Firefox 社群討論區

I GOT TIRED OF FREQUENT FIREFOX CRASHES (C0000005) IN BOTH THE 64-BIT AND 32-BIT DESKTOP VERSIONS. I HAVE BEEN USING THE 64-BIT VERSION IN WINDOWS 11 (I HAVE A HIGH-END SAGER LAPTOP WITH 32GB RAM. I INSTALLED THE FREQUENT FIREFOX UPDATES BUT THE PROBLEN PERSISTED EVER SINCE VERSIONS 42X WERE RELEASED. I TRIED THE 32-BIT VERSION BUT THE PROBLEM PERSISTED. FINALLED, I TRIED THE DEVELOPER VERSION: NO MORE CRASHES! I READ THE RESPONSES FROM YOUR CLUELESS STAFF TO OTHER CUSTOMERS WITH THE SAME TROUBLE. THIS IS NOT A WINDOWS ERROR; THIS IS A FIREFOX APPLICATION ERROR. MAYBE SOME OF YOUR FIREFOX DEVELOPER CODERS SHOULD ASSIST THE 32-BIT AND 64-BIT DEVELOPERS. OR, DUMP THE VERSION 4X CODE AND BUILD ON THE MORE STABLE 39X CODE. ALSO, DON'T BLAME WINDOWS FOR FIREFOX APPLICATION ERRORS. AND...NEVER SUGGEST A WINDOWS REINSTALL FOR FIREFOX ERRORS!!!

Since this week's update of Firefox Developer edition when the browser is restarted tabs do not load until I reset the browser.

I suspect an add-on but have not been able to determine which one.

This is happening on multiple (3) physical computers.

I just started a new work role and haven't been able to find the time to troubleshooting of the issue myself.

This has been very disrupting and stressful.

I want to avoid any 'ai assist' searches because I do not find their summaries accurate or valuable enough to be worth the environmental impact they consume. I know my web browser searches are not under the control of firefox, but for privacy and security I kill cookies when I end browsing sessions. So I am not staying logged in to search engines when I finish my sessions, and setting my preferences to 'no ai assist' on DDG doesn't last session to session because the search engine defaults to 'ai assist' searches now, as does google.

Are there any search engines that do not use ai?

Has anyone written an extension/add-on to FF that would add 'minus ai' to all my searches no matter what browser I use? Or otherwise indicate to search engines that I do not want ai-assisted summaries period?

We've got various privacy options built into FF--this is why it is my preference always--and it would be LOVELY to have a 'no ai' option too.

Hello why my firefox installation 1440b6 64 bit on windows 10 do not autocomplete the third field in a form login ..

namely , username and identification password are correctly filled , but the third field (that in my case are named "company ID") would not, it remain empty, and i need to manually fill in each time. Actually this happen only on a one site , but may be because only this site that i use have a three field to fill in the login page...all the others need only password and username

thankyou kind regards klx140

I really enjoy the new sidebar revamp, but I've had an issue with it recently that I haven't been able to find a solution for. Typically, the settings gear is supposed to be situated near the bottom of bar. However, as demonstrated in the attached image, it is at the top near the bookmarks and history buttons. I have tried reinstalling the browser from scratch, turning the sidebar on and off, turning vertical tabs on and off, and even getting rid of my custom CSS theme for a time. None of these have worked. If anyone knows what the root of this issue is, I'd really appreciate the help.

Firefox used to start in a second on my Windows 10 PC. But lately it now takes about 10-20 secunds to start (on 143 beta). Is there any reason why it takes so much longer to start now? Is there any setting og tweak I can do to get it to start faster?

Hello Firefox Support Team,

I would like to report a browser compatibility issue regarding CSS positioning behavior that differs from Chromium-based browsers.

• • Issue Description:**

When an element with `position: sticky` is placed inside a container with `position: fixed`, Firefox treats the sticky element as if it has `position: relative`, effectively breaking the sticky positioning functionality.

• • Expected Behavior:**

The sticky element should maintain its sticky positioning behavior even when nested inside a fixed-positioned container, as it does in Chromium-based browsers.

• • Current Firefox Behavior:**

The sticky element loses its sticky properties and behaves like a relatively positioned element.

• • Use Case:**

This issue particularly affects modal implementations where: - The `body` element receives `position: fixed` to prevent background scrolling - Page elements (such as `.total-section`) should maintain their sticky behavior regardless of changes to the body positioning

• • Browser Comparison:**

- **Chromium browsers (Chrome):** Sticky positioning works correctly in this scenario - **Firefox:** Sticky positioning fails and falls back to relative behavior

• • Request:**

Could you please consider aligning Firefox's behavior with other major browsers? The current inconsistency creates cross-browser compatibility issues and forces developers to implement JavaScript workarounds.

Thanks!

I don't need to pin tabs, ever. Every time I try and drag a tab to the first slot, it always pins the tab, and I don't want it to do that. Is there a way to disable this stupid feature?

Developer edition seems to be blocking Today's Deals when browsing amazon.com. Regular firefox does not do this. Suggestion on what to do to fix it.

Also trying to browse distrowatch give the following: Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead.

This is the 4th time I've reported this problem. Here's the warning I get every day only after I have already been loading Newsmax pages with no problems:

Secure Connection Failed

The connection to www.newsmax.com was interrupted while the page was loading.

   The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.
   Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem.

Learn more…

There are no other sites in which I have this problem with FF x64 DE. In Edge, I see the newsmax pages load while the FF x64 DE https//newsmax.com xontinues to genberate the above message and fails to load the screen.

Please fix.

Thanks, WaltC

Whether a person clicks the fullscreen indicator or types F on the keyboard, the cursor will remain on screen as the video is playing until it is again moved. This also affects video played through the browser on steampowered.com. This issue appeared as of 143 and is still going strong in 144. This seems to be macOS specific as I am not noticing this behaviour on the Windows client. Could be a conflict with Tahoe.. I don't really know at this point.

There used to be a website where you could fire off a 'Firefox made me happy/sad' which is where I would've preferred to send this. So, have other people encountered this issue? And if so, are there any lasting solutions beyond wiggling the mouse?

1] Topic list is insufficient; 2] I tried to use the share data option of <;tblshg ; > troubleshooting. It could not automatically collect data, so I returned [back icon] to the form and found the form blank. The write-up I had spent well over an hour preparing was simply GONE.

No reply needed, buy that needs a fix. how could that ever pass QA.

I'm having huge memory problems with Firefox. In about:performance I can see that the extensions process takes up way too much memory. When I start Firefox it usually shows a memory usage of around 180MB. However, at some point the memory usage of the extensions process starts to increase and it doesn't stop increasing until my RAM is full and then it increases even further. It increases until I restart Firefox or until it uses so much RAM that my computer runs incredibly slow.

Below you can see a screenshot of the Task Manager showing how much RAM is available on my computer and a screenshot of the about:performance page showing the memory usage of the Extensions process. The RAM available on my laptop is 10GB (the default configuration was 4GB of soldered RAM plus 4GB of exchangeable RAM. I have upgraded from 4+4GB to 4+8GB but 2GB of the soldered RAM on this laptop are used as GPU memory so the remaining RAM is 10GB). The about:performance screenshot shows a memory usage of 13GB for the extensions process which is possible because Windows automatically pages RAM on the SSD when I'm running low on available physical memory. This enables programs to actually use more memory than the available physical RAM but of course programs become incredibly slow when the RAM is full and huge parts of memory have to be paged on the SSD.

My actual question: How can I find the cause of these memory problems?

What I've tried so far

- I have created a memory report on about:memory. The result is at the bottom of this post. - I have watched the about:performance page and tried to find out what action triggers the memory usage of the extensions process to increase. At the start of the browsing session the memory usage is only at around 180MB. It stays like that for a while. At some point it starts to steadily increase by many GBs. But I couldn't find the cause. I don't know what triggers the extensions process to increase memory usage. - I could simply disable extensions and see if the problem gets solved. But I want to know which exact extension causes this problem. It is very difficult to find out which one it is because I have many extensions and I don't know what causes the memory usage to increase. So I would have to disable extensions one by one and wait for an indefinite amount of time and check whether memory usage stays low. But I don't know how long I have to wait until the memory usage would increase because I couldn't identify what triggers it to increase.

Rather than just using trial and error I would like to find a way to use debugging tools to exactly determine what causes the problem.

_______________________

This (https://pastebin.com/U3QXTAt9) is the memory report from about:memory. This contains the whole extension (pid 18332) section (copy & pasted by selecting the text on the about:memory page). I have left out the rest because I don't know if it contains private data. Please note: this is not taken from the same browsing session as the screenshot that shows a memory usage of 13GB. Why? Because programs run very slow when memory is low and large parts of memory are being paged. The debug tools usually require a lot of RAM and CPU performance so it's very difficult to use the debug tools when the memory is already full and programs are already running slow. This memory report shows a very high memory usage of the extensions process. In this case it's "only" 3.5GB but it was taken in an early stage of the increasing memory usage. As shown in the screenshot below, memory usage can go even higher than the available physical RAM on my computer. The memory report doesn't clearly show which extension is responsible for the high memory usage. In the memory report, I can only see a high memory usage for the items gc-buffers and gc-heap which leads me to think that the memory problem has something to do with the garbage collector. However, I cannot see which extension is responsible for this. No item in this list with a description that identifies a specific extension has a high memory usage. This is only an excerpt from the memory report (only the extension section). I went through the whole memory report with Ctrl + F "moz-extension" and looked for items with a high memory usage but I didn't find a single item with high memory usage that belongs to a specific extension.