memory leak fixed
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: October 21st, 2017, 9:54 pm
memory leak fixed
...................................................................................................................................................................
Last edited by bozodclown on October 24th, 2017, 8:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
- DanRaisch
- Moderator
- Posts: 127188
- Joined: September 23rd, 2004, 8:57 pm
- Location: Somewhere on the right coast
Re: memory leak fixed
So that confirms that the "memory lead" wasn't in Firefox but actually a problem with the installed extension. Thanks for reporting that.
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: October 21st, 2017, 9:54 pm
Re: memory leak fixed
...................................................................................................................................
Last edited by bozodclown on October 24th, 2017, 8:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 913
- Joined: December 24th, 2011, 10:29 am
Re: memory leak fixed
Hint. Hint. Download from "third party site'.
- James
- Moderator
- Posts: 27999
- Joined: June 18th, 2003, 3:07 pm
- Location: Made in Canada
Re: memory leak fixed
Nope it is a third-party extension https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addo ... out-flash/ like the vast majority of extensions being hosted at addons.mozilla.orgbozodclown wrote:The "video without flash" extension was included in the FF I installed on my new computer. It wasn't something I added myself.
-
- Posts: 913
- Joined: December 24th, 2011, 10:29 am
Re: memory leak fixed
Nope it is a third-party extension https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addo ... out-flash/ like the vast majority of extensions being hosted at addons.mozilla.org
The OP said 'it came with the download'. So did it magically appear with an install from Mozilla? Did someone else add it for him?
All I meant was that it should be looked into as a 'bad' extension maybe added by a third part site.
Especially as we near Firefox 57 where many Legacy extensions are 'dying' and failing. All, or most, of the the old 'try this' help will become pretty useless. IMHO.
- mightyglydd
- Posts: 9813
- Joined: November 4th, 2006, 7:07 pm
- Location: Hollywood Ca.
Re: memory leak fixed
Really, name one third party site that offers Fx with one random AMO extension...The Tinsmith wrote:All I meant was that it should be looked into as a 'bad' extension maybe added by a third part site.
#KeepFightingMichael and Alex.
-
- Posts: 913
- Joined: December 24th, 2011, 10:29 am
Re: memory leak fixed
mightyglydd wrote:Really, name one third party site that offers Fx with one random AMO extension...The Tinsmith wrote:All I meant was that it should be looked into as a 'bad' extension maybe added by a third part site.
It has long been my policy to not "Feed the Trolls".
- James
- Moderator
- Posts: 27999
- Joined: June 18th, 2003, 3:07 pm
- Location: Made in Canada
Re: memory leak fixed
There would be lots of talk at places like here, at support.mozilla.org and elsewhere if one or more third-party extensions was indeed a part of Firefox download from http://www.mozilla.org or http://www.mozilla.org/firefox/all/ or got installed in a Firefox update from Mozilla. It has not been uncommon for somebody to see an extensions installed in Firefox or one or more Plugins installed on OS that Firefox was making use of and the thread poster then thought it came with Firefox download.The Tinsmith wrote:The OP said 'it came with the download'. So did it magically appear with an install from Mozilla? Did someone else add it for him?Nope it is a third-party extension https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addo ... out-flash/ like the vast majority of extensions being hosted at addons.mozilla.org
All I meant was that it should be looked into as a 'bad' extension maybe added by a third part site.
-
- Posts: 913
- Joined: December 24th, 2011, 10:29 am
Re: memory leak fixed
There would be lots of talk at places like here, at support.mozilla.org and elsewhere if one or more third-party extensions was indeed a part of Firefox download from http://www.mozilla.org
Obviously I said that incorrectly or you all misunderstood what I wrote.
What I said, or meant to say, is that the OP, or a friend, downloaded a Firefox install from a site OTHER, than an official Mozilla site and that site had attached the extension.
I am sorry that all of your crap is dying or going away. But I did not do that. It affected me too. But I dealt with it.
Sheesh. With all that is going on lately everyone here seems to ready to pick a fight over almost nothing.
I am sorry for trying to offer a thought of a possibility. I promise i won't do that again. Otta' here.
- mightyglydd
- Posts: 9813
- Joined: November 4th, 2006, 7:07 pm
- Location: Hollywood Ca.
Re: memory leak fixed
I suspect the AMO Extension Fairy project... They earn badges
#KeepFightingMichael and Alex.
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: October 21st, 2017, 9:54 pm
Re: memory leak fixed
........................................................................................................................................................
Last edited by bozodclown on October 24th, 2017, 8:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
- James
- Moderator
- Posts: 27999
- Joined: June 18th, 2003, 3:07 pm
- Location: Made in Canada
Re: memory leak fixed
What I mean by third-party in this case is this extension at https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addo ... out-flash/ was made by a third-party author. A extension that was made by Mozilla would have a author of Mozilla or Mozilla Labs though this was is basically discontinued.bozodclown wrote:I've never installed a third party add-on intentionally.
The Add-on word is generic term as it groups together the separate Extensions, Themes (complete and image background), Plugins, dictionaries, language packs, and search engines. https://addons.mozilla.org/faq
-
- Posts: 4480
- Joined: March 19th, 2005, 10:51 am
Re: memory leak fixed
rather old and seems to be abandonned.ast Updated: October 3, 2015
nevertheless uninstalling flash for NPAPI could do same
- therube
- Posts: 21703
- Joined: March 10th, 2004, 9:59 pm
- Location: Maryland USA
Re: memory leak fixed
(While probably not the situation here, "crap" can "just appear" [even if it might need a little help, from yours truly.)
<therube> why in the world would FF put out these experimental features (tabs in the sidebar, for instance) that are certainly not ready for prime time, that certainly have no place what so ever in a "regular" persons (release) browser. a brand new Profile, just created, & 1st, instead of letting me do what i wanted to do, i'm interrupted by this "request", then to top it off, i end up loosing what i...
<therube> ...had done to that point (as in existing tabs went - away - somewhere, not that i have any idea where). anyhow, just spouting off, not looking for a response.
<azaki> therube: tabs in the sidebar? what're you talking about?
<azaki> that sounds like an addon
<azaki> not firefox proper.
<therube> no, not an addon, straight from the horses mouth
<therube> lets see, they call it "tab center", https://github.com/bwinton/TabCenter (part of "testpilot")
<azaki> therube: if it's part of testpilot, then it's not built into firefox out of the box right now... =\
<azaki> that page even says it's an addon
<azaki> are you high? =p
<azaki> "Firefox add-on for arranging tabs vertically"
<azaki> in fact, this experiment is over and is already no longer available.
<azaki> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... ter-redux/
<therube> i open FF with a brand new Profile, i'm almost immediately told (bugged) about this "thing", i say to myself, whatever. in any case, this experiment, for me, failed.
<azaki> it's been replaced by this, which is still just an addon.
<azaki> therube: linux, windows?
<azaki> what distro, if linux
<azaki> makes no sense that it would be in a new profile. i have never seen it.
<azaki> also, what version of firefox are you on?
<therube> i never went to that page, i did nothing to get that extension, i had no desire to have that extension. i open the browser, & there is this dialog waiting for me. that's the extent of it. that i may be an actual "extension" or that it came from github or where ever is immaterial. that point is that it was even suggested to me - through no action of my own.
<therube> Windows 7.
<therube> if its no longer available, it sure made its way to me, just this moment.
<therube> FF 56.0
<azaki> that just doesn't make sense...
<azaki> your system might be infected with malware... lol
<therube> not hardly.
<Caspy7> therube: it's unclear what's going on in your case, but this is not a part of the default install.
<therube> of course it is not part of the /install/, it is not part of the browser firefox.*installer.exe, but it /is/ part of the OOB experience that i just had.
<azaki> therube: you and only you, though.
<azaki> i've never heard of this before.
<Caspy7> "that i just had" - yes, sorry to hear it was an offensive experience, but yours is not everyone's, nor common
<therube> there is always a first.
<azaki> then file a bug, and see where it goes. i would be surprised beyond belief if it can be reproduced by anyone else, though. =\
<azaki> and bugs need to be reproduced before they can be tackled properly.
<therube> i did not say that it was.
<therube> i have opened plenty of fresh FF Profiles. this is the first (& hopefully) last time i have an experience like this.
<therube> & likewise, i have now opened yet another new Profile - without the same occurring.
<therube> oh, & FF also updated, must now be 56.0.2...
<therube> yes.
Fire 750, bring back 250.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 Pinball CopyURL+ FetchTextURL FlashGot NoScript