@bernd_afa

Porting generally involves more than a mere recompilation. If you're afraid of porting a layer because it means writing new code, then porting is definitely not for you.

So about "mozilla", if pthread gives you an issue, you just get rid of it (assuming the api is separated enough to allow that without too much trouble) and use the native amigaos API to implement it (or implement pthread yourself, your choice).

In the same way, it's just lame to "port" OWB or Netsurf using SDL+ixemul, and it would be equally lame to port FireFox using ixemul + X11 or any random unsuitable library that makes the developer work easier but in the end produce a low quality and unusable port.

And by the way, let's assume there would be a proper port of firefox using a native toolkit (i.e not ixemul or x11 crap)... You can be sure it would be far from the firefox you know in its first incarnation, since it's quite probable most GUI parts or even modules wouldn't be ported in a first version. So guess what... You would have something less usable than current versions of OWB, Sputnik or Netsurf browsers.

And finally, you say there's no OWB port on Windows... That's not really a big surprise considering the original target of sandlabs. OWB in its common tree is mostly a layer above WebKit that makes it a bit easier to port it to embedded devices (or anything else, actually), and it also comes with ready-to-use but very simple "Web Viewers" for SDL, GTK, QT & co. But these viewers should in no way be considered as a full browser (especially not the SDL one). AROS, OS4 & MorphOS OWB ports come with quite some additional code (mostly GUI related) to make it a remotely usable browser. Something which was not done for Windows, since there's no real need for it there, considering all the already existing browsers.

@bernd_afa

Currently AmiZilla isn't using ixemul, as an OS abstraction layer (the NSPR) has been written for Amiga OS3 (and I think OS4). For OS3 it uses normal threads (not Pthreads), which assume no memory protection or other more sophisticated features. Pthread support may be end up being needed though, as normal threads may not work well enough. We could use Pthread support in ixemul (but only for threads) I suppose, or write something to emulate them (urrrg).


@Rogue

From memory the the NSPR work done for OS4 by afxgroup used PThreads- I know he used as much as possible of OS4's Posix/Linux implementations as possible, like Linux Library support etc, to make porting quicker, and run FF as best as possible (as who knows what bugs/quirks you come up against if you don't use PThreads etc!).


@Insanity
Quote:

Why on EARTH keep the (seemingly) retarded demand of porting it to 3.x? The other three are at least developing growing operative systems with a somewhat modern structure?

Well first it's part of the Bounty- second it's API is well known by all Amiga devs and easily available (unlike OS4 and MOS)- and thirdly it's an independent OS to port to first- then anyone can fairly easily port it to OS4, MOS, or AROS if they want- it was done to avoid any OS bias, and get support from devs from all the Amiga-like OSes. Unfortunately I feel this OS neutrality is partly why no programmers wanted to work on AmiZilla- because they don't want to give the opposition an equal advantage- they work on their own OS web browser solutions instead...


@Fab
Initially we'll be compiling AmiZilla using the X11 and GTK/GDK GUI (XUL) option, to get it working- then once program is stable- we can work on a native MUI/Reaction GUI layer.


-Ants
AmiZilla Coordinator

_________________
- Ants

@bernd_afa

Quote:

here is a link, that show that it seem not possible to build firefox without pthread support.

FYI, and this single line shows you don't know what you are talking about, Firefox uses NSPR for threads. How you implement threads in NSPR is up to you; BeOS uses native BThreads. So, thank you for demonstrating your ignorance. It saves me the hassle of refuting the other FUD you posted; you managed to disqualifiy yourself nicely.

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

@Rogue

>FYI, and this single line shows you don't know what you are talking about, Firefox >uses NSPR for threads. How you implement threads in NSPR is up to you; BeOS >uses native BThreads. So, thank you for demonstrating your ignorance. It saves me >the hassle of refuting the other FUD you posted; you managed to disqualifiy yourself >nicely.

this i dont understand.
Wy should somebody write a own thread implementation for firefox on OS4 and not use the existing pthread implementation firefox have and the pthread lib in OS4 , when it is known that OS4 support pthreads work well ???

Last edited by bernd_afa on 09-Jul-2009 at 08:42 AM.
Last edited by bernd_afa on 09-Jul-2009 at 08:41 AM.

@fairlanefastback

@ALL

>Quote:

>>Rogue wrote:
>>@bernd_afa

>>Yet, you again use this to wage your puny little propaganda war against everything >>not 68k related.
>>I am not even going to reply to the rest of your posting, it's so obviously ignorant.

>To everyone in this thread, please, lets try to stay courteous here. I know frustrations can arise for some, and the frustration part may be totally >valid, but the TOS tells us not to act on that here.

>You have a lot of accusations in here. And I have never seen Rogue or Hyperion say some of these things you accuse them as having said. Now >that makes me think you might be trolling here. And thats a problem if you are, as the TOS forbids it. So please think on that.

sorry, maybe my reaction of this bad attack from rogue was little hard, but i dont like when rogue is attacking me with that words and want tell i want only 68k and no other systems.I release sources to everyone and i help also if
somebody want run it on other systems.i always told i see AOS should work together as on Linux.But when rogue write this


http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=29160&forum=2&start=20&viewmode=flat&order=0#499499

""""
It never ceases to amaze me that in your eternal quest to badmouth everything AmigaOS 4.x-related, you always manage to stoop even lower with every posting.

...
Yet, you again use this to wage your puny little propaganda war against everything not 68k related.
"""""

is complete diffrent what i think and of course lots offtopic and i do no propaganda.

I get a PN with abuse report.I hope rogue Post get too a abuse report......
My Post was only a reaction of rogues Post.

but only write a abuse report and dont answer at rogue post is not enough because there are lots people that believe all what rogue say.

also my english is not good, so i have bring questions so users can think themself who does not like other AOS......

@Ants

Quote:

@Rogue From memory the the NSPR work done for OS4 by afxgroup used PThreads- I know he used as much as possible of OS4's Posix/Linux implementations as possible, like Linux Library support etc, to make porting quicker, and run FF as best as possible (as who knows what bugs/quirks you come up against if you don't use PThreads etc!).

AFAIR, afxgroup based his stuff on Thomas' and my NSPR port. If that is the case, it doesn't use the pthreads implementation from Unix but rather an own thread implementation based on Thomas' pthreads library. I seem to remember that the original PRThread implementation used a mixture of local and global threads, i.e. based on ALERT.

NSPR comes with an extensive testing suite, so porting it isn't too much of an issue, although a number of these tests are outdated and/or don't work at all - I've cross-checked with Linux, some of them outright core-dump. The finer points are the socket/file IO handling, especially Poll.

I remember that one of the issues that afxgroup had with his build was that the pipes didn't work. IIRC it was something in the nsAppShell (the gtk2 nsAppShell uses pipes for forcing user interface code into the application's main thread). Might have been somewhere else and not AppShell, but I know that it was something with pipes and not with threads.

Anyway, pthreads and NSPR aren't the major problem when porting firefox. widget is, and that mainly because of the nsWindow/nsChildView hierarchy. gfx used to be a problem, too, but with Thebes now that is no longer the case.

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

@bernd_afa

Quote:

Wy should somebody write a own thread implementation for firefox on OS4 and not use the existing pthread implementation firefox have and the pthread lib in OS4 , when it is known that OS4 support pthreads work well ???

That wasn't actually the point, was it? Your claim was that it is impossible to build Firefox/NSPR without pthreads, I merely pointed out to you that you are wrong (which you failed to admit) and that other platforms like BeOS (and Windows for the matter) do not use pthreads at all.

FYI, there are several pthread calls in Linux that are not in the original POSIX specs for threads, I don't remember what it was exactly but the NSPR Unix code depended on one of them. Besides, it also used alert() to schedule local threads via setjmp/longjmp, which is kind of messy and not exactly needed on AmigaOS since task switching is fast enough to only use global threads in NSPR.

Finally, NSPR is an abstraction layer, and has a well-defined interface which tells exactly what each and every call must do. It's sometimes easier and more desirable to re-implement things to better fit the OS than going for existing code.

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

@bernd_afa

I guess you should take a serious English training course because you don't seem to have understood what Rogue said. He never said one must *not* use PThreads under AOS4 to implement Firefox, he was just discussing the fact, as usual, that you are presenting as facts things that you don't have any, even remotely, a small idea about. Here it was your assertion about the fact that Firefox *can't* be implemented without PThreads, Rogue answered that's false and gave a sample : under BeOS it uses BThreads...

EDIT: I guess I was too slow to reply

Last edited by abalaban on 09-Jul-2009 at 09:00 AM.

_________________
AOS 4.1 : I dream it, Hyperion did it !
Now dreaming AOS 4.2...
Thank you to all devs involved for this great job !

@bernd_afa

Quote:

i always told i see AOS should work together as on Linux

That wasn't actually the point, was it? The point was that your original post merely served as another platform for you to badmouth AmigaOS 4.x, with totally unrelated (and untrue) points.

Yes, my initial reaction towards you was rude, I should have used more friendly words to tell you what I think about you. It doesn't change my opinion though. It also doesn't change the fact that you are wrong.

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

yes, and IIRC NSPR was the last of the problem to port Firefox.. yes. i've started the port using HJ and Thomas port and so it was simplier but i don't think it is tto hard if someone use pthread code.
But this was 3-4 years ago.. and i'm old..
BTW the problem with firefox is the debug. it is hard to debug that beast since it has a lot of components.. but someone know this very well...

_________________
http://www.amigasoft.net

@fab
>In the same way, it's just lame to "port" OWB or Netsurf using SDL+ixemul, and it >would be equally lame to port FireFox using ixemul + X11 or any random unsuitable >library that makes the developer work easier but in the end produce a low quality >and unusable port.

i dont see that the sdl ports are unusable.when look how many time is invest and what can do with it, there can do a lot and it work stable and fast.sure some is miss, but all in all can lots more do with it than with nothing or with slower.but the time stay in SDL is not very large, most time wait for internet or parse html code.i profile a little and see this.also write a own GUI is not so hard as write a webbrowser.

Also the SDL or gtk gui is enhanced from many.

so can see netsurf work all in all stable and dont crash system.

then if this work there is something to be usefull, then can say ok, all work well, and when use later GTK to MUI wrapper and there come crahes that happen not on X11 build, its near sure there , the problem must be in gtk to MUI wrapper.

maybe its lame to use A GUI System with a graphical GUI builder(gtk is), but as can see, many devs use it, i think thats a reason not to code for amiga OS, because on Amiga OS not many code big programs.you are a OS developer, not sure wy you spend this much work.

same is with firefox, when it run on X11, then it can later change to use AOS direct.
then it can change that XUl use gtk mui wrapper and later can change to AOS.

Last edited by bernd_afa on 09-Jul-2009 at 09:39 AM.

@afxgroup
>yes, and IIRC NSPR was the last of the problem to port Firefox.. yes. i've started the >port using HJ and Thomas port and so it was simplier but i don't think it is tto hard if >someone use pthread code.

does this mean the friedens begin on firefox, give up and then you continue, give up and then begin with OWB ?

and also the friedens have not use pthread and write their own NSPR Implementation ?

Wy ?

everybody know that new written code can contain more bugs and problems so its always a good idea to use libs that run well with many other prpograms to see that this lib (pthread) can not cause problems.

-----------------------------------------------------


Wy is latest firefox source from OS4 not upload so that other on non OS4 systems can continue the work, when you give up firefox ?

every source is usefull, so please upload the current firefox OS4 source.

i stay on 68k, because there are good debuggers to find bugs and all libs contain debugging symbols.

here can read that newlib contain no debug symbols and bugs and it is outdate.

read at this date(no direct link here)

Posted: 2009-Jul-8 16:29:27

http://utilitybase.com/forum/index.php?action=vthread&forum=3&topic=1744

so i think when firefox full working on OS4 fail, there are good chances it can get better working on a amiga system with better dedug support or bug free clib.

>That wasn't actually the point, was it? The point was that your original post merely >served as another platform for you to badmouth AmigaOS 4.x, with totally unrelated >(and untrue) points.

Your post is only a bad bash.
Wy you not just answer Firexofox on OS4 use npt pthread, we have written a own OS4 nsdp here is the link, look yourself.

when somebody bring bashes o casn easy show thats wrong when i post code.
so nobody need believe me, he can look.

I speculate on 68k and OS4 about the same threadsafe problem, so how can you then write

maybe 68k pthread work too not good and ixemul V61.1 dont help.

""""
I guess he run in the same problems that are discribe here.
problems with thread safety.firefox and other big apps use many threads.
""""

is it forbidden to do some speculation theory, what problem could be

I remember there was a netscape running on 68k but nobody find out wy it crash and so i think motivation goes down.


i write also that on 68k this can be same problem, because the netsurf on 68k too run not stable

@bernd_afa

Okay I think I've just understood where the problem lies : in fact not only your written English is nearly beyond understanding but your English reading skills are almost at the same level.
I think a discussion with you is impossible because of this language barrier.

_________________
AOS 4.1 : I dream it, Hyperion did it !
Now dreaming AOS 4.2...
Thank you to all devs involved for this great job !

@bernd_afa

Quote:

Wy ? everybody know that new written code can contain more bugs and problems so its always a good idea to use libs that run well with many other prpograms to see that this lib (pthread) can not cause problems.

this is not true. Otherwise you will never have new programs/libs.. i think that a skilled developer can write good code without problems. Pthreads can speed up a porting but this not mean that is the best solution. Otherwise also other systems like Windows or Beos could use pthreads into NSPR but they don't. Why?

_________________
http://www.amigasoft.net

you make me think that i have to claim my money back. I shouldn't have never donated.

_________________

>@afxgroup

>this is not true. Otherwise you will never have new programs/libs.. i think that a >skilled developer can write good code without problems. Pthreads can speed up a >porting but this not mean that is the best solution. Otherwise also other systems >like Windows or Beos could use pthreads into NSPR but they don't. Why?

you yourself write pthread can speed up porting, and speed up porting is what need on OS4 land.so whats the reason wy there is not first get firefox on OS4 with pthread working and when it work, then later do for optimizing a own npsr

also you dont answer my questen, wy you not release firefox source currently have and ask for help ?

I think there are lots that can help to find bugs.OS4 is not need, important for unix soft, also users of other AOS systems can help.

and please make the latest firefox source available you done, sure its not upto date but when problems come in new source can look in old source if this is solved.also the nspr currently done can verify by other if it work well.

so please post a link to your last sources you then give up.

when somebody want port firefox to maybe playstation 1, i think he do ask for help before he give up and port OWB that is far not soo good as firefox.

@bernd_afa

have you ever used owb on mos oros4 before? im using mos version everyday and i like it better than firefox in fact. its faster, and works like a charm. i like ff but its slow and bloated. sure it has a wonderful plugin system with tons of plugins but most of them arent needed for an amiga browser (ad-blocks, etc..), we can download and even watch youtube, googlevideo, etc.. already, in much better way than on firefox in my opinion (and not just mine) and so on.

personaly since fab released his owb port for morphos (and the latest versions of os4's owb) i really dont see the need of a firefox port for amiga systems anymore (68k's got netsurf and owb, but most 68k users are using some kind of emulation where the host os has got a modern browser anyway).

owb for amiga is so young and firefox has got more than a decade old history of development, yet this owb is pretty good and usable and im sure its getting more advanced in time. dont write out owb, its far more better than you think.

also dont foget about ibrowse, the king of browsers, maybe it will really have css support soon (soon in amiga time:) and will rule again (but gotta admit that at some areas owb-mos beats it in usability:)

@abalaban

>small idea about. Here it was your assertion about the fact that Firefox *can't* be >implemented

thats wrong, i think you have problems with english.
I never have written that it is fact and cant implement in this sentence.You write totally wrong.

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=29160&forum=2&start=20&viewmode=flat&order=0#499527

I have this written

""""
here is a link, that show that it seem not possible to build firefox without pthread support.

http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-pkg/2006/01/26/0004.html

but to be sure maybve somebody can ask firefox devs if it is possible that firefox work without pthread and what about speed then
""""

It seem also possible that due to a Bug in newlib OS4, firefox not work.
this is a correct sentence and mean it is a speculation that can be verify.

all my sentence about pthread show it is speculation, i have no OS4 to vertify exact, and i dont want do it, so i can only guess what problems can get with OS4, when i read in Forums and give some hints what is possible.

and speculation is always need to find bugs in programs, because first must try out what problem is possible and then verify if the speculation is right or not.

thats a main rule in fast development.

@bernd_afa

Quote:

If OWB is such a good browser, wy it is not here on windows or linux binary ?

Do the words "Safari" and "Chrome" ring a bell?

_________________

@Zardoz

>Do the words "Safari" and "Chrome" ring a bell?

yes, but a webkit engine make no full browser, there need a clever refresh that draw a page as soon as possible, do threaded internet access without polling, so text can read and it can scroll to buttom fast before all pictures or data is load.and thats called as safari or chrome, the whoole thing.

try on OWB page back or look how long it take to view a large page until it can scroll full down, and compare with firefox and safari.

I see OWB not on OS4 or MOS, i see only on AROS actual version, and here time before page text is load and its possible to scroll full down need 3-4* longer than on safari or firefox.bit full page load is nesar same time.but for usability its always good to show page as soon as possible before all images are load.

I think thats because safari or firefox on windows use threads to update render, during wait for inet data etc...
(i have only a single core CPU)

so i still think a firefox is usefull or change OWB to be full threaded as safari maybe help.

i also ask several time to see video, how OWB show a big page for example www.reuters.com go to a link and press page back button.

but no video see

Last edited by bernd_afa on 09-Jul-2009 at 02:19 PM.
Last edited by bernd_afa on 09-Jul-2009 at 02:14 PM.
Last edited by bernd_afa on 09-Jul-2009 at 01:55 PM.