Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Other Software › Waterfox 55.0.2: 22 August [Firefox 64-Bit]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Waterfox 55.0.2: 22 August [Firefox 64-Bit] - Page 640

post #6391 of 7341
Yes, Avast is to blame. Thank you!
post #6392 of 7341
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uglydwarf View Post

Yes, Avast is to blame. Thank you!

 

Great to know it's sorted out. I was trying to figure out what was wrong! Avast works fine with Waterfox when it's signed but doesn't like it when it's unsigned.

 

Thanks blackps, I'll keep that in mind for future releases.

    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Yosemite" 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Yosemite" 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6393 of 7341
Yea avast has to many false positives for any software it does not know...

I uninstalled that crap recently just stick with windows defender and malware bytes. It will protect you and not screw things up like avast.
post #6394 of 7341
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAlex View Post

Developed by a final year university student. Started when I was 16 and had a break for a few months last year, but it's become pretty much full time now. Come next March it'll be 4 years that I've been working on Waterfox. It started first as just a straight 64-Bit recompilation of Firefox, but that wasn't good enough. So I've spend so many hours making it possible to compile Firefox with Intel's C++ compiler, which brought fantastic performance improvements to Waterfox. AMD systems benefit as well!

I've seen this pop up a few times, it doesn't affect anything but it's annoying and I'm trying to get rid of it.


That's fair enough. 34.0 bring in a better memory allocator though, so you might want to update for security.


Strange, always get issues with that language pack! I'll look into it smile.gif.



Sorry about that, but I don't mess around with any of the UI stuff. Waterfox is meant to be a seamless alternative to Firefox, but faster.


Thanks for helping, seems this is a prevalent issue that I need to get resolved!


Builds are ready, testing everything and the likes!


Yep, pretty much!


Of course I do! 34.0 is cleaning up a lot of these issues.


Don't worry I saw and am grateful. Fixes aren't always straightforward though!


This is it essentially, thanks for your support.


Don't worry I can understand the frustration users feel! I try my best though.


Hmm, this isn't acceptable. I'll see if I can create some test cases, then get back to you.


Thanks for the support seti, it's greatly appreciated!


Ignoring the silent updater, does the Menu>About updater not do it's job? If so let me know, that shouldn't be happening!


Sorry about that MalcomX! Waterfox source code is actively updated on github, which is why it'll appear out-dated on other sources. It takes way too long keeping them all in sync. Also I appreciate the effort you make to post in English, being multilingual I know it can be very hard, especially with such long posts! But your memory tips have come in handy. I'm testing out tcmalloc and the results are very promising!


That's true, but he does also have a point. It's important that I keep Waterfox secure, after all no-one wants to use a vulnerable program!

Yes that's my hope as well. From estimated calculations (there isn't a way for me to keep track .of active users, because I see that as an invasion of privacy) there are probably about ~200,000 active users? A drop in the ocean compared to the market share of every other browser!


It's almost ready smile.gif .


Unfortunately not yet, as Mozilla haven't supported YouTube HTML5 100% yet, so technically it should be 'for testing only'. Hopefully with each release it becomes more stable though!


Yes, I won't be releasing 34.0.5 because all it does is makes Yahoo! the default search, and I use StartPage either way. I prefer not to make such a huge mess of version numbers and keep it at 34.0 so everyone knows.


I hope they're not against it! It's part of the HTML5 specification. It shouldn't impede, but enhances everyone's browser experience!





To each their own really! Moon Child (developer of Palemoon) is a good developer and he has a different vision for his browser than Waterfox does, so sort of different boats really!




That's fair enough smile.gif



Yep, 34.0 will be release this week for definite!



Sorry about that! Definitely shouldn't be happening, what's your system specifications?


It's better to use Flash for YouTube at the moment anyway, it's HTML5 YouTube isn't fully supported yet on Firefox.


Yep, will be ready this week!

Yep it's almost ready for release. If it works properly, I'll enable 60fps in this build instead of 35.0 wink.gif

 Haha don't worry, it's coming this week!



That's great and all, but I'm not a fan of Cyberfox at all. I like Palemoon. The developer is nice and supportive. Cyberfox on the other hand...
Back in the beginning of 2013 I had a break from Waterfox because I couldn't find a way to balance both my studies and Waterfox. People wanted updates though and I couldn't really find out how to help them, because ICC wasn't working properly with the builds and I just couldn't get anywhere!

Low and behold one day, spam starts making its way in anything that Waterfox was on, disqus, sourceforge etc. And what was this spam? Why of course it was bots showcasing Cyberfox! My sourceforge rating took a tumble as it got hammered by negative votes (by bots). And unsurprisingly cyberfox's positive vote count is maxed out at 2 Billion...yeah..right.
Unfortunately I was too late as the damage had been done, a mass exodus of users from Waterfox to Cyberfox. All I could do was damage control. Report the problems to sourceforge (which they rectified, that should be evidence enough!) and then remove all the spam.

Edit: I'm probably wrong here as it does appear to be compiled with ICC by checking the buildconfig, I'll check through the source code as well. Props to whomever for making the builds so quick. Either way, point still stands above.

Anyway, I don't like causing issues or controversy. Everyone is free to use whatever they like best! That's the point of the web after all (and it's good as well!), but it's very annoying when I get so many people and suspicious posts about Cyberfox all the time. Disqus used to be flooded until I put in a filter to block any mention of Cyberfox. I try to be as neutral as possible and I thought it's time I fill in the gaps. Sorry for the long post and MalcomX this isn't directed at you, more of a PSA.


34.0.5 aren't different codebase wise, Mozilla just set Yahoo! as default on US browsers (doesn't affect Waterfox) so I'll be sticking to 34.0 smile.gif






To these quotes, see my reply above about my opinions on this.


Hi Marc! You can see the compiler flags I use here:
https://github.com/MrAlex94/Waterfox/blob/master/.mozconfig

34.0 is better optimised as I worked around some key issues without using MSVC at all! Download the source and let me know how it goes!
Thats problem i have with palemoon i liked it for everything else but its just not compatible anymore and there not going to add MSE or anything of sort to it so browsing will become worse and worse and there will be some things the browser just wont do any more. Like fact silverlight is going away soon netflix will only work with HTML5/MSE.
post #6395 of 7341
Damn, my 34.0 ended up being at 4GB of RAM usage after a night of browsing. Wasn't this version supposed to reduce the amount? I saw it even peak at 6GB, I've never had numbers anywhere close to it in the past.

EDIT: Been using it for another 2 hours, seems to be stable and not overly excessive right now.
Edited by Panwaffles - 12/11/14 at 4:20am
post #6396 of 7341
bsod.JPG 18k .JPG file

new watefox max system memory cause bsod mad.gif left on night
many issue present PartitionAlloc use you must if not jemalloc
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/blink/+/master/Source/***/PartitionAlloc.h#34
post #6397 of 7341
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcooper21 View Post

Thats problem i have with palemoon i liked it for everything else but its just not compatible anymore and there not going to add MSE or anything of sort to it so browsing will become worse and worse and there will be some things the browser just wont do any more. Like fact silverlight is going away soon netflix will only work with HTML5/MSE.

 

Yeah that's a shame. I'm sure Moonchild has a plan!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Panwaffles View Post

Damn, my 34.0 ended up being at 4GB of RAM usage after a night of browsing. Wasn't this version supposed to reduce the amount? I saw it even peak at 6GB, I've never had numbers anywhere close to it in the past.

EDIT: Been using it for another 2 hours, seems to be stable and not overly excessive right now.

 

Oof! It is supposed to! It works well on about 5 different systems I've managed to test myself. Have you got a comparison to usual? What's your total system memory?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by malcomX View Post

bsod.JPG 18k .JPG file

new watefox max system memory cause bsod mad.gif left on night
many issue present PartitionAlloc use you must if not jemalloc
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/blink/+/master/Source/***/PartitionAlloc.h#34

 

Hmm, not got either. 25GB usage?! Please tell me you've got a system with 64GB of RAM or had like a thousand tabs open?

Also could I have your system specs, I want to see if it's a recurring thing with certain configurations or not since I can't reproduce any leaks or so.

    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Yosemite" 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Yosemite" 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6398 of 7341
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAlex View Post

Oof! It is supposed to! It works well on about 5 different systems I've managed to test myself. Have you got a comparison to usual? What's your total system memory?

I think the average usage after my "normal" day would be around 1.6-2.2GB with the previous versions. My total memory is 8GB. I've been using the test build all day and it's sitting at 1.4GB, so at least now it doesn't seem out of the ordinary. I'm pretty sure what caused the "leak" was a tumblr page/blog that had at least a few hundred MBs of image/video content on it and the RAM usage just kept increasing to a point that it froze my browser, even though I tried closing the tab.
post #6399 of 7341
As for cyberfox or waterfox i can say i find waterfox overall faster on my pc. So take your pick for me waterfox is faster for some reason but gets slower updates slightly so if you always want update right away cyberfox might be better but i find running same version waterfox loads pages faster and benchmarks better.

Both are great honestly.
post #6400 of 7341
Hmm, don't know if it's just me or if there is a problem in the build.
I don't seem to be able to change anything in the options menu.
It open about:preferences but I cannot click on anything at all in there. Not the tabs to the left and not any settings.
Anyone else have this problem? Is it a known problem I have missed info about? Will it be fixed?

Btw. I am running the preview of Waterfox v34.0
Edited by Screemer - 12/12/14 at 4:43am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Other Software
Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Other Software › Waterfox 55.0.2: 22 August [Firefox 64-Bit]