Firefox Cache



  • I know Mozilla has slowly been going full-retard over the past couple years but this is the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

    I spend a lot of time working on HTML5 applications now. As a result the pages I'm working on change all the time, like every few minutes or so. I've gotten used to hitting "Ctrl-F5" because that forces the page to refresh while completely bypassing the browser's cache. Normal F5 usually pulls from the cache and my changes aren't reflected.

    This itself was a dumb change on Mozilla's part. Earlier this year I never even had to use Ctrl-F5, it was smart enough to avoid caching anything pulling from localhost. That changed at some point.

    And now this. Mozilla, in their infinite wisdom, has decided to remove that feature. Ctrl-F5 appears to be identical to F5 now, using version 21.0. Now my process involves editing some scripts and HTML and then clearing my history and cache before reloading the page to test my changes.

    Hello, Chrome.



  • What is wrong with people? Chrome does the same thing...or my workstation is haunted.



  • Once I really liked Seamonkey but I never liked Firefox it's somehow bloaty and featureless at the same time.



  • And TRWTF is CS gives me an error page every time I post, yet the post is successfully posted.



  • There is no spoon.



  • @mott555 said:

    What is wrong with people? Chrome does the same thing...or my workstation is haunted.

     

    for chrome, you can fix that by opening the dev tools window (F12), clicking on the settings icon (in the bottom right corner), then select "disable cache".

     



  • @mott555 said:

    Ctrl-F5 appears to be identical to F5 now, using version 21.0. Now my process involves editing some scripts and HTML and then clearing my history and cache before reloading the page to test my changes.
     

    Either something's fucked in your installation of FF, or [url="https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/keyboard-shortcuts-perform-firefox-tasks-quickly#w_navigation"]their documentation is wrong[/url].

    I'm willing to believe either situation.



  •  If you use mouse gestures, down-up is a regular refresh, and down-up-down is a refresh that skips the cache. I have no idea why they'd do stupid things in the first place, though. 



  • @mott555 said:

    And now this. Mozilla, in their infinite wisdom, has decided to remove that feature. Ctrl-F5 appears to be identical to F5 now, using version 21.0. Now my process involves editing some scripts and HTML and then clearing my history and cache before reloading the page to test my changes.



    Doesn't seem like they removed that feature (which would be incredibly stupid as every single web developer in the world uses it).



  • I just tried http://www.refreshyourcache.com/en/cache-test/ and Ctrl-F5 still works fine.

    In any case, I'm sure you could use another brower/use an older version/disable cache/set no-cache tags for quick testing.



  • @mott555 said:

    And TRWTF is CS gives me an error page every time I post, yet the post is successfully posted.

     

     

    +1 confirm. I mean, it happens here too. And I can't edit tags.



  • @mott555 said:

    What is wrong with people me? Chrome does the same thing...or my workstation demeanor is haunted that of a whiny freeloader who should contribute to F/OSS projects whose features dissatisfy him.

    There, FTFY. :-{)>



  • Chrome's super aggressive cache is my least favorite thing about it.



  •  @SuperJames74 said:

    @mott555 said:

    What is wrong with people me? Chrome does the same thing...or my workstation demeanor is haunted that of a whiny freeloader who should contribute to F/OSS projects whose features dissatisfy him.

    There, FTFY. :-{)>

     

    it's hard to tell if you are seriously deluded enough to think that's a reasonable recourse when you have a problem with an OSS project or if you are satirizing idiots that are deluded enough to think that.

    Personally, if I use a piece of OSS software, and it doesn't meet my needs, I find something else. I don't take it apart and start learning how it works in order to fix it the way I want it. Because- fuck that, it's not my problem.

     



  • @LordOfThePigs said:

    @mott555 said:

    What is wrong with people? Chrome does the same thing...or my workstation is haunted.

     

    for chrome, you can fix that by opening the dev tools window (F12), clicking on the settings icon (in the bottom right corner), then select "disable cache".

     


    Mind = blown. Fucking hell. Why didn't I know about that a year ago?



  • Go to the extensions tab, install the Web Developer Toolbar (and the switcher button for it). On the "Disable" menu, disable the entire cache. Problem gone!

    And now that you learned that Firefox has extensions, gather the Firebug too.



  • @BC_Programmer said:

    it's hard to tell if you are seriously deluded enough to think that's a reasonable recourse when you have a problem with an OSS project
     

    Well, personaly I've never had problems getting my patches accepted by the developers. I didn't try enough times to tell you it's a trend, but I'm still failing to see any problem.

    Also, I've never tried to patch Firefox, PHP, Gnome, or some other project with extremely opionated developers. At least for Firefox, you can "patch" by creating extensions...



  • @spamcourt said:

    +1 confirm. I mean, it happens here too. And I can't edit tags.

    Usually a sign the DB is about out of space.



  • From now on, let's put amusing one-liners in this box instead.

    @blakeyrat said:

    @spamcourt said:
    +1 confirm. I mean, it happens here too. And I can't edit tags.

    Usually a sign the DB is about out of space.

    I DON'T WANT TO LOSE EVERYTHING AGAIN



  • @mikeTheLiar said:

    Mind = blown. Fucking hell. Why didn't I know about that a year ago?

    Don't get too excited, sometimes it mysteriously caches shit. So ctrl-shift-R is still your friend.

    Honestly, though, who needs to clear cache in development? Why are your development web servers sending any cache headers that aren't "no-cache"?



  • If using localhost mean you have a webserver at localhost, then the problem is with your webserver sending wrong cache headers for the request.

    Firefox will ask the server if there is a new version of your resource, unless you have configured the server to sent headers which allow the client to use cached version instead of asking if there is a new version.

    Try to use firebug to find out if your webserver sends a "No change"answe, or if the problem is that the browser newer request the resource in the first place.

     




  • @Mcoder said:

    Well, personaly I've never had problems getting my patches accepted by the developers.

    He's not even talking about having a patch accepted, he's talking about how retarded the idea is that you should have to fucking write your own patches for the software you use. If I have to spend a single hour writing and submitting a patch for a FOSS app (and, let's be honest, it's going to take more than an hour) that's a serious pain in my ass. I'd rather just spend money on a non-shitty application in the first place.

    I don't understand it. Do you people really not value your time at all? Do you want to spend your lives rotting away writing code to fix someone else's mistakes for a WTFy piece of software? Sure, you do it to get paid, son, but why the fuck would you ever spend your free time doing this?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @mikeTheLiar said:
    Mind = blown. Fucking hell. Why didn't I know about that a year ago?

    Don't get too excited, sometimes it mysteriously caches shit. So ctrl-shift-R is still your friend.

    Honestly, though, who needs to clear cache in development? Why are your development web servers sending any cache headers that aren't "no-cache"?


    It's mainly just when I'm making css changes. The graphic designer wants things changed from gray to a slightly different shade of gray, or wants there to be an additional 2.5 pixels between images. Chrome is super aggressive about caching that shit, to the point of where I'm not sure if I fucked something up or if Chrome decided to hold on to it from last week. It got so bad that I was clearing my cache every time I changed something, where Chrome actually started suggesting I use incognito mode because they as they thought I was just watching shitloads of porn.



  • btw: You really need the "Css reloader" plugin for firefox. Then you can reload all stylesheets by pressing F9, without reloading the rest of the page. A true time saver, when doing ajax because you don't lose any page state.



  • @mikeTheLiar said:

    It's mainly just when I'm making css changes. The graphic designer wants things changed from gray to a slightly different shade of gray, or wants there to be an additional 2.5 pixels between images. Chrome is super aggressive about caching that shit, to the point of where I'm not sure if I fucked something up or if Chrome decided to hold on to it from last week. It got so bad that I was clearing my cache every time I changed something, where Chrome actually started suggesting I use incognito mode because they as they thought I was just watching shitloads of porn.

    It shouldn't matter what files you're changing--if your dev webservers are sending the wrong cache headers, lock that shit down. The only time I need to clear cache is when I'm checking out stuff in production which is aggressively cached by the CDN.



  • @SuperJames74 said:

    @mott555 said:

    What is wrong with people me? Chrome does the same thing...or my workstation demeanor is haunted that of a whiny freeloader who should contribute to F/OSS projects whose features dissatisfy him.

    There, FTFY. :-{)>

    Except the way you contribute fixes to Firefox is by opening a bug on the Bugzilla that will get immediately closed wontfix.



  • @MiffTheFox said:

    @SuperJames74 said:
    @mott555 said:

    What is wrong with people me? Chrome does the same thing...or my workstation demeanor is haunted that of a whiny freeloader who should contribute to F/OSS projects whose features dissatisfy him.

    There, FTFY. :-{)>

    Except the way you contribute fixes to Firefox is by opening a bug on the Bugzilla that will get immediately closed wontfix.

     

    Or worksforme.

     



  • @BC_Programmer said:

    Personally, if I use a piece of OSS software, and it doesn't meet my needs, I find something else. I don't take it apart and start learning how it works in order to fix it the way I want it. Because- fuck that, it's not my problem.

    If I use a piece of OSS software that doesn't meet my needs, I go and buy something commercial after visiting the automatic ATM machine and entering my personal PIN number.



  • @flabdablet said:

    @BC_Programmer said:
    Personally, if I use a piece of OSS software, and it doesn't meet my needs, I find something else. I don't take it apart and start learning how it works in order to fix it the way I want it. Because- fuck that, it's not my problem.

    If I use a piece of open source OSS software that doesn't meet my needs, I go and buy something commercial after visiting the automatic ATM teller machine and entering my personal PIN identification number.

    Fixed FTFY that for you



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @Mcoder said:
    Well, personaly I've never had problems getting my patches accepted by the developers.

    I don't understand it. Do you people really not value your time at all? Do you want to spend your lives rotting away writing code to fix someone else's mistakes for a WTFy piece of software? Sure, you do it to get paid, son, but why the fuck would you ever spend your free time doing this?

    The fucking truth!



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    but why the fuck would you ever spend your free time doing this?
     

    Well, you can make something that many people use slightly better. Some people enjoy doing things like that just for the sake of it.



  • @flabdablet said:

    @BC_Programmer said:
    Personally, if I use a piece of OSS software, and it doesn't meet my needs, I find something else. I don't take it apart and start learning how it works in order to fix it the way I want it. Because- fuck that, it's not my problem.

    If I use a piece of OSS software that doesn't meet my needs, I go and buy something commercial after visiting the automatic ATM machine and entering my personal PIN number.

     

    would you like to issue a pull request to fix this spelling error in my previous post?

     



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @mikeTheLiar said:
    Mind = blown. Fucking hell. Why didn't I know about that a year ago?

    Don't get too excited, sometimes it mysteriously caches shit. So ctrl-shift-R is still your friend.

    Honestly, though, who needs to clear cache in development? Why are your development web servers sending any cache headers that aren't "no-cache"?

     

    Maybe because he overwrites the default headers, and is testing that. There are probably thousands of reasons for caching responses in development. None of them are common, but they may happen.

    Or maybe the original poster's stack is indeed a WTF.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    he's talking about how retarded the idea is that you should have to fucking write your own patches for the software you use
     

    And the alternative is? Spending those hours at the support line until the other side acknowleges the bug and mark it wontfix (the MS way)? Spending those hours revising a contract, then paying for the most expensive developpers that you'll ever hire to work quite a lot of hours "solving" the bug that they already marked wontfix (the Oracle way)? I still wonder where do you people pay for those bug-free software you talk about.

    Or, then, if the bug is so unimportant that you don't need to fix it ASAP, you can just report to the maintainers. They'll acknowledge it without any problems, and mark it wontfix in a speed that makes you closed software people dizzy. No need for hours on the phone, talking to your lawyers and paying extra for that.

     



  • Then the next version of the software comes out and you lose your changes. That is if you can ever get the software to compile in the first place, let alone dig through god knows how many KLOC in a language/framework you don't understand just to try to fix the bug that eluded the people who wrote it.



  • @spamcourt said:

    Some people enjoy doing things like that just for the sake of it.

    Sociopaths?



  • @Mcoder said:

    Maybe because he overwrites the default headers, and is testing that. There are probably thousands of reasons for caching responses in development. None of them are common, but they may happen.

    Or maybe the original poster's stack is indeed a WTF.

    You know damn well that's not what was happening here.



  • @Mcoder said:

    I still wonder where do you people pay for those bug-free software you talk about.

    Nobody said "bug free". It's just significantly less buggy and shitty. Seriously, if you think "you have the source, patch it yourself" is a reasonable response to broken, shitty software, then you are insane.

    @Mcoder said:

    They'll acknowledge it without any problems, and mark it wontfix in a speed that makes you closed software people dizzy.

    Is your argument actually that FOSS sucks faster?

    @Mcoder said:

    No need for hours on the phone...

    I don't even.. who the hell spends hours on the phone talking about a bug? What decade is your TimePod® from?



  • @boomzilla said:

    Chrome's super aggressive cache is my least favorite thing about it.

      +1

     If you don't like how Firefox handles cache, you're going to love how Chrome handles it.



  • @movzx said:

    @boomzilla said:

    Chrome's super aggressive cache is my least favorite thing about it.

      +1

     If you don't like how Firefox handles cache, you're going to love how Chrome handles it.

    Explain. Admittedly the Chrome cache isn't perfect, but it does offer me two things Firefox does not: 1) the ability to turn off all caching (while this is sometimes flaky, it still works a lot of the time); and 2) the ability to clear the DNS cache. How can you develop without being able to clear the DNS cache? I used to have an extension for FF I wrote to do this, using internal browser calls, but it never worked reliably. Really, I just had to run a separate profile for development work and close and re-open the browser when I wanted to clear the DNS cache.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Nobody said "bug free". It's just significantly less buggy and shitty.
     

    Guess that's exactly why everybody is abandonning everything else, but shitty FOSS.

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Is your argument actually that FOSS sucks faster?

    Yes, if you are ok with the default response of prorpietary software, you'll need to wait much less to get it from FOSS, and do way less work.

    @morbiuswilters said:

    who the hell spends hours on the phone talking about a bug?

    I dunno. When I worked at datacenter admininstration I asked my boss why he was paying for MS support, but then, he could come up with one time, 3 years earlier, when it was usefull.

    Mind you, my team lost at least 5 man-hours (of qualified people, because they must be able to answer questions and cut through bullshit) every time a non-disclosed known bug hit us. It was always wontfix, mind you, but once in a while they could explain what was happening (things like "no, our encoding conversion is O(n^3), how could you expect a linear one?" or "yep, we broke this functionality that you paid for at our last update, you must reimplement it") so we could work around the problem.

     

     



  • @Mcoder said:

    Guess that's exactly why everybody is abandonning everything else, but shitty FOSS.

    What's the atmosphere like on your world? In my world, except for a couple of scripting languages, network daemons or web browsers, nobody uses FOSS. (Besides, the "everybody's doing it" argument is really weak. A lot of people drink Bud Light, and they're clearly Philistines.)

    @Mcoder said:

    Yes, if you are ok with the default response of prorpietary software, you'll need to wait much less to get it from FOSS, and do way less work.

    Most of the commercial software I've used was far more responsive to bugs than FOSS. What's more, there were fewer bugs in the first damn place.

    @Mcoder said:

    Mind you, my team lost at least 5 man-hours (of qualified people, because they must be able to answer questions and cut through bullshit) every time a non-disclosed known bug hit us.

    Half of my job is just working around stupid, broken FOSS crapware. And my time is more valuable than yours, so that's an even bigger shame.

    @Mcoder said:

    It was always wontfix, mind you, but once in a while they could explain what was happening...

    Thank God that never happens with FOSS!

    Of course, from the sound of it, the software you're using probably doesn't even have a FOSS alternative.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    In my world, except for a couple of scripting languages, network daemons or web browsers, nobody uses FOSS.

    Let's see... What do I use during a day?

    Go? Oh yeah, that's open source.

    Chromium? That's open source too.

    Couchbase? Open source.

    CBFS? Yep.

    Fedora 18: Spherical Cow. Yep yep.

    Steam? It has a GitHub page. That counts, right?

    Thunderbird? FOSS.



  • @Ben L. said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    In my world, except for a couple of scripting languages, network daemons or web browsers, nobody uses FOSS.

    Let's see... What do I use during a day?

    Go? Oh yeah, that's open source.

    Chromium? That's open source too.

    Couchbase? Open source.

    CBFS? Yep.

    Fedora 18: Spherical Cow. Yep yep.

    Steam? It has a GitHub page. That counts, right?

    Thunderbird? FOSS.

    I'm not sure if I'm more curious about what you do with Couchbase or how you came to pick that specific technology. For someone who can't code SQL there are plenty of other technologies, why this one?



  • @Ronald said:

    For someone who can't code SQL

    That's like complaining that a C# programmer isn't an expert in VB5.



  • @Ben L. said:

    @Ronald said:
    For someone who can't code SQL

    That's like complaining that a C# programmer isn't an expert in VB5.

    I understand what you mean but believe it or not, I have yet to meet a skilled C# programmer who is not comfortable with VB5, yet they usually are a bit lost with VB.Net.



    As for knowing SQL: it's not an expertise, it's more of a prerequisite for general IT work like knowing HTML or being able to use a word processor. I know that our education system has failed us and that a lot of young people are living under the illusion that relational databases and SQL are about to disappear, but unfortunately that's not how the world works. I remember the last "SQL will die" scare a few years ago where the new trend was object oriented databases... Fads go away, reliable technology stays.



  • @Ben L. said:

    Go? Oh yeah, that's open source.

    Just search this forum for why Go sucks.

    Chromium? That's open source too.

    Chromium isn't developed by the "community" though, it's developed by Google and they make the source available.

    Couchbase? Open source.
    What the fuck is a couchbase?
    CBFS? Yep.

    Callback File System isn't open source. And doesn't run on Fedora. I'm assuming that's what you mean because that's the first result for CBFS in Google

    Fedora 18: Spherical Cow. Yep yep.

    Yeah, got no qualms about Fedora, I just hope it still works out for you when Red Hat drops support for 18 later this year.

    Steam? It has a GitHub page. That counts, right?

    Unless all of Steam is implemented in two Markdown files, NO. Last time someone figured out how Steam works internally, we got PacSteam, so I highly doubt Valve will release any info such as source code.

    Thunderbird? FOSS.

    Thunderbird is an okay desktop email client, but until there's a FOSS webmail client so I'm not shackled to a single PC, I'm sticking with Gmail.



  • @MiffTheFox said:

    Thunderbird is an okay desktop email client, but until there's a FOSS webmail client so I'm not shackled to a single PC, I'm sticking with Gmail.
    Roundcube? Though why'd you use webmail except when not on one of your own computers, I have no idea.



  • @Ben L. said:

    Let's see... What do I use during a day?

    When I said "nobody" uses FOSS, that was obviously an exaggeration. There's you, Torvalds, Richard Stallman and Morbs makes four. So four people use FOSS.



  • @Ronald said:

    I remember the last "SQL will die" scare a few years ago...

    SQL's not going anywhere. That said, other database technologies are more appropriate for some things, but I agree that so many of these "NoSQL" DBs are over-hyped and under-deliver.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.