Groups > alt.os.linux.ubuntu > #186083 > unrolled thread

Firefox 43 bug

Started by	Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>
First post	2016-01-11 21:25 +0100
Last post	2016-01-14 10:40 -0500
Articles	20 on this page of 23 — 13 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux.ubuntu

  Firefox 43 bug Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-11 21:25 +0100
    Re: Firefox 43 bug Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-01-11 16:13 -0500
    Re: Firefox 43 bug "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-11 22:29 +0100
    Re: Firefox 43 bug Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:14 +0000
    Re: Firefox 43 bug Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io> - 2016-01-11 15:07 -0800
      Re: Firefox 43 bug "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-12 16:37 +0100
        Re: Firefox 43 bug Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io> - 2016-01-12 09:37 -0800
          Re: Firefox 43 bug Gordon <Gordon@clear.net.nz> - 2016-01-13 03:56 +0000
    Re: Firefox 43 bug pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> - 2016-01-12 17:42 +0000
      Re: Firefox 43 bug Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-12 19:11 +0100
        Re: Firefox 43 bug Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io> - 2016-01-12 10:43 -0800
          Re: Firefox 43 bug "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2016-01-12 11:11 -0800
            Re: Firefox 43 bug Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io> - 2016-01-12 16:17 -0800
              Re: Firefox 43 bug Paul J Gans <gansno@panix.com> - 2016-01-13 01:15 +0000
        Re: Firefox 43 bug highlandham <highlandham.nospam@rfburns.eu> - 2016-01-12 22:19 +0000
          Re: Firefox 43 bug Paul J Gans <gansno@panix.com> - 2016-01-13 01:14 +0000
          Re: Firefox 43 bug Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 21:55 -0600
        Re: Firefox 43 bug pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> - 2016-01-13 18:06 +0000
          Re: Firefox 43 bug Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-13 20:38 +0100
      Re: Firefox 43 bug Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2016-01-12 14:09 -0500
        Re: Firefox 43 bug "jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2016-01-12 11:21 -0800
    Re: Firefox 43 bug Yrrah <Yrrah-aol@aol.invalid> - 2016-01-13 18:49 +0100
    Re: Firefox 43 bug Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2016-01-14 10:40 -0500

Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →

#186083 — Firefox 43 bug

From	Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>
Date	2016-01-11 21:25 +0100
Subject	Firefox 43 bug
Message-ID	<20160111212541.03d3e7b7@maxa-pc>

https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05

Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
kill the process...

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#186085

From	Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org>
Date	2016-01-11 16:13 -0500
Message-ID	<n715pj$5m7$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#186083

On 01/11/2016 03:25 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>
> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
> kill the process...
>

Using FF43.0.4. Clicked on first item on that page. CPU 
usage jumped to 25%
while loading, dropped to 2-4% when loaded.

-- 
Caver1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186086

From	"Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl>
Date	2016-01-11 22:29 +0100
Message-ID	<56941ec8$0$23738$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
In reply to	#186083

Op 11-01-16 om 21:25 schreef Melzzzzz:
> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>
> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
> kill the process...
>
No problem here...
Btw, I like that USB to Serial/Parallel adapter :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186089

From	Eef Hartman <E.J.M.Hartman@gmail.com>
Date	2016-01-11 22:14 +0000
Message-ID	<56942931$0$23795$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
In reply to	#186083

In alt.os.linux Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote:
> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
> kill the process...

Note: there are 5 (FIVE) different FF 43 releases:
 	firefox-43.0.tar.bz2 	51M 	14-Dec-2015 19:29
	firefox-43.0.1.tar.bz2 	51M 	18-Dec-2015 12:52	
	firefox-43.0.2.tar.bz2 	51M 	22-Dec-2015 15:43
	firefox-43.0.3.tar.bz2 	51M 	28-Dec-2015 16:13
 	firefox-43.0.4.tar.bz2 	51M 	06-Jan-2016 19:28

The package in Slackware-current is based on the 43.0.3 release, Pat
hasn't upgraded to 43.0.4 yet (but probably will, real soon).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186091

From	Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io>
Date	2016-01-11 15:07 -0800
Message-ID	<n71cf9$2q3$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#186083

Melzzzzz wrote:
> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
> 
> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
> kill the process...
> 

Firefox is a memory pig. It kind of maintained some composure when I was
using WinXP, but it goes wild using Mint xfce and demands 1.5 gigs with
3 or 4 tabs open on a computer with a max memory allotment of 2gigs.
Just use Seamonkey and forget about it.

g2s

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186115

From	"Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl>
Date	2016-01-12 16:37 +0100
Message-ID	<56951db4$0$23861$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
In reply to	#186091

Op 12-01-16 om 00:07 schreef Goody2Shoes:
> Melzzzzz wrote:
>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>
>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
>> kill the process...
>>
>
> Firefox is a memory pig. It kind of maintained some composure when I was
> using WinXP, but it goes wild using Mint xfce and demands 1.5 gigs with
> 3 or 4 tabs open on a computer with a max memory allotment of 2gigs.
> Just use Seamonkey and forget about it.
>
> g2s
>
Have a look at Chrome to see a real memory pig :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186121

From	Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io>
Date	2016-01-12 09:37 -0800
Message-ID	<n73dff$lb0$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#186115

Dirk T. Verbeek wrote:
> Op 12-01-16 om 00:07 schreef Goody2Shoes:
>> Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>>
>>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
>>> kill the process...
>>>
>>
>> Firefox is a memory pig. It kind of maintained some composure when I was
>> using WinXP, but it goes wild using Mint xfce and demands 1.5 gigs with
>> 3 or 4 tabs open on a computer with a max memory allotment of 2gigs.
>> Just use Seamonkey and forget about it.
>>
>> g2s
>>
> Have a look at Chrome to see a real memory pig :)


I know. Chrome's idea of 'crashproofing' is start a whole separate
browser process for each tab. I don't know why FF runs amuck with my
memory like that using Mint xfce. Maybe XP had some sort of control over
S/w's use of Ram, or...

g2s

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186152

From	Gordon <Gordon@clear.net.nz>
Date	2016-01-13 03:56 +0000
Message-ID	<dfm076Fof6rU3@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#186121

On 2016-01-12, Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io> wrote:
> Dirk T. Verbeek wrote:
>> Op 12-01-16 om 00:07 schreef Goody2Shoes:
>>> Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>>>
>>>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
>>>> kill the process...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Firefox is a memory pig. It kind of maintained some composure when I was
>>> using WinXP, but it goes wild using Mint xfce and demands 1.5 gigs with
>>> 3 or 4 tabs open on a computer with a max memory allotment of 2gigs.
>>> Just use Seamonkey and forget about it.
>>>
>>> g2s
>>>
>> Have a look at Chrome to see a real memory pig :)
>
>
> I know. Chrome's idea of 'crashproofing' is start a whole separate
> browser process for each tab. I don't know why FF runs amuck with my
> memory like that using Mint xfce. Maybe XP had some sort of control over
> S/w's use of Ram, or...

There was not a whole lot of physical ram to consume.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186122

From	pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy>
Date	2016-01-12 17:42 +0000
Message-ID	<n73dt5$69q$1@usenet.news.interia.pl>
In reply to	#186083

On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:
> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
> 
> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
> kill the process...

Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?

-- 
pozdrawiam,   pioruns
_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.
Linux Registered User #454644

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186128

From	Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>
Date	2016-01-12 19:11 +0100
Message-ID	<20160112191159.26ce3876@maxa-pc>
In reply to	#186122

On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:42:31 +0000
pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> wrote:

> On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:
> > https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
> > 
> > Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will
> > have to kill the process...  
> 
> Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?
> 

It's not just me. I saw this from other guy...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186130

From	Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io>
Date	2016-01-12 10:43 -0800
Message-ID	<n73hb1$6s3$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#186128

Melzzzzz wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:42:31 +0000
> pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> wrote:
> 
>> On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>>
>>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will
>>> have to kill the process...  
>>
>> Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?
>>
> 
> It's not just me. I saw this from other guy...
> 

I've seen this before (as well as FF just being a ram hog) and always
attributed it to "Too much Flash" or a page full of Jscript. SOME addons
hog memory... typically the adblockers, but I'm sure there are other
offenders out there.

g2s

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186133

From	"jeff g." <jeff.g.group@att.net>
Date	2016-01-12 11:11 -0800
Message-ID	<n73j0l$dl5$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#186130

On 01/12/2016 10:43 AM, Goody2Shoes wrote:
> Melzzzzz wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:42:31 +0000
>> pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>>>
>>>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will
>>>> have to kill the process...
>>>
>>> Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?
>>>
>>
>> It's not just me. I saw this from other guy...
>>
>
> I've seen this before (as well as FF just being a ram hog) and always
> attributed it to "Too much Flash" or a page full of Jscript. SOME addons
> hog memory... typically the adblockers, but I'm sure there are other
> offenders out there.
>

This discussion has been ongoing since the days of Netscape Navigator. 
  The variables are so numerous its ridiculous.  In seeking to become 
all things to all people, Firefox is really a victim of its own success. 
  There is nothing much to be gained by the "memory hog" complainers - 
try Pale Moon for a change.  Bet you'll be back to FF at some point. 
Arch has provided a fairly comprehensive wiki on some things that can be 
tried here

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Firefox_tweaks#Network_settings

Clear the cache, trim your history, shut done auto updating, and limit 
extensions to fewer than 100 or so, try not to open more than 30-40 tabs 
at once, ad nausiem.

43.0.4 is now out - go for it - by the time you've got it all set up, FF 
45 will be here and you can start all over.

Or find something else to vent your spleen on, like MS doubtlook or 
something...

-- 
Jeff G.
There was the person who sent ten puns to friends with the hope that at 
least one would make them laugh. No pun in ten did.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186142

From	Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io>
Date	2016-01-12 16:17 -0800
Message-ID	<n744tv$lhk$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#186133

jeff g. wrote:
> try Pale Moon for a change.  Bet you'll be back to FF at some point...

I used to use Pale Moon for XP and it was ...ok, but it also seems to
grab a lot of memory in Linux for some reason. Been using Seamonkey for
a while and it behaves pretty nicely. Even when the browser and mail are
running it rarely goes over 250mb Ram usage. Pale Moon was averaging 500
or so, and as I mentioned earlier, FF was pulling 1.5 gigs of ram out of
1.9 or so available, with pretty much the same addons as Seamonkey.

Ofc, none of this matters if you have a more modern computer with 8, 16,
or 32 gigs of Ram, but that's not me.

g2s

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186146

From	Paul J Gans <gansno@panix.com>
Date	2016-01-13 01:15 +0000
Message-ID	<n748f2$d2m$4@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to	#186142

Goody2Shoes <Goody2Shoes@wmail.io> wrote:
>jeff g. wrote:
>> try Pale Moon for a change.  Bet you'll be back to FF at some point...

>I used to use Pale Moon for XP and it was ...ok, but it also seems to
>grab a lot of memory in Linux for some reason. Been using Seamonkey for
>a while and it behaves pretty nicely. Even when the browser and mail are
>running it rarely goes over 250mb Ram usage. Pale Moon was averaging 500
>or so, and as I mentioned earlier, FF was pulling 1.5 gigs of ram out of
>1.9 or so available, with pretty much the same addons as Seamonkey.

>Ofc, none of this matters if you have a more modern computer with 8, 16,
>or 32 gigs of Ram, but that's not me.

I've got 8 gigs and CPU usage still went to 100%.

-- 
   --- Paul J. Gans

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186139

From	highlandham <highlandham.nospam@rfburns.eu>
Date	2016-01-12 22:19 +0000
Message-ID	<n73u11$p8g$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#186128

On 01/12/2016 06:11 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:42:31 +0000
> pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> wrote:
>
>> On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>>
>>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will
>>> have to kill the process...
>>
>> Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?
>>
>
> It's not just me. I saw this from other guy...
>
======================
Yes I also have problems with the latest Firefox ....should disable the 
add-ons as a starter.   Currently use  Chrome browser.

Frank  in the north of Scotland

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186145

From	Paul J Gans <gansno@panix.com>
Date	2016-01-13 01:14 +0000
Message-ID	<n748cu$d2m$3@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to	#186139

In alt.os.linux.ubuntu highlandham <highlandham.nospam@rfburns.eu> wrote:
>On 01/12/2016 06:11 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:42:31 +0000
>> pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>>>
>>>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will
>>>> have to kill the process...
>>>
>>> Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?
>>>
>>
>> It's not just me. I saw this from other guy...
>>
>======================
>Yes I also have problems with the latest Firefox ....should disable the 
>add-ons as a starter.   Currently use  Chrome browser.

>Frank  in the north of Scotland

I've had the problem with several earlier versions of FF.  My current
"fix" has been to disable Adobe Flash.

-- 
   --- Paul J. Gans

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186151

From	Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com>
Date	2016-01-12 21:55 -0600
Message-ID	<TK2dnZSUoeMlVwjLnZ2dnUU7-dGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to	#186139

On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:19:48 +0000, highlandham wrote:

> On 01/12/2016 06:11 PM, Melzzzzz wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:42:31 +0000
>> pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>>>
>>>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will
>>>> have to kill the process...
>>>
>>> Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?
>>>
>>
>> It's not just me. I saw this from other guy...
>>
> ======================
> Yes I also have problems with the latest Firefox ....should disable the 
> add-ons as a starter.   Currently use  Chrome browser.
> 
> Frank  in the north of Scotland

By default the Linux version of Chrome will leave process running
in the background when the it exits so it can startup faster the
next time it is run.  It can be turned off.  Look way down in the
advanced settings.

-- 
<Wildman> GNU/Linux user #557453
The cow died so I don't need your bull!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186206

From	pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy>
Date	2016-01-13 18:06 +0000
Message-ID	<n763m5$kdc$2@usenet.news.interia.pl>
In reply to	#186128

On 12/01/16 18:11, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:42:31 +0000
> pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> wrote:
> 
>> On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>>
>>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will
>>> have to kill the process...  
>>
>> Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?
>>
> 
> It's not just me. I saw this from other guy...
> 
Doesn't matter. Try with disabled addons AND/OR new, fresh Firefox
profile. They we can tell you anything.

-- 
pozdrawiam,   pioruns
_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.
Linux Registered User #454644

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186210

From	Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>
Date	2016-01-13 20:38 +0100
Message-ID	<20160113203811.0c75c824@maxa-pc>
In reply to	#186206

On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 18:06:34 +0000
pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> wrote:

> On 12/01/16 18:11, Melzzzzz wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:42:31 +0000
> > pioruns <cvbehaf@b2.cy> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:  
> >>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
> >>>
> >>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will
> >>> have to kill the process...    
> >>
> >> Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?
> >>  
> > 
> > It's not just me. I saw this from other guy...
> >   
> Doesn't matter. Try with disabled addons AND/OR new, fresh Firefox
> profile. They we can tell you anything.
> 

Same effect... does not have to do with that...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#186132

From	Paul <nospam@needed.com>
Date	2016-01-12 14:09 -0500
Message-ID	<n73isu$dfv$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#186122

pioruns wrote:
> On 11/01/16 20:25, Melzzzzz wrote:
>> https://www.links.hr/hr/komponente-05
>>
>> Choose any item from the page. CPU will go to 100% and you will have to
>> kill the process...
> 
> Have you tried on clean profile or disable addons?
> 

I can reproduce it here, in Windows, and
on the next beta of Firefox. It's a Firefox
bug of some sort. The process goes to 100%,
and Firefox is entirely non-responsive. The
OS doesn't seem to play a part at all. You would
need a proper code debugger, to figure out
what loop it's stuck in. No opportunity to use
any built-in Firefox debugging tools. Had to kill it.

Loading the page isn't the step that breaks it.
Clicking an item image, causes it to go into the weeds.

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →

csiph-web

Firefox 43 bug

Contents

#186083 — Firefox 43 bug

#186085

#186086

#186089

#186091

#186115

#186121

#186152

#186122

#186128

#186130

#186133

#186142

#186146

#186139

#186145

#186151

#186206

#186210

#186132