- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

[Dillo-dev]Mozilla (was src/IO/Makefile.in missing)

by Peter Wiehe

(I've taking the liberty to answer this private mail on the list. If that is against Your will, jump up and down and shout, and I will apologize.) > All of the above & I am not a programmer <grin>.. Thanks for the help especially as You aren't a programmer. IAAPBIHNCAAE I am a programmer but I have no clue about autoconf either :) I don't mean running ./configure but I mean writing/modifiying/understanding 'Makefile.in', 'depcomp', whatever. BTW I'm currently downloading Mozilla sources. Mozilla has definitively its good aspects. But the download says at the very start: 5.5 KB/sec :-) Time left 1 hour 15 minutes :-( 31380 KB :-o Anyone still believing Dillo is obsolete? ;-) Interesting to know that Internet Explorer and Mozilla use the same code base as ancestor! Did You know that? And I've taken a look at Zen another browser, circa the same size as Dillo. But Zen is unmaintained, C++ and most importantly, Dillo sources seem more nicely structured than Zen (from aesthetical and technical view). Kind regards Peter Wiehe

March 23, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]src/IO/Makefile.in missing

by Peter Wiehe

On Monday 22 March 2004 00:39, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > * Peter Wiehe <peter_wiehe2004(a)yahoo.de> [03-21-04 18:34]: > > I tried to "./configure" dillo 0.8.0, but got this error: > > did you run 'autoconf' first ?? > I didn't. Docu gives the impression someone should and need not do this. I did it now. Have to update autoconf to 2.54+. If I have done so, the chances are good, that autoconf fixes my problem? > note: IANAP... I am not a person? Intel architecture notoriously abandons productivity? I ate Nachos and Pizza?

March 22, 2004

[Dillo-dev]src/IO/Makefile.in missing

by Peter Wiehe

I tried to "./configure" dillo 0.8.0, but got this error: ... configure: creating ./config.status ... config.status: creating src/IO/Makefile config.status: error: cannot find input file: src/IO/Makefile.in Did this happen to other users (Dillo's fault)? Or is my Linux system messed up/my build tools have wrong versions (my fault)? If I would understand this autoconf stuff, I would know the answer and wouldn't bother You with this question. And if it's my system's fault, I don't expect You to help me out, of course. But maybe it's a Dillo bug? Kind regards Peter Wiehe

March 22, 2004

[Dillo-dev]Re.: /src/IO/Makefile.in missing/Dillo obsolete?

by Achim Woellgens

Hi folks, well seems to be first kind of THAT kind of problems ; my compiling went very well, no probs even to more "exotic" installation pathes than usual ;-) so no Makefile missing..... and secondly Dillo is not obsolete because I still appreciate a small and FAST browser for surfing pages not overloaded with (java-) scripts or pictures till doomsday comes... so keep goin please, this thing is damn good so far... just waiting, what othere features will be included in he future, will be online banking possible one day? bye Achim dillo-dev-request(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de wrote: >Send Dillo-dev mailing list submissions to > dillo-dev(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > dillo-dev-request(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de > >You can reach the person managing the list at > dillo-dev-admin(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of Dillo-dev digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. src/IO/Makefile.in missing (Peter Wiehe) > 2. Re: src/IO/Makefile.in missing (Peter Wiehe) > 3. Re: src/IO/Makefile.in missing (Jorge Arellano Cid) > 4. Mozilla (was src/IO/Makefile.in missing) (Peter Wiehe) > 5. Re: src/IO/Makefile.in missing (Peter Wiehe) > >--__--__-- > >Message: 1 >From: Peter Wiehe <peter_wiehe2004(a)yahoo.de> >To: dillo-dev(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de >Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 00:26:13 +0100 >Subject: [Dillo-dev]src/IO/Makefile.in missing > >I tried to "./configure" dillo 0.8.0, but got this error: > >=2E.. >configure: creating ./config.status >=2E.. >config.status: creating src/IO/Makefile >config.status: error: cannot find input file: src/IO/Makefile.in > >Did this happen to other users (Dillo's fault)? Or is my Linux system mes= >sed=20 >up/my build tools have wrong versions (my fault)? >If I would understand this autoconf stuff, I would know the answer and=20 >wouldn't bother You with this question. And if it's my system's fault, I=20 >don't expect You to help me out, of course. But maybe it's a Dillo bug? > >Kind regards >Peter Wiehe > > > >--__--__-- > >Message: 2 >From: Peter Wiehe <peter_wiehe2004(a)yahoo.de> >To: Patrick Shanahan <pat(a)wahoo.no-ip.org>, > dillo-dev(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de >Subject: Re: [Dillo-dev]src/IO/Makefile.in missing >Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 00:47:27 +0100 > >On Monday 22 March 2004 00:39, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > > >>* Peter Wiehe <peter_wiehe2004(a)yahoo.de> [03-21-04 18:34]: >> >> >>>I tried to "./configure" dillo 0.8.0, but got this error: >>> >>> >>did you run 'autoconf' first ?? >> >> >> >I didn't. Docu gives the impression someone should and need not do this. >I did it now. Have to update autoconf to 2.54+. If I have done so, the=20 >chances are good, that autoconf fixes my problem? > > > >>note: IANAP... >> >> >I am not a person? Intel architecture notoriously abandons productivity? >I ate Nachos and Pizza? > > >--__--__-- > >Message: 3 >Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:56:54 -0400 (CLT) >From: Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid(a)dillo.org> >To: Dillo mailing list <dillo-dev(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de> >Subject: Re: [Dillo-dev]src/IO/Makefile.in missing > > > >On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Peter Wiehe wrote: > > > >>I tried to "./configure" dillo 0.8.0, but got this error: >> >>... >>configure: creating ./config.status >>... >>config.status: creating src/IO/Makefile >>config.status: error: cannot find input file: src/IO/Makefile.in >> >>Did this happen to other users (Dillo's fault)? Or is my Linux system messed >>up/my build tools have wrong versions (my fault)? >> >> > > The file is in the tarball: > >-rw-r--r-- 1000/100 12293 2004-02-08 09:57:37 dillo-0.8.0/src/IO/Makefile.in > > but not in your HD... > > > >>If I would understand this autoconf stuff, I would know the answer and >>wouldn't bother You with this question. And if it's my system's fault, I >>don't expect You to help me out, of course. But maybe it's a Dillo bug? >> >> > > You're the first person to complain! > > If you took 0.8.0 from CVS, just run ./autogen.sh before ./configure > > Cheers > Jorge.- > > > > >--__--__-- > >Message: 4 >From: Peter Wiehe <peter_wiehe2004(a)yahoo.de> >To: Patrick Shanahan <pat(a)wahoo.no-ip.org>, > Dillo mailing list <dillo-dev(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de> >Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 04:47:54 +0100 >Subject: [Dillo-dev]Mozilla (was src/IO/Makefile.in missing) > >(I've taking the liberty to answer this private mail on the list. If that= > is=20 >against Your will, jump up and down and shout, and I will apologize.) > > > >>All of the above & I am not a programmer <grin>.. >> >> >Thanks for the help especially as You aren't a programmer. > >IAAPBIHNCAAE >I am a programmer but I have no clue about autoconf either :) >I don't mean running ./configure but I mean writing/modifiying/understand= >ing=20 >'Makefile.in', 'depcomp', whatever. > >BTW I'm currently downloading Mozilla sources. Mozilla has definitively i= >ts=20 >good aspects. But the download says at the very start: >5.5 KB/sec :-) >Time left 1 hour 15 minutes :-( >31380 KB :-o >Anyone still believing Dillo is obsolete? ;-) > >Interesting to know that Internet Explorer and Mozilla use the same code=20 >base as ancestor! Did You know that? > >And I've taken a look at Zen another browser, circa the same size as Dill= >o. >But Zen is unmaintained, C++ and most importantly, Dillo sources seem mor= >e=20 >nicely structured than Zen (from aesthetical and technical view). > >Kind regards >Peter Wiehe > > >--__--__-- > >Message: 5 >From: Peter Wiehe <peter_wiehe2004(a)yahoo.de> >To: Jorge Arellano Cid <jcid(a)dillo.org>, > Dillo mailing list <dillo-dev(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de> >Subject: Re: [Dillo-dev]src/IO/Makefile.in missing >Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 04:48:52 +0100 > >On Monday 22 March 2004 01:56, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > >> The file is in the tarball: >> >>-rw-r--r-- 1000/100 12293 2004-02-08 09:57:37 >>dillo-0.8.0/src/IO/Makefile.in >> >> but not in your HD... >>[...] >> >> >>>If I would understand this autoconf stuff, I would know the answer an= >>> >>> >d > > >>>wouldn't bother You with this question. And if it's my system's fault= >>> >>> >, > > >>>I don't expect You to help me out, of course. But maybe it's a Dillo >>>bug? >>> >>> >> You're the first person to complain! >> >> >I downloaded, extracted, read install and readme, then run ./configure. >So maybe it's lost at the download. Or maybe some of my software has a bu= >g >(I already have a candidate: Linux FAT-FS). But anyway it's my fault from= >=20 >Dillo's point of view. Because a file being no there which should be alre= >ady=20 >there, that would have lead to many reports. So I download it again.=20 >That should fix it. Thanks. > > > >> If you took 0.8.0 from CVS, just run ./autogen.sh before ./configure >> >> >No, wasn't from CVS. > >Kind regards >Peter Wiehe > > > >--__--__-- > >_______________________________________________ >Dillo-dev mailing list >Dillo-dev(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de >http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev > > >End of Dillo-dev Digest > > >

March 22, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]src/IO/Makefile.in missing

by Jorge Arellano Cid

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Peter Wiehe wrote: > I tried to "./configure" dillo 0.8.0, but got this error: > > ... > configure: creating ./config.status > ... > config.status: creating src/IO/Makefile > config.status: error: cannot find input file: src/IO/Makefile.in > > Did this happen to other users (Dillo's fault)? Or is my Linux system messed > up/my build tools have wrong versions (my fault)? The file is in the tarball: -rw-r--r-- 1000/100 12293 2004-02-08 09:57:37 dillo-0.8.0/src/IO/Makefile.in but not in your HD... > If I would understand this autoconf stuff, I would know the answer and > wouldn't bother You with this question. And if it's my system's fault, I > don't expect You to help me out, of course. But maybe it's a Dillo bug? You're the first person to complain! If you took 0.8.0 from CVS, just run ./autogen.sh before ./configure Cheers Jorge.-

March 22, 2004

[Dillo-dev]Re: pixmaps.netscape.h

by Jorge Arellano Cid

On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Erik Sittmann wrote: > Hello Jorge, Hi. > attached an updated 'pixmaps.netscape.h' for dillo-0.8.0. Oh, thanks. I just noticed the toolbar icons page was complitely out of sync. After some work, now all the icon sets are up-to-date. I didn't update the screenshots, though, but I'll gladly accept if someone volunteers to send me a package with an updated set of images (all with the same GTK+ theme please). Cheers Jorge.-

March 15, 2004

[Dillo-dev]Hello

by Diriel

Hi Everyone, I heard of dillo recently when installing Gentoo linux. I was browsing their software. I am a Big fan of small efficient tools of most any kind. Dillo has definately made a fan of me. For daily usage I generally use FireFox, but when im setting up a box on very limited resources, generally I will set things up as lightweight as possible. A Big Thank You for Dillo. Ok, ill be good and stay on topic here on out /grin. Gary

March 13, 2004

[Dillo-dev]Re: dillo / fltk

by Jorge Arellano Cid

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Matt wrote: > > Hi Jorge, Hi Matt! > > I just visited your dillo web pages (by a hint from the FLTK mailing > list) and I have to say, you guys got something great going there! Thanks. It's great you liked it because we could make it even better by porting to FLTK! > > I saw mentioned that you are checking the feasibility of using FLTK > (replacing or adding to gtk?). The idea is to replace GTK+. (In a nutshell, GTK2 got too big and slow to suit our needs). You can find interesting threads in our mailing list about the FLTK port issue. For instance, go to: http://www.dillo.org/search-dillo-dev.html And search for "FLTK" by "jcid" sorted by "Relevance". This will not only bring my posts but also the ones from Michael Sweet that I forwarded to dillo-dev. > FLTK on the other side is lacking a > good browser, or even just a browser interface. So I believe that > dillo/FLTK would be a great combination. Yes. The only thing that scared me a bit about FLTK's help viewer is that it is too slow, even for very simple pages. For instance vertical scrolling is much slower than what we get with GTK1 by now. Considering FLTK's reputation for speed, and after looking at the demo programs (as "scroll"), I feel it should be possible to improve page scrolling speed. > > Anyway, I am one of the FLTK core developers and cross platform porter, > and I would like to offer you my support in connecting FLTK and dillo. Excellent! Do you plan to work as an advisor, a porting core-developer or the port's leader? :) After reading Sebastian's comments, there seems to be no major obstacle to start the porting effort. What we'd need is to coordinate the communication of specific knowledge: Sebastian and Dw, me and network2parser and parser2widgets, you and FLTK. > Pleas let me know what you think, I think it's great to have one of the core developers of FLTK in the porting team! Technically, I see two ways of making the port: (I'll concentrate on the HTML rendering part because the UI port should be pretty easy in comparison). Rendering port alternatives: 1) Port Dw to FLTK 2) Make a pure FLTK widget tree (convert Dw into FLTK analogs) Maybe the first is easier in the short term, but I'd much prefer the second one because: * Having a custom widget system (Dw) that's embedded into FLTK and that also embedds native FLTK widgets is a very complex scenery that requires too much knowledge to work with (BTW that's what we currently have with Dw/GTK+). * If we can push the positioning/resizing/rendering complexity into FLTK's internal mechanism, it would simplify a lot the task (less complex algorithms, less code, less intertoolkit sync) * If we end we a pure FLTK tree (with its parser), it could be easily reused by the FLTK community, and this also leads to easier maintenance because more developers would be deploying it and helping to improve and fix bugs. One of the main points of Dillo's speed is streamed rendering. That is the ability to show the page as it is being constucted. I assume this is possible with FLTK. The way this works is by letting the parser to build the widget tree as it gets the HTML building blocks. By far, the most complex part is table rendering (because you don't know the table size in advance (i.e. each cell size). This means that cells start to resize and affect their rows and hence the table itself. OTOH, I have hopes in FLTK's internal mechanism. Fl_Group manual says: "It is possible to achieve any type of resize behavior by using an invisible Fl_Box as the resizable and/or by using a hierarchy of child Fl_Group's." and Michael S. wrote: <q> The current FLTK layout mechanism is infinitely flexible, but takes a little getting used to since there are no layout "hints", just resizeable widgets inside groups. In short, you group widgets (and sometimes create empty "box" widgets) to get the layout behavior you want. This is actually a lot faster than the older Motif-style layout stuff that GTK+ uses... There are specialized group widgets (Fl_Pack, Fl_Tile, etc.) that provide for special positioning/resizing capabilities separate from the user resizing the window. </q> So, the way I'd start is by trying to make a FLTK widget (set) that's able to draw generic HTML tables whose content is initially limited to be text only. This means, having HTML test files, a simple parser and the widget tree construction logic. When this is ready, images are added (images are a very good example of resizing cells). After that, a generic HTML content widget should be defined, and it would be a matter of adding support for the missing HTML elements (a much simpler task). In parallel with this last stage, Dillo's UI could be ported and finally merge both to have the first FLTK prototype of Dillo! Looking forward to hear from you Jorge.- PS: Feel free to forward this to the FLTK mailing list.

March 12, 2004

[Dillo-dev]dillo / fltk (fwd)

by Jorge Arellano Cid

As you can see, my hopes for volunteers were heard! --Jorge ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 07:30:33 -0800 From: Matt <mm(a)matthiasm.com> To: jcid(a)dillo.org Subject: dillo / fltk Hi Jorge, I just visited your dillo web pages (by a hint from the FLTK mailing list) and I have to say, you guys got something great going there! I saw mentioned that you are checking the feasibility of using FLTK (replacing or adding to gtk?). FLTK on the other side is lacking a good browser, or even just a browser interface. So I believe that dillo/FLTK would be a great combination. Anyway, I am one of the FLTK core developers and cross platform porter, and I would like to offer you my support in connecting FLTK and dillo. Pleas let me know what you think, Matthias

March 4, 2004

Re: [Dillo-dev]About proxy authorization && password storing

by Jorge Arellano Cid

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004, Ivan Daniluk wrote: > Hi, all! Hi Ivan. Please excuse me for taking so long to answer; after a large list of pending duties, finally I've reached your letter. > I use proxy server, that requires basic authorization. So, I wrote patch > for dillo 0.8.0 that enables this feature. It's available on: > > http://dem2mpg.by.ru/dillo-0.8.0-proxy-auth.patch.gz This proxy password authorization is a part of HTTP/1.1. As Dillo supports HTTP/1.0, it was left out. Now, we know of the problem from a long time ago. BTW Henrik worked on a way to be able to do proxy auth. Note that the patch "as is" is a hack. Dillo would tell the server it speaks HTTP/1.0 while sending "extended" headers. But, as very seldom things are black or white in this world, it also provides for a simple way to add the feature without having to bloat dillo with a full HTTP/1.1 switch. > Main question I would ask is about password storing. This patch > just implements new dillorc option - "http_proxyauth", which is the > string like "user:password". But, I guess, it's not correspond to dillo > security policy, is it? Yes, we're very concerned about privacy. > Maybe, we should open popup dialogue and ask user for > login/password? The login may be specified in dillorc, and the password asked in a popup dialog (whenever there's a login in dillorc :). This adds the burden of entering the password, but keeps things a bit more private. If you make it this way, it'd be a fast commit! (unless you find a better way to do it, of course) Thanks a lot Jorge.-

March 4, 2004