Firefox crashes about gdipp HOT 12 CLOSED

I can visit Facebook without any problem. I have two recommendations for you. 
1) wait
the upcoming 0.7 release, which is a major improvement. Check if the problem 
still
exists. 2) If 1) fails, build the debug version, check which assertion fails. 
Report
me back and I will take a look at it. Thanks.

0.7.0 still has the problem. I'll try the debug version. Where is the log file 
located?

You are quick. No log file is created. I simply make assertion after each 
important
function call. You should get a assertion fail dialog with error file and line 
number
if such function call returns incorrect code.

I built the debug version, but I could not get the executables to work. Debug
versions of loader, service and demo do not work. Debug version of gdimm.dll 
works
with release versions of the executables. What am I doing wrong?

I do not know. They work fine in my case. You can debug the executables if you 
want.
However, what you need is only the debug version gdimm.dll. Substitute the 
release
version and visit Facebook.

There are some suggestions to debug gdipp: 
http://code.google.com/p/gdipp/wiki/HowToBuild

Thanks for the instructions. MS Linker segfaults when building gdipp_loader, 
demo and
svc. It would be great if you can upload the debug build.

Find the debug version in the download tab.

I use a clean Firefox with no addon. Currently no problem. However, my chrome 
with 9
addons crashed every-time it starts.

I think it may be related to addons in these two browsers.

Firefox was crashing in safe mode also. Latest snapshot from the repository 
solves
the problem.

No, now forums.adobe.com crashes firefox. Interesting.

Solved. The forums.adobe.com problem is different than multi-threading. If you 
can
debug, you can clearly see that the lpDx array in that call contains negative
distances, therefore the calculated bitmap width is negative, leading to a 
invalid
BITMAPINFO for CreateDIBSection. Solution is easy, abs(bmp_width).

Yes, there is no restriction of using negative distances in lpDx, per MSDN
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd162713%28VS.85%29.aspx). It is just 
not
orthodox.

Anyway, thanks for catching this bug.