- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

[Dillo-dev]Test for socklen_t in configure.in

by Jorge Arellano Cid

Hi there, Our configure.in is in need of a test for socklen_t. I thought this one could be a good one: dnl ------------------- dnl Check for socklen_t dnl ------------------- dnl AC_MSG_CHECKING(for socklen_t) AC_TRY_COMPILE([#include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/socket.h> socklen_t x; ], [], [AC_MSG_RESULT(yes)], [ AC_TRY_COMPILE([#include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/socket.h> int accept(int, struct sockaddr *, size_t *); ], [], [ AC_MSG_RESULT(size_t) AC_DEFINE(socklen_t, size_t)], [ AC_MSG_RESULT(int) AC_DEFINE(socklen_t, int)])]) but my autoheader complains... Can someone please complete the patch, I'm currently chasing a segfault bug I found... TIA Jorge.-

April 28, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]Preparing the 0.8.1 release

by Jorge Arellano Cid

Hi Francis, First of all, thanks for your research and well backed answer. Here I go: On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Francis Daly wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 07:48:11PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Jens Arm wrote: > > > > > Please test our current CVS hardly, and tell us how it did. > > > > > > Directories like > > > > > > http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/tools/ > > > > > > or others are not rendered correctly > > > > Yes. This is a complex problem. > > > > Apache (the web server), generates bad HTML for directory > > listings (at least 1.3.x series): > > > > <PRE> is an inline container excluding: > > > > {IMG, OBJECT, APPLET, BIG, SMALL, SUB, SUP, FONT, BASEFONT} > > > > Also, it can't hold block elements (e.g. HR). > > > > > > So there's a bug in having <HR> inside <PRE> and one bug per > > directory entry because <PRE> can't contain <IMG>. > > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9307 and <q from above URL> Yes, it's a known issue. In 2.0 and later, tables can be enabled by configuration. 1.3 will stick with the <pre> stuff, also because of backwards compat, sorry. <q> > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13351 suggest that > the apache developers know, and it's not going to change in the 1.3 > series. Well, they know the bad HTML issue and made a tables version for the directory listing (that was also faulty but that as of the bug entry should be corrected now). > > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10880 suggests that > the default won't change in the 2.0 series, <q from above URL> Item 1 has been fixed in 2.1 and is proposed for backport. Item 2 ... ehm? what standard? html? agreed. ;-) As said you can use IndexOptions to fix that issues. For backwards compat we should stick with the current defaults. Item 3 doesn't appear in the current tree so I'm assuming it fixed already. </q> The backwards compatibility is a point that was easy to foresee. Although the developer above doesn't seem to be much concerned about the standards, and this surprises me. A simple solution woud be to replace: -<HR> +</PRE><HR><PRE> and replece the <IMG> tag with its alt text, and make _that_ the default in apache. They could provide an option to produce the old directory listing, and thus, leave the responsibility of deciding whether to serve bad HTML to every webmaster, but the default should be valid HTML (IMHO). In brief, the webmaster would have: - Good HTML by default (no images) based on <PRE> - The option to serve bad HTML with images based on <PRE> - The option to serve good HTML with images based on <TABLE> > > > After analizing the produced HTML for directory listings, I > > found that isolating the <HR> outside <PRE> is a trivial fix that > > helps keeping the block element outside. > > > > That is: > > > > - <HR> > > + </PRE><HR><PRE> > > > > Very simple. It would allow for violations of the type "inline > > container with excluded inline element within" (instead of > > "inline container with a block inside"). > > > > Does anyone know an apache developer? It seems that sending the > > patch through bugzilla could take years to be noticed... > > It can be a bit hit and miss. If one of the core team is directly > interested and not otherwise engaged, they can get things done quickly. I got a bit discouraged to make the patch and submit it because it's a toilsome work that I don't know will have a warm reception ;) If you feel like doing it, please go ahead, but I'd suggest first to contact one of the developers and explain the idea before making a patch. It's reasonable, unless they have to support some scripts that rely on the directory listing source being served exactly the old way... > > Their most recent attempt not to lose patches seems to be described in > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-dev&m=108012889313136&w=2 > which suggests that bugzilla may be being watched closely. This is good news. But the whole issue is more a "backwards compatibilty" problem than "valid HTML". This is better to be asked in advance. > > > OTOH, I don't like very much breaking our policies with code to > > handle bad HTML, and yes I know this is the most used web server. > > Maybe a dillorc option to enable a workaround for apache could do > > it, but I'd really like to talk with one of the developers. > > > > Comments? > > As others have said, any future change to apache won't change current > servers for years to come. Sigh, I suppose this is right. Even under the pressure of a security-fix release... > So rendering it usefully, if not ideally, would be prudent. And a big > black mark in the bug meter is in order, too. > > Correctness vs usefulness... Yes Francis, I think the same as you, but I'd appreciate if someone asks them if serving good HTML without the images for the directory listing is a good default (providing the alternatives described above). For those that read this far: the CVS contains the patch I made for this issue. Cheers Jorge.-

April 28, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]Preparing the 0.8.1 release

by Pete

On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 04:11:19PM +0100, Francis Daly wrote: > > > I may be missing something with this. What I think I am reading is > > that this is an Apache issue as far as why the page isnt rendering > > well. I am running Thttp for a server. I copied the source and stuck > > it on my server. It then will not render well with Dillo either. > > The fact is that the html is invalid, and therefore renders funny. > Saving the html and serving it from another web server, or fetching it > from a file, won't change that it is invalid. > > The reason it is an apache problem is that the html is generated by > apache, not that it is served by apache. > Ok, that is what I was thinking but wasnt sure. Seeing all these webservers serve up the html incorrectly, do you make them correct the issue or do you have Dillo also 'render incorrectly'? I know there are a lot of sites that are not rendered correctly with Dillo. Whether these issues would be the reason or not I am not educated enough to know. Thanks for the explination though. -- Pete http://milneweb.com http://nomorevirus.com

April 27, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]Preparing the 0.8.1 release

by Francis Daly

On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 08:44:45AM -0600, Pete wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 12:19:51PM +0100, Francis Daly wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 07:48:11PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Jens Arm wrote: > > > > Directories like > > > > > > > > http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/tools/ > > > > > > > > or others are not rendered correctly > > > > > > Yes. This is a complex problem. > > > > > > Apache (the web server), generates bad HTML for directory > > > listings (at least 1.3.x series): > I may be missing something with this. What I think I am reading is > that this is an Apache issue as far as why the page isnt rendering > well. I am running Thttp for a server. I copied the source and stuck > it on my server. It then will not render well with Dillo either. The fact is that the html is invalid, and therefore renders funny. Saving the html and serving it from another web server, or fetching it from a file, won't change that it is invalid. The reason it is an apache problem is that the html is generated by apache, not that it is served by apache. > I sense I am still missing part of this discussion but thought I would > add my 2 cents anyways. *;o) Does that fill in the missing bit? As it happens, thttpd (2.25b) has a very similar problem, in that its default directory listing, if enabled, looks like === <H2>Index of /</H2> <PRE> mode links bytes last-changed name <HR>dr-x 2 4096 Mar 23 12:23 <A HREF="/./">.</A>/ === which current dillo will also recognise as invalid, and render not as the server author presumably hoped. Cheers, f -- Francis Daly francis(a)daoine.org

April 27, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]Preparing the 0.8.1 release

by Pete

On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 12:19:51PM +0100, Francis Daly wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 07:48:11PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Jens Arm wrote: > > > > > Please test our current CVS hardly, and tell us how it did. > > > > > > Directories like > > > > > > http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/tools/ > > > > > > or others are not rendered correctly > > > > Yes. This is a complex problem. > > > > Apache (the web server), generates bad HTML for directory > > listings (at least 1.3.x series): > > > > <PRE> is an inline container excluding: > > > > {IMG, OBJECT, APPLET, BIG, SMALL, SUB, SUP, FONT, BASEFONT} > > > > Also, it can't hold block elements (e.g. HR). > > > > I may be missing something with this. What I think I am reading is that this is an Apache issue as far as why the page isnt rendering well. I am running Thttp for a server. I copied the source and stuck it on my server. It then will not render well with Dillo either. I sense I am still missing part of this discussion but thought I would add my 2 cents anyways. *;o) -- Pete http://milneweb.com http://nomorevirus.com

April 27, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]Preparing the 0.8.1 release

by Francis Daly

On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 07:48:11PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Jens Arm wrote: > > > Please test our current CVS hardly, and tell us how it did. > > > > Directories like > > > > http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/tools/ > > > > or others are not rendered correctly > > Yes. This is a complex problem. > > Apache (the web server), generates bad HTML for directory > listings (at least 1.3.x series): > > <PRE> is an inline container excluding: > > {IMG, OBJECT, APPLET, BIG, SMALL, SUB, SUP, FONT, BASEFONT} > > Also, it can't hold block elements (e.g. HR). > > > So there's a bug in having <HR> inside <PRE> and one bug per > directory entry because <PRE> can't contain <IMG>. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9307 and http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13351 suggest that the apache developers know, and it's not going to change in the 1.3 series. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10880 suggests that the default won't change in the 2.0 series, but there may be IndexOptions settings that the web server administrator can use to make it valid. > Parhaps the 2.x.x Apache series produces XML. Does anyone know? http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/mod_autoindex.html#indexoptions says that it can (2.0.49 and later) if the admin configures it that way. (I haven't verified it, though.) > After analizing the produced HTML for directory listings, I > found that isolating the <HR> outside <PRE> is a trivial fix that > helps keeping the block element outside. > > That is: > > - <HR> > + </PRE><HR><PRE> > > Very simple. It would allow for violations of the type "inline > container with excluded inline element within" (instead of > "inline container with a block inside"). > > Does anyone know an apache developer? It seems that sending the > patch through bugzilla could take years to be noticed... It can be a bit hit and miss. If one of the core team is directly interested and not otherwise engaged, they can get things done quickly. Their most recent attempt not to lose patches seems to be described in http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-dev&m=108012889313136&w=2 which suggests that bugzilla may be being watched closely. > OTOH, I don't like very much breaking our policies with code to > handle bad HTML, and yes I know this is the most used web server. > Maybe a dillorc option to enable a workaround for apache could do > it, but I'd really like to talk with one of the developers. > > Comments? As others have said, any future change to apache won't change current servers for years to come. So rendering it usefully, if not ideally, would be prudent. And a big black mark in the bug meter is in order, too. Correctness vs usefulness... f -- Francis Daly francis(a)daoine.org

April 27, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]Preparing the 0.8.1 release

by Riccardo Mottola

Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > OTOH, I don't like very much breaking our policies with code to > handle bad HTML, and yes I know this is the most used web server. > Maybe a dillorc option to enable a workaround for apache could do > it, but I'd really like to talk with one of the developers. > > Comments? Yes, I think dillo should render those pages. Even if a new 1.3 version comes out many people won't upgrade immediatly, old evrsions of apache are aorund for a very very long time and I woudl respect this. I think we should have an option like iCab which allows "strict" rendering and then options to make it more and more tolerant. After all we have to use dillo in the real world, not in an ideal one. -R

April 27, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]Preparing the 0.8.1 release

by Kelson Vibber

On Monday 26 April 2004 4:48 pm, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > OTOH, I don't like very much breaking our policies with code to > handle bad HTML, and yes I know this is the most used web server. > Maybe a dillorc option to enable a workaround for apache could do > it, but I'd really like to talk with one of the developers. No offense, but you have *got* to be kidding about (a) not working around this in some way, (b) expecting a program with an install base orders of magnitude higher than Dillo to change immediately, and (c) actually adding an "unbreak my application" preference. Even if Apache is fixed next week, how long will it take for the millions of sites using it to upgrade? What about all those installations using an OS distribution that keeps using the same old 1.3.10 or whatever, just backporting security patches? I see little harm in working around this bug, but if you prefer not to cater to it, perhaps a compromise would be to discard the invalid HR, rather than end the PRE block early. -- Kelson Vibber www.hyperborea.org

April 27, 2004

[Dillo-dev]what should do after the window is scrolled?

by Lei Jin

After the window is scrolled, should the new contents of the window be redrawed by the code written by human? Can we output the whole contents to a place, then when the window is scrolled, we only need to updated the visible rectangle parameter? --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? 惠普TT游戏剧，玩游戏，中大奖！

April 27, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]Preparing the 0.8.1 release

by Jorge Arellano Cid

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Jens Arm wrote: > > Please test our current CVS hardly, and tell us how it did. > > Directories like > > http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/tools/ > > or others are not rendered correctly Yes. This is a complex problem. Apache (the web server), generates bad HTML for directory listings (at least 1.3.x series): <PRE> is an inline container excluding: {IMG, OBJECT, APPLET, BIG, SMALL, SUB, SUP, FONT, BASEFONT} Also, it can't hold block elements (e.g. HR). So there's a bug in having <HR> inside <PRE> and one bug per directory entry because <PRE> can't contain <IMG>. As usual, the problem is not black or white, because producing valid HTML for the directory listing would require tables (if you want to keep the image). Probably, a long time ago, they considered the situation and found that bad HTML using PRE was more portable than one based on TABLE. I don't know for sure. Parhaps the 2.x.x Apache series produces XML. Does anyone know? After analizing the produced HTML for directory listings, I found that isolating the <HR> outside <PRE> is a trivial fix that helps keeping the block element outside. That is: - <HR> + </PRE><HR><PRE> Very simple. It would allow for violations of the type "inline container with excluded inline element within" (instead of "inline container with a block inside"). Does anyone know an apache developer? It seems that sending the patch through bugzilla could take years to be noticed... OTOH, I don't like very much breaking our policies with code to handle bad HTML, and yes I know this is the most used web server. Maybe a dillorc option to enable a workaround for apache could do it, but I'd really like to talk with one of the developers. Comments? Cheers Jorge.- PS: Patching Dillo to render it is trivial. Though it could break other pages...

April 26, 2004