Date: Sun, 06 May 2018 07:55:21 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: gecko@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 226476] www/firefox: update to 60.0 Message-ID: <bug-226476-21738-tLsgl3mXII@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-226476-21738@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-226476-21738@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D226476 --- Comment #48 from Graham Perrin <grahamperrin@gmail.com> --- > =E2=80=A6 disabled Tab Session Manager,=20 > re-enabled Session Boss,=20 > re-enabled e10s, quit.=C2=A0=E2=80=A6 I forgot to re-enable e10s.=20 > The same number, restored with Session Boss: =E2=80=A6 =E2=80=93 was OK.=20 > =E2=80=A6 use Tip Tab to load some (restored) YouTube tabs. Within the restored session I found (with Tip Tab) and loaded three YouTube videos.=20 At some point during the session =E2=80=93 maybe whilst the three videos pl= ayed concurrently =E2=80=93 there was, in response to a click on (or load of) a = tab, _momentary_ appearance of a content process. The momentary multi-process surprised me, but I don't know whether it's a bug:=20 - is it _ever_ appropriate to have=20 more than one process when=20 browser.tabs.remote.force-disable is true?=20 I guess that Mozilla may invalidate any bug report that involves browser.tabs.remote.force-disable with Firefox Quantum.=20 Jan, any thoughts? Would you like this spun off to a separate bug report in either the Mozilla or FreeBSD area? TIA --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-226476-21738-tLsgl3mXII>