therube wrote:> Why install a not working extension?
Because it can be done?
No, because bad things can happen installing not compatible extensions, like that:
viewtopic.php?p=11030927#p11030927
NoSquint or equivalent available yet?
-
Mc.
- Guest
Re: NoSquint or equivalent available yet?
No, because bad things can happen installing not compatible extensions, like that:
viewtopic.php?p=11030927#p11030927
-
R.N. Folsom
- Posts: 583
- Joined: July 24th, 2004, 4:52 pm
Re: NoSquint or equivalent available yet?
There appears to be no consensus in this thread, together with the related threads to which various contributors in this thread have linked, about how to get at least some of NoSquint's benefits (which I described in http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?p=11414969#p11414969) into SM 2.x (x>0).
There seem to be at least two proposals:
1) A modified version of NoSquint 1.93.2.1 (Philip Chee's port of a Firefox NoSquint to SeaMonkey 2.0.14 and earlier) installed as an extension into SM 2.x (x>0).
2) A modified version of a Firefox NoSquint extension installed into SM 2.x (x>0).
And there may be other alternatives, in this thread or in related threads, that I didn't see and/or didn't understand.
Part of the problem may be that alternative NoSquint workaround installations are discussed in discontinuous sets of messages.
But I'm especially puzzled about the loss of NoSquint's benefits in SM 2.x (x>0), and the detailed modifications required to get at least some of those benefits, when on SeaMonkey's home page (http://www.seamonkey-project.org/) I read that "Under the hood, SeaMonkey uses much of the same Mozilla source code which powers such successful siblings as Firefox, Thunderbird, Camino, Sunbird and Miro."
Given that commonality between SM and Firefox, shouldn't adding NoSquint's features into SM 2.x (x>0) --- either as an extension or as part of SM 2.x (x>0) itself --- be a fairly straightforward programming project?
Here's hoping, once again, that someone much more knowledgeable than I am will write a layman's summary of the NoSquint alternatives and their benefits and disadvantages.
Roger Folsom (still a very badly confused ignoramus)
There seem to be at least two proposals:
1) A modified version of NoSquint 1.93.2.1 (Philip Chee's port of a Firefox NoSquint to SeaMonkey 2.0.14 and earlier) installed as an extension into SM 2.x (x>0).
2) A modified version of a Firefox NoSquint extension installed into SM 2.x (x>0).
And there may be other alternatives, in this thread or in related threads, that I didn't see and/or didn't understand.
Part of the problem may be that alternative NoSquint workaround installations are discussed in discontinuous sets of messages.
But I'm especially puzzled about the loss of NoSquint's benefits in SM 2.x (x>0), and the detailed modifications required to get at least some of those benefits, when on SeaMonkey's home page (http://www.seamonkey-project.org/) I read that "Under the hood, SeaMonkey uses much of the same Mozilla source code which powers such successful siblings as Firefox, Thunderbird, Camino, Sunbird and Miro."
Given that commonality between SM and Firefox, shouldn't adding NoSquint's features into SM 2.x (x>0) --- either as an extension or as part of SM 2.x (x>0) itself --- be a fairly straightforward programming project?
Here's hoping, once again, that someone much more knowledgeable than I am will write a layman's summary of the NoSquint alternatives and their benefits and disadvantages.
Roger Folsom (still a very badly confused ignoramus)