[Tihiy]

This project is finished.

To run Firefox 3 on Win98/Me, install KernelEx 0.3.4 (or later). As simple as is.

This post has been edited by Tihiy: 25 May 2008 - 02:59 PM

[rainyd]

Tihiy, as I understand this is exactly the same patch as the previous one but this time it will be acceptable for our moderators.

This post has been edited by rainyd: 16 April 2008 - 04:37 AM

[thydreamwalker]

using Win98SE (plus all updates to date today) with RP7 & Kex0.3.2a on MitacAvenia lp6613/chempc :500mhz;100mhzBus-128mbRAM;10gb hdd,+1gb&2gb flashusb drives............... ***Will Uberkern "UPSET" WindowsExplorer5.50.4134.100??? <NOTE:***KEX0.3.3b,c,d work wierdly with programs and internet surfin'...just locks up system "Totally-needs to re-boot after using each application or program-*yet no problems with older Kex0.3.2a????"> thanks...thydreamwalker (p.s.:will pray and sleep on tryin' this in mornin later today*

[Analada]

Athlon 3100+
98SE2ME
KernelEx033

Thanks for your hard work, Thihy!

Thought I'd report this even though it's largely negative...

Downloaded latest beta release of FF3. When i tried to install it, got it to unpack, but then it hangs. A few files installed and left in windows\temp. That's all.

Experimented with different paths in KEXVER.INI but it didn't make any difference. Still won't install.

alt+Ctrl+del showed "Setup not responding". Also showed Firefox Setup 3 but with no message.

Anyway, unfortunately couldn't get it installed...Any tips to possibly get past this hurdle, Thihy?

Will try later on an old pentium iii.

[Tihiy]

Quite strange you can't install or unpack it. Adding into [PerApp] of kexver.ini

Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 5.exe=win2000

is enough to install it. WinRAR >3.50 can unpack the installer.
Also note that minimum 0.3.3d is required!

[Analada]

Tihiy, on Apr 16 2008, 08:26 AM, said:

Quite strange you can't install or unpack it. Adding into [PerApp] of kexver.ini

Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 5.exe=win2000

is enough to install it. WinRAR >3.50 can unpack the installer.
Also note that minimum 0.3.3d is required!

Thanks for getting back.

I can unpack it, -- uberkern and kernelex. I was referring to the installer-unpacker of the Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 5.exe program. I was presuming that it unpacks in c:\windows\temp which I think is correct.
Anyway, the firefox setup just hung...

BTW I'm using the latest 033e of kernelex. Anyway, i'll try later using the [perApp] setting you suggested and report back on what happened, hopefully with something positive to report!

Thanks once again for all you great efforts!

[Analada]

Pentium 3 (P866)
98SE2ME
KenelEx033e
Win98Lite

Fantastic!

Installed a treat. Added "Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 5.exe=win2000" (without inverted commas) into [PerApp] of kexver.ini.

So this message comes via FF3! No problems as yet.

I think Thihy has done a tremendous job here and hopefully more people will be encouraged now to give it a try, and so spread the feedback for any needed improvements.

[rainyd]

Analada, on Apr 16 2008, 03:38 PM, said:

BTW I'm using the latest 033e of kernelex. Anyway, i'll try later using the [perApp] setting you suggested and report back on what happened, hopefully with something positive to report!

If you use Tihiy's tip, I'm prety sure that you'll install and run this version successfully (I've tested it yesterday for a couple of hours).

[icefireicefire]

Yay! its back!

[Analada]

icefireicefire, on Apr 16 2008, 09:57 AM, said:

Yay! its back!

Been using it for the past 24 hours on and off. No real troubles. FF3 locked up just once but that could easily have been the browser. It is a beta after all.

Hopefully someone is still looking into the naming issue, if there is one that is. Separate from this forum I'm in touch with some of the FF3 development guys so if i come across any definite positive info I'll flag it up in a new thread here, admin permitting of course.

[cluberti]

Analada, on Apr 17 2008, 11:49 AM, said:

icefireicefire, on Apr 16 2008, 09:57 AM, said:

Yay! its back!

Been using it for the past 24 hours on and off. No real troubles. FF3 locked up just once but that could easily have been the browser. It is a beta after all.

Hopefully someone is still looking into the naming issue, if there is one that is. Separate from this forum I'm in touch with some of the FF3 development guys so if i come across any definite positive info I'll flag it up in a new thread here, admin permitting of course.

Course of action is very good .

[Analada]

cluberti, on Apr 17 2008, 01:34 PM, said:

Analada, on Apr 17 2008, 11:49 AM, said:

icefireicefire, on Apr 16 2008, 09:57 AM, said:

Yay! its back!

Been using it for the past 24 hours on and off. No real troubles. FF3 locked up just once but that could easily have been the browser. It is a beta after all.

Hopefully someone is still looking into the naming issue, if there is one that is. Separate from this forum I'm in touch with some of the FF3 development guys so if i come across any definite positive info I'll flag it up in a new thread here, admin permitting of course.

Course of action is very good .

You can see the feedback to date here, in this Newsgroup if you are interested:

mozilla.support.firefox on server 216.916.97.169 port 119.

Thanks. BTW These are really nice guys, been around in that forum for over 10 years now...Interesting to note how polite they are in addressing differences of opinion...

Cluberti, would you address the "stopped" Firefox 3 thread soon, please; one way or the other. At least everyone would then know where we stood. I sincerely hope common sense will prevail. This is, after all freeware and open source we're talking about. One wonders sometimes...

[Analada]

"An issue similar to this was just addressed in Navigator 9 where a user
wrapped NN 9 into a portable version. There is/was no legal issue
involved .. AND .. NN 9 isn't even open-source."

This is from the above stated Newsgroup by an officially recognised Netscape Champion.

Whilst the permanent blocking of the FF3 thread is one thing, this is another.

THERE IS NO LEGAL ISSUE INVOLVED.

Go visit the entire thread for yourself to check it out.

I guess if anyone is seriously interested in developing FF3 for win98SE this MSFN Forum is probably not the place?

But AFAICT there is no reason for it not to proceed.

[cluberti]

Analada, on Apr 17 2008, 03:42 PM, said:

Cluberti, would you address the "stopped" Firefox 3 thread soon, please; one way or the other. At least everyone would then know where we stood. I sincerely hope common sense will prevail. This is, after all freeware and open source we're talking about. One wonders sometimes...

I plan to. But you need to remember that it's NOT freeware, it's open source (free as in beer). There is a difference, it does have a license, and it should/must be followed (at least here on MSFN we try to follow EULAs regardless of from whom or of what type, closed source or GPL/BSD/open source).

If the FF people (an actual FF dev or a spokesperson) says you can make the binaries portable in this manner, then I don't think there will be any more noise from the mods here about it. Short of that, it's still in limbo. However, we've decided not to take any further actions with regards to this project, until there's word from the Firefox team directly on how they want to address it (if at all - again, this may be perfectly OK).

I'll read up when I get the chance later, as I want to see this newsgroup and perhaps ask some questions.

[Aloha]

One of the problems I have is that Firefox 3 will exit every time I right click on the background of a page. It happens even when I right click just on a blank page. Does anyone have the same problem? And when I open FF3, I find it difficult to move the mouse round and round. After a few minutes it becomes normal again. I still have Firefox 2.0.0.14 on my computer. Is it the cause of the problem?

Edit: changing some words to make it clear.

Edit again: I tried installing FF3 on another drive other than the one having FF2 (Thanks Analada for the hint). The mouse works fine but the right click problem still exists. This is the error message:
[attachment=21792:ff3crash.jpg]
I think I won't use FF3 on Win 98. Anyway, it's not my favourite browser.

This post has been edited by Aloha: 18 April 2008 - 12:04 PM

[Analada]

cluberti, on Apr 17 2008, 05:09 PM, said:

Analada, on Apr 17 2008, 03:42 PM, said:

Cluberti, would you address the "stopped" Firefox 3 thread soon, please; one way or the other. At least everyone would then know where we stood. I sincerely hope common sense will prevail. This is, after all freeware and open source we're talking about. One wonders sometimes...

<snip>If the FF people (an actual FF dev or a spokesperson) says you can make the binaries portable in this manner, then I don't think there will be any more noise from the mods here about it. Short of that, it's still in limbo. However, we've decided not to take any further actions with regards to this project, until there's word from the Firefox team directly on how they want to address it (if at all - again, this may be perfectly OK). <snip>

From the mozilla.support.firefox Newsgroup:

"An issue similar to this was just addressed in Navigator 9 where a user
wrapped NN 9 into a portable version. There is/was no legal issue
involved .. AND .. NN 9 isn't even open-source."

-- Jay Garcia Netscape Champion UFAQ - http://www.UFAQ.org

Also from another person:

"if it's just wrapping a binary from Mozilla, I don't think there's any
problem with calling the browser itself Firefox. Naming the wrapper
may be a stickier issue. I'm not a lawyer, so I won't hazard an
opinion. You might want to read some of the documents linked from
<http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/index.html>. There's
also an e-mail address for trademark questions at the bottom of the
page."

Please see the whole thread at at the Newsgroup server 216.196.97.169 port 119 under "Firefox 3 on win98SE platform".

The naming /might/ be an issue. One experienced guy on that forum made the comment:

"...They [the Mozilla Foundation] may view this as a new Mozilla based product that should have an independent name."

On the other hand the Mozilla Foundation might not. Has anyone asked them? Anyway if it's just a question of naming the wrapper it can probably easily be resolved. As a matter of fact TiHiy always /did/ call the wrapper by another name, i.e. not Firefox; so there probably never was an issue.

Finally, to be perfectly candid with you, I hope that I'm not being a little too innocent here. And that behind all this (perhaps) understandable hesitancy on your part there is not a certain commercial entity which might not wish to see this solution advanced, and thus extend the effective usefulness of an "old" OS (?)

[erpdude8]

Tihiy, on Apr 16 2008, 12:59 AM, said:

In Firefox 3, this DLL is XUL.DLL.
In other programs, it may be called LIBCAIRO-2.DLL or CAIRO.DLL.

In the Seamonkey 2.x alpha nightly builds I'm beta testing, XUL.DLL file is also used there.

[Tihiy]

UberKern 0.2
- Fixed text output (multi-line text could be weird);
- Fixed non-existent glyph matching (some symbols were not displayed);
- Dummed UpdateLayeredWindow (scrolling arrow was not displayed);
- Fixed GetRandomRgn (trunk builds gfx was completely broken - note: they have other problems).

[rainyd]

Great! Thank you very much, Tihiy, for the update!

[Analada]

Tihiy, on Apr 20 2008, 07:20 AM, said:

UberKern 0.2
- Fixed text output (multi-line text could be weird);
- Fixed non-existent glyph matching (some symbols were not displayed);
- Dummed UpdateLayeredWindow (scrolling arrow was not displayed);
- Fixed GetRandomRgn (trunk builds gfx was completely broken - note: they have other problems).

Many thanks TiHiy !