Re: [Bulk] Re: Using abrt for bugs that are non-crashes ?!?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 16:14 +1030, Tim wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 12:37 -0500, William Case wrote:
> > I now find that Epiphany takes about 40 to 80 seconds to load a site
> > while Firefox is still almost instantaneous.
> If you mentioned the site, someone may be able to look at it and say why
> that browser has problems.  Otherwise, we're left with guessing at
> things.  Proxies, JavaScript, Java, Flash, DNS...  

Epiphany ≅ 40 sec.  FF ≅ 10 sec. to load.

However, I have tried loading other sites that seemed to have slowed
down considerably in Epiphany this morning and they now seem to be
speeding right along.  Even the SciAm site seemed faster.

If I can catch Epiphany slowing again, I'll let the list know.  It is
not about ISP etc.; my issue is about the difference in speed between
Epiphany (which used to be the fastest) and Firefox.

My main question, however, was about the use of abrt for reporting
non-crash bugs.

Regards Bill
Fedora 12, Gnome 2.28
Evo.2.28, Emacs 23.1.1

users mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux