- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

printer symbols in dillo

by corvid＠lavabit.com

I wrote: > I wrote: > > I put dillo through nm, and I saw a bunch of > > Fl_Paged_Device, Fl_PostScript_Printer, T Fl_PostScript_File_Device > > in there. > > > > I didn't pay any attention when they were all enthusiastic about printer > > support for a while there. Is there a justifiable reason that this gets > > pulled in, as opposed to an oversight on their part when #ifdef'ing > > or something? > > Turns out there's a > > if (Fl_Surface_Device::surface()->class_name() == Fl_Printer::class_id) > > in Fl_Text_Display.cxx that pulls it all in. > I'll have to ask them whether there's a reasonable way for them to > do something about this someday... In http://fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s23982+gfltk.general+v23991+T0 , Domingo Alvarez Duarte made a suggestion that seems to work fine for me. Patch attached.

June 19, 2011

Time to celebrate!

by rogerx.oss＠gmail.com

Within an hour or so, we pushed a fltk-1.3.0.ebuild into Gentoo's Portage. ;-) Enjoy. Oh, and no pun intended Debian. (lol) > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:52:02PM -0300, Fabio Pasini wrote: > Hi Folks, > > > This means a lot to us: ? ? [1]http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 > > After read Jorge's email, I sent a message to the Debian FLTK1.3 package > maintainer, and he answered really fast ! > See attached below the answer :) > > Jorge, thanks a lot for the update! > > Best regards, > Fabio Pasini > > 2011/6/17 Aaron M. Ucko <[2]ucko(a)debian.org> > > ??? Fabio Pasini <[3]fabio.pasini(a)gmail.com> writes: > > ??? > FLTK1.3 Final Version was released (Jun 16, 2011), you may the > official post > ??? > at [4]http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 , those are the great news > I'd like to > ??? > share :) > > ??? Thank you very much for bringing that news to my attention!? I've been > ??? busy with other matters, but I'll try to get 1.3.0 final into Debian > ??? unstable within the next couple of weeks. > > ??? -- > ??? Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at [5]alum.mit.edu, ucko at [6]debian.org) > ??? [7]http://www.mit.edu/~amu/ | > [8]http://stuff.mit.edu/cgi/finger/?amu@monk.mit.edu > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Fabio Pasini <[9]fabio.pasini(a)gmail.com> > Date: 2011/6/17 > Subject: Regarding FLTK1.3 at Launchpad and news at [10]fltk.org > To: [11]amu(a)alum.mit.edu, [12]ucko(a)debian.org > > Hi Aaron, > > I got your emails from [13]https://launchpad.net/~ucko, when searching for > FLTK1.3 packages to use with Dillo Browser. > > Are you still maintaining the content at > [14]https://launchpad.net/debian/+source/fltk1.3 ? > > FLTK1.3 Final Version was released (Jun 16, 2011), you may the official > post at [15]http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 , those are the great news > I'd like to share :) > > I'm trying to help Dillo to get back to the package repositories,? and > FLTK1.3 is a pre-requisite. If you're not the maintainer for > debian/+source/fltk1.3, can you point someone else, or some other PPA? > > Best regards, and thanks a lot > Tilpa > >References > > Visible links > 1. http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 > 2. mailto:ucko@debian.org > 3. mailto:fabio.pasini@gmail.com > 4. http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 > 5. http://alum.mit.edu/ > 6. http://debian.org/ > 7. http://www.mit.edu/~amu/ > 8. http://stuff.mit.edu/cgi/finger/?amu@monk.mit.edu > 9. mailto:fabio.pasini@gmail.com > 10. http://fltk.org/ > 11. mailto:amu@alum.mit.edu > 12. mailto:ucko@debian.org > 13. https://launchpad.net/~ucko > 14. https://launchpad.net/debian/+source/fltk1.3 > 15. http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 >_______________________________________________ >Dillo-dev mailing list >Dillo-dev(a)dillo.org >http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev -- Roger http://rogerx.freeshell.org/

June 17, 2011

Time to celebrate!

by fabio.pasini＠gmail.com

Hi Folks, > This means a lot to us: http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 After read Jorge's email, I sent a message to the Debian FLTK1.3 package maintainer, and he answered really fast ! See attached below the answer :) Jorge, thanks a lot for the update! Best regards, Fabio Pasini 2011/6/17 Aaron M. Ucko <ucko(a)debian.org> Fabio Pasini <fabio.pasini(a)gmail.com> writes: > FLTK1.3 Final Version was released (Jun 16, 2011), you may the official post > at http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 , those are the great news I'd like to > share :) Thank you very much for bringing that news to my attention! I've been busy with other matters, but I'll try to get 1.3.0 final into Debian unstable within the next couple of weeks. -- Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org) http://www.mit.edu/~amu/ | http://stuff.mit.edu/cgi/finger/?amu@monk.mit.edu ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Fabio Pasini <fabio.pasini(a)gmail.com> Date: 2011/6/17 Subject: Regarding FLTK1.3 at Launchpad and news at fltk.org To: amu(a)alum.mit.edu, ucko(a)debian.org Hi Aaron, I got your emails from https://launchpad.net/~ucko, when searching for FLTK1.3 packages to use with Dillo Browser. Are you still maintaining the content at https://launchpad.net/debian/+source/fltk1.3 ? FLTK1.3 Final Version was released (Jun 16, 2011), you may the official post at http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 , those are the great news I'd like to share :) I'm trying to help Dillo to get back to the package repositories, and FLTK1.3 is a pre-requisite. If you're not the maintainer for debian/+source/fltk1.3, can you point someone else, or some other PPA? Best regards, and thanks a lot Tilpa

June 17, 2011

Time to celebrate!

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi, This means a lot to us: http://fltk.org/articles.php?L1086 !! :-) !! -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 17, 2011

Development schedule for version 1.3

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 07:50:27PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Jorge wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 08:08:15PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > - tab titles > > > > > > Just cosmetic issues of: They seem too short, the original title of, e.g., > > > ctab5, is suboptimal, and the ones without a title tag are initially blank. > > > > This may be a matter of taste. e.g. Dillo-2.x used "dillo" > > instead of a blank title, and allowed longer labels. I like the > > current behaviour with fixed length tabs. YMMV. > > > > "ctab<n>" as label is weird, and should be changed. > > > > Suggestions? (e.g. tab length, initial string). > > Keep it simple please ;-) > > The case where you open an image. At first the tab title is blank. > Then I click another tab and then return to the image. Now it's the > beginning of the URL (not that "http://..." is terribly meaningful :) Patch committed. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 15, 2011

Update on segfault issues

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Rob wrote: > I have been playing around with the 1.3 port on my "broken" machine. > Still no luck with sorting out the segfault. I have spent a fair > amount of time in gdb and valgrind trying to track down the source of > the trouble, but no luck. The best I can do when compiling with gcc > is to use -O0, which produces an executable which does not segfault. > I have tried gcc 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6, to no avail. I have wondered if > it was something to do with my architecture; I am running an AMD E-350 > fusion processor in my machine. In light of this, I tried using the > appropriate -march setting with gcc 4.6, but again no luck. Have you tried 1) adding MSG()s to watch interesting variables? 2) Turning on various warning options in gcc for issues that matter when optimization is used (overflow, for instance)?

June 11, 2011

Update on segfault issues

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:42:53PM -0400, Rob S wrote: > I have been playing around with the 1.3 port on my "broken" machine. > Still no luck with sorting out the segfault. I have spent a fair > amount of time in gdb and valgrind trying to track down the source of > the trouble, but no luck. The best I can do when compiling with gcc > is to use -O0, which produces an executable which does not segfault. > I have tried gcc 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6, to no avail. I have wondered if > it was something to do with my architecture; I am running an AMD E-350 > fusion processor in my machine. In light of this, I tried using the > appropriate -march setting with gcc 4.6, but again no luck. The only > bright side of all of this was that I decided to compile with Clang, > and it built nicely with only one warning (which I could not see the > reason for): > > > chain.c:189:50: warning: too many arguments in call to 'Chain_debug_msg' > Chain_debug_msg(FuncStr, Op, Branch, Dir, Info); > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ That's simple, just check the last repo! ;) > I will keep playing with this, to see if I can figure out the problem > with gcc, but my hope is fading with regards to finding a solution. Compile with debug info: CFLAGS="-g -O0" CXXFLAGS="-g -O0" ./configure --enable-ssl then run it under gdb: gdb ./dillo when it segfaults, look where it was: bt that's a good point to start. HTH -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 11, 2011

Development schedule for version 1.3

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 08:52:18PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Fabio wrote: > > Guys, how about putting some images from current Dillo with FLTK1.3 into > > another table at //www.dillo.org/screenshots/? > > Once there is no definition about release name, the table title can be > > something like "Dillo with FLTK1.3", plus (maybe) something catchy as > > "Coming Soon". > > For the version number, I initially leaned toward 2.3 a little, but > now I think I'm leaning toward 3.0 because it's simpler to say "3.x uses > 1.3 and runs on [whatever]" than "Starting with 2.3, ..." ... and dillo-3.0 works with fltk-1.3, and in the future with fltk-3.0, at least that's fltk devs' plan by now. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 11, 2011

Development schedule for version 1.3

by darkspirit5000＠gmail.com

How about dillo 2.1.3? It is a 2 version (fltk, css, ...) with fltk 1.3. Dillo can jump to 3.0 with floating objects :P Diego. 2011/6/11, Reza Farivar <rf.opensource(a)gmail.com>: > > > -Reza > > On Jun 10, 2011, at 3:52 PM, "corvid" <corvid(a)lavabit.com> wrote: > >> Fabio wrote: >>> Guys, how about putting some images from current Dillo with >>> FLTK1.3 into >>> another table at //www.dillo.org/screenshots/? >>> Once there is no definition about release name, the table title can >>> be >>> something like "Dillo with FLTK1.3", plus (maybe) something catchy as >>> "Coming Soon". >> >> For the version number, I initially leaned toward 2.3 a little, but >> now I think I'm leaning toward 3.0 because it's simpler to say "3.x >> uses >> 1.3 and runs on [whatever]" than "Starting with 2.3, ... > > How about dillo 2011? > >> >> It'd be interesting to have some screenshots (mostly if anyone >> contributes >> ones showing native OSX, if that looks any different from using the X >> backend) > > I can take screenshots of the Mac version. It's not that different > though, but at least it shows it's cocoa and not running on X. > > >> once Jorge decides that there won't be any more UI tweaking. >> (e.g., will the sizes of the progress boxes depend on their labels? >> I've >> noticed that the labels don't fit on occasion, but maybe that's >> intended >> to reduce redraws.) >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dillo-dev mailing list >> Dillo-dev(a)dillo.org >> http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev > > _______________________________________________ > Dillo-dev mailing list > Dillo-dev(a)dillo.org > http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev >

June 11, 2011

Update on segfault issues

by mr_semantics＠hotmail.com

I have been playing around with the 1.3 port on my "broken" machine. Still no luck with sorting out the segfault. I have spent a fair amount of time in gdb and valgrind trying to track down the source of the trouble, but no luck. The best I can do when compiling with gcc is to use -O0, which produces an executable which does not segfault. I have tried gcc 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6, to no avail. I have wondered if it was something to do with my architecture; I am running an AMD E-350 fusion processor in my machine. In light of this, I tried using the appropriate -march setting with gcc 4.6, but again no luck. The only bright side of all of this was that I decided to compile with Clang, and it built nicely with only one warning (which I could not see the reason for): chain.c:189:50: warning: too many arguments in call to 'Chain_debug_msg' Chain_debug_msg(FuncStr, Op, Branch, Dir, Info); ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ I will keep playing with this, to see if I can figure out the problem with gcc, but my hope is fading with regards to finding a solution. Rob

June 11, 2011