Gran Paradiso Alpha 3

[dickvl]

Did you look at the workaround in: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=332972#c8

[Warduke]

Ever since the first alpha I have been unable to run any trunk build. Every time I launch it, I get this error message...

firefox.exe has encountered a problem and needs to close. We are sorry for the inconvenience.

And that's with a new profile. Firefox 2 (and all three updates since) have been running just fine.

[RyanVM]

I'm betting this is your problem:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331404

Try running the findold program attached to the bug and see what it says. That being said, if it does turn up something, you've probably got some kind of malware on your system too.

[Rocketman]

On the Gran Paradiso Alpha 3 release notes page, under "Changes in this Development Milestone" there is a note, Added a new preference, "Warn me when web sites try to redirect or reload the page", which notifies the user when the page specifies HTTP-EQUIV=refresh. Anybody know where this preference is located?

[Wildmyron]

On the Gran Paradiso Alpha 3 release notes page, under "Changes in this Development Milestone" there is a note, Added a new preference, "Warn me when web sites try to redirect or reload the page", which notifies the user when the page specifies HTTP-EQUIV=refresh. Anybody know where this preference is located?

Tools -> Options -> Advanced -> General - Accessibility

Or in about:config -- accessibility.blockautorefresh

[Warduke]

I'm betting this is your problem:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331404

Try running the findold program attached to the bug and see what it says. That being said, if it does turn up something, you've probably got some kind of malware on your system too.

I did and here's what I got...

C:\WINDOWS\system32\mswinsck.ocx has invalid Write time: 1901-07-13 09:13:00 UT

[3DD]

I'm experiencing crashing with embedded video - actually a problem since Alpha 1. Anyone else having the same problem?

[Wildmyron]

I'm betting this is your problem:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331404

Try running the findold program attached to the bug and see what it says. That being said, if it does turn up something, you've probably got some kind of malware on your system too.

I did and here's what I got...

C:\WINDOWS\system32\mswinsck.ocx has invalid Write time: 1901-07-13 09:13:00 UT

That's a valid Microsoft file, so you could try the touch utility also attached to the bug. Or you could get a new copy of the file from somewhere and replace the old one.

[Rocketman]

On the Gran Paradiso Alpha 3 release notes page, under "Changes in this Development Milestone" there is a note, Added a new preference, "Warn me when web sites try to redirect or reload the page", which notifies the user when the page specifies HTTP-EQUIV=refresh. Anybody know where this preference is located?

Tools -> Options -> Advanced -> General - Accessibility

Or in about:config -- accessibility.blockautorefresh

Thanks Wildmyron.

[RyanVM]

C:\WINDOWS\system32\mswinsck.ocx has invalid Write time: 1901-07-13 09:13:00 UT

That's a valid Microsoft file, so you could try the touch utility also attached to the bug. Or you could get a new copy of the file from somewhere and replace the old one.

To back up what he said, I would personally suggest expanding the version you've got on your WinXP CD (it's a standard CAB file which any archiver should be able to expand) and overwriting the existing version. DLLs don't just magically get corrupted dates on them. I've got a bad feeling something fishy is going on with that file.

[wgianopoulos]

C:\WINDOWS\system32\mswinsck.ocx has invalid Write time: 1901-07-13 09:13:00 UT

That's a valid Microsoft file, so you could try the touch utility also attached to the bug. Or you could get a new copy of the file from somewhere and replace the old one.

To back up what he said, I would personally suggest expanding the version you've got on your WinXP CD (it's a standard CAB file which any archiver should be able to expand) and overwriting the existing version. DLLs don't just magically get corrupted dates on them. I've got a bad feeling something fishy is going on with that file.

If I recall correctly, most of the people with bad dates on files had installed security software from Checkpoint Systems, which during the install replaced some DLLs with versions (which ma or may not be newer than the ones on the original install cd) that had incorrect date stamps. Reloading the version from the install CD might result in this software not working correctly. So, there is no really good solution to all of this. THis has been a longstanding issue with windows DLLs install programs for various product, that require a specific version of the dll files, instead of doing this correctly so that they use their own version and don;t mess with the one installed in the system, seem to have no qualms about overwriting the version that cam with you system. I hope they came up with a way to prevent third party apps form doing stupid stuff like this in Vista.

[Warduke]

I used the touch program on that file and everything works fine now.

Thanks!

[RyanVM]

If I recall correctly, most of the people with bad dates on files had installed security software from Checkpoint Systems, which during the install replaced some DLLs with versions (which ma or may not be newer than the ones on the original install cd) that had incorrect date stamps. Reloading the version from the install CD might result in this software not working correctly. So, there is no really good solution to all of this. THis has been a longstanding issue with windows DLLs install programs for various product, that require a specific version of the dll files, instead of doing this correctly so that they use their own version and don;t mess with the one installed in the system, seem to have no qualms about overwriting the version that cam with you system. I hope they came up with a way to prevent third party apps form doing stupid stuff like this in Vista.

Theoretically, Windows File Protection should prevent such a situation from occuring...

[wgianopoulos]

If I recall correctly, most of the people with bad dates on files had installed security software from Checkpoint Systems, which during the install replaced some DLLs with versions (which ma or may not be newer than the ones on the original install cd) that had incorrect date stamps. Reloading the version from the install CD might result in this software not working correctly. So, there is no really good solution to all of this. THis has been a longstanding issue with windows DLLs install programs for various product, that require a specific version of the dll files, instead of doing this correctly so that they use their own version and don;t mess with the one installed in the system, seem to have no qualms about overwriting the version that cam with you system. I hope they came up with a way to prevent third party apps form doing stupid stuff like this in Vista.

Theoretically, Windows File Protection should prevent such a situation from occuring...

Is that the stupid feature that asks you to load the CD you probably don't have with you so it can restore the original file and does not tell you what files it is trying to restore, so that you can fix it later when the CD is unavailable? That is totally useless. Basically it says you are screwed and there is nothing you can do about it.

[RyanVM]

Well, it defaults to pulling the file from the dllcache directory first. I only asks for the CD if that fails.