has anybody run into, and resolved --
" (caused by ExtractorError("Could not find JS function 'na'; please report this issue..."
in Win 7 Home Premium, or is it specifically you tube's version of JP?
I already determined it was not a problem at (at least ones tested) other video sites.

<jackpatton@astraweb.com> wrote:

> has anybody run into, and resolved --
> " (caused by ExtractorError("Could not find JS function 'na'; please report this issue..."
> in Win 7 Home Premium, or is it specifically you tube's version of JP?
> I already determined it was not a problem at (at least ones tested) other video sites.

Are you using an ad/content extension in your unidentified web browser?
If so, maybe you configured it to disable Javascript, by default, until
you choose to enable at the visited site. I remember trialing NoScript
a long time ago (but switched to uBlock Origin) where there was, as I
recall, an option to disable Javascript by default, but you could
override that choice after connecting to a site (although you may have
needed to refresh the page to have JS create the objects or references
that it expects when it runs).

If it is just one site that is generating the error, maybe their JS code
is invalid; i.e., instead of checking an object was defined, or checking
a function was defined, the coder erroneously assumed those would always
be available. Lots of JS is hosted elsewhere, like at a CDN (Content
Delivery Network; e.g., Akamai). If connection to the 3rd party is
unavailable to access the resource, the JS at that resource cannot be
retrieved. That could be the fault of your hosts file blocking, an
adblocker, a content blocker or modifier (e.g., Greasemonkey), or by the
3rd party resource provider (CDN).

See what happens when you disable all extensions in your unidentified
web browser, reload it, and retest the site. Google is known for coding
their sites to work best with Chrome. That is, you need to use Chrome
(or a web browser that uses Google's Blink rendering engine and/or
Google's J8 script interpreter) to properly support the Google site.
Which web browsers have your tried? You never mentioned which one(s)
you tried.

You also never mention if the JS error occurs for every video you watch
at YT, or just one, or a few. There is a feedback link (3-dot icon,
Report) to report issues. If you add a comment, the author of a video,
if they monitor their own YT account, might contact YT on the issue, or
the problem is with the author's content.

You could report the JS coding error to the site admin. Youtube, like
many major sites, don't really provide one-on-one support. See:

https://www.youtube.com/t/contact_us/

Your choices with Youtube is to search their online help, see if posting
in their forums provides help (if it is a peer-only community, no
participation by a YT rep, then you'll unlikely get an issue resolved),
or see if there is a known site issue.

On 12/15/2021 8:36 AM, jackpatton@astraweb.com wrote:
> has anybody run into, and resolved --
> " (caused by ExtractorError("Could not find JS function 'na'; please report this issue..."
> in Win 7 Home Premium, or is it specifically you tube's version of JP?
> I already determined it was not a problem at (at least ones tested) other video sites.
>

It could be a part of Youtube-dl, which is a dead project.

https://askubuntu.com/questions/1381100/no-longer-able-to-download-youtube-using-youtube-dl-how-do-i-fix-this-problem

There are some follow-on projects that have forked the source
and are repairing broken functions like your example. When I looked
in the source for the youtube PY, I don't see that message.

https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp

https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/latest/download/yt-dlp.exe

https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/latest/download/yt-dlp_x86.exe

One other dependency the program might have, is ffmpeg.exe . That is used
when an audio stream and a video stream need to be re-multiplexed. A typical usage
is if a download wants "Best" in which case you take the Best video and the Best audio
and re-multiplex them to make a final video file.

The virustotal scans are clean, yet there is no mention of a packer. 7ZIP can't
open the file as an EXE, which suggests something isn't entirely what it seems.
While 7ZIP can't do much with an EXE, it's still refreshing to see it open the
file as an archive and expose the segments inside.

Paul

On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:23:09 -0500, in alt.windows7.general, Paul
<nospam@needed.invalid>, wrote

>On 12/15/2021 8:36 AM, jackpatton@astraweb.com wrote:
>> has anybody run into, and resolved --
>> " (caused by ExtractorError("Could not find JS function 'na'; please report this issue..."
>> in Win 7 Home Premium, or is it specifically you tube's version of JP?
>> I already determined it was not a problem at (at least ones tested) other video sites.
>>
>
>It could be a part of Youtube-dl, which is a dead project.
>
>https://askubuntu.com/questions/1381100/no-longer-able-to-download-youtube-using-youtube-dl-how-do-i-fix-this-problem
>
>There are some follow-on projects that have forked the source
>and are repairing broken functions like your example. When I looked
>in the source for the youtube PY, I don't see that message.
>
>https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp
>
> https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/latest/download/yt-dlp.exe
>
> https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/latest/download/yt-dlp_x86.exe
>
>One other dependency the program might have, is ffmpeg.exe . That is used
>when an audio stream and a video stream need to be re-multiplexed. A typical usage
>is if a download wants "Best" in which case you take the Best video and the Best audio
>and re-multiplex them to make a final video file.
>
>The virustotal scans are clean, yet there is no mention of a packer. 7ZIP can't
>open the file as an EXE, which suggests something isn't entirely what it seems.
>While 7ZIP can't do much with an EXE, it's still refreshing to see it open the
>file as an archive and expose the segments inside.
>
> Paul

Thanks, Paul. I guess I should be glad that i got a bunch of stuff when the getting
was good.

I do have, and use, ffmpeg.exe for audio only......

Since i have no problem with other sites getting full video and audio, ffmpeg for
audio only may well be the problem.....

"Paul" <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote

| It could be a part of Youtube-dl, which is a dead project.
|

Fixed in recent update of 12/17/21:

https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/issues/30391

But it doesn't seem to be working any better. On one
of the support chat pages it seems to be indicated that
there is a fix but that no one has integrated it into the
Windows EXE.

Unfortunately for those of us primarily using XP, yt-dlp
is not an option. It seems to be using an incompatible
version of Python.

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 08:40:42 -0500, in alt.windows7.general, "Mayayana"
<mayayana@invalid.nospam>, wrote

>"Paul" <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote
>
>| It could be a part of Youtube-dl, which is a dead project.
>|
>
>Fixed in recent update of 12/17/21:
>
>https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/issues/30391
>
> But it doesn't seem to be working any better. On one
>of the support chat pages it seems to be indicated that
>there is a fix but that no one has integrated it into the
>Windows EXE.
>
> Unfortunately for those of us primarily using XP, yt-dlp
>is not an option. It seems to be using an incompatible
>version of Python.
>

Apparently someone did integrate the fix with into the Windows.exe -- no update
date change from 12-17-21. I just ran it on a christmas carol and it worked fine.

ca:\youtube-dl_ 8:59:17.31_>yt --version
2021.06.06

c:\youtube-dl_ 8:59:27.23_>youtube-dl -U
Updating to version 2021.12.17 ...
Waiting for file handle to be closed ...

c:\youtube-dl_ 9:00:54.30_>Updated youtube-dl to version 2021.12.17.
yt --version
2021.12.17

"FACE" <AFaceInTheCrowd@today.net> wrote

|
| Apparently someone did integrate the fix with into the Windows.exe -- no
update
| date change from 12-17-21. I just ran it on a christmas carol and it
worked fine.
|

It's good that's fixed, but I tried to download a non-commercial
video yesterday with the update and it was hopelessly slow.
The chat on the support page seems to indicate that's fixed
by recompiling with some kind of code edit, but no one has
done it for Windows. Did you just get high speed downloads?

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 11:16:20 -0500, in alt.windows7.general, "Mayayana"
<mayayana@invalid.nospam>, wrote

>"FACE" <AFaceInTheCrowd@today.net> wrote
>
>|
>| Apparently someone did integrate the fix with into the Windows.exe -- no
>update
>| date change from 12-17-21. I just ran it on a christmas carol and it
>worked fine.
>|
>
> It's good that's fixed, but I tried to download a non-commercial
>video yesterday with the update and it was hopelessly slow.
>The chat on the support page seems to indicate that's fixed
>by recompiling with some kind of code edit, but no one has
>done it for Windows. Did you just get high speed downloads?
>

I still had the page up --

"c:\youtube-dl_ 9:34:43.29_>yt -x --audio-format mp3 "https://www.youtube.com/watc
[youtube] bYe7odIJLF0: Downloading webpage
[youtube] bYe7odIJLF0: Downloading player 8da38e9a
[download] Destination: Mary, Did You Know-bYe7odIJLF0.m4a
[download] 100% of 3.74MiB in 01:25
[ffmpeg] Correcting container in "Mary, Did You Know-bYe7odIJLF0.m4a"
[ffmpeg] Destination: Mary, Did You Know-bYe7odIJLF0.mp3
Deleting original file Mary, Did You Know-bYe7odIJLF0.m4a (pass -k to keep)"

So no, not even close. I have noticed that it varies -- in some cases by source and
in others by item. On some sites i get near full pipe of about 38-40MBPS on most
all DLs and on others--- well, like this.
The first time that i saw a gigabyte download in about 7 seconds i was like "hey,
did I really get it?". (Yes, I did)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 11:16:20 -0500, in alt.windows7.general, "Mayayana"
<mayayana@invalid.nospam>, wrote

>"FACE" <AFaceInTheCrowd@today.net> wrote
>
>|
>| Apparently someone did integrate the fix with into the Windows.exe -- no
>update
>| date change from 12-17-21. I just ran it on a christmas carol and it
>worked fine.
>|
>
> It's good that's fixed, but I tried to download a non-commercial
>video yesterday with the update and it was hopelessly slow.
>The chat on the support page seems to indicate that's fixed
>by recompiling with some kind of code edit, but no one has
>done it for Windows. Did you just get high speed downloads?
>

I just tried a site that is normally near full pipe and it was slow as molasses --
it could be the time of day. But, if not, luckily i saved the old version of
youtube-dl (renamed as ytold, so i don't have to type all that)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

c:\youtube-dl_16:55:17.18_>ytold --version
2021.06.06

c:\youtube-dl_16:55:42.31_>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 09:49:15, FACE <AFaceInTheCrowd@today.net> wrote
(my responses usually follow points raised):
[]
>Apparently someone did integrate the fix with into the Windows.exe --
>no update
>date change from 12-17-21. I just ran it on a christmas carol and it
>worked fine.
>
>
>ca:\youtube-dl_ 8:59:17.31_>yt --version
>2021.06.06
>
>c:\youtube-dl_ 8:59:27.23_>youtube-dl -U
>Updating to version 2021.12.17 ...
>Waiting for file handle to be closed ...
>
>c:\youtube-dl_ 9:00:54.30_>Updated youtube-dl to version 2021.12.17.
>yt --version
>2021.12.17
>
>
Or not:
D:\MOVIES>yt-dl -U
ERROR: can't find the current version. Please try again later.

D:\MOVIES>yt-dl --version
2021.06.06

I'm guessing the server isn't very up. (W7-32 here.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The advantage with David Attenborough is that people just want to hear him
talk. About anything.
- Kirsty Young (Desert Island Discs presenter), RT 2015/9/25-10/2

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote

| Or not:
| D:\MOVIES>yt-dl -U
| ERROR: can't find the current version. Please try again later.
|

Why not just go get it at the website? It doesn't seem
to be fixed in terms of speed. From what I can gather,
there's a fix that's not included in the Windows EXE. I found
what seems to be the code update, but the source code
seems to be for a Linux compile only. I was hoping I could
download the source, swap out youtube.py (which I did)
then recompile in Visual Studio 2010. But the VS project
files are nowhere to be found. Oh, well.

On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 16:46:10 +0000, in alt.windows7.general, "J. P. Gilliver
(John)" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>, wrote

>On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 09:49:15, FACE <AFaceInTheCrowd@today.net> wrote
>(my responses usually follow points raised):
>[]
>>Apparently someone did integrate the fix with into the Windows.exe --
>>no update
>>date change from 12-17-21. I just ran it on a christmas carol and it
>>worked fine.
>>
>>
>>ca:\youtube-dl_ 8:59:17.31_>yt --version
>>2021.06.06
>>
>>c:\youtube-dl_ 8:59:27.23_>youtube-dl -U
>>Updating to version 2021.12.17 ...
>>Waiting for file handle to be closed ...
>>
>>c:\youtube-dl_ 9:00:54.30_>Updated youtube-dl to version 2021.12.17.
>>yt --version
>>2021.12.17
>>
>>
>Or not:
>D:\MOVIES>yt-dl -U
>ERROR: can't find the current version. Please try again later.
>
>D:\MOVIES>yt-dl --version
>2021.06.06
>
>I'm guessing the server isn't very up. (W7-32 here.)

Somewhere i had gotten the idea that the update should be done using the original
..exe name. Note my example where i used the shorthand .exe name to get the current
version on-hand but then the full name for the update.

If this requirement is true or not, i have no idea. I do see how it could be
incorporated into the update as identifying the calling .exe as
verification.......for some reason.

On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 09:06:56 -0500, FACE <AFaceInTheCrowd@today.net>
wrote:

>On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 16:46:10 +0000, in alt.windows7.general, "J. P. Gilliver
>(John)" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>, wrote
>
>>On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 09:49:15, FACE <AFaceInTheCrowd@today.net> wrote
>>(my responses usually follow points raised):
>>[]
>>>Apparently someone did integrate the fix with into the Windows.exe --
>>>no update
>>>date change from 12-17-21. I just ran it on a christmas carol and it
>>>worked fine.
>>>
>>>
>>>ca:\youtube-dl_ 8:59:17.31_>yt --version
>>>2021.06.06
>>>
>>>c:\youtube-dl_ 8:59:27.23_>youtube-dl -U
>>>Updating to version 2021.12.17 ...
>>>Waiting for file handle to be closed ...
>>>
>>>c:\youtube-dl_ 9:00:54.30_>Updated youtube-dl to version 2021.12.17.
>>>yt --version
>>>2021.12.17
>>>
>>>
>>Or not:
>>D:\MOVIES>yt-dl -U
>>ERROR: can't find the current version. Please try again later.
>>
>>D:\MOVIES>yt-dl --version
>>2021.06.06
>>
>>I'm guessing the server isn't very up. (W7-32 here.)
>
>Somewhere i had gotten the idea that the update should be done using the original
>.exe name. Note my example where i used the shorthand .exe name to get the current
>version on-hand but then the full name for the update.
>
>If this requirement is true or not, i have no idea. I do see how it could be
>incorporated into the update as identifying the calling .exe as
>verification.......for some reason.

I don't think it matters. My copy has been called yt.exe since forever
and both the version check and the update (when an update is available)
work without any issues.