February 2010 - Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

dillo-2.2-rc3

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

Hello, here comes rc3, which contains a minor addition to the blackhole fix. On some systems processes get a SIGHUP before SIGTERM / SIGKILL on shutdown. To make sure that we cleanup properly in that case, SIGHUP needs to be catched too. http://www.dillo.org/download/dillo-2.2-rc3.tar.bz2 SHA1: ec78c1b8a5f3e0199bd6ac0912edeabfd18ae35f If no issues come up this will become dillo-2.2. I want to release 2.2 tomorrow. We can wait with the freshmeat announcement until packages are available, but I don't want to delay the official release of the 2.2 sources any further. Cheers, Johannes

Feb. 10, 2010

middle_click_drags_page=NO [Re: [Dillo-dev] dillo-2.2-rc2]

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Johannes wrote: > corvid, should we get this into the dillo-2.2 release? I will have > to make some minor adjustments to the rc2 code anyway. It's up to > you. Just commit it if you think it should go in. Given the circumstances, I think I would prefer to save it for after release.

Feb. 10, 2010

middle_click_drags_page=NO [Re: [Dillo-dev] dillo-2.2-rc2]

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:08:27AM +0100, Thomas Orgis wrote: > Am Tue, 9 Feb 2010 01:28:46 +0000 > sc > > > > > middle_click_drags_page=NO > > > > > > > > in dillorc. A Major flaw of this setting is that pasting into form fields does not work. Any middle-click triggers URL loading... when this setting is YES, the pasting into form fields works, is not harmed by the page dragging functions. > > > > Please try the attached patch... > > > > Looks good to me! Built the 2.2 rc1 with this patch and it works as expected now (as one is accustomed from other browsers). > Nice to see that this is such a small patch, even. nice! corvid, should we get this into the dillo-2.2 release? I will have to make some minor adjustments to the rc2 code anyway. It's up to you. Just commit it if you think it should go in. Cheers, Johannes

Feb. 10, 2010

middle_click_drags_page=NO [Re: [Dillo-dev] dillo-2.2-rc2]

by thomas-forum＠orgis.org

Am Tue, 9 Feb 2010 01:28:46 +0000 sc > > > middle_click_drags_page=NO > > > > > > in dillorc. A Major flaw of this setting is that pasting into form fields does not work. Any middle-click triggers URL loading... when this setting is YES, the pasting into form fields works, is not harmed by the page dragging functions. > > Please try the attached patch... > Looks good to me! Built the 2.2 rc1 with this patch and it works as expected now (as one is accustomed from other browsers). Nice to see that this is such a small patch, even. Alrighty then, Thomas.

Feb. 10, 2010

Starting dpis on FreeBSD: blackhole(4) timeouts

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 06:24:48PM +0100, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 02:16:08PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 07:15:59PM +0100, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 08:59:44AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:13:14PM +0100, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 04:44:57PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 07:02:54PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > > > > bf wrote: > > > > > > > > Because blackhole(4) is a common security measure, and because this > > > > > > > > problem did not exist under the previous dpi framework, it must be > > > > > > > > considered a regression, even if, in hindsight, it is to be "expected". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I finally looked back to refresh my memory on why we switched to inet > > > > > > > sockets: Minix. If we do return to Unix sockets eventually, what is the > > > > > > > thinking on what we would do for Minix? > > > > > > > > > > > > At some point in time Minix 3 will have to implement UDS. > > > > > > In the meanwhile they can use the version with inet sockets. > > > > > > > > > > What shall we do about this TCP blackhole issue? > > > > > Should we try to switch back to UDS before release? > > > > > > > > Sorry for the delayed answer Johannes (I was out of the city). > > > > > > > > IMO, UDS before the release is too risky. It will need lots of > > > > testing time. > > > > > > Just came to the same conclusion ... > > > > > > > > > > I believe we may choose the solution bf has found > > > > to work better as workaround, make a patch with it and release. A > > > > few times in the past I rushed a "better" solution into an rc, > > > > only to learn not to do it! :) > > > > > > What patch exactly would you propose? I see > > > > > > * increasing dpid_idle_timeout > > > * adding a linger variable > > > * and a shell wrapper to start dillo > > > > a dpid_linger dillorc variable would save the user the trouble > > of re-compiling, but it would add the burden of prefs parsing in > > dpid. So, I'd say centinel solution could work: > > > > e.g. "touch ~/.dillo/DPID_LINGER" > > > > and dpid acting accordingly. > > > > Also a mention of the shell wrapper script in the README, with > > a link to a working example in our site would do the rest. An > > entry in the FAQ could help too. > > Jorge, as you might have seen already I committed a different fix > after reproducing the issue here on my system. Yes. When back home, I started answering email, then saw the patch ;-) > Please check it in the repo: > http://hg.dillo.org/dillo/rev/3a159d7e5098 +1 I think the committed solution is much better. My only concern with this type of solution is that it fails when the dpid gets hung (and then "kill -9" doesn't help). Maybe adding an unlink() call in dpidc's stop part is worth the effort. That way "dpidc stop" would always clear the centinel. ... but checking whether dpid is still alive after dpibye, killing it and thence going after each dpi with a kill signal looks like overkill (pun intended!) to me. ;) > * \todo what is the most portable way to ignore the signo > argument of without generating a warning? Is "int signo __unused" > gcc specific? a_Http_ccc() uses this nice trick: (void)Data2; /* suppress unused parameter warning */ -- Cheers Jorge.-

Feb. 9, 2010

Starting dpis on FreeBSD: blackhole(4) timeouts

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 02:16:08PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 07:15:59PM +0100, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 08:59:44AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:13:14PM +0100, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 04:44:57PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 07:02:54PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > > > bf wrote: > > > > > > > Because blackhole(4) is a common security measure, and because this > > > > > > > problem did not exist under the previous dpi framework, it must be > > > > > > > considered a regression, even if, in hindsight, it is to be "expected". > > > > > > > > > > > > I finally looked back to refresh my memory on why we switched to inet > > > > > > sockets: Minix. If we do return to Unix sockets eventually, what is the > > > > > > thinking on what we would do for Minix? > > > > > > > > > > At some point in time Minix 3 will have to implement UDS. > > > > > In the meanwhile they can use the version with inet sockets. > > > > > > > > What shall we do about this TCP blackhole issue? > > > > Should we try to switch back to UDS before release? > > > > > > Sorry for the delayed answer Johannes (I was out of the city). > > > > > > IMO, UDS before the release is too risky. It will need lots of > > > testing time. > > > > Just came to the same conclusion ... > > > > > > > I believe we may choose the solution bf has found > > > to work better as workaround, make a patch with it and release. A > > > few times in the past I rushed a "better" solution into an rc, > > > only to learn not to do it! :) > > > > What patch exactly would you propose? I see > > > > * increasing dpid_idle_timeout > > * adding a linger variable > > * and a shell wrapper to start dillo > > a dpid_linger dillorc variable would save the user the trouble > of re-compiling, but it would add the burden of prefs parsing in > dpid. So, I'd say centinel solution could work: > > e.g. "touch ~/.dillo/DPID_LINGER" > > and dpid acting accordingly. > > Also a mention of the shell wrapper script in the README, with > a link to a working example in our site would do the rest. An > entry in the FAQ could help too. Jorge, as you might have seen already I committed a different fix after reproducing the issue here on my system. Please check it in the repo: http://hg.dillo.org/dillo/rev/3a159d7e5098 Cheers, Johannes

Feb. 9, 2010

valgrind [Re: [Dillo-dev] dillo-2.2-rc1]

by onepoint＠starurchin.org

On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 09:10:44AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:32:29PM +0000, Jeremy Henty wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 08:07:13AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > > > I've been wondering whether it is possible to check dpid and the > > > dpis as well. [...] > > > > [...] > > The tricky thing is identifying the process - currently I just > > slurp the whole output before doing anything, by which time the > > dpi might have died. It might be better to process it > > line-by-line so I can check the process table right away. That > > would need a little re-engineering. Or maybe it would be better > > to replace the dpis with wrappers that run valgrind? > > I'd definitely try with wrappers! I think you're right. It's a little kludgy but at least it's robust - you know for sure which program the output is from and you don't get scrambled results from multiple processes writing to the same stream. Regards, Jeremy Henty

Feb. 9, 2010

middle_click_drags_page=NO [Re: [Dillo-dev] dillo-2.2-rc2]

by corvid＠lavabit.com

I wrote: > Thomas wrote: > > one feature I motivated is not interacting as it should. > > It is the middle-click pasting into the browser window to trigger loading of the pasted URL, activated via > > > > middle_click_drags_page=NO > > > > in dillorc. A Major flaw of this setting is that pasting into form fields does not work. Any middle-click triggers URL loading... when this setting is YES, the pasting into form fields works, is not harmed by the page dragging functions. Please try the attached patch...

Feb. 9, 2010

Starting dpis on FreeBSD: blackhole(4) timeouts

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 07:15:59PM +0100, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 08:59:44AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:13:14PM +0100, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 04:44:57PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 07:02:54PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > > bf wrote: > > > > > > Because blackhole(4) is a common security measure, and because this > > > > > > problem did not exist under the previous dpi framework, it must be > > > > > > considered a regression, even if, in hindsight, it is to be "expected". > > > > > > > > > > I finally looked back to refresh my memory on why we switched to inet > > > > > sockets: Minix. If we do return to Unix sockets eventually, what is the > > > > > thinking on what we would do for Minix? > > > > > > > > At some point in time Minix 3 will have to implement UDS. > > > > In the meanwhile they can use the version with inet sockets. > > > > > > What shall we do about this TCP blackhole issue? > > > Should we try to switch back to UDS before release? > > > > Sorry for the delayed answer Johannes (I was out of the city). > > > > IMO, UDS before the release is too risky. It will need lots of > > testing time. > > Just came to the same conclusion ... > > > > I believe we may choose the solution bf has found > > to work better as workaround, make a patch with it and release. A > > few times in the past I rushed a "better" solution into an rc, > > only to learn not to do it! :) > > What patch exactly would you propose? I see > > * increasing dpid_idle_timeout > * adding a linger variable > * and a shell wrapper to start dillo a dpid_linger dillorc variable would save the user the trouble of re-compiling, but it would add the burden of prefs parsing in dpid. So, I'd say centinel solution could work: e.g. "touch ~/.dillo/DPID_LINGER" and dpid acting accordingly. Also a mention of the shell wrapper script in the README, with a link to a working example in our site would do the rest. An entry in the FAQ could help too. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Feb. 8, 2010

Starting dpis on FreeBSD: blackhole(4) timeouts

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 05:04:18PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Jorge wrote: > > With regard to UDS, it can be scheduled into the repo shortly > > after the release; Thereafter users can help us polish it from > > there. > > Do you expect that you will have time to do it yourself? Yes. > Would it make sense to make a 2.2.1 with just the uds dpi changes and > nothing else that isn't rather trivial? I guess it'll be UDS plus other things as the testing period needs to extend around a few weeks. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Feb. 8, 2010