March 2003 - Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

Re: [Dillo-dev] float implementation

by John Bradford

> I just want to announce the availability of my code to > fix bug #233 which concernes the rendering of > align=left and align=right tables. The patches and > screen shots are at > > http://home.earthlink.net/~crayne2 > > Feedback would be appreciated. :) It seems to have broken something - have a look at http://grabjohn.com The lists no longer have bullets. Also, at: http://kde.org If you use a small Dillo window, the links on the left can overlap the text to their right. For some reason, using FVWM2, maximising the Dillo window no longer makes it redraw with your patches. Having said all that, it does make some pages look a lot better. John.

March 5, 2003

float implementation

by Joe Crayne

I just want to announce the availability of my code to fix bug #233 which concernes the rendering of align=left and align=right tables. The patches and screen shots are at http://home.earthlink.net/~crayne2 Feedback would be appreciated. :)

March 5, 2003

Re: [Dillo-dev] More bugfixes

by Thorben Thuermer

On Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:22:27 -0300 (CLST) Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid(a)softhome.net> wrote: > Sebastian: Please review BUG#424, Keith says it's a trivial fix. for reference: BUG#: 424 Impact: soft error At: run time Type: memory leak Comments: Version 0.7.0 pixmap leak on resize. Dw_gtk_viewport_paint calls gdk_pixmap_ref instead of gdk_pixmap_unref. Fix is trivial. HTReproduce: Resize dillo repeatedly and note X server memory size increase WorkedBy: keithp(a)keithp.com this looks interesting. i noticed problems with *excessive* X resource leaks (=growth of the server's memory usage), and this might be a possible fix, i'm going to test that. diff -r1.22 dw_gtk_viewport.c 263c263 < gdk_pixmap_ref (viewport->back_pixmap); --- > gdk_pixmap_unref (viewport->back_pixmap); > Ah, can anyone reproduce/not_reproduce bug 406? i could never reproduce that... maybe you should ask people to at least include a gdb backtrace for crashes? Greetings, Thorben Thuermer

March 5, 2003

Re: [Dillo-dev] Question about dpi interface ...

by Thorben Thuermer

On Wed, 05 Mar 2003 10:07:59 +0100 Lars Segerlund <lars.segerlund(a)comsys.se> wrote: > > If I have dillo 0.7.0 with the bookmarks working through dpi, how can > I add dpi functionality ? > > Can I make a dpi server without modyfying the dillo binary ? you might want to read http://dillo.auriga.wearlab.de/dpi1.html for information on the dpi system. > / rgards, Lars Segerlund. Greetings, Thorben Thuermer

March 5, 2003

Question about dpi interface ...

by Lars Segerlund

If I have dillo 0.7.0 with the bookmarks working through dpi, how can I add dpi functionality ? Can I make a dpi server without modyfying the dillo binary ? / rgards, Lars Segerlund.

March 5, 2003

More bugfixes

by Jorge Arellano Cid

Hi there! I've been reviewing the bugtrack and receiving a lot of emails with regard to problems with solaris. There were several issues, some solved in CVS and others that escape our scope (Solaris is so inconsistent that some versions require certain libraries that others not, some fail, some work...) If someone has the patience to tweak configure.in to detect the different subversions of Solaris and add the magical options, I'd put it in. Just read the ChangeLog for a brief of the fixes. --------------------------------------------------- NOTE: There're lots of fixes, not just for Solaris. --------------------------------------------------- Please send me feedback about how it went. Sadly I just received _one_ mail report. Andreas: Please test the flock patch. It should work with *BSD as it defines flock(). Sebastian: Please review BUG#424, Keith says it's a trivial fix. Ah, can anyone reproduce/not_reproduce bug 406? Has anyone with a 64bit machine had NO trouble at all? :-) Cheers Jorge.-

March 4, 2003

Re: [Dillo-dev] Loosing bookmarks

by Sebastian Geerken

On Sat, Mar 01, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > The attached patch (against dillo-0.7.0) does five things: > [...] This patch is now in the CVS. Sebastian

March 2, 2003

Re: [Dillo-dev] BUGFIX set close_on_exec (FD_CLOEXEC)

by Raphael Barabas

On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 11:21:10PM +0100, Raphael Barabas wrote: > reason: > in IO.c, function IO_submit, filedescriptor-flag close_on_exec > is not set the right way (not at all). on solaris, as a direct > result, non-blocking io will accidentally be handled via > O_NDELAY instead of O_NONBLOCKING, resulting in an endless > loop. looks like i shot too fast. i forgot to grep the rest of the source for FD_CLOEXEC: IO/IO.c:533: O_NONBLOCK | FD_CLOEXEC | fcntl(r_io->FD, F_GETFL)); IO/http.c:267: O_NONBLOCK | FD_CLOEXEC | fcntl(S->SockFD, F_GETFL)); cookies.c:115: fcntl(fileno(F_in), F_SETFL, FD_CLOEXEC | fcntl(fileno(F_in), F_GETFL)); prefs.c:257: fcntl(fd, F_SETFL, FD_CLOEXEC | fcntl(fd, F_GETFL)); of course all of these need to be fixed. FD_CLOEXEC is set via F_SETFD, not F_SETFL. by now i also read the developer info on the webpage. i'll behave now, file a bugreport and mail a diff -pru to jcid(a)softhome.net ;) regards, raphael

March 2, 2003

patch for POSIX file lock

by yangguilong

I'm compiling dillo on Cygwin, which lacks of flock/lockf, but has support for POSIX file lock (fcntl()). To enable the cookies support, I write a patch for it. In hope that it will be useful for other platform having similar situation. diff -Nurp dillo-0.6.6/src/cookies.c dillo-0.6.6-cygwin/src/cookies.c --- dillo-0.6.6/src/cookies.c 2002-05-28 04:47:50.000000000 +0800 +++ dillo-0.6.6-cygwin/src/cookies.c 2003-03-01 10:23:56.000000000 +0800 @@ -130,6 +130,9 @@ void a_Cookies_init() GList *domain_cookies; char *filename; char line[LINE_MAXLEN]; +#ifndef HAVE_LOCKF + struct flock lck; +#endif Cookie_control_init(); @@ -145,7 +148,16 @@ void a_Cookies_init() } /* Try to get a lock from the file descriptor */ +#ifdef HAVE_LOCKF disabled = (lockf(fileno(file_stream), F_TLOCK, 0) == -1); +#else /* POSIX lock */ + lck.l_start = 0; /* start at beginning of file */ + lck.l_len = 0; /* lock entire file */ + lck.l_type = F_WRLCK; + lck.l_whence = SEEK_SET; /* absolute offset */ + + disabled = (fcntl(fileno(file_stream), F_SETLK, &lck) == -1); +#endif if (disabled) { DEBUG_MSG(10, "The cookies file has a file lock:\n" " disabling cookies in this dillo!\n"); @@ -278,6 +290,9 @@ static gboolean Cookies_freeall_cb(gpoin void a_Cookies_freeall() { int fd; +#ifndef HAVE_LOCKF + struct flock lck; +#endif if (disabled) return; @@ -288,7 +303,16 @@ void a_Cookies_freeall() g_hash_table_foreach_remove(cookies, Cookies_freeall_cb, NULL); +#ifdef HAVE_LOCKF lockf(fd, F_ULOCK, 0); +#else /* POSIX file lock */ + lck.l_start = 0; /* start at beginning of file */ + lck.l_len = 0; /* lock entire file */ + lck.l_type = F_UNLCK; + lck.l_whence = SEEK_SET; /* absolute offset */ + + fcntl(fileno(file_stream), F_SETLKW, &lck); +#endif fclose(file_stream); } --------------------------------------------- »¶Ó¹âÁÙ http://www.cmmail.com

March 2, 2003

BUGFIX set close_on_exec (FD_CLOEXEC)

by Raphael Barabas

hello, in my neverending search for the perfect browser i stumbled across dillo. it looks great and quite usable, altough it's still alpha. unfortunately dillo 0.7.0 won't run on solaris8 (ultra30), so i wrote a fix. turns out every other os is affected by this bug, too. solaris just seems to be less forgiving in this matter :) to compile on solaris you may also need some workarounds, take a look at bugreports 402, 413 and 415. problem: solaris: see bugreport 416, dillo enters endless loop on startup, repeating "IO_write: Changing io->Buf (0)" linux: no immediate effect, although some filedescriptors are in state "open" for too long. i've not really looked into it but this should have negative effects in the long run. reason: in IO.c, function IO_submit, filedescriptor-flag close_on_exec is not set the right way (not at all). on solaris, as a direct result, non-blocking io will accidentally be handled via O_NDELAY instead of O_NONBLOCKING, resulting in an endless loop. patch: *** IO.c.org Sat Mar 1 21:56:13 2003 --- IO.c Sat Mar 1 21:56:54 2003 *************** *** 530,536 **** /* Set FD to background and to close on exec. */ fcntl(r_io->FD, F_SETFL, ! O_NONBLOCK | FD_CLOEXEC | fcntl(r_io->FD, F_GETFL)); if ( r_io->Op == IORead ) { g_io_add_watch(r_io->GioCh, G_IO_IN | G_IO_ERR | G_IO_HUP, --- 530,538 ---- /* Set FD to background and to close on exec. */ fcntl(r_io->FD, F_SETFL, ! O_NONBLOCK | fcntl(r_io->FD, F_GETFL)); ! fcntl(r_io->FD, F_SETFD, ! FD_CLOEXEC | fcntl(r_io->FD, F_GETFD)); if ( r_io->Op == IORead ) { g_io_add_watch(r_io->GioCh, G_IO_IN | G_IO_ERR | G_IO_HUP, disclaimer: this bugfix has been tested briefly on debian gnu/linux 2.4.20 and solaris 8. please review my code for correctness. also note that bugreport 417 has been proven wrong by this. regards, raphael

March 1, 2003