Firefox 0.9 compatible Themes

fourwood · Post by **fourwood** » June 9th, 2004, 5:08 pm

Does anyone know if the Plastifox theme has or is going to be updated? That's the one I miss the most.

gdeka · Post by **gdeka** » June 9th, 2004, 8:57 pm

has anyone been able to install themes on linux, i cant get it to work, i have tried texturizers install page and that did not work

daihard · Post by **daihard** » June 9th, 2004, 9:10 pm

gdeka wrote:has anyone been able to install themes on linux, i cant get it to work, i have tried texturizers install page and that did not work

Yes, I have been able to install a couple of themes on my Linux branch build. Which theme(s) are you having trouble installing?

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040609 Firefox/0.8.0+ (daihard: XFT+GTK2; opt. for P4/SSE-2)

gdeka · Post by **gdeka** » June 9th, 2004, 9:41 pm

charamel (get the experimental build from the charamel site) - i cant get it to install - drag and drop does not work and neither does using the install on texturizers site

daihard · Post by **daihard** » June 9th, 2004, 10:12 pm

gdeka wrote:charamel (get the experimental build from the charamel site) - i cant get it to install - drag and drop does not work and neither does using the install on texturizers site

Is it Charamel 1.0 that was updated in February 2004? If so, it's probably not going to work with Fx 0.9. If you're using a different version, please provide me with the link here so I can try it.

gdeka · Post by **gdeka** » June 9th, 2004, 10:26 pm

no its not - get it from here http://members.shaw.ca/lucx/ or direct link http://members.shaw.ca/lucx/charamel-br ... mental.jar

daihard · Post by **daihard** » June 9th, 2004, 10:41 pm

gdeka wrote:no its not - get it from here http://members.shaw.ca/lucx/ or direct link http://members.shaw.ca/lucx/charamel-br ... mental.jar

I've been able to install it using the texturizer's install page. Which branch build are you using? Would you care to copy and paste your UA string from Help/About Firefox here? I know that the theme installer was broken until the day before yesterday (2004-06-07).

gdeka · Post by **gdeka** » June 9th, 2004, 10:49 pm

im using 0.9 rc -- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608 Firefox/0.8.0+

daihard · Post by **daihard** » June 9th, 2004, 10:59 pm

gdeka wrote:im using 0.9 rc -- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608 Firefox/0.8.0+

Chances are, something related to the theme installer was fixed between yesterday and today. Which Linux distro are you using? If it supports XFT and GTK2, and if your computer is a P4 machine, you can try my branch (2004-06-09) build to see if installing Caramel works there. You can grab my builds from here.

gdeka · Post by **gdeka** » June 9th, 2004, 11:03 pm

debian stable - i got a amd k7

daihard · Post by **daihard** » June 9th, 2004, 11:15 pm

gdeka wrote:debian stable - i got a amd k7

I quickly looked through the "Firefox Bugs" forum. Looks like a lot of bugs reported with 0.9 RC have already been fixed. Is this the same RC build that you are using?

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/ ... ses/0.9rc/

The files are dated 2004-05-09, which leaves me wondering if they released a newer version today?

fishbert · Post by **fishbert** » June 10th, 2004, 12:13 am

daihard wrote:
gdeka wrote:debian stable - i got a amd k7

I quickly looked through the "Firefox Bugs" forum. Looks like a lot of bugs reported with 0.9 RC have already been fixed. Is this the same RC build that you are using?

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/ ... ses/0.9rc/

The files are dated 2004-05-09, which leaves me wondering if they released a newer version today?

There may be confusion when people go marking bugs as 'fixed' in threads associated with a specific build. Is it 'fixed' in the build the thread is about? Or is it a bug in the build the thread it about, but has been fixed in the mean time? If the bug in question falls under the latter category, it's probably a good idea for people to say "fixed for tomorrow's build" or "fixed for the next RC" ... something like that. Most people don't, though.

[Unknown] · Post by **[Unknown]** » June 10th, 2004, 12:21 am

Most people don't say anything because it almost always means "fixed for tommorow's build aka and/or the next release."

If the comment that says it was checked in was made on 2004, of course it wasn't fixed in a release in/around 2003 :P.

-[Unknown]

fishbert · Post by **fishbert** » June 10th, 2004, 12:46 am

Well, it could...
They way some people say it (and where -- especially in Peter(6)'s or Ale's nightly build threads), it could easily be taken to mean "hey, you mistakenly listed this bug as being present in this build, but it's really fixed." And those kinds of comments occur all the time in those threads as well.

Technically, in a forum topic specifically about a particular build, even if a bug has been marked 'fixed' in bugzilla, the bug is not 'fixed' in that topic unless it is actually 'fixed' (as in: not an issue) in that build.

pcdingo · Post by **pcdingo** » June 10th, 2004, 6:15 am

grey moderm seems not work with RC1, i can install it but after i don't see the theme in theme manager.