- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

New tab colours - suggestion

by nick＠linicks.net

On Wed, 18 May 2016 18:52:13 +0000 eocene <eocene at gmx.com> wrote: > > All fixed now using: > > > > ui_tab_active_bg_color=lightgrey > > ui_tab_bg_color=#808080 > > I wonder whether there'd be any value in printing a MSG complaining > when dillorc sets something more than once (search_url excepted). Actually, I am now using: ui_tab_active_fg_color=brown ui_tab_bg_color=#909090 which works great. AS to your question, what I don't understand is why there is a section for tab colours, and then later in the default theme section (which is active) more options for tab colour options? Perhaps move the 'stand-alone' tab colour options after the themes, so if the all the themes are #'ed out, these will take precedence? Or why have them at all? Nick -- Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara"

May 18, 2016

New tab colours - suggestion

by eocene＠gmx.com

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 04:34:50PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote: > On Tue, 17 May 2016 19:05:34 +0000 > eocene <eocene at gmx.com> wrote: > > (Also check that > > they aren't being set again farther down in dillorc.) > > Thanks, I didn't thing of looking further down - the theme was setting > it. > > All fixed now using: > > ui_tab_active_bg_color=lightgrey > ui_tab_bg_color=#808080 I wonder whether there'd be any value in printing a MSG complaining when dillorc sets something more than once (search_url excepted).

May 18, 2016

CPU hog bug with https?

by nick＠linicks.net

On Wed, 18 May 2016 19:00:44 +0100 Nick Warne <nick at linicks.net> wrote: > On Tue, 17 May 2016 21:45:27 -0400 > Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org> wrote: > > > Then suddenly at some point, gdb's backtrace was still near the > > hundred in depth, but a few functions remained. Studying the code in > > the involved functions made me finally spot the hiding bug. Trivial > > to fix, but very hard to find. > > > > For this case, what took more than 2 minutes to render, now takes > > near 1/8 second. ;-) > > It is quiet amazing sometimes how a simple typo/mind mistake can take > ages to track down. > > Well down Jorge! Duh! Proves the point. Well done Jorge! Nick -- Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara"

May 18, 2016

CPU hog bug with https?

by nick＠linicks.net

On Tue, 17 May 2016 21:45:27 -0400 Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid at dillo.org> wrote: > Then suddenly at some point, gdb's backtrace was still near the > hundred in depth, but a few functions remained. Studying the code in > the involved functions made me finally spot the hiding bug. Trivial > to fix, but very hard to find. > > For this case, what took more than 2 minutes to render, now takes > near 1/8 second. ;-) It is quiet amazing sometimes how a simple typo/mind mistake can take ages to track down. Well down Jorge! Nick -- Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara"

May 18, 2016

New tab colours - suggestion

by nick＠linicks.net

On Tue, 17 May 2016 19:05:34 +0000 eocene <eocene at gmx.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 06:47:20PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote: > > Actually, I can't get this to work - the same bg colours do not > > change > > - the text colour does though. > > Do the tab background prefs work at all for you? Yes, they do now :) >I remember FLTK > sometimes was stubborn about colors if it felt a > foreground/background pair had too little contrast. (Also check that > they aren't being set again farther down in dillorc.) Thanks, I didn't thing of looking further down - the theme was setting it. All fixed now using: ui_tab_active_bg_color=lightgrey ui_tab_bg_color=#808080 Nick -- Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara"

May 18, 2016

Dillo_grows merged

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 05:52:11PM +0200, Sebastian Geerken wrote: > On So, Mai 15, 2016, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > Hi Sebastian, > > > > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 04:42:31PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > Hi there! > > > > > > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 01:17:40PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote: > > > > On Sat, 14 May 2016 22:48:12 +0000 > > > > eocene <eocene at gmx.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Searching the page doesn't cause any more, though. > > > > > > > > > > Searching backward causes segfaults with regularity. > > > > > > > > Messing about with this this morning, the segfault happens when using > > > > 'previous' goes back past the first found 'next'. > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > I sent this bug to Per Anderson a few weeks ago for him to debug, > > > but didn't get an answer. @Per: did you get the email? > > > > > > Anyway, today I made a simple patch for it, but will investigate > > > the issue a bit further before sending it to Sebastian for review. > > > > OK, the bisect shows the problem starts with commit 4241 which is > > a new design for textblock iterators. > > > > The attached patch works OK for the text search, but I don't know > > whether it fits with the overall design. > > > > It *seems to fit* but I'd prefer you to check it. ;) > > I've just pushed a variant of your patch, please give it a try. Much better! I still wander what a negative sectionIndex means (0 is in flow). It takes negative values sometimes. It should be commented. What should getPart() do upon a negative sectionIndex? HTH. -- Cheers Jorge.-

May 18, 2016

CPU hog bug with https?

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi there, On Sun, May 01, 2016 at 09:58:53PM +0200, Sebastian Geerken wrote: > On So, Mai 01, 2016, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > Hi, > > > > If I start current dillo with [1], an https dialog springs > > (untrusted certificate). Answering "continue" gets into a CPU hog, > > answering "cancel" allows reading the page with no problems. > > > > FWIW, I've done that lots of times with other sites, and this is the > > first CPU hog I get accross. > > > > > > [1] https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=5852295&cid=48188823 > > I can reproduce this. However, profiling shows rather problems in the > rendering code (dw::core::Widget::queueResize etc.), so the problem is > probably not related to HTTPS. > > Also, mirroring this page ("wget -pkH") and displaying it locally > shows the same symptoms. > > Looks that this belongs rather on my todo list. Good news on this one. Patch committed! I'd like to comment a bit on this bugfix for those that would like to help making patches for dillo. You can check the patch and verbose log with: "hg log -vp|less". It was hard to find, sometimes backtraces gave near 85 or more nested calls, full of different functions. There was no CPU lock because it finally solved the page (after more than two minutes in my machine). It took a few days of work, by reducing the testcase (a slashdot page) by: * removing the scripting * removing one stylesheet completely (no bug without CSS). * removing sections of the HTML code while checking the bug was still reproducible. And checking the backtrace stack from gdb from time to time. gprof may have served also, but as there where so many functions I decided to keep reducing the case. This is a trial&error iteration process. At some point I could clean the testcase enough to run tidy on it, and no, it wasn't a tag soup corner case. Back to reducing the testcase. It started to solve in less time, but still hogging my CPU for near 20 secs.. Then suddenly at some point, gdb's backtrace was still near the hundred in depth, but a few functions remained. Studying the code in the involved functions made me finally spot the hiding bug. Trivial to fix, but very hard to find. For this case, what took more than 2 minutes to render, now takes near 1/8 second. ;-) -- Cheers Jorge.-

May 18, 2016

New tab colours - suggestion

by eocene＠gmx.com

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 06:47:20PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote: > Actually, I can't get this to work - the same bg colours do not change > - the text colour does though. Do the tab background prefs work at all for you? I remember FLTK sometimes was stubborn about colors if it felt a foreground/background pair had too little contrast. (Also check that they aren't being set again farther down in dillorc.)

May 17, 2016

New tab colours - suggestion

by nick＠linicks.net

On Tue, 17 May 2016 18:37:58 +0100 Nick Warne <nick at linicks.net> wrote: > On Tue, 17 May 2016 18:26:29 +0100 > Nick Warne <nick at linicks.net> wrote: > > > I find that when opening a new tab, the colour of it changes to a > > sort of turquoise colour - which suggests it is in the background. > > > > I do find it confusing - could it be possible to change the working > > tab to the default grey and the background tabs to the turquoise > > colour? > > > > Just a suggestion. > > > > If it doesn't seem to bother anybody else, can someone point me to > > the area of code so I can do a local patch. > > Sorry, ignore the idiot - dillorc has it. Actually, I can't get this to work - the same bg colours do not change - the text colour does though. Nick -- Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara"

May 17, 2016

New tab colours - suggestion

by nick＠linicks.net

On Tue, 17 May 2016 18:26:29 +0100 Nick Warne <nick at linicks.net> wrote: > I find that when opening a new tab, the colour of it changes to a sort > of turquoise colour - which suggests it is in the background. > > I do find it confusing - could it be possible to change the working > tab to the default grey and the background tabs to the turquoise > colour? > > Just a suggestion. > > If it doesn't seem to bother anybody else, can someone point me to the > area of code so I can do a local patch. Sorry, ignore the idiot - dillorc has it. Duh. Nick -- Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara"

May 17, 2016