[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  taharka <res00vl8 at alltel dot net>
 To:  Chris Buechler <cbuechler at gmail dot com>
 Cc:  m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall-dev] SVG Graphs in Firefox 3.0a3
 Date:  Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:14:47 -0500
>From the guy running Windows 98
How do,

On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 13:08 -0500, Chris Buechler wrote:
> On 3/7/07, Dan Bond <dan dot bond at gmail dot com> wrote:
> >
> > Figure that's because you've got the Adobe SVG plugin installed, which
> > I don't think people have an issue with. The issue is with the Mozilla
> > implementation of SVG and how it's rendered. Somewhere in the back of
> > my mind I seem to remember something about some implementations not
> > holding as strictly to the spec as they should (what's new), is it
> > that the m0n0 SVG has been written to work with the Adobe plugin
> > because it's  the dominant solution?
> >
> 
> There were changes made in m0n0wall when Firefox's built in SVG
> support first came out so it worked right with it. Those changes were
> provided by a Firefox developer, IIRC. It currently works fine with
> either the current Firefox's SVG or Adobe's SVG.  (except for the guy
> running Windows 98, sheesh, who runs that crap anymore... I can't say
> I'm surprised it doesn't work on 98, and there's no telling what the
> issue may be).

"Windows 98, sheesh, who runs that crap anymore"? Not to be rude, but if
you had bothered to read the whole post, you'd see I was able to get the
traffic graph displaying properly by changing svg.enabled from true to
false via about:config. As far as crap goes, a person could say that
about any operating system, yours included. They all have their fleas.
FYI, Windows 98/98SE is still in use by millions of folk, along with
Windows 95. Also, behind my m0n0wall, I have Windows 95/Windows 98, OS/2
warp, SCO Open Server, Linux & FreeBSD systems running.

> My guess is it's a bug in Firefox 3.0 (it is alpha, after all), or
> they changed something so m0n0wall is going to need another change.
> Either way, unless another Firefox dev pops up with a fix, I wouldn't
> expect it to get looked at until Firefox 3.0 is much closer to
> completion.
> 
> -Chris

taharka

Lexington, Kentucky U.S.A.