Dillo - will it take over the (*miga) World by storm?

[pixie]

It's Dillo, it's a Web browser and it's:
- small: source is less than 420 KB, and the binary is around 350 KB!
- aimed to be a multi-platform compliant
- based on GTK+
- fast!!

So what are we waiting to get it ported to *migaOS!? Atari done it trough Atari-Mint, so why can't we?

[Piru]

small: source is less than 420 KB, and the binary is around 350 KB!

glib source code is 19 MB (uncompressed).
GTK+ source code is 74 MB (uncompressed).

Just go ahead and port the thing if it's so simple.

glib actually is rather trivial (./configure && make), at least if you ignore fork() issues, threads, dynamic module loading, and such.

GTK+ is another matter. It depends on other libs like libpango and libatk, libpango needs fontconfig, freetype, and so on.

It's not trivial. If it was, we would already have gtk+ and all these apps ported.

will it take over the (*miga) World by storm?

Not before amiga world is taken over by storm of competent coders.

[keropi]

this looks to me a VERY nice and simple browser... I like it, I wish it run also on Amiga

[Cymric]

Err... dillo's plugins use the dreaded fork() call. In other words, no go, unless you plan on ripping the program to pieces. It is however a good sign that the main code is free from this function. That leaves worry about pthreads---albeit in minimal form---and GTK+. And I have never bothered to look at what nice surprises lie in store for Amiga coders there.

But it's a cute little program for sure, I'll give it that.

[Cymric]

@Piru:

It really makes you wonder why people even bother to try porting Mozilla or Firefox to OS3.

[DethKnight]

In an effort to bring you more up-tp-date, realizing Dillo is getting old in "internet-time"

Try not to forget Minimo in your wish/dream-list

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/minimo/

[Xand]

small: source is less than 420 KB,

Actually, when the tarball is uncompressed, it's closer to 2.1mb...

[ncafferkey]

I think it's a bit limited. It doesn't support frames or Javascript for example. And it's bound to lag behind Mozilla/Firefox or Konqueror in compatibility with websites. The GUI also lacks many features (in terms of preferences etc.).

[Gordon]

if you want mozilla you might want to check this out:
http://www.discreetfx.com/AmiZilla.html

[Cymric]

@Piru

Well, who would've guessed... Some brave souls have begun porting OpenOffice too---to OS4, and some even braver ones have begun looking into a port of GTK+. But that is OS4, which is inherently better suited to support software libraries of this magnitude. But even then it will still be a tough nut to crack.

[Piru]

@Cymric

some even braver ones have begun looking into a port of GTK+. But that is OS4, which is inherently better suited to support software libraries of this magnitude.

Not sure what you mean by "better suited"? Other than the fact that OS4 generally runs on faster hardware, there isn't that much difference to OS 3.x, IMO. I'm no expert on OS4 though, so maybe I've missed something?

In my books it's still equally hard to port it, be it 3.x or 4.x.

ABrowse is the KHTML based browser from the AtheOS/Syllable OS.

Would this be easier to port to AROS/AOS/MOS than a GTK based browser?

From what I can tell the GUI and the HTML renderer are pretty much not dependant on each other.

Get the source here

[Cymric]

Well, it is in all likeness just a relative term. OS4 has improved memory management and knows about virtual memory---even though it is turned off by default---and as far as I know it now knows about proper threads as well. Things have improved in the shared library sector too. It may not amount to much, but it still is an improvement over OS3 where you can only add these things by breaking a lot of unwritten rules. It is in all likeniss still a tough job, but it should be easier for sure.

[itix]

OS4 has improved memory management and knows about virtual memory

You could have virtual memory on AmigaOS 3 already... remember VMM or GigaMem? Nevertheless, you are limited to 4GB shared address space still.

and as far as I know it now knows about proper threads as well

Nope. There is pthreads port/implementation but CreateNewProcTags() in OS4 DOS is almost identical to AmigaOS 3 implementation. To make it work current implementation needs lot of changes.

It may not amount to much, but it still is an improvement over OS3 where you can only add these things by breaking a lot of unwritten rules.

True. However real value is in better and faster hardware. Compiling complex stuff is bit different on slow 68060 than on PPC.

But fundamental limitations are still there... you cant implement proper fork() without ditching current 68k and PPC programs, and it might be still impossible...

[Cymric]

@itix:

Aw man :-(. Just when I thought OS4 coding would be a turn for the better. Well, the Friedens of course had other things on their mind, so I guess they are excused. But still... If I said I didn't care, I would be lying. Perhaps they still have plans to include some nice bits and pieces to the kernel, as I can imagine their plate is rather full at the moment.