- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 05:24:25PM +0200, Devid Antonio Filoni wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Jorge Arellano Cid<jcid(a)dillo.org> wrote: > > [...] > > ?BTW, the rc2 version of dillo-2.1 (hopefully final) was > > just uploaded to http://www.dillo.org/download/ so packagers > > can make the respective files. > > > > ?The idea is to make the announcement tomorrow in the morning. > > > > ?Devid: please send me the .deb and its directions when done. > DONE! You can find it at https://launchpad.net/~d.filoni/+archive/ppa > . However I found an error checking my package using lintian: > > E: dillo: possible-gpl-code-linked-with-openssl > N: > N: This package appears to be covered by the GNU GPL but depends on the > N: OpenSSL libssl package and does not mention a license exemption or > N: exception for OpenSSL in its copyright file. The GPL (including version > N: 3) is incompatible with some terms of the OpenSSL license, and therefore > N: Debian does not allow GPL-licensed code linked with OpenSSL libraries > N: unless there is a license exception explicitly permitting this. > N: > N: If only the Debian packaging, or some other part of the package not > N: linked with OpenSSL, is covered by the GNU GPL, please add a lintian > N: override for this tag. Lintian currently has no good way of > N: distinguishing between that case and problematic packages. > N: > N: Severity: serious, Certainty: wild-guess > > Can you please fix it? OK guys, don't hurry! ---------------------------------------------------- Let's make the announcement early this Saturday 20. ---------------------------------------------------- That way we have until tomorrow to sort out the packaging problem and this license issue. I'd proceed in this order: 1.- Solve the OpenSSL license issue and upload rc3. 2.- To enable-ssl or not enable-ssl (define what to do). 3.- Get to the less painful package-system for the user given the current situation. (most probably distribution repositories) 4.- Future planning: how to get dillo2 into distros to enlarge its user base. FLTK2 vs FLTK-1.3 * I have plenty of info here, but will hold on until the previous points are done. Thanks for all the help. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 18, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Kelson wrote: > http://www.hyperborea.org/software/dillo/rpms/fltk2-2.0.x.r6403-0.2.src.rpm We should use >= 6525

June 18, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by kelson＠pobox.com

On Jun 17, 2009, at 7:54 PM, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > Well in that case, I assume that no SSL as default is OK. So...no SSL for the official packages? I'll redo them. On that front, I haven't been able to get a Fedora 10 x86 LiveCD setup to install all the build requirements - it keeps crashing with I/O errors. I've been trying to set up a USB stick system, but it's the first time I've tried it and things don't seem to be working right. I've got the folowing: Fedora 10 x86_64 RHEL 3 i386 RHEL 4 x86_64 RHEL 5 i386 RHEL 5 x86_64 If anyone wants to try to build a matching RPM on Fedora 10 i686, here's the URLs to the sources... http://www.hyperborea.org/software/dillo/rpms/dillo-2.1-2.src.rpm (-3 once I turn SSL off again) http://www.hyperborea.org/software/dillo/rpms/fltk2-2.0.x.r6403-0.2.src.rpm And here's the list of build requirements I've found so far that aren't on the LiveCD yum install rpm-build openssl-devel gcc make automake automake17 automake16 automake15 libjpeg-devel libpng-devel zlib-devel xorg-x11- proto-devel libXft-devel libSM-devel libICE-devel libXt-devel libX11- devel libXi-devel libXinerama-devel libGL-devel libGLU-devel libXext- devel gcc-c++

June 18, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Michal wrote: > I understand that my proposal won't be popular but switching from > FLTK2 is necessary - we hardly have FLTK2 in distributions (read: no > Dillo-2 in distribution) and that's shortening our user base. > > How hard it would be to rewrite/port Dillo-2 to FLTK-1.3? > > (I see that the speed of v1.3 development is nothing exciting, but > from what I read months ago they at least plan to have a release > ever.) > > While looking at the devel cycle of Dillo - two releases per year - > I believe this porting should be mid-term goal. Unless we wanna > spend another year out of mainstream distributions. (And frankly: > even with Dillo-2 based on FLTK-1.3 we are quite far from Dillo-2 > in distribution...) It seems to be the consensus that going to 1.3 will happen eventually. They still have some work on UTF-8 to do first: http://svn.easysw.com/public/fltk/fltk/branches/branch-1.3/TODO.utf8 Out of curiosity, I once made a dillo that compiled with 1.3. It failed to work at all because I don't know the fltk and dw code well enough in general, but I was satisfied with getting an idea of how much there was to it. - We would have to get Johannes to do dw/fltkview*. - Fonts are a bit different. I didn't dig into that. - Menus are a bit different. Didn't dig into that either. - The PackedGroup for the UI behaved differently. I fought with it for a little while, then grew impatient. The rest was mostly changing a whole lot of fltk::something to Fl_something.

June 18, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by newman.x＠gmail.com

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:00 AM, Jorge Arellano Cid<jcid(a)dillo.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 05:45:02PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:01:12PM +0200, Devid Antonio Filoni wrote: >> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Jorge Arellano Cid<jcid(a)dillo.org> wrote: >> > > Hi Michal, >> > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 03:11:44PM +0200, Michal Nowak wrote: >> > >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Kelson Vibber<kelson(a)pobox.com> wrote: >> > >> > Michal Nowak wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >> I'd like to create Fedora RPM's (since I am Fedora packager), the >> > >> >> problem is that fltk2 is not in Fedora (Package Review's pending [1], >> > >> >> help welcomed), so, only unofficial packages are doable now. >> > >> >> >> > >> >> Problem with Fedora 11 is that fltk2 can't be built with recent g++ [2]. I >> > >> >> might check with with F-10, it used to work. >> > >> > >> > >> > I've just built FLTK2 r6786 and Dillo 2.1 on a Fedora 10 system, so it does >> > >> > work there. >> > > >> > > ?It's ?good ?to ?see ?you're ?already ?coordinating with Kelson, >> > > because that's exactly what I was to suggest. >> > > >> > > >> > >> In http://fltk.org/str.php?L2205 I was suggested to make a code change in >> > >> FLTK2, I did so and it compiles fine now. I am not sure of the root cause >> > >> because fltk guys suggested that the problem is glibc-2.10 and pointed to >> > >> patch but the patch looks to be incorporated in F-11 glibc. >> > > >> > > ?FLTK2 is giving some confusion even to FLTK developers: >> > > http://fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s6818+gfltk.development+T1 >> > > ("pre-release thread"). >> > > >> > > ?In a nutshell (from my point of view): >> > > >> > > ? * fltk2 is not officially released, and maybe never will. >> > > ? * dillo2 uses fltk2, and this creates pressure to package it. >> > > ? * Distros have a policy against statically-linked binaries. >> > > ? * We can provide unofficial statically-linked packages until >> > > ? ? the distro provides a shared fltk2 lib. >> > > >> > > ?So, I'd suggest to package a statically-linked binary until the >> > > shared ?fltk2 ?is ?available from the distro. Once this happen we >> > > can provide a dynamic one. >> > > >> > > ?This ?avoids ?having to sort out the patching/adjusting problem >> > > of packaging a shared library, which is best solved by the distro >> > > itself. >> > > >> > > ?Now, ?it looks like you are the Fedora distro developer working >> > > on ?both ?fltk2 ?and ?dillo2, ?so in this case you can decide and >> > > suggest what looks best from your point of view. >> > > >> > > ?From ?a user perspective, it looks simpler to download a single >> > > binary ?and ?install it. If the shared way is decided, we need to >> > > provide nutshell directions. >> > > >> > > ?In ?the ?Debian ?case, I assume a statically linked deb will be >> > > produced (until the license problem is solved). >> > Yes, I preparated an FLTK2 Debian package and it is built as static >> > lib but this should be avoided if possible, the problem is that fltk2 >> > isn't stable enough so ATM it is static... The Debian license is the >> > issue that doesn't allow me to upload the fltk2 ?(and also dillo2) >> > package in Debian, there is an open bug about this >> > (http://www.fltk.org/str.php?L2198+P0+S-2+C0+I0+E0+Qlicense) >> >> ? OK. >> >> ? BTW, the rc2 version of dillo-2.1 (hopefully final) was >> just uploaded to http://www.dillo.org/download/ so packagers >> can make the respective files. >> >> ? The idea is to make the announcement tomorrow in the morning. >> >> ? Devid: please send me the .deb and its directions when done. >> >> ? Same for rpm. > > ?Last but not the least. > > ?I use "./configure --enable-ssl" bacause that way dillo is much > more ?useful (mainly for reading forums and bug trackers). So I'd > suggest ?to ?make ?the packages with SSL enabled, unless somebody > reembers a compelling reason not to do so. > > ?There're ?times ?when ?the ?certificate asking dialog bombs the > user, ?but maybe not so often, or annoyingly enough, to avoid the > SSL dpi. > > ?Comments? > Generally speaking for Fedora, we won't turn on options which are not turned on by default in upstream - it usually brings divergence from upstream and comments in upstream mailing lists (not this one :) ) like: "That poor distroX turned on --enable-coolness so we are not supporting users of this distro at all." Turning on SSL in upstream means more pressure for fixing it, usually :). But I am reading dillo-dev long enough to know it's not that easy. > > -- > ?Cheers > ?Jorge.- > > _______________________________________________ > Dillo-dev mailing list > Dillo-dev(a)dillo.org > http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev >

June 18, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by newman.x＠gmail.com

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Jorge Arellano Cid<jcid(a)dillo.org> wrote: > Hi Michal, Hola Jorge, > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 03:11:44PM +0200, Michal Nowak wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Kelson Vibber<kelson(a)pobox.com> wrote: >> > Michal Nowak wrote: >> >> >> >> I'd like to create Fedora RPM's (since I am Fedora packager), the >> >> problem is that fltk2 is not in Fedora (Package Review's pending [1], >> >> help welcomed), so, only unofficial packages are doable now. >> >> >> >> Problem with Fedora 11 is that fltk2 can't be built with recent g++ [2]. I >> >> might check with with F-10, it used to work. >> > >> > I've just built FLTK2 r6786 and Dillo 2.1 on a Fedora 10 system, so it does >> > work there. > > ?It's ?good ?to ?see ?you're ?already ?coordinating with Kelson, > because that's exactly what I was to suggest. > > >> In http://fltk.org/str.php?L2205 I was suggested to make a code change in >> FLTK2, I did so and it compiles fine now. I am not sure of the root cause >> because fltk guys suggested that the problem is glibc-2.10 and pointed to >> patch but the patch looks to be incorporated in F-11 glibc. > > ?FLTK2 is giving some confusion even to FLTK developers: > http://fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s6818+gfltk.development+T1 > ("pre-release thread"). Yes. While I did not read the license yet, if Debian feels the fltk2 one is problematic, Fedora legal will feel probably the same (aka blocker). > > ?In a nutshell (from my point of view): > > ? * fltk2 is not officially released, and maybe never will. > ? * dillo2 uses fltk2, and this creates pressure to package it. > ? * Distros have a policy against statically-linked binaries. Definitely agree. The first and the second one can be somehow sorted out and fltk2 pushed to distribution, the last one is blocker. > ? * We can provide unofficial statically-linked packages until > ? ? the distro provides a shared fltk2 lib. > That's of course possible and doable but pita anyway. We can't ever make package for every distro out there, that's obvious. > ?So, I'd suggest to package a statically-linked binary until the > shared ?fltk2 ?is ?available from the distro. Once this happen we > can provide a dynamic one. > I can do F-11 builds if needed. > ?This ?avoids ?having to sort out the patching/adjusting problem > of packaging a shared library, which is best solved by the distro > itself. > > ?Now, ?it looks like you are the Fedora distro developer working > on ?both ?fltk2 ?and ?dillo2, ?so in this case you can decide and > suggest what looks best from your point of view. > I'm behind fltk2 in Fedora, Dillo is maintained by someone else but is prepared for bump to Dillo-2 (there's bugzilla for this) when is fltk2 in place... > ?From ?a user perspective, it looks simpler to download a single > binary ?and ?install it. If the shared way is decided, we need to > provide nutshell directions. I believe the simplest way for user how to get distro conforming packages is via distribution repositories (+ receives security, in-between-release problems solving, not necessary to check third party websites, etc). You greatly outlined the problems with having Dillo-2 in distribution; the problem is FLTK2. While watching at "changes" in FLTK2 snapshots I can't thing that the development is stalled or even stopped. I understand that my proposal won't be popular but switching from FLTK2 is necessary - we hardly have FLTK2 in distributions (read: no Dillo-2 in distribution) and that's shortening our user base. How hard it would be to rewrite/port Dillo-2 to FLTK-1.3? (I see that the speed of v1.3 development is nothing exciting, but from what I read months ago they at least plan to have a release ever.) While looking at the devel cycle of Dillo - two releases per year - I believe this porting should be mid-term goal. Unless we wanna spend another year out of mainstream distributions. (And frankly: even with Dillo-2 based on FLTK-1.3 we are quite far from Dillo-2 in distribution...) > > ?In ?the ?Debian ?case, I assume a statically linked deb will be > produced (until the license problem is solved). > > ?Comments? > > -- > ?Cheers > ?Jorge.- > > _______________________________________________ > Dillo-dev mailing list > Dillo-dev(a)dillo.org > http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev >

June 18, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 11:09:16PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Jorge wrote: > > I use "./configure --enable-ssl" bacause that way dillo is much > > more useful (mainly for reading forums and bug trackers). So I'd > > suggest to make the packages with SSL enabled, unless somebody > > reembers a compelling reason not to do so. > > > > There're times when the certificate asking dialog bombs the > > user, but maybe not so often, or annoyingly enough, to avoid the > > SSL dpi. > > > > Comments? > > iirc it stops giving you those messages if the dpi can find > a directory containing certificates, in which case the fact > that we don't check (I don't think we do, anyway) that the > server is presenting _its_ certificate is a problem. *Sigh* Well in that case, I assume that no SSL as default is OK. OTOH packagers may provide an enabled version with the warning that no certificates are being checked. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 18, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Jorge wrote: > I use "./configure --enable-ssl" bacause that way dillo is much > more useful (mainly for reading forums and bug trackers). So I'd > suggest to make the packages with SSL enabled, unless somebody > reembers a compelling reason not to do so. > > There're times when the certificate asking dialog bombs the > user, but maybe not so often, or annoyingly enough, to avoid the > SSL dpi. > > Comments? iirc it stops giving you those messages if the dpi can find a directory containing certificates, in which case the fact that we don't check (I don't think we do, anyway) that the server is presenting _its_ certificate is a problem.

June 18, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 05:45:02PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:01:12PM +0200, Devid Antonio Filoni wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Jorge Arellano Cid<jcid(a)dillo.org> wrote: > > > Hi Michal, > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 03:11:44PM +0200, Michal Nowak wrote: > > >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Kelson Vibber<kelson(a)pobox.com> wrote: > > >> > Michal Nowak wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >> I'd like to create Fedora RPM's (since I am Fedora packager), the > > >> >> problem is that fltk2 is not in Fedora (Package Review's pending [1], > > >> >> help welcomed), so, only unofficial packages are doable now. > > >> >> > > >> >> Problem with Fedora 11 is that fltk2 can't be built with recent g++ [2]. I > > >> >> might check with with F-10, it used to work. > > >> > > > >> > I've just built FLTK2 r6786 and Dillo 2.1 on a Fedora 10 system, so it does > > >> > work there. > > > > > > ?It's ?good ?to ?see ?you're ?already ?coordinating with Kelson, > > > because that's exactly what I was to suggest. > > > > > > > > >> In http://fltk.org/str.php?L2205 I was suggested to make a code change in > > >> FLTK2, I did so and it compiles fine now. I am not sure of the root cause > > >> because fltk guys suggested that the problem is glibc-2.10 and pointed to > > >> patch but the patch looks to be incorporated in F-11 glibc. > > > > > > ?FLTK2 is giving some confusion even to FLTK developers: > > > http://fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s6818+gfltk.development+T1 > > > ("pre-release thread"). > > > > > > ?In a nutshell (from my point of view): > > > > > > ? * fltk2 is not officially released, and maybe never will. > > > ? * dillo2 uses fltk2, and this creates pressure to package it. > > > ? * Distros have a policy against statically-linked binaries. > > > ? * We can provide unofficial statically-linked packages until > > > ? ? the distro provides a shared fltk2 lib. > > > > > > ?So, I'd suggest to package a statically-linked binary until the > > > shared ?fltk2 ?is ?available from the distro. Once this happen we > > > can provide a dynamic one. > > > > > > ?This ?avoids ?having to sort out the patching/adjusting problem > > > of packaging a shared library, which is best solved by the distro > > > itself. > > > > > > ?Now, ?it looks like you are the Fedora distro developer working > > > on ?both ?fltk2 ?and ?dillo2, ?so in this case you can decide and > > > suggest what looks best from your point of view. > > > > > > ?From ?a user perspective, it looks simpler to download a single > > > binary ?and ?install it. If the shared way is decided, we need to > > > provide nutshell directions. > > > > > > ?In ?the ?Debian ?case, I assume a statically linked deb will be > > > produced (until the license problem is solved). > > Yes, I preparated an FLTK2 Debian package and it is built as static > > lib but this should be avoided if possible, the problem is that fltk2 > > isn't stable enough so ATM it is static... The Debian license is the > > issue that doesn't allow me to upload the fltk2 (and also dillo2) > > package in Debian, there is an open bug about this > > (http://www.fltk.org/str.php?L2198+P0+S-2+C0+I0+E0+Qlicense) > > OK. > > BTW, the rc2 version of dillo-2.1 (hopefully final) was > just uploaded to http://www.dillo.org/download/ so packagers > can make the respective files. > > The idea is to make the announcement tomorrow in the morning. > > Devid: please send me the .deb and its directions when done. > > Same for rpm. Last but not the least. I use "./configure --enable-ssl" bacause that way dillo is much more useful (mainly for reading forums and bug trackers). So I'd suggest to make the packages with SSL enabled, unless somebody reembers a compelling reason not to do so. There're times when the certificate asking dialog bombs the user, but maybe not so often, or annoyingly enough, to avoid the SSL dpi. Comments? -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 18, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:01:12PM +0200, Devid Antonio Filoni wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Jorge Arellano Cid<jcid(a)dillo.org> wrote: > > Hi Michal, > > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 03:11:44PM +0200, Michal Nowak wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Kelson Vibber<kelson(a)pobox.com> wrote: > >> > Michal Nowak wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I'd like to create Fedora RPM's (since I am Fedora packager), the > >> >> problem is that fltk2 is not in Fedora (Package Review's pending [1], > >> >> help welcomed), so, only unofficial packages are doable now. > >> >> > >> >> Problem with Fedora 11 is that fltk2 can't be built with recent g++ [2]. I > >> >> might check with with F-10, it used to work. > >> > > >> > I've just built FLTK2 r6786 and Dillo 2.1 on a Fedora 10 system, so it does > >> > work there. > > > > ?It's ?good ?to ?see ?you're ?already ?coordinating with Kelson, > > because that's exactly what I was to suggest. > > > > > >> In http://fltk.org/str.php?L2205 I was suggested to make a code change in > >> FLTK2, I did so and it compiles fine now. I am not sure of the root cause > >> because fltk guys suggested that the problem is glibc-2.10 and pointed to > >> patch but the patch looks to be incorporated in F-11 glibc. > > > > ?FLTK2 is giving some confusion even to FLTK developers: > > http://fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s6818+gfltk.development+T1 > > ("pre-release thread"). > > > > ?In a nutshell (from my point of view): > > > > ? * fltk2 is not officially released, and maybe never will. > > ? * dillo2 uses fltk2, and this creates pressure to package it. > > ? * Distros have a policy against statically-linked binaries. > > ? * We can provide unofficial statically-linked packages until > > ? ? the distro provides a shared fltk2 lib. > > > > ?So, I'd suggest to package a statically-linked binary until the > > shared ?fltk2 ?is ?available from the distro. Once this happen we > > can provide a dynamic one. > > > > ?This ?avoids ?having to sort out the patching/adjusting problem > > of packaging a shared library, which is best solved by the distro > > itself. > > > > ?Now, ?it looks like you are the Fedora distro developer working > > on ?both ?fltk2 ?and ?dillo2, ?so in this case you can decide and > > suggest what looks best from your point of view. > > > > ?From ?a user perspective, it looks simpler to download a single > > binary ?and ?install it. If the shared way is decided, we need to > > provide nutshell directions. > > > > ?In ?the ?Debian ?case, I assume a statically linked deb will be > > produced (until the license problem is solved). > Yes, I preparated an FLTK2 Debian package and it is built as static > lib but this should be avoided if possible, the problem is that fltk2 > isn't stable enough so ATM it is static... The Debian license is the > issue that doesn't allow me to upload the fltk2 (and also dillo2) > package in Debian, there is an open bug about this > (http://www.fltk.org/str.php?L2198+P0+S-2+C0+I0+E0+Qlicense) OK. BTW, the rc2 version of dillo-2.1 (hopefully final) was just uploaded to http://www.dillo.org/download/ so packagers can make the respective files. The idea is to make the announcement tomorrow in the morning. Devid: please send me the .deb and its directions when done. Same for rpm. TIA. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 17, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by devidfil＠gmail.com

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Jorge Arellano Cid<jcid(a)dillo.org> wrote: > Hi Michal, > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 03:11:44PM +0200, Michal Nowak wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Kelson Vibber<kelson(a)pobox.com> wrote: >> > Michal Nowak wrote: >> >> >> >> I'd like to create Fedora RPM's (since I am Fedora packager), the >> >> problem is that fltk2 is not in Fedora (Package Review's pending [1], >> >> help welcomed), so, only unofficial packages are doable now. >> >> >> >> Problem with Fedora 11 is that fltk2 can't be built with recent g++ [2]. I >> >> might check with with F-10, it used to work. >> > >> > I've just built FLTK2 r6786 and Dillo 2.1 on a Fedora 10 system, so it does >> > work there. > > ?It's ?good ?to ?see ?you're ?already ?coordinating with Kelson, > because that's exactly what I was to suggest. > > >> In http://fltk.org/str.php?L2205 I was suggested to make a code change in >> FLTK2, I did so and it compiles fine now. I am not sure of the root cause >> because fltk guys suggested that the problem is glibc-2.10 and pointed to >> patch but the patch looks to be incorporated in F-11 glibc. > > ?FLTK2 is giving some confusion even to FLTK developers: > http://fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s6818+gfltk.development+T1 > ("pre-release thread"). > > ?In a nutshell (from my point of view): > > ? * fltk2 is not officially released, and maybe never will. > ? * dillo2 uses fltk2, and this creates pressure to package it. > ? * Distros have a policy against statically-linked binaries. > ? * We can provide unofficial statically-linked packages until > ? ? the distro provides a shared fltk2 lib. > > ?So, I'd suggest to package a statically-linked binary until the > shared ?fltk2 ?is ?available from the distro. Once this happen we > can provide a dynamic one. > > ?This ?avoids ?having to sort out the patching/adjusting problem > of packaging a shared library, which is best solved by the distro > itself. > > ?Now, ?it looks like you are the Fedora distro developer working > on ?both ?fltk2 ?and ?dillo2, ?so in this case you can decide and > suggest what looks best from your point of view. > > ?From ?a user perspective, it looks simpler to download a single > binary ?and ?install it. If the shared way is decided, we need to > provide nutshell directions. > > ?In ?the ?Debian ?case, I assume a statically linked deb will be > produced (until the license problem is solved). Yes, I preparated an FLTK2 Debian package and it is built as static lib but this should be avoided if possible, the problem is that fltk2 isn't stable enough so ATM it is static... The Debian license is the issue that doesn't allow me to upload the fltk2 (and also dillo2) package in Debian, there is an open bug about this (http://www.fltk.org/str.php?L2198+P0+S-2+C0+I0+E0+Qlicense) > ?Comments? > > -- > ?Cheers > ?Jorge.- > > _______________________________________________ > Dillo-dev mailing list > Dillo-dev(a)dillo.org Devid > http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev >

June 17, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi Michal, On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 03:11:44PM +0200, Michal Nowak wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Kelson Vibber<kelson(a)pobox.com> wrote: > > Michal Nowak wrote: > >> > >> I'd like to create Fedora RPM's (since I am Fedora packager), the > >> problem is that fltk2 is not in Fedora (Package Review's pending [1], > >> help welcomed), so, only unofficial packages are doable now. > >> > >> Problem with Fedora 11 is that fltk2 can't be built with recent g++ [2]. I > >> might check with with F-10, it used to work. > > > > I've just built FLTK2 r6786 and Dillo 2.1 on a Fedora 10 system, so it does > > work there. It's good to see you're already coordinating with Kelson, because that's exactly what I was to suggest. > In http://fltk.org/str.php?L2205 I was suggested to make a code change in > FLTK2, I did so and it compiles fine now. I am not sure of the root cause > because fltk guys suggested that the problem is glibc-2.10 and pointed to > patch but the patch looks to be incorporated in F-11 glibc. FLTK2 is giving some confusion even to FLTK developers: http://fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s6818+gfltk.development+T1 ("pre-release thread"). In a nutshell (from my point of view): * fltk2 is not officially released, and maybe never will. * dillo2 uses fltk2, and this creates pressure to package it. * Distros have a policy against statically-linked binaries. * We can provide unofficial statically-linked packages until the distro provides a shared fltk2 lib. So, I'd suggest to package a statically-linked binary until the shared fltk2 is available from the distro. Once this happen we can provide a dynamic one. This avoids having to sort out the patching/adjusting problem of packaging a shared library, which is best solved by the distro itself. Now, it looks like you are the Fedora distro developer working on both fltk2 and dillo2, so in this case you can decide and suggest what looks best from your point of view. From a user perspective, it looks simpler to download a single binary and install it. If the shared way is decided, we need to provide nutshell directions. In the Debian case, I assume a statically linked deb will be produced (until the license problem is solved). Comments? -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 17, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 03:33:56AM +0000, corvid wrote: > I just remembered that the README needs to be updated > since it talks about all of the new things that 2.0 brought. I just updated the repo. Please give it a review and fix the grammar where necessary. The patch for working keyboard under numlock was also committed (overlooked by me). Those having trouble with rc1, please confirm the repo (rc2) works OK now. When I get both OKs, I'll upload a new tarball for making the respective packages. If there's anything else pending, speak now! -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 17, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by newman.x＠gmail.com

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Kelson Vibber<kelson(a)pobox.com> wrote: > Michal Nowak wrote: >> >> I'd like to create Fedora RPM's (since I am Fedora packager), the >> problem is that fltk2 is not in Fedora (Package Review's pending [1], >> help welcomed), so, only unofficial packages are doable now. >> >> Problem with Fedora 11 is that fltk2 can't be built with recent g++ [2]. I >> might check with with F-10, it used to work. > > I've just built FLTK2 r6786 and Dillo 2.1 on a Fedora 10 system, so it does > work there. In http://fltk.org/str.php?L2205 I was suggested to make a code change in FLTK2, I did so and it compiles fine now. I am not sure of the root cause because fltk guys suggested that the problem is glibc-2.10 and pointed to patch but the patch looks to be incorporated in F-11 glibc. > > If you want to take a look, my SRPMS are available at > http://www.hyperborea.org/software/dillo/rpms/ > > The spec for FLTK2 is *very* rough, and the spec for Dillo has a lot of > cruft from back when I was maintaining packages for a bunch of different > distros. While looking at [1] it looks like you are using static archives (.a), while I turned on shared libs [2] option in FLTK2 and provide them instead. I fixed the remaining issues from package review [3], I guess FLTK2 might be in Fedora in near future. But now: FLTK2 packages for Fedora 10, 11, 12 (Rawhide) for ix86 and x86-64 ---> http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/ Enjoy [1] http://www.hyperborea.org/software/dillo/rpms/fltk2-2.0.x.r6786-0.1.f10.x86… [2] http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/fltk2/ [3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=fltk2 > > -- > Kelson Vibber > Hyperborea.org - SpeedForce.org > Michal

June 17, 2009

keyboard shortcuts non-functioning under KDE 3.5.10

by higuita7＠yahoo.co.uk

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:54:17 +0000, "corvid" <corvid(a)lavabit.com> wrote: > > > > > No keyboard shortcuts are working for me using KDE 3.5.10. > > i checkout the latest HG and i found that i also have this > > problem. > Does this > http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/pipermail/dillo-dev/2009-May/006378.html > make any difference for you? well... at least if i turn on the numlock, the key shortcuts start to work again. what a easy workaround :) after applying the email patch and rebuilding, i have the shortcuts working, with or without numlock on... so that patch fix this. Thanks! by the way, i also think that command=keybinding is more friendly, in a quick check we can see what are the actions available and their shortcut Thanks for dillo higuita -- Naturally the common people don't want war... but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country. -- Hermann Goering, Nazi and war criminal, 1883-1946

June 17, 2009

keyboard shortcuts non-functioning under KDE 3.5.10

by corvid＠lavabit.com

higuita wrote: > On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 20:29:43 +0300, Rogut?s Sparnuotos <rogutes(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > I've got recent code from mercurial, June 1st. > > > > No keyboard shortcuts are working for me using KDE 3.5.10. > > i checkout the latest HG and i found that i also have this > problem. > > i'm using fluxbox on a slamd64 linux system. here is my > locale: > > LANG=pt_PT@euro > LC_CTYPE="pt_PT@euro" > LC_NUMERIC="pt_PT@euro" > LC_TIME="pt_PT@euro" > LC_COLLATE="pt_PT@euro" > LC_MONETARY="pt_PT@euro" > LC_MESSAGES=en_US.utf8 > LC_PAPER="pt_PT@euro" > LC_NAME="pt_PT@euro" > LC_ADDRESS="pt_PT@euro" > LC_TELEPHONE="pt_PT@euro" > LC_MEASUREMENT="pt_PT@euro" > LC_IDENTIFICATION="pt_PT@euro" > LC_ALL= > > i tried to remove the .dillo, put the previous post > keysrc, remove the system keysrc and nothing works, > any shortcut i try will not do anything. > > if the focus is in the url bar and i do a ctrl+q it will > show ^Q ... ^V do the paste, ^H erases, ^T swaps the > letters and some others... it seems like i'm in a terminal > using the terminal shortcuts. I don't recall doing this in > the past. > > i don't know exactly what previous version i was using, > it was also a HG checkout, maybe a month or two old > > i'm ready to do more tests and rebuilds to help debug > this problem. Does this http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/pipermail/dillo-dev/2009-May/006378.html make any difference for you?

June 17, 2009

keyboard shortcuts non-functioning under KDE 3.5.10

by higuita7＠yahoo.co.uk

Hi all On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 20:29:43 +0300, Rogut?s Sparnuotos <rogutes(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > > > I've got recent code from mercurial, June 1st. > > > No keyboard shortcuts are working for me using KDE 3.5.10. i checkout the latest HG and i found that i also have this problem. i'm using fluxbox on a slamd64 linux system. here is my locale: LANG=pt_PT@euro LC_CTYPE="pt_PT@euro" LC_NUMERIC="pt_PT@euro" LC_TIME="pt_PT@euro" LC_COLLATE="pt_PT@euro" LC_MONETARY="pt_PT@euro" LC_MESSAGES=en_US.utf8 LC_PAPER="pt_PT@euro" LC_NAME="pt_PT@euro" LC_ADDRESS="pt_PT@euro" LC_TELEPHONE="pt_PT@euro" LC_MEASUREMENT="pt_PT@euro" LC_IDENTIFICATION="pt_PT@euro" LC_ALL= i tried to remove the .dillo, put the previous post keysrc, remove the system keysrc and nothing works, any shortcut i try will not do anything. if the focus is in the url bar and i do a ctrl+q it will show ^Q ... ^V do the paste, ^H erases, ^T swaps the letters and some others... it seems like i'm in a terminal using the terminal shortcuts. I don't recall doing this in the past. i don't know exactly what previous version i was using, it was also a HG checkout, maybe a month or two old i'm ready to do more tests and rebuilds to help debug this problem. Thanks higuita -- Naturally the common people don't want war... but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country. -- Hermann Goering, Nazi and war criminal, 1883-1946

June 17, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by newman.x＠gmail.com

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 04:10:59PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 09:34:43PM +0200, Devid Antonio Filoni wrote: > > I'm working on the Debian/Ubuntu package. I'm the Debian developer of > > dillo so I know what I do, however I will not upload this in Debian > > until fltk doesn't fix the license (it should be December 2001 in > > order to get uploaded in Debian). I will send you the package > > tomorrow. > > Excellent. > I'd like to create Fedora RPM's (since I am Fedora packager), the problem is that fltk2 is not in Fedora (Package Review's pending [1], help welcomed), so, only unofficial packages are doable now. Problem with Fedora 11 is that fltk2 can't be built with recent g++ [2]. I might check with with F-10, it used to work. Michal [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477683 [2] http://fltk.org/str.php?L2205 > > -- > Cheers > Jorge.- > > _______________________________________________ > Dillo-dev mailing list > Dillo-dev(a)dillo.org > http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev -- Regards, Michal Nowak

June 16, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 09:34:43PM +0200, Devid Antonio Filoni wrote: > I'm working on the Debian/Ubuntu package. I'm the Debian developer of > dillo so I know what I do, however I will not upload this in Debian > until fltk doesn't fix the license (it should be December 2001 in > order to get uploaded in Debian). I will send you the package > tomorrow. Excellent. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 16, 2009

Re: Limiting number connections made to server

by dennisn＠dennisn.dyndns.org

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:51:40 -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 02:15:00AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Dennis wrote: > > > Currently, I don't think dillo places any kind of regulation on > > > the number of connections it tries to make with an http server, > > > and this causes bad things to happen with some -- ie. if it tries > > > to open a page with hundreds of thumbnails, it can crash some > > > http servers. Is there a way to limit the number of connections > > > made? > > > > I really wish there were. > > Dillo should be a good citizen. > > Currently Dillo doesn't have a way to limit the number of > connections. I assume that apache has a way on the server side and > that more or less has made of it a smaller problem. What http server > are you using? Freenet's fproxy :P. Currently dillo DoS'es the server if it tries opening a page with hundreds of images. (It causes the server to exceed the thread limit, which stalls everything :|). I hope they'll do something on their end as well :). > > This will probably get into the feature request queue for dillo-2.2. >

June 16, 2009

dillo-2.1.tar.bz2

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi there, We're approaching quickly to the release of dillo-2.1 ! :) The idea is to make the official announcement this Thursday 18 (June) I've uploaded the source tarball: http://www.dillo.org/download/ We need the main .deb and .rpm before Thursday (e.g. Ubuntu & Debian current, same for the most used Fedora). Would you mind Andreas, Kelson? Any comments, confirmation of OK-ness, tests or last minute touches, this is the moment. TIA. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 16, 2009

Limiting number connections made to server

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 02:15:00AM +0000, corvid wrote: > Dennis wrote: > > Currently, I don't think dillo places any kind of regulation on the > > number of connections it tries to make with an http server, and this > > causes bad things to happen with some -- ie. if it tries to open a page > > with hundreds of thumbnails, it can crash some http servers. Is there a > > way to limit the number of connections made? > > I really wish there were. > Dillo should be a good citizen. Currently Dillo doesn't have a way to limit the number of connections. I assume that apache has a way on the server side and that more or less has made of it a smaller problem. What http server are you using? This will probably get into the feature request queue for dillo-2.2. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 16, 2009

Limiting number connections made to server

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Dennis wrote: > Currently, I don't think dillo places any kind of regulation on the > number of connections it tries to make with an http server, and this > causes bad things to happen with some -- ie. if it tries to open a page > with hundreds of thumbnails, it can crash some http servers. Is there a > way to limit the number of connections made? I really wish there were. Dillo should be a good citizen. (Well, there's always the 'solution' of turning off automatic image loading :)

June 16, 2009

Limiting number connections made to server

by dennisn＠dennisn.dyndns.org

Currently, I don't think dillo places any kind of regulation on the number of connections it tries to make with an http server, and this causes bad things to happen with some -- ie. if it tries to open a page with hundreds of thumbnails, it can crash some http servers. Is there a way to limit the number of connections made?

June 15, 2009

release candidate 1

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Jorge wrote: > A splash page was committed. Please comment or send > suggestions/patches/ideas/kudos :) Edited slightly.

June 15, 2009

release candidate 1

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 01:02:27PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > Johannes, Corvid, > > I'll be out of town this weekend, please attend any > problem on the repo. as it's rc1. The idea is to make > a release next week. > > On the pending things that you may like to advance: > - write the dillo-2.1 about:splash page A splash page was committed. Please comment or send suggestions/patches/ideas/kudos :) We're almost there... -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 15, 2009

release candidate 1

by jcid＠dillo.org

Johannes, Corvid, I'll be out of town this weekend, please attend any problem on the repo. as it's rc1. The idea is to make a release next week. On the pending things that you may like to advance: - write the dillo-2.1 about:splash page - check making packages - polish FAQ and help text -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 13, 2009

memory use

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 02:54:52PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Jorge wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 01:14:51AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > Interesting that Firefox has a greater VSZ without images. > > > I don't think I noticed that earlier. > > > > Oh, I didn't notice too. > > Is this result reproducible in your computer? > > I just tried with http://fltk.org/shots.php > which is easier to deal with. > > dillo > 8812 4668 -g, no optimization > 10940 5852 opening page > 14844 9732 retrieving images > > I noticed that opening the page had to pull in fonts, libXcursor, libXcompat, > libnss*, libresolv, and some other things I've already forgotten. > > firefox 2.0.0.20 > 54280 21952 to start > 57108 23916 to show the page (only had to pull in fonts) > 55996 25120 with images > 49968 25124 after waiting a little while without having touched anything. > > firefox 2.0.0.20 second try because it occurred to me that the dialog box > for preferences for turning on image loading is very heavyweight > 47084 21872 to start (seven megs less this time??) > 50804 23716 to show page > 51764 24812 pref dialog up > 49816 25052 with images > 47768 25048 after waiting a while > afaik firefox stores pixmaps on the server side, so you probabely need to keep an eye on Xorg memory usage too. Cheers, Johannes

June 13, 2009

memory use

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Jorge wrote: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 01:14:51AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Interesting that Firefox has a greater VSZ without images. > > I don't think I noticed that earlier. > > Oh, I didn't notice too. > Is this result reproducible in your computer? I just tried with http://fltk.org/shots.php which is easier to deal with. dillo 8812 4668 -g, no optimization 10940 5852 opening page 14844 9732 retrieving images I noticed that opening the page had to pull in fonts, libXcursor, libXcompat, libnss*, libresolv, and some other things I've already forgotten. firefox 2.0.0.20 54280 21952 to start 57108 23916 to show the page (only had to pull in fonts) 55996 25120 with images 49968 25124 after waiting a little while without having touched anything. firefox 2.0.0.20 second try because it occurred to me that the dialog box for preferences for turning on image loading is very heavyweight 47084 21872 to start (seven megs less this time??) 50804 23716 to show page 51764 24812 pref dialog up 49816 25052 with images 47768 25048 after waiting a while

June 13, 2009

memory use

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 01:14:51AM +0000, corvid wrote: > Interesting that Firefox has a greater VSZ without images. > I don't think I noticed that earlier. Oh, I didn't notice too. Is this result reproducible in your computer? -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 13, 2009

memory use

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi, After a long time, a memory usage page was added! There's a link from the first bullet point of dillo.org, and another form the 9years page. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 13, 2009

[patch] change font size on the fly

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:47:10PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 03:32:35PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Johannes wrote: > > > attached patch allows to change the font size form the tools menu. > > > I find this quite handy sometimes. What do you think? > > As is, it's handy for developers, although it may be confusing > for users. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. When it doesn't > it looks as if nothing happened, but when going to another page, > the font factor surprises with a change. > > e.g. http://www.linuxpackages.net > > (click larger fonts a few times, then go back). That happens when websites specify fixed font sizes (e.g. 12pt). In that case font_factor does not change it. It only changes font sizes like "small", "medium" ... and font sizes relatively defined to the base font. Here is a related discussion: http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=ForceFontSize > > > > No objections here. > > (although I've been content since increasing font_min_size a bit) > > As is now, I'd go for a plain explanation of font_min_size and > font_factor in the FAQ. Ok. > > I'd prefer to polish the patch until is behaves "as expected" > in all cases, but that may involve keeping a per page font_factor. > It may take some time... Hm, let's check what other browsers do. Cheers, Johannes

June 12, 2009

[patch] change font size on the fly

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 03:32:35PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Johannes wrote: > > attached patch allows to change the font size form the tools menu. > > I find this quite handy sometimes. What do you think? As is, it's handy for developers, although it may be confusing for users. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. When it doesn't it looks as if nothing happened, but when going to another page, the font factor surprises with a change. e.g. http://www.linuxpackages.net (click larger fonts a few times, then go back). > No objections here. > (although I've been content since increasing font_min_size a bit) As is now, I'd go for a plain explanation of font_min_size and font_factor in the FAQ. I'd prefer to polish the patch until is behaves "as expected" in all cases, but that may involve keeping a per page font_factor. It may take some time... -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 12, 2009

[patch] change font size on the fly

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Johannes wrote: > attached patch allows to change the font size form the tools menu. > I find this quite handy sometimes. What do you think? No objections here. (although I've been content since increasing font_min_size a bit)

June 11, 2009

[patch] change font size on the fly

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

Hi, attached patch allows to change the font size form the tools menu. I find this quite handy sometimes. What do you think? Cheers, Johannes

June 11, 2009

[PATCH] fix dillorc path

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 06:43:25PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 12:34:31PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 02:08:22AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > Jorge wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:26:40PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > > Paul wrote: > > > > > > When opening dillo from the CLI I noticed the following message: > > > > > > > > > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/home/user/.dillo/dillorc' > > > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/etc/dillo/dillorc' > > > > > > paths: Using internal defaults... > > > > > > > > > > > > Checked my system and saw that dillorc had been installed > > > > > > in /usr/etc/dillorc > > > > > > > > > > > > Checking config.log showed sysconfdir='${prefix}/etc', so no > > > > > > surprises there. But Paths::getPrefsFP() in src/paths.cc uses > > > > > > PATHS_RC_SYS, which is "/etc/dillo/", so my patch uses DILLORC_SYS, > > > > > > as specified in src/Makefile.am, instead. Now all is fine! > > > > > > > > > > In addition, perhaps we should make sysconfdir have '/dillo' at the end. > > > > > If I look in an etc dir and see dillorc, I'd know what it's for, > > > > > but I wouldn't know what uses keysrc. > > > > > > > > Yes, a '/dillo' suffix looks OK. > > > > Please merge both ideas and commit. > > > > > > I defined a DILLO_SYSCONF instead of DILLORC_SYS > > > so that a system keysrc will work someday. > > > Please test. > > > > dillorc and dpidrc got into "/usr/local/etc". > > (I was expecting them in "/usr/local/etc/dillo"). > > Works fine for me. Did you call ./autogen.sh before configuring/ > compiling? Sorry, my mistake. I run autoreconf before the "hg up". It works fine now. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 7, 2009

keyboard shortcuts non-functioning under KDE 3.5.10

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Rogutes wrote: > Johannes Hofmann (2009-06-04 16:58): > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:22:34AM +0100, Paul wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I've got recent code from mercurial, June 1st. > > > No keyboard shortcuts are working for me using KDE 3.5.10. > > > > > > I was speaking to Johannes Hofmann about this problem, he asked me > > > what my locale was (it's en-GB.UTF-8) and also asked me to report > > > the problem here. > > > > Thanks for reporting. > > > > > > > > Do you need more information from me? > > > > Is anyone else seeing this? dillo shortcuts don't seem to work at > > all for Paul. Shortcuts in test/editor from fltk2 seem to work > > though. > > I can't reproduce the problem so far. > > Paul, > > Does anything change when you save the keysrc file attached to this > e-mail to ~/.dillo/keysrc ? I think I had something similar, but > I didn't have time to report...and now I forgot what it was :/ Did it have anything to do with your earlier mail (http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/pipermail/dillo-dev/2009-May/006378.html) for restricting the modifiers?

June 7, 2009

[PATCH] fix dillorc path

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Jorge wrote: > On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 02:08:22AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Jorge wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:26:40PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > Paul wrote: > > > > > When opening dillo from the CLI I noticed the following message: > > > > > > > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/home/user/.dillo/dillorc' > > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/etc/dillo/dillorc' > > > > > paths: Using internal defaults... > > > > > > > > > > Checked my system and saw that dillorc had been installed > > > > > in /usr/etc/dillorc > > > > > > > > > > Checking config.log showed sysconfdir='${prefix}/etc', so no > > > > > surprises there. But Paths::getPrefsFP() in src/paths.cc uses > > > > > PATHS_RC_SYS, which is "/etc/dillo/", so my patch uses DILLORC_SYS, > > > > > as specified in src/Makefile.am, instead. Now all is fine! > > > > > > > > In addition, perhaps we should make sysconfdir have '/dillo' at the end. > > > > If I look in an etc dir and see dillorc, I'd know what it's for, > > > > but I wouldn't know what uses keysrc. > > > > > > Yes, a '/dillo' suffix looks OK. > > > Please merge both ideas and commit. > > > > I defined a DILLO_SYSCONF instead of DILLORC_SYS > > so that a system keysrc will work someday. > > Please test. > > dillorc and dpidrc got into "/usr/local/etc". > (I was expecting them in "/usr/local/etc/dillo"). Was a new 'configure' generated? I get: test -z "/usr/local/etc/dillo" || mkdir -p -- "/usr/local/etc/dillo" list='dillorc'; for p in $list; do \ if test -f "$p"; then d=; else d="./"; fi; \ f=`echo $p | sed -e 's|^.*/||'`; \ echo " /usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 '$d$p' '/usr/local/etc/dillo/$f'"; \ /usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 "$d$p" "/usr/local/etc/dillo/$f"; \ done

June 7, 2009

[PATCH] fix dillorc path

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 12:34:31PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 02:08:22AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Jorge wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:26:40PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > Paul wrote: > > > > > When opening dillo from the CLI I noticed the following message: > > > > > > > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/home/user/.dillo/dillorc' > > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/etc/dillo/dillorc' > > > > > paths: Using internal defaults... > > > > > > > > > > Checked my system and saw that dillorc had been installed > > > > > in /usr/etc/dillorc > > > > > > > > > > Checking config.log showed sysconfdir='${prefix}/etc', so no > > > > > surprises there. But Paths::getPrefsFP() in src/paths.cc uses > > > > > PATHS_RC_SYS, which is "/etc/dillo/", so my patch uses DILLORC_SYS, > > > > > as specified in src/Makefile.am, instead. Now all is fine! > > > > > > > > In addition, perhaps we should make sysconfdir have '/dillo' at the end. > > > > If I look in an etc dir and see dillorc, I'd know what it's for, > > > > but I wouldn't know what uses keysrc. > > > > > > Yes, a '/dillo' suffix looks OK. > > > Please merge both ideas and commit. > > > > I defined a DILLO_SYSCONF instead of DILLORC_SYS > > so that a system keysrc will work someday. > > Please test. > > dillorc and dpidrc got into "/usr/local/etc". > (I was expecting them in "/usr/local/etc/dillo"). Works fine for me. Did you call ./autogen.sh before configuring/ compiling? Cheers, Johannes

June 7, 2009

two image problems

by corvid＠lavabit.com

I wrote: > Johannes wrote: > > Some websites seems to send images with a charset set in the header, > > e.g: Content-Type: image/jpeg;charset=ISO-8859-1 > > In that case dillo seems to decode the data resulting in: > > Not a JPEG file: starts with 0xc3 0xbf > > Not sure whether we can/want to do anything about that. > > It seems like it would make sense to restrict decoding to text/*. > I'll look in the rfc to see whether it says something relevant. Fix committed. RFC 2046 defines a charset parameter for text/* (and it's also mentioned in the RFCs for text/html and text/css media types). Nothing mentions any parameters defined for image/*, or for the specific image types that dillo displays. Interestingly, I learned of RFC 5147, which is a proposed standard involving URI fragments and text/plain: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5147#section-5

June 7, 2009

[PATCH] fix dillorc path

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 02:08:22AM +0000, corvid wrote: > Jorge wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:26:40PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > Paul wrote: > > > > When opening dillo from the CLI I noticed the following message: > > > > > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/home/user/.dillo/dillorc' > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/etc/dillo/dillorc' > > > > paths: Using internal defaults... > > > > > > > > Checked my system and saw that dillorc had been installed > > > > in /usr/etc/dillorc > > > > > > > > Checking config.log showed sysconfdir='${prefix}/etc', so no > > > > surprises there. But Paths::getPrefsFP() in src/paths.cc uses > > > > PATHS_RC_SYS, which is "/etc/dillo/", so my patch uses DILLORC_SYS, > > > > as specified in src/Makefile.am, instead. Now all is fine! > > > > > > In addition, perhaps we should make sysconfdir have '/dillo' at the end. > > > If I look in an etc dir and see dillorc, I'd know what it's for, > > > but I wouldn't know what uses keysrc. > > > > Yes, a '/dillo' suffix looks OK. > > Please merge both ideas and commit. > > I defined a DILLO_SYSCONF instead of DILLORC_SYS > so that a system keysrc will work someday. > Please test. dillorc and dpidrc got into "/usr/local/etc". (I was expecting them in "/usr/local/etc/dillo"). -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 7, 2009

two image problems

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Johannes wrote: > I noticed two problems related to images: > > Some websites seems to send images with a charset set in the header, > e.g: Content-Type: image/jpeg;charset=ISO-8859-1 > In that case dillo seems to decode the data resulting in: > Not a JPEG file: starts with 0xc3 0xbf > Not sure whether we can/want to do anything about that. It seems like it would make sense to restrict decoding to text/*. I'll look in the rfc to see whether it says something relevant. It might be good to have text decoded outside of cache to UTF-8 in the same way that images are decoded outside of cache to RGB. (Right now that would be a problem with view src using getbuf, and perhaps for text/css following @charset="..." eventually, but still it would be nice to have one way of doing things.) Speaking of the rfc, I noticed just recently that it says "The value of Content-Location also defines the base URI for the entity." and I wonder whether that's ever a problem in practice because dillo makes no use of this header. > I don't understand the other problem: > http://sz-magazin.sueddeutsche.de/upl/images/user/8059/17337.jpg > loads and displays fine. > from html however it doesn't work > <img src="http://sz-magazin.sueddeutsche.de/upl/images/user/8059/17337.jpg" /> When you load it by itself, dillo follows the redirection to http://szmimg.sueddeutsche.de/upl/images/user/8059/17337.jpg

June 7, 2009

two image problems

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

Hi, I noticed two problems related to images: Some websites seems to send images with a charset set in the header, e.g: Content-Type: image/jpeg;charset=ISO-8859-1 In that case dillo seems to decode the data resulting in: Not a JPEG file: starts with 0xc3 0xbf Not sure whether we can/want to do anything about that. I don't understand the other problem: http://sz-magazin.sueddeutsche.de/upl/images/user/8059/17337.jpg loads and displays fine. from html however it doesn't work <img src="http://sz-magazin.sueddeutsche.de/upl/images/user/8059/17337.jpg" /> Cheers, Johannes

June 7, 2009

[PATCH] fix dillorc path

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Jorge wrote: > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:26:40PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Paul wrote: > > > When opening dillo from the CLI I noticed the following message: > > > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/home/user/.dillo/dillorc' > > > paths: Cannot open file '/etc/dillo/dillorc' > > > paths: Using internal defaults... > > > > > > Checked my system and saw that dillorc had been installed > > > in /usr/etc/dillorc > > > > > > Checking config.log showed sysconfdir='${prefix}/etc', so no > > > surprises there. But Paths::getPrefsFP() in src/paths.cc uses > > > PATHS_RC_SYS, which is "/etc/dillo/", so my patch uses DILLORC_SYS, > > > as specified in src/Makefile.am, instead. Now all is fine! > > > > In addition, perhaps we should make sysconfdir have '/dillo' at the end. > > If I look in an etc dir and see dillorc, I'd know what it's for, > > but I wouldn't know what uses keysrc. > > Yes, a '/dillo' suffix looks OK. > Please merge both ideas and commit. I defined a DILLO_SYSCONF instead of DILLORC_SYS so that a system keysrc will work someday. Please test.

June 7, 2009

form widgets, ascent/descent

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:11:43PM +0000, corvid wrote: > I was playing around in dw, and noticed that, > whereas form widgets normally like to put > much of their height into descent, when style > sets the height, Textblock::calcWidgetSize() > puts it all into ascent. > > I checked firefox and saw that their form widgets ascend. > > If we made everything ascend and just put font->descent > into the descent, it would make life simpler. > Or, nearly. I guess there is RELIEF_Y_THICKNESS, but I > could almost ignore that... Not knowing exactly about the details, I'd be very careful in changing ascents, descents and friends because the may interfere with correct handling of CSS. If you're sure it's OK to do it, even considering the "details" (e.g. reliefs, spacings, paddings), then why not. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 7, 2009

[PATCH] fix dillorc path

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:26:40PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Paul wrote: > > When opening dillo from the CLI I noticed the following message: > > > > paths: Cannot open file '/home/user/.dillo/dillorc' > > paths: Cannot open file '/etc/dillo/dillorc' > > paths: Using internal defaults... > > > > Checked my system and saw that dillorc had been installed > > in /usr/etc/dillorc > > > > Checking config.log showed sysconfdir='${prefix}/etc', so no > > surprises there. But Paths::getPrefsFP() in src/paths.cc uses > > PATHS_RC_SYS, which is "/etc/dillo/", so my patch uses DILLORC_SYS, > > as specified in src/Makefile.am, instead. Now all is fine! > > In addition, perhaps we should make sysconfdir have '/dillo' at the end. > If I look in an etc dir and see dillorc, I'd know what it's for, > but I wouldn't know what uses keysrc. Yes, a '/dillo' suffix looks OK. Please merge both ideas and commit. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 7, 2009

experimental patch: Re: dillo2 wrapping Chinese

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Jorge wrote: > On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 06:36:43AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > I wrote: > > > furaisanjin wrote: > > > > I just wonder why this condiction exists in the patch. > > > > > > > > if (*s&0xe2 == 0xe2) { > > > > > > > > There are characters which start from 0xe5 in Japanese. > > > > > > Ah yes, that is an error. Thank you. > > > > > > Any problems with "if (*s&0xe0 == 0xe0) {" instead? > > > I believe that would force everything above U+0800 > > > through the decoding, but oh well. > > > > Wait, why don't I just use > > if (*s >= 0xe2) > > > > (My excuse now is that I'm tired and it's time for bed, but > > I don't know what my excuse is for the other day :) > > > > How UTF-8 works, if anyone cares: > > 0x000000-00007F is 0xxxxxxx > > 0x000080-0007FF is 110xxxxx 10xxxxxx > > 0x000800-00FFFF is 1110xxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx > > 0x010000-1FFFFF is 11110xxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx > > > > so (*s >= 0xe2) is at least > > 1110xxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx > > 0010 000000 000000 == U+2000 > > FWIW, please consider this work "in progress". > Not to be committed into dillo-2.1 (to be released soon). Right, I'm not regarding it as anything that would go into 2.1. It's just something available for those who have a use for it.

June 6, 2009

experimental patch: Re: dillo2 wrapping Chinese

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 06:36:43AM +0000, corvid wrote: > I wrote: > > furaisanjin wrote: > > > I just wonder why this condiction exists in the patch. > > > > > > if (*s&0xe2 == 0xe2) { > > > > > > There are characters which start from 0xe5 in Japanese. > > > > Ah yes, that is an error. Thank you. > > > > Any problems with "if (*s&0xe0 == 0xe0) {" instead? > > I believe that would force everything above U+0800 > > through the decoding, but oh well. > > Wait, why don't I just use > if (*s >= 0xe2) > > (My excuse now is that I'm tired and it's time for bed, but > I don't know what my excuse is for the other day :) > > How UTF-8 works, if anyone cares: > 0x000000-00007F is 0xxxxxxx > 0x000080-0007FF is 110xxxxx 10xxxxxx > 0x000800-00FFFF is 1110xxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx > 0x010000-1FFFFF is 11110xxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx > > so (*s >= 0xe2) is at least > 1110xxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx > 0010 000000 000000 == U+2000 FWIW, please consider this work "in progress". Not to be committed into dillo-2.1 (to be released soon). -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 6, 2009

experimental patch: Re: dillo2 wrapping Chinese

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 06:36:43AM +0000, corvid wrote: > I wrote: > > furaisanjin wrote: > > > I just wonder why this condiction exists in the patch. > > > > > > if (*s&0xe2 == 0xe2) { > > > > > > There are characters which start from 0xe5 in Japanese. > > > > Ah yes, that is an error. Thank you. > > > > Any problems with "if (*s&0xe0 == 0xe0) {" instead? > > I believe that would force everything above U+0800 > > through the decoding, but oh well. > > Wait, why don't I just use > if (*s >= 0xe2) > > (My excuse now is that I'm tired and it's time for bed, but > I don't know what my excuse is for the other day :) > > How UTF-8 works, if anyone cares: > 0x000000-00007F is 0xxxxxxx > 0x000080-0007FF is 110xxxxx 10xxxxxx > 0x000800-00FFFF is 1110xxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx > 0x010000-1FFFFF is 11110xxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx > > so (*s >= 0xe2) is at least > 1110xxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx > 0010 000000 000000 == U+2000 Whatever the C code finally is, please be sure to comment it well (it had happen to me to forget later why my own code was doing something... ;). Sometimes I've "cleaned it up" to rediscover some days or months later (by bug reports) why it was there. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 6, 2009

experimental patch: Re: dillo2 wrapping Chinese

by corvid＠lavabit.com

I wrote: > furaisanjin wrote: > > I just wonder why this condiction exists in the patch. > > > > if (*s&0xe2 == 0xe2) { > > > > There are characters which start from 0xe5 in Japanese. > > Ah yes, that is an error. Thank you. > > Any problems with "if (*s&0xe0 == 0xe0) {" instead? > I believe that would force everything above U+0800 > through the decoding, but oh well. Wait, why don't I just use if (*s >= 0xe2) (My excuse now is that I'm tired and it's time for bed, but I don't know what my excuse is for the other day :) How UTF-8 works, if anyone cares: 0x000000-00007F is 0xxxxxxx 0x000080-0007FF is 110xxxxx 10xxxxxx 0x000800-00FFFF is 1110xxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx 0x010000-1FFFFF is 11110xxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx so (*s >= 0xe2) is at least 1110xxxx 10xxxxxx 10xxxxxx 0010 000000 000000 == U+2000

June 6, 2009