superreview requested: [Bug 372232] text inside <svg> won't render in FF 2. 0.0.2 (it shows in DOM tree). However, it renders inside 2.0.0 and 2.0.0.1. #2
T Rowley (IBM) <tor@acm.org> has asked Robert O'Callahan <roc@ocallahan.org> for superreview: Bug 372232: text inside <svg> won't render in FF 2.0.0.2 (it shows in DOM tree). However, it renders inside 2.0.0 and 2.0.0.1. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=372232 Attachment 261164: compact logic https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=261164&action=edit ...

superreview granted: [Bug 372232] text inside <svg> won't render in FF 2.0. 0.2 (it shows in DOM tree). However, it renders inside 2.0.0 and 2.0.0.1.
Robert O'Callahan <roc@ocallahan.org> has granted T Rowley (IBM) <tor@acm.org>'s request for superreview: Bug 372232: text inside <svg> won't render in FF 2.0.0.2 (it shows in DOM tree). However, it renders inside 2.0.0 and 2.0.0.1. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=372232 Attachment 261164: compact logic https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=261164&action=edit ...

superreview cancelled: [Bug 372232] text inside <svg> won't render in FF 2. 0.0.2 (it shows in DOM tree). However, it renders inside 2.0.0 and 2.0.0.1.
T Rowley (IBM) <tor@acm.org> has cancelled T Rowley (IBM) <tor@acm.org>'s request for superreview: Bug 372232: text inside <svg> won't render in FF 2.0.0.2 (it shows in DOM tree). However, it renders inside 2.0.0 and 2.0.0.1. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=372232 Attachment 260740: add test as suggested https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=260740&action=edit ...

superreview requested: [Bug 375710] Firefox wants to downgrade to 2.0.0. 2 from 2.0.0.3 #2
Benjamin Smedberg [:bs] (bsmedberg@) <benjamin@smedbergs.us> has asked Seth Spitzer [:ss] (away until 4/30) <sspitzer@mozilla.com> for superreview: Bug 375710: Firefox wants to downgrade to 2.0.0.2 from 2.0.0.3 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=375710 Attachment 262259: Normalize to longnames using a dirprovider, and add debugging code, rev. 1.1 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=262259&action=edit ------- Additional Comments from Benjamin Smedberg [:bs] (bsmedberg@) <benjamin@smedbergs.us> Updated with comments, I'm going to comm...

superreview requested: [Bug 375710] Firefox wants to downgrade to 2.0.0. 2 from 2.0.0.3
Benjamin Smedberg [:bs] (bsmedberg@) <benjamin@smedbergs.us> has asked Seth Spitzer [:ss] (away until 4/30) <sspitzer@mozilla.com> for superreview: Bug 375710: Firefox wants to downgrade to 2.0.0.2 from 2.0.0.3 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=375710 Attachment 261972: Normalize to longnames using a dirprovider, and add debugging code, rev. 1 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=261972&action=edit ------- Additional Comments from Benjamin Smedberg [:bs] (bsmedberg@) <benjamin@smedbergs.us> I've cleaned up the last patch a little, a...

Update from 2.0.0.2 to 2.0.0.3
Name: Alexander Wijnhamer Email: arvwijnhameratlycosdotnl Product: Firefox Summary: Update from 2.0.0.2 to 2.0.0.3 Comments: I get a pop-up that: "Firefox was unable to verify the integrity of the incremental update it downloaded, so it is now downloading the complete update package" However the counter is at 4 of 4 kb and has been for 5 minutes now. It doesn't seem to be doing anything. Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2) Gecko/20070219 Firefox/2.0.0.2 ...

2.0.0.2 to version 2.0.0.3
Name: Ed Strait Email: estraitateds-placedotcom Product: Firefox Summary: 2.0.0.2 to version 2.0.0.3 Comments: A week or so ago I was prompted to download and install version 2.0.0.3 as an upgrade from 2.0.0.2. I selected the upgrade and was running the ..3 version since. This morning, out of now where, it downloaded the .2 version and ask to to install which it looked as if I had no choice. After it restarted it was showing that I was running the .2. I then went and checked for any updates and it found the .3 again and installed it. Now I'm back to the .3 again. Any rea...

Upgrading from 2.0.0.3 to 2.0.0.2???
Hi all, My Firefox was upgraded to 2.0.0.3 last week. However, last night I got a pop-up window informing me that I have just received 2.0.0.2 as an update. What is going on? Regards, alex ozgwei@gmail.com wrote: > Hi all, > > My Firefox was upgraded to 2.0.0.3 last week. > > However, last night I got a pop-up window informing me that I have > just received 2.0.0.2 as an update. > > What is going on? > > Regards, > alex > Did you have 2.0.0.2 and updated to 2.0.0.3, and are not getting messages about 2.0.0.2? Lee ...

Update between 2.0.0.2 and 2.0.0.3
Name: John P Wright Email: klemnoctraatyahoodotcom Product: Firefox Summary: Update between 2.0.0.2 and 2.0.0.3 Comments: I have been reminded at regular intervals ( when online) by a pop up indicating that upgrade to 2.0.0.3 is recommended. I have now performed this exercise twice but the reminder pop up keeps re-appearing. Also the 'about Mozilla Firefox' tab persists in indicating that I am running 2.0.0.2 The update appeared in both cases to download and update without error or information on any problem found. Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win...

Upgraded from 2.0.0.3 to 2.0.0.2???
Just downloaded a FireFox prompted update. I was running 2.0.0.3. The downloaded update is 2.0.0.2 ... seems to me that's a step backwards ... is there a reason? On May 16, 1:45 pm, Dean Kay <dean...@earthlink.net> wrote: > Just downloaded a FireFox prompted update. I was running 2.0.0.3. The > downloaded update is 2.0.0.2 ... seems to me that's a step backwards ... > is there a reason? I had a weird instance today, where Firefox locked up (no, that's not weird...lol) on Vista, and so Vista did the "checking for problems" process, and then...

2.0.0.2 to 2.0.0.3 update failure #2
Name: firefox_fan Product: Firefox Summary: 2.0.0.2 to 2.0.0.3 update failure Comments: The new update fails to install other than in admin mode (Windows XP SP2). Now every time I start Firefox (other than admin mode), it tries to update but fails due to lack of privileges. Let me know how to over come this problem. Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2) Gecko/20070219 Firefox/2.0.0.2 ...

updating 2.0.0.1 to 2.0.0.2 is confusing at best.
Name: Raymond Gray Email: rcg123atoptonlinedotnet Product: Firefox Summary: updating 2.0.0.1 to 2.0.0.2 is confusing at best. Comments: I tried a few times to find the upgrade at the Firefox web site but only found the complete 2.0.0.2 install file. then I used the HELP > Check for Updates and found, downloaded and installed the 2.0.0.2 update. When it was completed, I re-launched firefox and checked the ABOUT, which showed 2.0.0.2 Yet today I got a firefox notice that an update was available; checked ABOUT again and it's back to 2.0.0.1. This does not give me...

superreview requested: [Bug 364692] [Fx 2.0.0.1/1.5.0.9 regression] Can' t view talkbacks on ynet.co.il #2
Jonas Sicking <bugmail@sicking.cc> has asked Johnny Stenback <jst@mozilla.org> for superreview: Bug 364692: [Fx 2.0.0.1/1.5.0.9 regression] Can't view talkbacks on ynet.co.il https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364692 Attachment 250660: Trunk patch https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=250660&action=edit ------- Additional Comments from Jonas Sicking <bugmail@sicking.cc> Btw, I love the new events stuff on trunk. This is the same as the branch patch except that it also makes us not process pending requests when mEnabled is false. Which...

Bug in FF 2.0.0.8 and not in 2.0.0.7
Name: Prem Gurbani Email: gurbaniatgmaildotcom Product: Firefox Summary: Bug in FF 2.0.0.8 and not in 2.0.0.7 Comments: Hi, I seem to find an issue in 2.0.0.8 but not in 2.0.0.7 I have verified this in Linux, Windows and Mac OS. The issue is quite critical. I have some images with imagemaps generated via Ajax. After loading, in 2.0.0.8 these images simply dissapear. 2.0.0.7 worked OK Please let me know if this is something know... I know I haven' provided more detail, I can do so if you are unaware of something like this ("dissapearing images"), and I...