7:23 a.m.
I've just upgraded to the latest NetSurf (29th Jan) and I've noticed that
my forum at http://forum.vigay.com no longer works. It always used to.
Indeed, I chose 'CuteCast' specifically because it was RISC OS and NetSurf
friendly.
All that happens now is that it comes up with "Bad redirect URL" after a
few seconds of not doing anything.
Paul
8:11 a.m.
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:23:59 +0000 (GMT), Paul Vigay
<lists-nospam(a)vigay.com> wrote:
I've just upgraded to the latest NetSurf (29th Jan) and I've
noticed that
my forum at http://forum.vigay.com no longer works. It always used to.
Indeed, I chose 'CuteCast' specifically because it was RISC OS and
NetSurf
friendly.
All that happens now is that it comes up with "Bad redirect URL" after a
few seconds of not doing anything.
Please report this on the bug tracker, attaching an appropriate log file.
Thanks,
John.
4:41 p.m.
In article <4f68c56767lists-nospam(a)vigay.com>, Paul Vigay
<lists-nospam(a)vigay.com> wrote:
I've just upgraded to the latest NetSurf (29th Jan) and
I've noticed that my forum at http://forum.vigay.com no
longer works. It always used to. Indeed, I chose
'CuteCast' specifically because it was RISC OS and
NetSurf friendly.
It seems all right here, Paul, and I downloaded the new
version this morning. This is using RISC OS 4.39 on
VRPC-Adjust (StrongARM model).
All that happens now is that it comes up with "Bad
redirect URL" after a few seconds of not doing anything.
No, the page came up straight away.
John
--
John McCartney
j.mccartney(a)blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jm689.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
4:58 p.m.
In a dim and distant universe <4f68f8737cj.mccartney(a)blueyonder.co.uk>,
John McCartney <j.mccartney(a)blueyonder.co.uk> enlightened us thusly:
It seems all right here, Paul, and I downloaded the new version this
morning. This is using RISC OS 4.39 on VRPC-Adjust (StrongARM model).
No, the page came up straight away.
Thanks for confirming that it works ok in NetSurf. Saying that, made me
think it was my machine somewhere.
I've just zapped the cookies and all is now working ok here too - so I
guess one of the cookies must have got corrupt somehow. I'll bear that in
mind in future if odd things start happening.
Thanks.
5:16 p.m.
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:58:27 +0000 (GMT), Paul Vigay
<lists-nospam(a)vigay.com> wrote:
In a dim and distant universe
<4f68f8737cj.mccartney(a)blueyonder.co.uk>,
John McCartney <j.mccartney(a)blueyonder.co.uk> enlightened us thusly:
> It seems all right here, Paul, and I downloaded the new version this
> morning. This is using RISC OS 4.39 on VRPC-Adjust (StrongARM model).
> No, the page came up straight away.
Thanks for confirming that it works ok in NetSurf. Saying that, made me
think it was my machine somewhere.
I've just zapped the cookies and all is now working ok here too - so I
guess one of the cookies must have got corrupt somehow. I'll bear that in
mind in future if odd things start happening.
This really isn't helpful because:
1) Now we'll never know the true cause of the problem so, if there /is/ a
bug in NetSurf's HTTP redirection handling, it won't be fixed until such a
time as it bites somebody else in the backside.
2) If the cookies are corrupt, then I would want to see the cookie file to
attempt to work out why.
This is why I asked you earlier to report the issue on the bug tracker with
a log file attached. If you want to have bugs fixed then please report them
properly and provide the relevant information when asked. If you can't do
that then I'd rather you didn't bother me with bug reports.
John.
2:56 a.m.
In a dim and distant universe
<5c7afafa5a5569125e6432edd085892e(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk>,
John-Mark Bell <jmb(a)netsurf-browser.org> enlightened us thusly:
[Snippety snip]
properly and provide the relevant information when asked. If you
can't do
that then I'd rather you didn't bother me with bug reports.
I wasn't bothering /you/ with bug reports. I was posting a generic question
on the mailing list to see if anyone else was experiencing the same problem.
Sheesh, some people in the RISC OS world get so tetchy about things! People
need to chill out more.
Speaking as a developer myself, it can often be very difficult to diagnose
what's an actual bug and what's just a misconfiguration or local problem
with a particular machine, hence a quick plea to see if anyone else was
getting the same effects.
IF other people had reported the same thing, then I'd have investigated
further and hopefully obtained more meaningful diagnosis and log files,
which would have been duly submitted to the bug tracker. No point clogging
it up with pseudo or false-alarm 'bugs' until some of the more serious bugs
already catalogued in it have been fixed.
Paul
4:21 a.m.
On 30 Jan 2008 Paul Vigay wrote:
I wasn't bothering /you/ with bug reports. I was posting a
generic
question on the mailing list to see if anyone else was experiencing
the same problem.
I have an outstanding bug report on the same problem which was
reported as open on 26th January but is now marked as fixed:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=464312&aid=1577...
719
I don't seem to have been notified about the last change.
--
_
|_|. _ Richard Porter http://www.minijem.plus.com/
|\_||_ mailto:ricp@minijem.plus.com
4:41 a.m.
In a dim and distant universe <d68e38694f.ricp(a)user.minijem.plus.com>,
Richard Porter <ricp(a)minijem.plus.com> enlightened us thusly:
I have an outstanding bug report on the same problem which was
reported
Of course, this is another issue that can possibly lead to confusion. If I
spot something which doesn't behave as I believe it should, it's difficult
to know if it's already been reported as a bug in the past, without
searching through the entire bug tracker looking for anything which could
be the same issue.
But, without searching through the entire bug tracker, aren't you likely to
run into the same bugs being reported multiple times but with different
descriptions?
5:03 a.m.
On 30 Jan 2008 Paul Vigay wrote:
In a dim and distant universe
<d68e38694f.ricp(a)user.minijem.plus.com>,
Richard Porter <ricp(a)minijem.plus.com> enlightened us thusly:
> I have an outstanding bug report on the same problem which was reported
Of course, this is another issue that can possibly lead to confusion.
If I
spot something which doesn't behave as I believe it should, it's difficult
to know if it's already been reported as a bug in the past, without
searching through the entire bug tracker looking for anything which could
be the same issue.
But, without searching through the entire bug tracker, aren't you
likely to
run into the same bugs being reported multiple times but with different
descriptions?
Possibly but if you search on status "any" for keywords "bad redirect
url" you get the one bug report which I raised. I can now confirm that
it has been fixed, so yours could be a slightly different bug.
Obviously it's important to put a sensible title on the bug report
when you raise it, so that it can be searched for without having to
trawl through five or six pages of bugs. That's not always possible -
for example a random crash with no obvious cause. Thankfully these are
getting fairly infrequent now.
--
_
|_|. _ Richard Porter http://www.minijem.plus.com/
|\_||_ mailto:ricp@minijem.plus.com
6:06 a.m.
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:56:38 +0000 (GMT), Paul Vigay
<lists-nospam(a)vigay.com> wrote:
Speaking as a developer myself, it can often be very difficult to
diagnose
what's an actual bug and what's just a misconfiguration or
local problem
with a particular machine, hence a quick plea to see if anyone else was
getting the same effects.
This is part of the reason why NetSurf produces a log file. It's also why,
when necessary, we ask for more information to be provided. Please don't
try to pre-empt this process by fiddling around with the files NetSurf
produces to see if it solves the problem. This will rarely, if ever,
uncover the root cause of the issue.
Posting to the mailing list to see if anyone else is experiencing similar
problems is fine, but is utterly no substitute for reporting the issue on
the bug tracker with appropriate detail. Additionally, when a developer
asks for more information to be provided, it's generally for a good reason,
so please try to fulfil their request.
In this particular case, NetSurf's HTTP redirect handling had just been
completely rewritten and, thus, it is eminently possible that bugs have
been introduced. That is why I asked for you to provide more information
and it's also why I get pretty irritated when such simple requests are
ignored.
IF other people had reported the same thing, then I'd have
investigated
further and hopefully obtained more meaningful diagnosis and log files,
which would have been duly submitted to the bug tracker. No point
clogging
it up with pseudo or false-alarm 'bugs' until some of the
more serious
bugs already catalogued in it have been fixed.
You've completely missed the point of having a bug tracker. If you, as a
user, encounter some misbehaviour, then report it on the bug tracker
including as much detail as you can. This generally includes a log file. It
is completely irrelevant whether anyone else has experienced the same
problem or not. Do not, under any circumstances, destroy any evidence that
might shed light on the cause of the issue.
As for your fear of "clogging [the bug tracker] up", if everyone took that
view, there would be no bug reports filed at all. Sure there's a bunch of
open bugs but there always will be and more reports do no harm. Duplicate
reports are also no problem, we'll just clean them up as and when it
becomes necessary.
John.
10:24 a.m.
In a mad moment - John-Mark Bell mumbled :
In this particular case, NetSurf's HTTP redirect handling had
just been
completely rewritten and, thus, it is eminently possible that bugs have
been introduced. That is why I asked for you to provide more information
This may be a red herring, in which case I apologise in advance!
In December, when I was using NF Release Ver. 1·1
I noticed a twitch in The Register - Hardware pages -
Trying to follow a link to price comparison/price
finder for reviewed items (The EEE computer) resulted
in an endless attempt to load a page. Gave up, suspecting
another code error by El Reg (it happens)
In January I switched to using the latest(ish) test
build (currently on r3802).
Visiting similar review pages in El Reg gives the same
effect but now with a 'Bad Redirect URL' meeasge from
NS after a few seconds.
Toady's example can be found here -
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/01/30/review_toshiba_hd_ep30/
on the lower left of the page is a Box 'Price Finder'
and at the bottem, below the editable window is the
link line 'Reg Hardware's price comparison site'
Clicking on this enters the following URL in NS status bar -
http://theregister.pgpartner.co.uk/: Compare Prices
Note the colon : and space after uk/ above.
I trawled through the page code and found what appears to be
the appropriate line here - (not wrapped in the original)
<p>or visit <a href="http://theregister.pgpartner.co.uk/"
title="Compare Prices">Reg Hardware's price comparison
site</a></p>
presumably this is bad code by El Reg? but it looks as
though other browsers may not be objecting.
Just my ½pennoth and may not be relevent to this thread.
Keep up the good work - It's appreciated.
--
|) [
|)ryn [vans mail to - BrynEvans(a)bryork.com
http://www.bryork.com
2:04 p.m.
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:24:08 GMT, Bryn Evans <netsurf(a)bryork.freeuk.com>
wrote:
Visiting similar review pages in El Reg gives the same
effect but now with a 'Bad Redirect URL' meeasge from
NS after a few seconds.
Toady's example can be found here -
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/01/30/review_toshiba_hd_ep30/
on the lower left of the page is a Box 'Price Finder'
and at the bottem, below the editable window is the
link line 'Reg Hardware's price comparison site'
This is fixed in r3809.
Clicking on this enters the following URL in NS status bar -
http://theregister.pgpartner.co.uk/: Compare Prices
Note the colon : and space after uk/ above.
That's simply how NetSurf displays link targets in the status bar (i.e.
<url>: <link title attribute contents>)
John.
2:22 p.m.
In a mad moment - John-Mark Bell mumbled :
> Note the colon : and space after uk/ above.
That's simply how NetSurf displays link targets in the status bar
(i.e.
<url>: <link title attribute contents>)
Thanks, I didn't know that.
--
|) [
|)ryn [vans mail to - BrynEvans(a)bryork.com
http://www.bryork.com
5534
days inactive
5535
days old
netsurf-users@netsurf-browser.org
12 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Bryn Evans -
John McCartney -
John-Mark Bell -
Paul Vigay -
Richard Porter