July 2011 - Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

Repository branch name

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi, Is there an easy way to rename the repo name from "dillo_port1.3" to "dillo3"? -- Cheers Jorge.-

July 16, 2011

release preparations (was Re: [Dillo-dev] Benchmark for web page rendering speed; dillo-svn vs dillo 2.2?)

by obeythepenguin＠gmail.com

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:52:03 -0400, Roger <rogerx.oss(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:29:15AM -0400, Benjamin Johnson wrote: >> >> FWIW, those dialogs have always been broken on Windows. I basically had >> to write my own Fl_Native_File_Chooser class (although Windows' dialogs >> are much nicer than FLTK's, anyway). >> >> I'd say just include a "known good" FLTK2 release in the Dillo tarball, >> and modify the build system to use that copy instead of the system one. >> As an added bonus, it might make Dillo more attractive to Linux >> distributions, since they don't have to add an unreleased dependency >> library to include an up-to-date Dillo package. >> >> Just a thought, >> ~Benjamin > > This then defeats the purpose of a source based distro such as Gentoo. It's a common enough trick -- OpenOffice.org does it, Audacity does it, basically any big-name open source project you can think of includes at least one dependency library in the stable tarballs because the upstream developers can't keep a stable API or functional code longer than ten minutes. If the distributions wish to change things, that's their prerogative; I mean, Debian's constitutionally incapable of leaving upstream code unmolested, and I'm sure anyone else who maintains an ebuild/RPM/BSD port can figure out how to patch it back to do things their own way. At least you've made an attempt. It may work, it may not, but it's still better than doing nothing but whine about how no distributions will ship your code because of a trivially avoidable technicality. ~Benjamin

July 16, 2011

release preparations (was Re: [Dillo-dev] Benchmark for web page rendering speed; dillo-svn vs dillo 2.2?)

by rogerx.oss＠gmail.com

> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:29:15AM -0400, Benjamin Johnson wrote: >On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 09:45:14 -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid(a)dillo.org> >wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 02:55:51PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: >> >> Today I made some tests, and found that newer FLTK2 versions as >> alpha-r8800, changed the internal API, rendering some parts of >> dillo-2.2.1 unusable. (e.g. "Open file", Close dialog, Repost >> dialog). >> >> fltk-2.0.x-r7513 works fine for me. >> >> The simple solution is to suggest a library version range in >> the README. e.g. >> >> "The FLTK2 library is statically linked into Dillo2. >> You can get it from fltk.org. >> The recommended version is >= r6916 and <=r7513 >> >> http://fltk.org/software.php?VERSION=2.0.x-r7513" >> >> >> Comments? >> > >FWIW, those dialogs have always been broken on Windows. I basically had >to write my own Fl_Native_File_Chooser class (although Windows' dialogs >are much nicer than FLTK's, anyway). > >I'd say just include a "known good" FLTK2 release in the Dillo tarball, >and modify the build system to use that copy instead of the system one. >As an added bonus, it might make Dillo more attractive to Linux >distributions, since they don't have to add an unreleased dependency >library to include an up-to-date Dillo package. > >Just a thought, >~Benjamin This then defeats the purpose of a source based distro such as Gentoo.

July 16, 2011

release preparations (was Re: [Dillo-dev] Benchmark for web page rendering speed; dillo-svn vs dillo 2.2?)

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 03:10:55PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 02:55:51PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 05:28:34PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > [...] > > > Will we have a dillo3-help.html? Done. Also updated dillo3 and its user-help.html. -- Cheers Jorge.-

July 16, 2011

release preparations (was Re: [Dillo-dev] Benchmark for web page rendering speed; dillo-svn vs dillo 2.2?)

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 02:55:51PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 05:28:34PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > [...] > > > Then some minor things as: source compilation instructions, > > > FAQ, Help pages. FAQ updated. > > Will we have a dillo3-help.html? > > I suppose we do have the fullscreen change... > > Yes. Next in my list. -- Cheers Jorge.-

July 15, 2011

release preparations (was Re: [Dillo-dev] Benchmark for web page rendering speed; dillo-svn vs dillo 2.2?)

by obeythepenguin＠gmail.com

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 09:45:14 -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid(a)dillo.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 02:55:51PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > Today I made some tests, and found that newer FLTK2 versions as > alpha-r8800, changed the internal API, rendering some parts of > dillo-2.2.1 unusable. (e.g. "Open file", Close dialog, Repost > dialog). > > fltk-2.0.x-r7513 works fine for me. > > The simple solution is to suggest a library version range in > the README. e.g. > > "The FLTK2 library is statically linked into Dillo2. > You can get it from fltk.org. > The recommended version is >= r6916 and <=r7513 > > http://fltk.org/software.php?VERSION=2.0.x-r7513" > > > Comments? > FWIW, those dialogs have always been broken on Windows. I basically had to write my own Fl_Native_File_Chooser class (although Windows' dialogs are much nicer than FLTK's, anyway). I'd say just include a "known good" FLTK2 release in the Dillo tarball, and modify the build system to use that copy instead of the system one. As an added bonus, it might make Dillo more attractive to Linux distributions, since they don't have to add an unreleased dependency library to include an up-to-date Dillo package. Just a thought, ~Benjamin

July 15, 2011

[syigwei@zoho.com: Dillo pre3 cannot view Chinese websites]

by johannes.hofmann＠gmx.de

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 11:53:25PM +0000, corvid wrote: > higuita wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:58:56 +0000, "corvid" <corvid(a)lavabit.com> wrote: > > > I wanted to make a screenshot with wenquanyi zen hei and dillo3 > > > in order to mention the change in specifying the font name, > > > and I get boxes when the text is bold or italic. > > > > I checked and that font don't define bold and italic styles, so > > is being replaced by other fonts...i dont have any Chinese font with > > bold or italic defined, so i also get a "box" from some random font. > > > > Looking to the Chinese characters, i would imagine > > that italic and bold don't make much sense, only make even harder to > > read, maybe only very special fonts may have it... maybe a native > > speaking may give some light over this? > > > > Either way, its possible and the user need a Chinese font > > with bold/italic support or else will see wrong characters. > > Yeah, it's similar to what I'd mentioned before about URW Chancery L > only having an italic form. I suppose that, in the general case, > we probably care more about matching the font family than about > matching the weight/style. Good point. We should change this in FltkFont::initSystemFonts (). Cheers, Johannes

July 15, 2011

release preparations (was Re: [Dillo-dev] Benchmark for web page rendering speed; dillo-svn vs dillo 2.2?)

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 02:55:51PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 05:28:34PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Jorge wrote: > > > I'm working on the tarball now: BTW, just committed fixes for gcc warnings on amd64. -- Cheers Jorge.-

July 15, 2011

release preparations (was Re: [Dillo-dev] Benchmark for web page rendering speed; dillo-svn vs dillo 2.2?)

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 02:55:51PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 05:28:34PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Jorge wrote: > > > I'm working on the tarball now: > > > > Oh, excellent! > > Ok, committed. > > The dates are left blank of course. > Please check the splash page and correct my english. > > That should be it. I've not tested it though. Today I made some tests, and found that newer FLTK2 versions as alpha-r8800, changed the internal API, rendering some parts of dillo-2.2.1 unusable. (e.g. "Open file", Close dialog, Repost dialog). fltk-2.0.x-r7513 works fine for me. The simple solution is to suggest a library version range in the README. e.g. "The FLTK2 library is statically linked into Dillo2. You can get it from fltk.org. The recommended version is >= r6916 and <=r7513 http://fltk.org/software.php?VERSION=2.0.x-r7513" Comments? -- Cheers Jorge.-

July 15, 2011

Mac OSX

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi, Does anybody know whether eliminating "large" panel creates a problem with Mac OSX? It used to have a global menu bar that merged that part of the GUI. TIA. -- Cheers Jorge.-

July 15, 2011