><H3
CLASS="SECT2"
><A
-NAME="AEN829"
+NAME="AEN967"
></A
>5.1. I am getting <SPAN
CLASS="QUOTE"
> Early <SPAN
CLASS="APPLICATION"
>Privoxy</SPAN
-> versions (and also
+> 2.x versions (and also
<SPAN
CLASS="APPLICATION"
>Junkbuster</SPAN
><H3
CLASS="SECT2"
><A
-NAME="AEN842"
+NAME="AEN980"
></A
>5.2. I just added a new rule, but the steenkin ad is
still getting through. How?</H3
><A
NAME="BADSITE"
></A
->5.3. One of my favorite sites does not work with <SPAN
-CLASS="APPLICATION"
->Privoxy</SPAN
->.
+>5.3. One of my favorite sites does not work with Privoxy.
What can I do?</H3
><P
> First verify that it is indeed a <SPAN
> Troubleshooting actions is discussed in more detail in the <A
HREF="../user-manual/appendix.html#ACTIONSANAT"
TARGET="_top"
->user-manual appendix</A
+>User Manual appendix,
+ Troubleshooting: the Anatomy of an Action</A
>.
There is also an <A
HREF="../user-manual/actions-file.html#ACT-EXAMPLES"
TARGET="_top"
>actions tutorial</A
->.</P
+>
+ with general configuration information and examples.</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="SECT2"
><A
NAME="DUN"
></A
->5.4. After installing <SPAN
-CLASS="APPLICATION"
->Privoxy</SPAN
->, I have to log in
+>5.4. After installing Privoxy, I have to log in
every time I start IE. What gives?</H3
><P
> This is a quirk that effects the installation of
><A
NAME="FTP"
></A
->5.5. I cannot connect to any FTP sites. <SPAN
-CLASS="APPLICATION"
->Privoxy</SPAN
->
- seems to be blocking me.</H3
+>5.5. I cannot connect to any FTP sites. Privoxy
+ is blocking me.</H3
><P
> <SPAN
CLASS="APPLICATION"
><I
CLASS="EMPHASIS"
>any protocol other than HTTP
- or HTTPS</I
+ or HTTPS (SSL)</I
></SPAN
>.
</P
CLASS="QUOTE"
>"proxy"</SPAN
>
- setting, which will silently enable <SPAN
+ setting, which will silently enable various protocols, including
+ <SPAN
CLASS="emphasis"
><I
CLASS="EMPHASIS"
>both</I
></SPAN
-> HTTP and FTP
- proxying! So it is possible to accidentally enable FTP proxying in these
- cases. And of course, if this happens, <SPAN
+> HTTP and FTP proxying! So it is possible to
+ accidentally enable FTP proxying in these cases. And of course, if this
+ happens, <SPAN
CLASS="APPLICATION"
>Privoxy</SPAN
->
- will indeed cause problems since it does not know FTP.
+> will indeed cause problems since
+ it does not know FTP. Newer version will give a sane error
+ message if a FTP connection is attempted. Just disable the FTP setting
+ and all will be well again.
</P
><P
> Will <SPAN
NAME="OSXIE"
></A
>5.6. In Mac OSX, I can't configure Microsoft Internet Explorer to use
- <SPAN
-CLASS="APPLICATION"
->Privoxy</SPAN
-> as the HTTP proxy.</H3
+ Privoxy as the HTTP proxy.</H3
><P
> Microsoft Internet Explorer (in versions like 5.1) respects system-wide
network settings. In order to change the HTTP proxy, open System
CLASS="MARKUP"
><html><body></body></html></SPAN
>. Without
- <SPAN
-CLASS="APPLICATION"
->Privoxy</SPAN
-> the page loads fine.</H3
+ Privoxy the page loads fine.</H3
><P
> Chances are that the site suffers from a bug in
<A
>Privoxy</SPAN
> on
some platforms due to DNS timeouts.</P
+><P
+> This can be caused by a problem with the local <TT
+CLASS="FILENAME"
+>HOSTS</TT
+>
+ file. If this file has been changed from the original, try reverting it to
+ see if that helps.</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="SECT2"
><A
NAME="INUSE"
></A
->5.12. When I try to launch <SPAN
-CLASS="APPLICATION"
->Privoxy</SPAN
->, I get an
+>5.12. When I try to launch Privoxy, I get an
error message <SPAN
CLASS="QUOTE"
>"port 8118 is already in use"</SPAN
><A
NAME="DEMORONIZER2"
></A
->5.14. Why are binary files (such as images) corrupted when <SPAN
-CLASS="APPLICATION"
->Privoxy</SPAN
->
+>5.14. Why are binary files (such as images) corrupted when Privoxy
is used?</H3
><P
> This may also be caused by the <SPAN
CLASS="APPLICATION"
>Privoxy</SPAN
> is attempting to disable malicious
- Javascript in this case, with the <TT
+ <A
+HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javascript"
+TARGET="_top"
+>Javascript</A
+>
+ in this case, with the <TT
CLASS="LITERAL"
>unsolicited-popups</TT
>
CLASS="QUOTE"
>"404 No Such Domain"</SPAN
>. Why
- can't <SPAN
-CLASS="APPLICATION"
->Privoxy</SPAN
-> do this better?</H3
+ can't Privoxy do this better?</H3
><P
> There are potentially several factors here. First of all, the DNS resolution
is done by the underlying operating system -- not
merely initiates the process and hands it off, and then later reports
whatever the outcome was. And tries to give a coherent message if there seems
to be a problem. In some cases, this might otherwise be mitigated by the
- browser itself which might try some work-arounds and alernate approaches (e.g
+ browser itself which might try some work-arounds and alternate approaches (e.g
adding <SPAN
CLASS="QUOTE"
>"www."</SPAN
><A
NAME="ALLCPU"
></A
->5.18. At one site <SPAN
-CLASS="APPLICATION"
->Privoxy</SPAN
-> just hangs, and starts taking
+>5.18. At one site Privoxy just hangs, and starts taking
all CPU. Why is this?</H3
><P
> This is probably a manifestation of the <SPAN
>
filters.</P
></DIV
+><DIV
+CLASS="SECT2"
+><H3
+CLASS="SECT2"
+><A
+NAME="SLOWCRAWL"
+></A
+>5.19. I just installed Privoxy, and all my
+browsing has slowed to a crawl. What gives?</H3
+><P
+> This should not happen, and for the overwhelming number of users world-wide,
+ it does not happen. I would suspect some inadvertent interaction of software
+ components such as anti-virus software, spyware protectors, personal
+ firewalls or similar components. Try disabling (or uninstalling) these one
+ at a time and see if that helps.</P
+></DIV
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="NAVFOOTER"
projects / privoxy.git / blobdiff