Need help --XPcom

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 08:42:22 -0600, Mathedman wrote:

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.4.0

Well, as I've said over and over, nothing involving Windows works.
So "links" are useless in this case! I try a link and get the
message I've quoted here numerous times already--namely--
"Couldn't load XPCOM "


Evidently Thunderbird works because you are posting with it.
You could use another browser such as IE and paste the links into it.


--
Kind regards
Ralph
🦊

Wolf K wrote:
On 2017-11-16 23:09, Ralph Fox wrote:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 08:42:22 -0600, Mathedman wrote:

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.4.0

Well, as I've said over and over, nothing involving Windows works.
So "links" are useless in this case! I try a link and get the
message I've quoted here numerous times already--namely--
"Couldn't load XPCOM"


Evidently Thunderbird works because you are posting with it.
You could use another browser such as IE and paste the links into it.

Mathedman doesn't understand what's going on: xpcom.dll is missing. that
means it has to be installed. So he should find it.

Mathedman, search on "xpcom.dll", and you'll find all kinds of help.

And BTW, Thunderbird does involve Windows. That's why clicking on a link
within it doesn't work: xpcom.dll is part of Windows.


In the source for Firefox 57, in "nsBrowserApp.cpp" there is
the one instance of the error message. This is the only place
in the program that message appears.

InitXPCOMGlue(const char *argv0)
...
gBootstrap = mozilla::GetBootstrap(exePath.get());
if (!gBootstrap) {
Output("Couldn't load XPCOM.\n"); -----
return NS_ERROR_FAILURE;
}

There is no XPCOM.dll.

There is only XUL.dll and XULrunner as examples
of access to "Cross Platform Component Object Model".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xpcom

It has *absolutely nothing* to do with Windows XP :-)
That's an unfortunate coincidence, leading to confusion.

*******

To debug this, you can build from source, and in .mozconfig,
I believe there's some selection to have the build done
with (Visual Studio) IDE integration. I did that once,
attached WinDBG to firefox.exe and debugged it line
by line. That was around firefox 3.5 or so. I found it
very annoying to debug - I was debugging printing,
and ended up in three print subroutines which were
almost identical. I spent about two hours
single stepping, trying to make sense of it, and
I gave up.

The build option to output debug statements to
the console, that option is rubbish. Only going
the full distance, and setting it up for WinDBG
usage, gives any information of merit. In this
case, you'd want to know what exePath.get() is
returning. It's like the program can't find
its Program Files folder.

Paul

On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 16:41:10 -0500, Wolf K wrote:

On 2017-11-16 23:09, Ralph Fox wrote:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 08:42:22 -0600, Mathedman wrote:

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.4.0

Well, as I've said over and over, nothing involving Windows works.
So "links" are useless in this case! I try a link and get the
message I've quoted here numerous times already--namely--
"Couldn't load XPCOM"


Evidently Thunderbird works because you are posting with it.
You could use another browser such as IE and paste the links into it.

Mathedman doesn't understand what's going on: xpcom.dll is missing. that
means it has to be installed. So he should find it.

Mathedman, search on "xpcom.dll", and you'll find all kinds of help.

And BTW, Thunderbird does involve Windows. That's why clicking on a link
within it doesn't work: xpcom.dll is part of Windows.


xpcom.dll is not part of Microsoft Windows. xpcom.dll is part of
some versions of Firefox.

The error "Couldn't load XPCOM" is an error starting Firefox. This
error can occur after performing a Windows System Restore.

Restoring xpcom.dll itself will not make clicking on a link work.
Windows is trying to start a version of Firefox which is not there.

If Mathedman wants a better understanding of what is going on, he
could paste the mozillazine link into IE.

Searching on "xpcom.dll" will find many low-grade fix-it sites which
have the same boilerplate text for many different dlls.


--
Kind regards
Ralph
🦊

go back into windows restore, and choose an older date, then
restore it again to that older date. Until it quits doing it.
Control Panel, System Security, Action Center, Restore to an earlier
time. then Restore Files, then at the bottom of that window, choose
select another backup to restore from link.... A window should pop open
full of dates of backups. choose an older one.

Then ask it for the
On 11/15/2017 6:32 AM, Mathedman scribbled:
I made a sad mistake --- using Firefox, today it asked
if I wanted the new version. Foolishly, it turns out I said yes.
It proceeded to mess up lots of stuff -- changed all icons, etc.
In disgust, I deleted it and ran system restore. It worked
I thought, But now nothing works. Every No icons work but give
message "COULDN'T LOAD XPCOM".
Any help to clean up this mess would be appreciated.
Thanks.

winner

On 11/18/2017 11:36 AM, tesla sTinker scribbled:
go back into windows restore, and choose an older date, then
restore it again to that older date. Until it quits doing it.
Control Panel, System Security, Action Center, Restore to an earlier
time. then Restore Files, then at the bottom of that window, choose
select another backup to restore from link.... A window should pop open
full of dates of backups. choose an older one.

Then ask it for the
On 11/15/2017 6:32 AM, Mathedman scribbled:
I made a sad mistake --- using Firefox, today it asked
if I wanted the new version. Foolishly, it turns out I said yes.
It proceeded to mess up lots of stuff -- changed all icons, etc.
In disgust, I deleted it and ran system restore. It worked
I thought, But now nothing works. Every No icons work but give
message "COULDN'T LOAD XPCOM".
Any help to clean up this mess would be appreciated.
Thanks.

"tesla sTinker" wrote

| go back into windows restore, and choose an older date, then
| restore it again to that older date.

He solved it two days ago. Doesn't anyone read
the thread before responding? yours are among a half
dozen solutions posted *after* the discussion was
ended.

On 11/18/2017 12:38 PM, Mayayana scribbled:
"tesla wrote

| go back into windows restore, and choose an older date, then
| restore it again to that older date.

He solved it two days ago. Doesn't anyone read
the thread before responding? yours are among a half
dozen solutions posted *after* the discussion was
ended.


your pretty dam stupid. shows you how much you know about dll files.
he only thinks its solved. registry does not fix itself.
to reinstall it, is not the answer. It was to late, the machine already
updated its registry. And that is why, he got the message in the first
place. The message will come back.

"tesla sTinker" wrote

| your pretty dam stupid. shows you how much you know about dll files.
| he only thinks its solved. registry does not fix itself.
| to reinstall it, is not the answer. It was to late, the machine already
| updated its registry. And that is why, he got the message in the first
| place. The message will come back.

If it matters that a DLL file is listed in the Registry it
would be a COM DLL, with one or more listings under
HKCR. I don't have an XPCOM entry there. Do you?
Are you aware of any COM DLLs installed by Firefox
that need to be registered? Do you know what COM is
or why the Registry might be necessary for Firefox
to run?

XPCOM is briefly outlined he

https://www.codeproject.com/Articles...XPCOM-Tutorial

Where a Windows COM DLL is registered in the
Windows Registry, Mozilla XPCOM libraries are not
Windows-based. They're cross-platform. The
registration is in files in the personal profile folder.

He *probably* got the message because he
deleted part of the program without uninstalling.
It was apparently fixed by re-installing. He seems to
be OK now. Yet you think he should revert to an
earlier backup, losing his recent files, "just in case",
despite the fact that he's already seemingly solved
the problem? Aren't you being a bit reckless with
*his* files?

I suspect you've been listening too
much to official Microsoft tech support people and
tech-illiterates who present System Restore as the
answer to everything. Sometimes you just have to
install a backup, but often things can be fixed
without such drastic measures.

"Wolf K" wrote

| your pretty dam stupid.
| [...]
|
| Ah, elegant diplomatic politesse.
|
| A real winner. Bound to be taken seriously at the highest levels.
|

Well, he called my dam stupid, but he also said
it's pretty. No one has ever said my dam is pretty
before. On the down side, I don't actually have a
dam, or even a stream to build it across. Still, it's
nice to know that people think my theoretical dam
is pretty.

did I say anything about the dll file being embedded inside the
registry? Your like the rest of the smart ass protestants, that
hate the true Catholic religion, as if, it is the only religion in the
world. Well, it is. And you are the that wanted help. Not me.


On 11/20/2017 6:28 AM, Mayayana scribbled:
"tesla wrote

| your pretty dam stupid. shows you how much you know about dll files.
| he only thinks its solved. registry does not fix itself.
| to reinstall it, is not the answer. It was to late, the machine already
| updated its registry. And that is why, he got the message in the first
| place. The message will come back.

If it matters that a DLL file is listed in the Registry it
would be a COM DLL, with one or more listings under
HKCR. I don't have an XPCOM entry there. Do you?
Are you aware of any COM DLLs installed by Firefox
that need to be registered? Do you know what COM is
or why the Registry might be necessary for Firefox
to run?

XPCOM is briefly outlined he

https://www.codeproject.com/Articles...XPCOM-Tutorial

Where a Windows COM DLL is registered in the
Windows Registry, Mozilla XPCOM libraries are not
Windows-based. They're cross-platform. The
registration is in files in the personal profile folder.

He *probably* got the message because he
deleted part of the program without uninstalling.
It was apparently fixed by re-installing. He seems to
be OK now. Yet you think he should revert to an
earlier backup, losing his recent files, "just in case",
despite the fact that he's already seemingly solved
the problem? Aren't you being a bit reckless with
*his* files?

I suspect you've been listening too
much to official Microsoft tech support people and
tech-illiterates who present System Restore as the
answer to everything. Sometimes you just have to
install a backup, but often things can be fixed
without such drastic measures.

did I say anything about the dll file being embedded inside the
registry? Your like the rest of the smart ass protestants, that
hate the true Catholic religion, as if, it is the only religion in the
world. Well, it is. And you are the one that wanted help. Not me.

On 11/20/2017 6:28 AM, Mayayana scribbled:
"tesla wrote

| your pretty dam stupid. shows you how much you know about dll files.
| he only thinks its solved. registry does not fix itself.
| to reinstall it, is not the answer. It was to late, the machine already
| updated its registry. And that is why, he got the message in the first
| place. The message will come back.

If it matters that a DLL file is listed in the Registry it
would be a COM DLL, with one or more listings under
HKCR. I don't have an XPCOM entry there. Do you?
Are you aware of any COM DLLs installed by Firefox
that need to be registered? Do you know what COM is
or why the Registry might be necessary for Firefox
to run?

XPCOM is briefly outlined he

https://www.codeproject.com/Articles...XPCOM-Tutorial

Where a Windows COM DLL is registered in the
Windows Registry, Mozilla XPCOM libraries are not
Windows-based. They're cross-platform. The
registration is in files in the personal profile folder.

He *probably* got the message because he
deleted part of the program without uninstalling.
It was apparently fixed by re-installing. He seems to
be OK now. Yet you think he should revert to an
earlier backup, losing his recent files, "just in case",
despite the fact that he's already seemingly solved
the problem? Aren't you being a bit reckless with
*his* files?

I suspect you've been listening too
much to official Microsoft tech support people and
tech-illiterates who present System Restore as the
answer to everything. Sometimes you just have to
install a backup, but often things can be fixed
without such drastic measures.