Originally Posted by verticalgr
Yesterday, there was a post here saying clearly that all these DLL missing exist. The post was NOT offending to anyone, didn't use any false language and was explaining a few things from a technical perspective.
I am surprised that this post disappeared. It was not mine, but as a software developer myself, I found interesting what this forum member was writing. I would like to know, under what forum rule that post was deleted because it was not trolling, it was not offending. Just explaining a few things about WF18 compilation.
I would like a word from moderators about their action and a word from Mr. Alex regarding the content of this post, if it is real or not. The forums are here for communicating and not deleting posts that there's nothing wrong with. I am administrator in 2 forums and I've never seen anything like that, never. It's just a computer program people. If democracy and freedom of speech is to be gone for a computer program, then please, let us know.
The post your referring to was made by me and I came back last nite to check to see if there were any replies to my questions to find the post removed. I was quite busy last nite with some work and did not have time to get back to it in fact am just on my way out to work this morning as well.
I was going to pm an administrator to find out why the post I made got removed just for pointing out a few things in the way the new browsers of the firefox x64 class for version 18 were being made.
All I did was note that HTguard said it was version 18 but upon inspection after install of the browser in the platform.ini which indicates what build of firefox the x64 version is based on was in fact 17.02 not 18 as you see in the platform.ini of Waterfox and Cyberfox. Also in knowing that I checked the Gecko version in peacekeeper for that browser it indicated version 17 as well in the about:config gecko:mstone showing version 17 I thought people should be aware as that is not really version 18 of firefox but built on version 17.
For waterfox it was just a case of having said that the compiler bugs for intel c++ were sloved but the fact was that the build was complied as a stock x64 build of version 18 without the use of the intel C++ compiler. That was the reason people were getting the dll errors when trying to run. If the C++ compiler was used then those dlls would have been linked and in your systems registry by the compiler as they cannot just be added to the appdir folder and work. So the runtimes would then need to be installed on the persons system instead when the program tried to reference them as they don't exist.
All I was saying was that so far Cyberfox was the only one to have been built off firefox version 18 using the c++ compiler having scanned over that build the developer had to do many work arounds to get it to compile. I had the same issues when doing firefox 18 as I compile personal x64 browsers myself of firefox for my personal use and like to check out the methods of others as I am always looking to improve things.
So I was going to ask an administrator why my post was removed I also administer a few sites and I was not given any reason of what it was I did where my post had to be removed. It was just all technical information about the browsers. I am not trying to start any wars or cause problems but I do believe it is right for people to know these things.
I do apologize for this post being a bit more hasty and not as detailed as the other but I do need to get off to work I am already a bit late.