RE: Thetrainline.com crashes CI #744

> -----Original Message-----
> From: george.greenfield@tiscali.co.uk
> Sent: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:22:05 GMT
> To: netsurf-users@netsurf-browser.org
> Subject: RE: Thetrainline.com crashes CI #744
>
> In message <AE9C0B0201F.00000E9Fdave@davehigton.me.uk>
> Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: george.greenfield@tiscali.co.uk
>>> Sent: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 09:20:59 GMT
>>> To: netsurf-users@netsurf-browser.org
>>> Subject: Thetrainline.com crashes CI #744
>>>
>>> Made three consecutive attempts to access Thetrainline.com using NS CI
>>> #744 with javascript enabled, each resulting in a NS crash and exit.
>>> Attempting to access the bug tracker and file a bug report crashed
>>> #744 again! Back to 2.9 for the bug report....
>>
>> I found that disabling Javascript on 744 enabled me to submit my
>> bug report (with file), which is easier than uninstalling etc.
>>
>> The quick smoke tests I've done with 744 with JS disabled don't show
>> any worse stability than versions prior to JS.
>>
>> There are also non-JS CI builds, if you prefer.
>
> Don't get me wrong: I intended no criticism of JS-enabled NetSurf, in
> fact I think it's splendid, and to be supported in every way,
> including the submission of bug reports where appropriate. It was just
> a bit ironic that the bug tracker itself was amongst the casualties!

Absolutely, and I'm sure you've seen my message of heartfelt
congratulations to everybody who contributed.

All I was doing was pointing out that, if you're testing a JS build
of NS, you shouldn't have to revert to 2.9 to report the bug; simply
disabling JS may well be enough. It's easier for you, and to continue
with a CI build would give it that bit more testing.

Dave

____________________________________________________________
FREE ONLINE PHOTOSHARING - Share your photos online with your friends and family!
Visit http://www.inbox.com/photosharing to find out more!