[Techtalk] Moz-a-browser II

[Andrew]

	Nils,

	Your explaination was very helpful. It seem sticking with Moz may be
the way to go, iritating as it is. Is Netscape less prone to flash &
Java problems?
Have you tried Phoenix?
	It is especially nice to know the "usual" X failure symptoms. I now
have more faith in my hardware. 

	Better informed again, Thank You,
		Andrew

On 11 Nov 2002 18:21:51 +0100
Nils Philippsen <nils at wombat.dialup.fht-esslingen.de> wrote:

> [ Cc:ing techtalk as it seems this reply belongs there as well ]
> 
> On Mon, 2002-11-11 at 17:53, Andrew wrote:
> > Hello Nils,
> > 
> > 	I am using both plug-ins Java and Flash. It seem they are
> > 	everywhere.
> 
> Yes it does, indeed.
> 
> > The reoccuring problem is screen redraw, where in the browser
> > freezes an
> 
> That's a normal manifestation of X programs hanging.
> 
> > if i drag a icon over the browser it repeats it self in a pretty
> > pattern, nice to look at but not good for getting things done. Do
> > you know of a fix?
> 
> For the moment, none except de-installing the Flash and/or Java
> plugins. Java plugins have gotten better lately from my experience, so
> you might want to start with disabling Flash. Unfortunately, both are
> binary-only/proprietary plugins where only the manufacturer can really
> help you with problems.
> 
> You could also use Galeon and Mozilla as a combo where you'd install
> the plugins in the app's plugin directory _beneath your home_
> (~/.mozilla or~/.galeon -- you have to do that as both use the
> /usr/lib/mozilla/plguins directory for system-wide installation). Then
> use the "disabled" browser for normal surfing and the "enabled" one on
> pages that you need/want to have with Flash/Java.
> 
> > 	Baring a simple correction, I would like to clean out the
> > 	browsers and
> > start fresh, without affecting Konquror, I use Konq to do
> > system/file moving.
> 
> I don't think that this is necessary.
> 
> > 	In furtherance of my Linux education I could use a clarification
> > 	on
> > Jen's statement, about another situation but it applies here.
> > >"Then you will need to read the INSTALL file and find the script
> > >(usually a make script similar to 'make clean') that gets read of
> > >the detritus of failed installation attempts, run it,
> > 		Question; is it likely each build (of foo) will have its own
> > "cleaning script or should I just issue the command "make clean"
> > while in that directory?
> 
> Most software (using the make command) has a "make clean" rule, which
> usually cleans the build tree of all the built object files. Sometimes
> it also has "make realclean" or (in the case of the Linux kernel)
> "make mrproper" rules which e.g. remove built dependencies as well.
> Typing"make clean" shouldn't hurt unless the package maintainer is
> malevolent to you ;-) -- if this rule is missing, you will see an
> error message hurting no one.
> 
> Nils
> -- 
> Nils Philippsen / Berliner Straße 39 / D-71229 Leonberg //
> +49.7152.209647
>    nils at wombat.dialup.fht-esslingen.de / nils at redhat.de /
>    nils at lisas.de PGP fingerprint:  C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8
>    9B65 6951 3011
>        Ever noticed that common sense isn't really all that common?
>