Firefox is now multi-process

>>55949770
>Now it will consume your RAM faster than Chrome!

wut.

is there any way to figure out which addon blocks e10s usage?
I don't really want to force enable it, but rather want to know which one is blocking it.

>>55949770
>>55950215
I switched extensions.e10sBlockedByAddons and extensions.e10sBlocksEnabling to false and now e10s works, but none of my extensions seem to have stopped working.

>>55950237
Bah nevermind, sadpanda stopped working

It's actually only two processes.

File: .png (15KB, 316x341px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 316x341px

>>55950196
Pic related. Chromium based browsers consume less RAM than multiprocess FF.
>>55950215
I dunno, probably no way as of yet.
>>55950252
Well, you're relatively lucky. Almost half of mine refused to work.
>>55950264
Are you sure your dom.ipc.processCount isn't set to 2 or 1?

File: Honey_-_Chrome_Web_Store_-_Firefox_Developer_Editi 07.08.16 00-00-32.png (359KB, 1428x898px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 1428x898px

Chrom* users BTFO
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/chrome-store-foxified/

>>55950300
With memory optimizations that opera guys came up with FF will have a long way to go when it comes to memory consumption. FFs last saving grace as that it was running single process. It was slower and less responsive but in some extreme cases way better on memory. If Mozilla really wants to go fully multi process then days of FF being least memory intensive browser are over.

>>55950252
i thought sadpanda stopped working beacause exhentai switched to https

Tried this out w/32g ram

Loaded up a tumblr page archive with a bagillion animated gifs to test load, lightning fast.

Checked ps aux and kek, FF grabbing all the resources.

Nice but still no sandbox, so can't leave Jewggle Chromium

>>55950557
Note, e10 only offers partial sandboxing where processes are isolated from each other there's no 'real sandbox' protecting the underlying system from the browser.

File: zva.png (110KB, 1042x655px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1042x655px

Running the latest nightly on XP; I was able to use e10s a couple of years ago, but oddly, I'm not able to use it now.

>>55950421
You can turn it off. And firefox never fit that bill.

>>55950421
Let's trust Mozilla to make Firefox great again.
>>55950557
Firefox doesn't need extension sandboxing because Mozilla has a better policy against potentially malicious extensions, and webpage sandboxing wasn't ever necessary for security, there's NoScript and ad blockers.
>>55950640
Now that's odd. You can try force-enabling e10s:
browser.tabs.remote.force-enable -> true
extensions.interposition.enabled -> false extensions.interposition.prefetching -> false

What is the pros of doing multiprocess? Crash-resistance? Better multicore optimization?

>>55950725
Yeah, both.

>>55950725
Both. When one tab lags or crashes, others don't.

File: vad.png (8KB, 771x173px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 771x173px

>>55950703
I don't have the first value, do I have to create it or anything?

The rest were there, though.

>>55950835
Works on my machine (tm)
Maybe they changed something in latest Nightly builds, or it's not compatible with XP anymore. Have you tried Developer edition?

...Wait, why is your browser.tabs.remote.autostart is set to false? Try setting it to true. Also there might be a "Open a new e10s window" in your File menu.

e10s is cancer

File: nope.png (1KB, 295x34px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 295x34px

>>55949770
disabled both "e10sBlockedByAddons" and "e10sBlocksEnabling" and I'm still getting this. I guess I just need to hope whichever addon is causing this will be updated.

>>55950911
Try this too:
browser.tabs.remote.force-enable -> true
extensions.interposition.enabled -> false
extensions.interposition.prefetching -> false

>>55950900
I'm gonna restart and post whether it works or not.

>>55950930
Nah, it doesn't.

Thanks, anyway.

Speaking of browsers, I need something super light weight so that I can have open stream on twitch while playing games. Only 4GB of ram so that's why. I tried midori or something and it uses like 50% of my CPU for some reason.

>>55950967
Livestreamer plus a media player of your choice (well, maybe not *any* player, but mpv and VLC will work for sure)
Or youtube-dl with mpv.

>>55950967
>using a browser to stream video
why.jpeg

>>55951027
No I am not streaming using a browser. I need the stream open while I am playing so I can see what fucks up. As in, WATCH the stream.

kek been using multi-process for months and you come here posting as if it's something new

>>55950414
Who's gonna audit it

>>55951486
(You)
Or anyone, most extensions are open source. There's a report button, too.

>>55949770
but i dont want to switch from abp to ublock ;-;
The UI feels alot more complicated. is there a way to use it while still keeping no-script/request policy?

>>55951529
> i dont want to switch from abp to ublock
DO IT! JUST DO IT! I mean seriously, you're not gonna regret it.
Most non-e10s extensions will work, but a bit slower than if you'd disable them.

>>55951572
ublock origin is the right one? i mean does it work with request policy and no script?

>>55951593
> ublock origin is the right one?
Yes.
> does it work with request policy and no script?
Dunno about request policy, but NoScript is not e10s-compatible, but Firefox has some weird magic to enable non-e10s-compatible extensions without disabling multi-process functionality.

>>55949770
>After you do that, restart Firefox. Now it will consume your RAM faster than Chrome!

Also be sure to use 64-bit Firefox, just in case.

>>55950414
The addon developer is an active reddit user who is very friendly and responsive.

>>55951593
>does it work with request policy
you can use ublock origin as request policy, and to block scripts by default too:
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode