Poster | Thread |
PR
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 11:16:33
| | [ #21 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 1-Sep-2004 Posts: 1961
From: Suomi-Finland | | |
|
| @_ThEcRoW
You can run it on OS4 at the same time and switch screens. There is AbiWord, a Paint-program and some other programs allready but FireFox... Could Our bounty go to AFX-group then? They deserve it like all Amigans deserve Firefox to use if IB does not load some pages. Then I'll party but not yet;)
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
amipal
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 12:11:46
| | [ #22 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 8-Apr-2003 Posts: 1907
From: Saltdean, East Sussex, UK | | |
|
| @PR
QUote from the Amizilla FAQ: Quote:
3. The AmiZilla Project must fully compile with running binaries on each of the following Amiga-like OS's: OS3.1, OS3.5+, MorphOS native version, Amiga OS 4.0 native version, UAE, Amithlon, DraCo. (Hint: don't hit the hardware, and stick to OS3.1: MUI, ClassAct 2, some internal gadget system, and bgui are acceptable). -etc. |
Can it be classed as "native" under X11?_________________ After a decade away from the scene, I am back! |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
spotUP
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 12:30:44
| | [ #23 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 19-Aug-2003 Posts: 2896
From: Up Rough Demo Squad | | |
|
| @amipal
it is native under x11. what's missing is an amiga gui. _________________ AOS4 Betatester, Peg2, G4@1ghz, Radeon 9250 256mb, 1gb RAM.
http://www.asciiarena.com http://www.uprough.net |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
tomazkid
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 12:33:16
| | [ #24 ] |
|
|
|
Team Member |
Joined: 31-Jul-2003 Posts: 11694
From: Kristianstad, Sweden | | |
|
| @amipal
Quote:
Can it be classed as "native" under X11? |
As SpotUp said, the X11 itself is native.
_________________ Site admins are people too..pooff! |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Drathro
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 17:17:25
| | [ #25 ] |
|
|
|
Member |
Joined: 20-May-2007 Posts: 38
From: Newcastle, England | | |
|
| @Bobsonsirjonny
Quote:
That's a lot of money
(Fixed quote, it was missing a space /tomazkid)Last edited by tomazkid on 12-Jul-2007 at 05:27 PM. Last edited by tomazkid on 12-Jul-2007 at 05:26 PM.
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tuxedo
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 18:49:37
| | [ #26 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 28-Nov-2003 Posts: 2341
From: Perugia, ITALY | | |
|
| @Drathro
Nice thing surely, but... X11 was SLOOOOOOW.... Video refresh was rellay slow not so nice to use a program with so bad scrolling... However that's first step... Hope that in near future we can have it fully working under OS4! GOOD WORK! _________________ Simone"Tuxedo"Monsignori, Perugia, ITALY. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
hotrod
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 18:56:26
| | [ #27 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 11-Mar-2003 Posts: 2993
From: Stockholm, Sweden | | |
|
| @all
Has any one read the FAQ lately? Read it here:
AmiZilla
An x11 port isn't anywhere close to what's written there. But one should keep in mind that even though these things are wishes I don't think that they are requirements for the bounty... Last edited by hotrod on 12-Jul-2007 at 07:00 PM.
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
NutsAboutAmiga
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 19:19:11
| | [ #28 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 9-Jun-2004 Posts: 12817
From: Norway | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
Crumb
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 21:57:58
| | [ #29 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 12-Mar-2003 Posts: 2209
From: Zaragoza (Aragonian State) | | |
|
| @NutsAboutAmiga
Quote:
So a program using dynamic linking becomes big in memory, but not on disk. |
mmm I guess that Linux/Windows will use the MMU to avoid having the same code various times in memory. Please tell me that it works that way, because if the code is duplicated that's simply a waste of ram._________________ The only spanish amiga news web page/club: CUAZ |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Hans
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 22:01:06
| | [ #30 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 27-Dec-2003 Posts: 5067
From: New Zealand | | |
|
| @Crumb
Quote:
Crumb wrote: @NutsAboutAmiga
Quote:
So a program using dynamic linking becomes big in memory, but not on disk. |
mmm I guess that Linux/Windows will use the MMU to avoid having the same code various times in memory. Please tell me that it works that way, because if the code is duplicated that's simply a waste of ram. |
Given that it's called a shared object, I'd assume that the code is not duplicated in memory for every program that uses it. In that case, it should be called a dynamic linked library, not a shared object.
Hans
_________________ http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project. https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Frags
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 22:31:51
| | [ #31 ] |
|
|
|
Cult Member |
Joined: 23-Nov-2004 Posts: 971
From: East-Midlands (Nottingham) UK | | |
|
| Could the OS4 x11 code be kind of `wrapped around` the firefox code to make a single binary? Then it could be compiled for everything and claim the bounty. _________________ Fraggle
- insert profound text here - |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
amipal
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 12-Jul-2007 22:49:15
| | [ #32 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 8-Apr-2003 Posts: 1907
From: Saltdean, East Sussex, UK | | |
|
| @hotrod
Quote:
Has any one read the FAQ lately? Read it here:
AmiZilla
An x11 port isn't anywhere close to what's written there. But one should keep in mind that even though these things are wishes I don't think that they are requirements for the bounty... |
My thoughts entirely!_________________ After a decade away from the scene, I am back! |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
pixie
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 13-Jul-2007 1:03:14
| | [ #33 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 10-Mar-2003 Posts: 3120
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
Ants
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 13-Jul-2007 3:14:45
| | [ #34 ] |
|
|
|
Member |
Joined: 28-Jun-2005 Posts: 75
From: Auckland, New Zealand | | |
|
| @Frags Quote:
Could the OS4 x11 code be kind of `wrapped around` the firefox code to make a single binary? Then it could be compiled for everything and claim the bounty. |
It's not that easy, you have to write OS specific code for each platform, where it differs from OS4, and go through and do all the configurations for each platform too- and XPCOM needs to be written in assem for each platform (not that hard though)- it's a lot of work! It would have been far easier to create an OS3.1 (68k) version, and then port from there.
Also, I'd note, that they couldn't use the AmiZilla's Team OS3 code to claim the bounty (well, not without coming to some arrangement with us first). But honestly, I doubt OS4 devs want an OS3 or any other version, as having Firefox only on OS4 is a big advantage over opposition!
But, hey- that aside, good luck to them- I'll be watching their progress with interest!
Ants AmiZilla Coordinator_________________ - Ants |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
umisef
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 13-Jul-2007 4:41:39
| | [ #35 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 19-Jun-2005 Posts: 1714
From: Melbourne, Australia | | |
|
| @Crumb
Quote:
Please tell me that it works that way, because if the code is duplicated that's simply a waste of ram. |
Of course it works that way. Actually, it works even better --- the code is (usually) also shared with the disk caching system.
Essentially, under linux, loading a shared library comes down to mmap()ing it into the process's address space. When multiple processes mmap() the same file, they get to use the same phyiscal memory pages, despite each process "seeing" their own copy in their own address space (and potentially, at an address different from where other processes see it).
There is a small caveat, which turns out to also be a large advantage.... Given that each process might see the shared library at a different address, it *may* be necessary to apply relocation information to the actual code (just the same way as is done when an AmigaOS executable is loaded). Of course, this modifies the content of the memory --- and with the memory shared between multiple processes, all hell would break loose. Which is why the mmap is done "privately" --- meaning that any modifications should only be visible to the one making them. This is implemented using "copy-on-write" --- memory pages are shared until they are written to; The moment a page is written, a brand new physical page is allocated, the unmodified content copied, and the modification done on that copy (which then gets mapped into the modifying process's address space to replace the shared version).
The drawback of course is that this reduces the amount of sharing that can be done; It's not that bad in real life. On most architectures, shared libraries are built using Position Independent Code, which means no relocation information needs to be applied, anyway. Where that is not fully possible, common libraries have "preferred" locations in the address space for which no relocations are necessary, and when mapped at those locations (which is usually the case), can be fully shared.
The huge advantage of allowing for this kind of thing, however, is that the copy-on-write works just as well for global and static variables. Unlike AmigaOS shared libraries, linux ones can use such variables to their heart's content without worrying about things breaking. And given that even the standard C library has numerous examples implying static variables in provided functions, that's worth a lot.
mmap() is a tremendously powerful and useful concept, especially when combined with multiple and/or stupidly large address spaces.
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
spotUP
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 13-Jul-2007 4:43:56
| | [ #36 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 19-Aug-2003 Posts: 2896
From: Up Rough Demo Squad | | |
|
| @pixie
uh? what have i got to do with things? i just answered a question. is it os4 native? yes.
_________________ AOS4 Betatester, Peg2, G4@1ghz, Radeon 9250 256mb, 1gb RAM.
http://www.asciiarena.com http://www.uprough.net |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
jahc
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 13-Jul-2007 5:22:50
| | [ #37 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 30-May-2003 Posts: 2959
From: Auckland, New Zealand | | |
|
| @umisef
Great post, man. I enjoyed reading that. :)
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
itix
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 13-Jul-2007 8:20:55
| | [ #38 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 22-Dec-2004 Posts: 3398
From: Freedom world | | |
|
| @umisef
Quote:
Unlike AmigaOS shared libraries, linux ones can use such variables to their heart's content without worrying about things breaking. And given that even the standard C library has numerous examples implying static variables in provided functions, that's worth a lot.
|
Ahem. Static variables are not problem in library code
_________________ Amiga Developer Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
pixie
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 13-Jul-2007 9:44:02
| | [ #39 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 10-Mar-2003 Posts: 3120
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
jahc
| |
Re: Firefox on X11 Posted on 13-Jul-2007 10:19:31
| | [ #40 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 30-May-2003 Posts: 2959
From: Auckland, New Zealand | | |
|
| @pixie
Are you saying that SpotUp is able to set the bounty conditions?
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|