Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Ok this is weird. I've just upgraded from FF 3.5.7 to 3.6 and now when I go to make a new post on this forum, the main text box is uneditable. You can select any text that might be in there, but can't delete or change it, nor type new text.

To get this text here I've clicked "Insert special item" -> Centered text, and filled in the field.

I can still edit the post normally, but only using quick edit, so the centred text should be edited back to normal by the time you read this.

Haven't tried replying yet, but I suspect the same will apply, will only be able to use quick reply.

Edited by Lum
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 1 month later...

Its actually a bug with IPS 2.3.6 - All users of Firefox 3.6 are going to experience this issue (as you can see, I cannot type text underneath what has been quoted as the cursor is not letting me place it where I want. There is a patch here.

http://community.invisionpower.com/topic/3...or-ipboard-236/

Could we please get that patch loaded into the server? Others will have this issue as they upgrade from 3.5 to 3.6.....

Many thanks

-Dohmar

Well it's nothing we can help you with mate.

You should report the issue via Firefox's reporting/issues log.

I'm using 3.6 daily... and have done so for a while... I still do not have this issue funnily enough.

Either way - we are migrating servers early next week.

I can't see any patching/changes in the next fortnight unfortunately - cant upgrade in the middle of a migration :(

its a strange issue. i downgraded to 3.5 and it works fine. Any chance of upgrading to ipboard 3 once the migration is complete (or convert the data and install 3 as part of that migration) - its very frustrating - are you using the basic editor

As far as the link is concerned, all that needs to be done is to replace a js file within the heirachy - its basically a re-coded subroutine for the editor to work correctly with 3.6's js implementation - should just be able to drop it in and have it work

-D

I'm using 3.6 daily... and have done so for a while... I still do not have this issue funnily enough.

Either way - we are migrating servers early next week.

I can't see any patching/changes in the next fortnight unfortunately - cant upgrade in the middle of a migration :nyaanyaa:

FF 3.6 and patch hasn't fixed quick replies or full replies from what I've experienced.

Quick edit works fine though.

Issue has to do with Firefox's change in JS engine. Will get onto it if no patch is issued by IPB in the next week or so.

I'm using 3.6 and I also suffer from all of these issues. Have to use IE to browse the site as it is just completely non functional in 3.6

Hope the patches are run soon otherwise the list of people experiencing these issues is going to grow and grow. Took me over a week to bother to even look for this thread, so I imagine that there are quite a few other users experiencing this that just haven't posted here yet.

Edited by Rolls

All the guys experiencing issues with FF 3.6, can you guys turn off all your addons and try using the forum? Just wanna make sure its not an incompatibility with one of the addons as I seem to be having the same issues when I have my addons enabled, but not when I turn em off. I haven't narrowed down which one though.

hmm. i've just updated FF to 3.6. still getting all the usual stuff with server timing out and stuff, but it seems to take forever to submit a post now. you can do it, but the tab just loads forever. the post can be seen as being submitted if you "view new posts" in a new tab though

I have FF 3.6 and have the same issues.

Have disabled all addons to no avail. And am having issues on two different computers on two different connections.

i have FF 3.6 and cant post a damn thing on SAU. (using IE7 :) for this) other forums i visit in FF work fine.

edit: works fine now. FF updated to 3.62 and all it good. :(

Edited by Peter89

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...