem
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:01:41 -0400 (EDT), Andrew Malcolmson wrote:
> Couldn't say why they switched, but I find pages in Epiphany 2.29 in
> Squeeze look vivid compared with the Gecko version.
I have switched back and forth between epiphany and iceweasel several
times, on the same computer and moni
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:25:02 -0400 (EDT), Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 2010-04-19 19:53, Stephen Powell wrote:
>> Maybe I'm slow, Ron, but I don't follow you. The above link appears to
>> give the origins of webkit, but I didn't see anything there about why
>> epiphany-browser decided to switch from ge
On 2010-04-19 19:53, Stephen Powell wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:59:29 -0400 (EDT), Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-04-17 21:32, Stephen Powell wrote:
Why did they switch from gecko to webkit anyway? It was working so well.
I still use it in Lenny. But not in Squeeze. Not anymore.
http://en.wik
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Stephen Powell wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:59:29 -0400 (EDT), Ron Johnson wrote:
>> On 2010-04-17 21:32, Stephen Powell wrote:
>>>
>>> Why did they switch from gecko to webkit anyway? It was working so well.
>>> I still use it in Lenny. But not in Squeeze. N
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:59:29 -0400 (EDT), Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 2010-04-17 21:32, Stephen Powell wrote:
>>
>> Why did they switch from gecko to webkit anyway? It was working so well.
>> I still use it in Lenny. But not in Squeeze. Not anymore.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebKit#Origins
On Sat, 2010-04-17 at 22:32 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:25:11 -0400 (EDT), Alan Ianson wrote:
> >
> > I've noticed the same things. I've stuck with epiphany because it worked
> > so well for so long but there are times recently when I need to use
> > iceweasel. I think it
On 2010-04-17 21:32, Stephen Powell wrote:
[snip]
Why did they switch from gecko to webkit anyway? It was working so well.
I still use it in Lenny. But not in Squeeze. Not anymore.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebKit#Origins
--
Dissent is patriotic, remember?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:25:11 -0400 (EDT), Alan Ianson wrote:
>
> I've noticed the same things. I've stuck with epiphany because it worked
> so well for so long but there are times recently when I need to use
> iceweasel. I think it's the switch from the gecko backend to webkit that
> broke a lot o
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:16:51 -0400 (EDT), Steve Kemp wrote:
> I think I over-reacted because I'm used to seeing people give
> lists of alleged problems in software, but without enough details to
> allow anybody else to confirm them, or investigate.
> Sometimes you'll get lucky and somebody else wil
On Sat, 2010-04-17 at 13:17 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
> I am continuing to suffer the on-going de-volution of the once-decent
> epiphany browser under Debian Squeeze. First they broke file
> downloading. They still haven't fixed that. I'll bet it's been
> six months or more.
>
> Now I can't
On Sat Apr 17, 2010 at 15:00:15 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
> > "They" probably haven't fixed it since it hasn't been reported as
> > a bug.
>
> As for the download problem, I didn't report a bug because someone else
> got there first: Debian bug report number 563056.
Your message initially d
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 14:31:38 -0400 (EDT), Steve Kemp wrote:
>
> "They" probably haven't fixed it since it hasn't been reported as
> a bug.
As for the download problem, I didn't report a bug because someone else
got there first: Debian bug report number 563056. I just checked back
and it has been
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 19:31:38 +0100
Steve Kemp wrote:
> On Sat Apr 17, 2010 at 13:17:40 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
>
> > I am continuing to suffer the on-going de-volution of the
> > once-decent epiphany browser under Debian Squeeze. First they
>
On Sat Apr 17, 2010 at 13:17:40 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
> I am continuing to suffer the on-going de-volution of the once-decent
> epiphany browser under Debian Squeeze. First they broke file
> downloading. They still haven't fixed that. I'll bet it's been
> six months or more.
"They" pr
You might wanna take a look at Midori, which is also webkit-based. So
far, I tend to like it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4bc9f1b0.9080...@gmail.
On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 11:49 -0400, JoeHill wrote:
> Arthur Barlow wrote:
>
> > I have a fairly recent clean install of Debian "testing" and everything
> > works well. Just one thing I find annoying. Whenever I start up the
> > Epiphany web browser, it by default begins in the "work offline" mod
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 11:49:19 -0400
From: JoeHill
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Epiphany browser always starts up off-line
Message-ID: <20090901114919.7eaec...@teksavvy.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Arthur Barlow wrote:
&g
Arthur Barlow wrote:
> I have a fairly recent clean install of Debian "testing" and everything
> works well. Just one thing I find annoying. Whenever I start up the
> Epiphany web browser, it by default begins in the "work offline" mode.
> There's nothing under preferences that I have found to
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 09:37:15AM -0400, Tony Baldwin wrote:
> sudo aptitude install epiphany
> (yes, I have sudo) and it got and installed
> epiphany epiphany-data
> But whereis epiphany shows
> /usr/lib/epiphany
> only
> and the only epiphany I can find to run is
> epiphany-game
> (much like dig
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 06:37, Tony Baldwin wrote:
> I suppose there are 2 issues here...or more...I'm bad at math.
>
> First, no amount of cache clearing, etc., is allowing me to view my google
> calendar in iceweasel.
> I've tried to view it in lynx, elinks and w3m, all to no avail, as I might
>
>
> So, why doesn't
> aptitude install epiphany
> give me the epiphany web browser?
>
You might try
apt-cache show epiphany-browser
--
Stanley C. Kitching
Human Being
Phoenix, Arizona
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject o
I suppose there are 2 issues here...or more...I'm bad at math.
First, no amount of cache clearing, etc., is allowing me to view my
google calendar in iceweasel.
I've tried to view it in lynx, elinks and w3m, all to no avail, as I
might have expected...
So, I want to install another gui browser
On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 01:28:00PM +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 08:28:00AM +0100, Liam O'Toole wrote:
> > > Any suggestions? Anything I should remove?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Kumar
> >
> > Doesn't epiphany store its user preferences under ~/.gconf? You could
> >
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:28:00 +0530
Kumar Appaiah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 08:28:00AM +0100, Liam O'Toole wrote:
> > > Any suggestions? Anything I should remove?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Kumar
> >
> > Doesn't epiphany store its user preferences under ~/.gconf?
On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 08:28:00AM +0100, Liam O'Toole wrote:
> > Any suggestions? Anything I should remove?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Kumar
>
> Doesn't epiphany store its user preferences under ~/.gconf? You could
> use gconf-editor to reset epiphany's entries.
Well, a removal of .gconf also did
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 12:45:07 +0530
Kumar Appaiah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whenever I start epiphany, it just crashes, and I get the following
> dialog box:
>
>
>
> The application epiphany-br
On 06/11/2007 12:07 AM, Eric d'Alibut wrote:
> On 6/10/07, Ralph Katz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Using cups? Install cups-pdf, then just "print" to printer cups-pdf.
>> Pretty simple. Works for me on etch.
>
> I have resorted to that. Is there a way to pass a proper filename to
> the pdf o
On 6/10/07, Ralph Katz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Using cups? Install cups-pdf, then just "print" to printer cups-pdf.
Pretty simple. Works for me on etch.
I have resorted to that. Is there a way to pass a proper filename to
the pdf output? All I get is ~/PDF/__.pdf
Firefox's print dialog o
On 06/10/2007 06:38 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 16:24:25 -0400, Eric d'Alibut wrote:
>> My epiphany instance (2.14.3-2) appears to offer the option of
>> printing to a pdf, but when that is tried, informs me that such
>> printing is not supported.
>>
>> What do I need to ge
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 16:24:25 -0400, Eric d'Alibut wrote:
>My epiphany instance (2.14.3-2) appears to offer the option of
>printing to a pdf, but when that is tried, informs me that such
>printing is not supported.
>
>What do I need to get that option working?
AFAIK there is no way to get it wo
Am Samstag, 12. Mai 2007 13:04 schrieb Mike Hommey:
> On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 12:27:46PM +0200, Rainer Dorsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote: (...)
>
> > When I copy the xulrunner directory additionally
> > to /mnt/hda1/usr/share/xulrunner epiphany-browser comes up and runs.
> >
> > I am even more sur
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 12:27:46PM +0200, Rainer Dorsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
(...)
> When I copy the xulrunner directory additionally
> to /mnt/hda1/usr/share/xulrunner epiphany-browser comes up and runs.
>
> I am even more surprised about that than about the not working relative link.
>
Am Samstag, 12. Mai 2007 12:11 schrieb Rainer Dorsch:
> Am Samstag, 12. Mai 2007 09:04 schrieb Mike Hommey:
> > On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:01:22PM +0200, Rainer Dorsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
> > > Am Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2007 22:45 schrieb Sven Arvidsson:
> > > > On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 19:18
Am Samstag, 12. Mai 2007 09:04 schrieb Mike Hommey:
> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:01:22PM +0200, Rainer Dorsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2007 22:45 schrieb Sven Arvidsson:
> > > On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 19:18 +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> > > > epiphany-browser comes up, bu
Am Samstag, 12. Mai 2007 00:19 schrieb Sven Arvidsson:
> On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 22:01 +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> > good observation, thanks. I did what you suggested and it looks to me
> > like the problem comes out of libxul. NS_RegistryGetFactory () is calling
> > itself many times before the c
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:01:22PM +0200, Rainer Dorsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2007 22:45 schrieb Sven Arvidsson:
> > On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 19:18 +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> > > epiphany-browser comes up, but then it most likely crashes during
> > > rendering of the
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:01:22PM +0200, Rainer Dorsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2007 22:45 schrieb Sven Arvidsson:
> > On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 19:18 +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> > > epiphany-browser comes up, but then it most likely crashes during
> > > rendering of the
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 22:01 +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> good observation, thanks. I did what you suggested and it looks to me like
> the
> problem comes out of libxul. NS_RegistryGetFactory () is calling itself many
> times before the crash. I see more details, I tried to run with libxul0d-dbg
Am Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2007 22:45 schrieb Sven Arvidsson:
> On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 19:18 +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> > epiphany-browser comes up, but then it most likely crashes during
> > rendering of the starting page www.debian.org. I run strace with
> > epiphany, but did not notice a problem.
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 19:18 +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> epiphany-browser comes up, but then it most likely crashes during rendering
> of
> the starting page www.debian.org. I run strace with epiphany, but did not
> notice a problem. For reference this output is at
>
> http://www.alzental-cast
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 20:59:46 -0300, J. Pablo Fernández wrote:
>Hello,
>I am getting this warning message from Epiphany very often:
>
>"Epiphany could not connect to the session message bus. Your default
>settings will not be available."
>
>When I start to get it I get it for the whole session.
Hi.
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe, 01.11.2006 17:54:
> On 11/1/06, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Turn off caching.
>
> I can't find any option to do that.
Enter „about:config“ into your address bar and filter with „cache“;
„browser.cache.disk.enable“ seems to be what you’re searching for.
R
On 11/1/06, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Turn off caching.
I can't find any option to do that.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 11/1/06, Gnu_Raiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Tshepang Lekhonkhobe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've been running Epiphany-browser on Fluxbox on my minimal 128MB PIII
>system for 6 days non-stop. Virtual memory usage now stands at 220MB
>according to top.
It seems that most Mozilla based bro
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
>I've been running Epiphany-browser on Fluxbox on my minimal 128MB PIII
>system for 6 days non-stop. Virtual memory usage now stands at 220MB
>according to top.
Turn off caching.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubs
"Tshepang Lekhonkhobe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've been running Epiphany-browser on Fluxbox on my minimal 128MB PIII
>system for 6 days non-stop. Virtual memory usage now stands at 220MB
>according to top.
It seems that most Mozilla based browsers like Epiphany, Firefox use lots of
memory.
On Wed, 17 May 2006 09:44:02 +0700
Surachai Locharoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whenever I close epiphany-browser, There is a error box to warn about
> error and request me to report to author. Why it happen?
>
> Kan
Because you're not using Firefox ;-)
Seriously though, what does the error
On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 00:20:10 +0200, Justin Guerin wrote:
>> > Does the preview in Mozilla look OK?
>>
>> The mozilla preview looks ok!
>>
> Wish I knew what was different between the preview and the output to the
> print queue...
>
>> > If the file looks OK, what happens when you print it? If it
On Friday 10 September 2004 13:13, Chrissie wrote:
> On 2004-09-06, Justin Guerin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sunday 05 September 2004 14:41, Chrissie wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> If i print a website, the text is scrambled. I only see squares.
> >> The graphics of the website is printed ok
> >>
On 2004-09-06, Justin Guerin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 05 September 2004 14:41, Chrissie wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> If i print a website, the text is scrambled. I only see squares.
>> The graphics of the website is printed ok
>> Printing from Konqueror is ok. I have made a photo to illustrate
On Sunday 05 September 2004 14:41, Chrissie wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I recently installed pnm2ppa, the driver for my HP DJ 710C. Everything
> works fine so far, i can print text using
> cat sometextfile | e2lpr -Pbw and postscript files using
> lpr file.ps. Yes, i set up lpr, not cups because it fits best
Thanks to all that responded.
Appreciated.
Regards,
David.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lance Simmons wrote:
* Michael Bona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [031020 17:18]:
Try apt-cache search epiphany (or whatever). Shows all packages with
epiphany in the name.
"apt-cache search " also shows all packages with in
in the brief description and in the complete description. "apt-cache
search br
* Michael Bona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [031020 17:18]:
>
> Try apt-cache search epiphany (or whatever). Shows all packages with
> epiphany in the name.
"apt-cache search " also shows all packages with in
in the brief description and in the complete description. "apt-cache
search browser", for exam
David Palmer. wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:00:59 -0600
> "Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 10:22:34PM +0800, David Palmer wrote:
>> >
>> > What risk do I run with apt-get remove epiphany (the game), without
>> > disturbing epiphany the browser (with bo
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 13:23:30 -0400
David Z Maze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > What risk do I run with apt-get remove epiphany (the game), without
> > disturbing epiphany the browser (with bookmarks).
>
> What I'd suggest you do:
>
> (0) Install apti
On (21/10/03 05:22), David Palmer. wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:00:59 -0600
> "Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 10:22:34PM +0800, David Palmer wrote:
> > >
> > > What risk do I run with apt-get remove epiphany (the game), without
> > > disturbing epiph
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:00:59 -0600
"Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 10:22:34PM +0800, David Palmer wrote:
> >
> > What risk do I run with apt-get remove epiphany (the game), without
> > disturbing epiphany the browser (with bookmarks).
>
> Since the browser
David Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What risk do I run with apt-get remove epiphany (the game), without
> disturbing epiphany the browser (with bookmarks).
What I'd suggest you do:
(0) Install aptitude, if you haven't yet.
(1) Start aptitude.
(2) Press '/', type "ephiphany" in the box t
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 10:22:34PM +0800, David Palmer wrote:
>
> What risk do I run with apt-get remove epiphany (the game), without
> disturbing epiphany the browser (with bookmarks).
Since the browser package is called "epiphany-browser" I would say
little-to-none.
--
Jamin W. Collins
Linux
92 matches
Mail list logo
