Deja Vu.... This site still takes my whole computer down
Dale Beckett
Accessing http://keir.net/firehole.html with Opera 1061 still crashes my
otherwise well-behaved Opera (1061 this time) , and takes my whole machine
down with it. It loads the site's blue background and then crashes. The
error is "divide error in module <unknown>." Opera is running with java and
javascript disabled this time. I'd try to get more information, but I'm
tired of rebooting for now.
--
Dale Beckett
Dave Stanley
Regards
Dave Stanley
Dale Beckett
> Works OK for me. Win ME/1061 with java/javascript on.
>
> Regards
>
> Dave Stanley
>
>
I didn't want to hear that :)
I'm going to disable everything else and try again. I'll be back, probably
after another reboot.
--
Dale Beckett
Dale Beckett
Okay, I'm back.
I eliminated all other running apps and rebooted before trying again. Same
crash on that site. I guess the answer is: don't go there.
I'm using Win98SE, which is well-behaved and solid. My Opera is also well-
mannered overall and rarely crashes. Even when it does occasionally dump out
on me, I can always just start it again with no windows. But when it crashes
at http://keir.net/firehole.html and I hit the "close" button, Opera refuses
to go away, but won't restart either. Curiously, I can continue to use other
on-line apps. In trying to shut down after this crash, I have to "End Task"
on everything until there's nothing at all left in the window. After that,
there's nothing to do but hit the hard reset button and then sit through
ScanDisk.
--
Dale Beckett
yashiro
> I'm using Win98SE, which is well-behaved and solid.
Your joking right? Win98 and 'solid' in the same sentence?
You really should move on to 2k/XP.
Dale Beckett
2K maybe.....
XP? Not until I have no choice.
For the moment Win98SE does everything I need on this machine, and gives me
no trouble. I'll keep my money for now, thanks.
--
Dale Beckett
Brixomatic
says...
Highly depends on your Hardware, your drivers and the software you're
running. A Win98 System can be Rock solid! A Mac running System9.x can be
rock solid too, even though it just has cooperative multitasking.
Opera was the only application in the last year that constantly crashed
my Win98 System, and I found out that it was in fact not Windows, but a
bad driver (turning down the Hardware-Accelleration in the system-
preferences solved the problem).
Greets,
-Wanja-
Josef W. Segur
>dal...@NOTsprynet.com says...
>> I'm going to disable everything else and try again. I'll be back, probably
>> after another reboot.
>>
>>
>
>Okay, I'm back.
>I eliminated all other running apps and rebooted before trying again. Same
>crash on that site. I guess the answer is: don't go there.
If you're still curious, perhaps you'd try an experiment. Clear your disk
cache, switch to User mode and no images and try loading the site. If that
works, then try right-clicking each image location and use 'Show image'.
Since the first image loaded will make Opera switch to showing cached
images, you lose the alt text and border at that point, but you can use the
D or E key to step through each element of the page. There are actually only
5 different images used: two GIFs for the buttons in the top left, a third
GIF used for a horizontal spacer, a PNG used for a screenshot, and a JPEG
used as a tiled background. If you get all 3 GIFs and the PNG loaded without
problem, switching to Author mode will turn on the background JPEG.
I've looked at the source code for that site and don't see anything
suspicious. The above is the best approach I can think of to isolate what
part is causing you problems, but don't be surprised if loading it stepwise
like that ends up avoiding the crash.
--
Joe
Quin Selman
Works OK here, too, using Win98SE.
--
Quin
Danny Smith
zin...@uswestmail.net says...
Well, it blows up for me, 1061 on win98se. And yes, it
sorta hoses the entire system, as well. (crap...)
More later
D
Dale Beckett
> > Works OK here, too, using Win98SE.
> >
>
> Well, it blows up for me, 1061 on win98se. And yes, it
> sorta hoses the entire system, as well. (crap...)
> More later
> D
>
Yeah! All right!! I mean..... uh... sorry to hear that. At least I'm not
the only one.
--
Dale Beckett
Dale Beckett
>
> If you're still curious, perhaps you'd try an experiment. Clear your disk
> cache, switch to User mode and no images and try loading the site. If that
> works, then try right-clicking each image location and use 'Show image'.
> Since the first image loaded will make Opera switch to showing cached
> images, you lose the alt text and border at that point, but you can use the
> D or E key to step through each element of the page. There are actually only
> 5 different images used: two GIFs for the buttons in the top left, a third
> GIF used for a horizontal spacer, a PNG used for a screenshot, and a JPEG
> used as a tiled background. If you get all 3 GIFs and the PNG loaded without
> problem, switching to Author mode will turn on the background JPEG.
>
> I've looked at the source code for that site and don't see anything
> suspicious. The above is the best approach I can think of to isolate what
> part is causing you problems, but don't be surprised if loading it stepwise
> like that ends up avoiding the crash.
>
Joe,
I tried what you suggested, although I forgot to clear the disk cache.
I set User mode and turned image loading off. The page loaded fine.
I set it back to Author mode, and it looked fine.
I loaded the images one at a time with no problem.
I turned image loading back on and it blew up.
--
Dale Beckett
Josef W. Segur
That last step shouldn't have changed anything. Is there a chance you
missed single-loading the image I described as a spacer? Looking more
closely, it is actually meant to put a vertical line down the screen
to the left of the main text, but with my screen resolution the line
isn't long enough and doesn't show near the top.
That image has alt="[3x1.gif]" and it's actually 3 pixels wide and
1 pixel high, but the html says to display it 3650 pixels high. In
no image mode the alt text appears halfway down the page to the left
of the text.
--
Joe
Dale Beckett
> That image has alt="[3x1.gif]" and it's actually 3 pixels wide and
> 1 pixel high, but the html says to display it 3650 pixels high. In
> no image mode the alt text appears halfway down the page to the left
> of the text.
>
>
Joe,
That was it! After several failed attempts and the required reboots I got
http://keir.net/firehole.html loaded and while I could still see it, tried
to load the 3X1.gif before anything else. Attempting to load it caused the
immediate crash of Opera and my whole system.
It's curious that a simple graphic like that could have such a devastating
effect. It's also interesting that it affects my system this way, but not
other systems.
The crash itself is also interesting. A blank Opera window stays on the
screen. No amount of cajoling will get rid of it, yet I can start, use, and
close other apps. The biggest problem arises when trying to shut down. The
"Not Responding" box comes up over and over until there is nothing left to
close, not even Explorer. At that point the only recourse is the reset
button.
Thanks for the help with this.
--
Dale Beckett
Geek
Hrm, 6.02 build 1066 loads it just fine....
Dale Beckett
By the way, I installed 1066 a few hours ago, but the problem remains.
--
Dale Beckett
Dale Beckett
Josef W. Segur
>jse...@westelcom.com says...
>
>> That image has alt="[3x1.gif]" and it's actually 3 pixels wide and
>> 1 pixel high, but the html says to display it 3650 pixels high. In
>> no image mode the alt text appears halfway down the page to the left
>> of the text.
>>
>>
>
>Joe,
>
>That was it! After several failed attempts and the required reboots I got
>http://keir.net/firehole.html loaded and while I could still see it, tried
>to load the 3X1.gif before anything else. Attempting to load it caused the
>immediate crash of Opera and my whole system.
>
>It's curious that a simple graphic like that could have such a devastating
>effect. It's also interesting that it affects my system this way, but not
>other systems.
I don't think it's involved, but there's an issue with the GDI routines
which might be used to stretch that image. The discussion in
http://www.lasergraphics.com/pages/bitmaps.htm and the MS kb article
ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/developr/win_dk/kb/q111/8/65.txt describe that.
On my Win95 system, that image displays with no problem with the page
code modified to say anything up to 16382 pixels high, at 16383 and above
it simply doesn't display. Since it's a monochrome image, I think those
figures reflect that GDI issue.
I'm thinking you may have found a bug in your video drivers if those
functions are accelerated by your video card or drivers, or it's even
possible that the particular version of GDI on your system is at fault.
Perhaps you and Danny Smith can compare systems and settings to try to
find commonality.
You might also try it with all video acceleration turned off. On Win95
that's accessed from the System Properties, Performance tab, Graphics
button. I tried the page that way just to be sure, and got the same
result of no problem.
>The crash itself is also interesting. A blank Opera window stays on the
>screen. No amount of cajoling will get rid of it, yet I can start, use, and
>close other apps. The biggest problem arises when trying to shut down. The
>"Not Responding" box comes up over and over until there is nothing left to
>close, not even Explorer. At that point the only recourse is the reset
>button.
I've seen similar cases after something caused a crash in user.exe, but
presumably any fault which affects system processes can do the same.
>Thanks for the help with this.
You're welcome, but I don't think we've pinned this down enough for the
developers to be able to guess where the problem lies. Have you tried
running drwatson to see if it sees the problem?
--
Joe
Dale Beckett
>
> You might also try it with all video acceleration turned off. On Win95
> that's accessed from the System Properties, Performance tab, Graphics
> button. I tried the page that way just to be sure, and got the same
> result of no problem.
Joe,
You were right. I moved the acceleration slider all the way to the left and
the crash went away. At the number 2 (basic acceleration) position it was
also fine, but at numbers 3 and 4 (most accelerator functions and full
functions) it crashes every time. So I assume the bug is in the video
drivers somewhere?
Someone suggested a while back (it could have been you) that I obtain the
latest Detonator drivers for my card, which I did. Doing this made no
difference.
I did indeed enlist Dr. Watson's help, and he first reported something about
"<display> has modified system files." But on subsequent crashes he reported
a different <xxxxxxx> each time, totally confusing me, something that's not
too hard to do.
Interestingly, I installed INSPECTR.EXE, posted by Axel Siebert today, but
it hasn't worked. My system goes too squirrelly before it has a chance to do
what it does.
Here's my system. Yes, it's dated, but rarely gives me any grief.
Gigabyte GA-5AX mainboard
AMD K6-2 550
256MB RAM
NVIDIA Vanta graphics card
Windows 98 SE
I don't even care about http://keir.net/firehole.html anymore - I've gotten
what I wanted from there. It's only curiosity that drives me now.
--
Dale Beckett
Josef W. Segur
>jse...@westelcom.com says...
>>
>> You might also try it with all video acceleration turned off. On Win95
>> that's accessed from the System Properties, Performance tab, Graphics
>> button. I tried the page that way just to be sure, and got the same
>> result of no problem.
>
>Joe,
>
>You were right. I moved the acceleration slider all the way to the left and
>the crash went away. At the number 2 (basic acceleration) position it was
>also fine, but at numbers 3 and 4 (most accelerator functions and full
>functions) it crashes every time. So I assume the bug is in the video
>drivers somewhere?
We're getting beyond my area of competence, but I think it's clearly in
NVIDIA territory. My understanding is that the actual acceleration is done
by the onboard hardware/firmware, but the drivers tell that what to do. I
think that a function which can be performed by GDI but not by their system
would have to be considered their bug. If they have a bug database perhaps
you'd find it's already known.
It's possible there's a setting buried somewhere in the drivers which would
allow turning off that specific acceleration. My Matrox drivers add some
additional items on the Display Properties which I'd be trying if I ran
into a similar problem.
>Someone suggested a while back (it could have been you) that I obtain the
>latest Detonator drivers for my card, which I did. Doing this made no
>difference.
>
>I did indeed enlist Dr. Watson's help, and he first reported something about
>"<display> has modified system files." But on subsequent crashes he reported
>a different <xxxxxxx> each time, totally confusing me, something that's not
>too hard to do.
That '..has modified system files' is really the crux of the issue, I think.
The video card has DMA access to memory, and if it puts data in the wrong
place things go to Hades in a hurry.
>Interestingly, I installed INSPECTR.EXE, posted by Axel Siebert today, but
>it hasn't worked. My system goes too squirrelly before it has a chance to do
>what it does.
Inspector IIXII is brought up by Windows at the same time you would formerly
have seen the dialog for a GPF or similar crash. Since you were seeing a
Divide by zero error instead. I'm not surprised it wasn't invoked.
>Here's my system. Yes, it's dated, but rarely gives me any grief.
>
>Gigabyte GA-5AX mainboard
>AMD K6-2 550
>256MB RAM
>NVIDIA Vanta graphics card
>Windows 98 SE
That's about 3 years newer than my system :-)
>I don't even care about http://keir.net/firehole.html anymore - I've gotten
>what I wanted from there. It's only curiosity that drives me now.
Some people do crosswords or other kinds of puzzles. I find this kind far
more engaging.
--
Joe
Dale Beckett
> It's possible there's a setting buried somewhere in the drivers which would
> allow turning off that specific acceleration. My Matrox drivers add some
> additional items on the Display Properties which I'd be trying if I ran
> into a similar problem.
>
NVIDIA adds four tabs, some with sub-tabs, to the advanced section, but when
I looked for them they were gone. I realized that it was backing off the
acceleration slider that made them disappear. Moving it to the right and
rebooting made them reappear. I never knew that because I never had occasion
to move the slider before.
In any case, I haven't the foggiest idea what mipmaps and texels are, nor
most of the other mysteries I see in there, so they are best left alone,
although I couldn't resist experimenting a little (with no success
whatsoever).
In the end I moved the slider back to the #2 position. For my purposes I
must confess I can see no difference in the performance. At that setting I
should have no trouble the next time I encounter a page with a 3X3650-pixel
graphic :)
But one last thing nags me: why did IE6 have no trouble displaying it?
--
Dale Beckett