Georg wrote:

Benjamin, you mention that your Win32 version will also compile with Linux. I tried to compile it on Linux and did not have much success. Your source code package does not include a configure file for that such as the main version does. I have doubts too that you frequently test if your version still works on Linux.

You can generate the configure script yourself by running autogen.sh (requires autoconf and automake). I don't include a pregenerated configure script mainly because I build my source tarballs using 'hg archive', and Mercurial is set not to track those files. I may change my release process in future versions to make installation from source easier. Technically, you're correct that I don't test Dillo-Win32 on *Linux*. I do, however, use it quite often on OpenBSD, as you can see in this (quite large) screenshot from my development machine: http://obeythepenguin.users.sourceforge.net/openbsd/files/screenshot.png

Will this version when compiled for Linux also use the sockets abstraction layer and not use the dpi parts? Georg

The sockets abstraction layer and DPI are two entirely separate things. The sockets layer is just some low-level network code that lets Dillo connect whether it's on Unix or Windows. Dillo doesn't know the difference, and that's the entire point -- it behaves exactly the same on both systems. As far as DPI, it's a little more complicated. In a nutshell: - Bookmarks, cookies, and HTTPS are built into the browser, and don't use DPI. - Downloads are built in by default, but you can disable the built-in downloader and use the DPI. - Everything else will fall back on DPI if it's available. Dillo-Win32 doesn't build dpid and DPI programs by default, but it will use mainline's DPIs if they're installed on the system. I haven't removed DPI support from Dillo -- I just moved most of their functionality into the browser. Hope this helps, ~Benjamin