Development Builds

ShAk · Post by **ShAk** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:16 pm

"List all blockable Elementes" lists nothing.

SM 1.5a 2005112110
W32 Installer.

ShAk · Post by **ShAk** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 12:05 am

Same Problem with adblock plus Build from 20051123

Mozilla: SM 2005112310 W32 Installer Build.

mcm · Post by **mcm** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 5:03 am

ShAk, have you tried uninstalling Adblock before installing the latest version?

Have you checked under the program directory for Mozilla that "nsAdblock.js" exists under "program\components" and "adblock.js" exists under "program\defaults\pref"?

Also does it work on a new profile? "Tools->Switch Profile->Manage Profiles->Create Profile".

And what new context menu are you referring to? Are you experiencing this users problem.
http://p2.forumforfree.com/enormous-new ... kplus.html

FLAMEX · Post by **FLAMEX** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 7:50 am

Hey.. I'm using the trunk builds.... all thing seems okay.. except some streaming video.. I was browsing Friendster by then, anyway...

here's a screenshot

http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/5503 ... mad2ki.jpg

mcm · Post by **mcm** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:18 am

If you're meaning that the video does not load then see:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=315841

Sasafrass · Post by **Sasafrass** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 4:54 pm

I just installed the latest dev build, & the version number says 1124, instead of 23 like it says on the first page of this thread. Perhaps it's just a typo?

mcm · Post by **mcm** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:16 pm

Apologies about that. I'll also start putting the version in the thread title for people to see.

ShAk · Post by **ShAk** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:23 pm

mcm wrote:ShAk, have you tried uninstalling Adblock before installing the latest version?

Have you checked under the program directory for Mozilla that "nsAdblock.js" exists under "program\components" and "adblock.js" exists under "program\defaults\pref"?

Also does it work on a new profile? "Tools->Switch Profile->Manage Profiles->Create Profile".

And what new context menu are you referring to? Are you experiencing this users problem.
http://p2.forumforfree.com/enormous-new ... kplus.html

I install adblock or all plugins only in the root, not in the user dir.
And i delete all data in the programm dir but the plugins (Blowser plugins like adobe and so).
The components dir will deletet every upgrade procedure.

I will try to uninstall it bevor with the next installation today.

ShAk

ShAk · Post by **ShAk** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:39 pm

Ok, it works.
With the daily build and the new adblcok build the list works.

I deleted the 2 js files too and unneedet files in the user/crome dir.
Ok, lets test it.

ShAk

Spad · Post by **Spad** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:30 pm

The latest builds of both SM and ABP seem to work together now, but I'm not getting any status bar icon/text regardless of the option I select in the Adblock prefs.

Peterg · Post by **Peterg** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:53 pm

mcm,

Since forums.mozillazone.org is having big problems and I cannot reply to your PM, I would just like to advise that the latest dev build 20051130 seems, after some intensive usage, to solve the issue that 20051124 had with excessive memory usage.

Thanks very much.

Peter

mcm · Post by **mcm** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:57 am

Cool, there's probably no point in PM me anyway as others are probably interested in these issues too.

Regarding the javascript tests, sorry to hear the latest builds don't seem to help. Comparing 0.5.10 and the latest build it seems to only take 0.3 sec longer for the total testing time at lest for me. But indeed they are kind of synthetic benchmarks, I suggest using something like Fasterfox and letting me know how you get on.

Peterg · Post by **Peterg** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:23 am

mcm wrote:Cool, there's probably no point in PM me anyway as others are probably interested in these issues too.

Regarding the javascript tests, sorry to hear the latest builds don't seem to help. Comparing 0.5.10 and the latest build it seems to only take 0.3 sec longer for the total testing time. But indeed they are kind of synthetic benchmarks, I suggest using something like Fasterfox and letting me know how you get on.

I had a look at Fasterfox and what they are doing there is not anything different from what I have been doing since 1.0 with pipelining, max-connections-per-server etc. Running the full block of 7 tests at Benchjs:

http://www.24fun.com/downloadcenter/benchjs/ I have, with no extensions installed and no AV running, been able to get a total of 6 seconds. All extensions enabled and AV running (but without Adblock) I still get about 8 seconds which is half the time the average Firefox tester has tested there. With Adblock release and dev builds up to 20051107 I will get 11.x seconds roughly which is still a lot better than the average tester. Throw in 20051130 (which had the high memory usage) or 20051201 (with the greatly improved memory usage) and I am taking 19 seconds for the tests.

All of this increase in time is due to very slow performance on Test 3 which is replaces 300 tiny images as fast as possible. Now I appreciate these tests are synthetic but as I mentioned, when prominent third party firefox builders like mmoy use Benchjs (amongst others) to test the js rendering of their builds I have to take notice.

I know I am repeating much of what we communicated in PMs but I thought it might be interesting for others.

Once again, thank you very much for your most prompt replies to me and the addressing of my concerns.

Peter

mcm · Post by **mcm** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:08 pm

Peterg wrote:I had a look at Fasterfox and what they are doing there is not anything different from what I have been doing since 1.0 with pipelining, max-connections-per-server etc.

I was referring to it's capability to time how long pages take to load so you can make comparisons between versions, not the changes to settings it makes.

Peterg · Post by **Peterg** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:56 pm

mcm wrote:
Peterg wrote:I had a look at Fasterfox and what they are doing there is not anything different from what I have been doing since 1.0 with pipelining, max-connections-per-server etc.
I was referring to it's capability to time how long pages take to load so you can make comparisons between versions, not the changes to settings it makes.

The problem I have with this is that it is very similar to this site:

http://www.numion.com/Stopwatch/

which operates the same way. The problem, as I see it, is that latency and loads on a remote server can vary in a matter of seconds and often it is more a test of one's connectivity at a particular moment in time than the rendering performance of one's browser. Loading from just cache avoids that I assume

Ideally, one would test this with a test suite like mmoy does with his suite of some 60 MB of images and a javascript timer and do comparisons locally. Unfortunately, I am unable to do this.

In any event, I have been very happy with the high memory fix that you did in 20051130 and 20051201 and am most appreciative.

Peter

Adblock Plus

Development Builds

Seamonkey nightlies