[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#634811: ITP: dillo -- fast and light web browser based on FLTK 1.3


Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 06:26:02AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > I remember asking for dillo to be removed due to the above, I'm glad
> > someone has had time to fix the issues. Is dillo v3.0 using GTK 3 or
> > GTK 2 with no deprecated code or just FLTK1.3? (I'm assuming dillo3 for
> > Debian would change the default build to not statically link FLTK.)

Just FLTK 1.3 from what I saw so far. (Looked at the FLTK 1.3 port
closer some months ago, but it wasn't ready at that time. Now it looks
much better, so I published the ITP. :-)

> > How does the (unreleased) version compare with Arora (my current
> > candidate for "small but usable web browser") and how soon is it
> > likely to be ready for release? 
> Arora is just a yet another interface for webkit; it takes over an order of
> magnitude more disk space than dillo+fltk, and I guess it has memory usage
> in that region as well.

I can just agree with that.

In generally, I don't think Dillo or Links2 can replace a web browser
with a full-blown rendering engine like Gecko, WebKit, etc., if you
want CSS and JS to work. But for some special purposes or the quick
lookup in the web, they serve very well (especially with the focus on
"quick" -- I don't want to load my whole browser session just lookup
one thing on Wikipedia or so :-).

The only more or less low-footprint browser which IMHO comes close the
big rendering engines is Netsurf. It's unfortunately not in Squeeze
due to some issues with build-dependencies (the used parser generator
suddenly started to fail) and new upstream versions needed a fistful
of new libraries to be packaged, too. But the version now in Wheezy
and Sid should be fine again.

Neil: Ever looked at the keyboard-focussed browsers in Debian like
Conkeror, Luakit, Uzbl or Surf? They all have one of the bloaty
rendering engines (WRT dependencies and memory usage) but are usually
quicker and more responsive than their GUI pendants. (300 to 400 tabs
in Conkeror are no performance issue. Try that with
Firefox^WIceweasel. :-)

> Another thing is, Arora is dead upstream and no one stepped in to
> revive it. 

Oops. That's a pity. From the classical GUI browsers with WebKit I
liked that one most. Would Rekonq be a suitable drop-in replacement
for Arora?

		Regards, Axel
 ,''`.  |  Axel Beckert <abe@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' :  |  Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `'   |  1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486  202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
  `-    |  4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329  6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5

Reply to: