Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6071 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
» Home
» Features
» News
» Forums
» Classifieds
» Links
» Downloads
Extras
» OS4 Zone
» IRC Network
» AmigaWorld Radio
» Newsfeed
» Top Members
» Amiga Dealers
Information
» About Us
» FAQs
» Advertise
» Polls
» Terms of Service
» Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Ports: 1024,5555, 6665-6669
SSL port: 6697
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

Who's Online
16 crawler(s) on-line.
 119 guest(s) on-line.
 2 member(s) on-line.


 BigD,  OlafS25

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 OlafS25:  30 secs ago
 BigD:  1 min ago
 zErec:  8 mins ago
 amigakit:  11 mins ago
 retrofaza:  40 mins ago
 kolla:  54 mins ago
 edwardsjethro:  1 hr 46 mins ago
 joeyunderwood:  1 hr 47 mins ago
 Sikharubel:  1 hr 50 mins ago
 Musashi5150:  2 hrs 12 mins ago

Miscellaneous News   Miscellaneous News : KHTML for MorphOS - update
   posted by mailman on 15-Aug-2006 9:15:06 (11275 reads)
Marcik announced a brief update concerning development of KHTML for MorphOS. It is said that the first public beta version is scheduled on the beginning of September but you need to be aware that the date could be as well postponed a bit until October. Marcik confirmed that parts of the code which are not covered by LGPL licence are not going to be published. MorphOS version of Sputnik will be available for free. Marcik also claims that the last version is the most stable browser he had ever used on MorphOS.
More information here.
    

STORYID: 3238
Related Links
· More about Miscellaneous News
· News by mailman


Most read story about Miscellaneous News
DiscreetFX Partners Makes an Urgent Appeal to the Amiga Community

Last news about Miscellaneous News
Passione Amiga issue 17 released
Printer Friendly Page  Send this Story to a Friend

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 )

PosterThread
deakmann 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 16:48:06
#41 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 20-Mar-2003
Posts: 360
From: Unknown

@all

Having started reading this thread anyone would think Marcik had ruled out any
chance of an OS4 version, but having actually checked his sight nothings really changed. He`s concenttrating on the Morph OS port at this time as always.

Just because the Aweb team enquired about helping him some people assumed they were already working on it when in reality Marcik told them he wanted to finish the MorphOS version first.

No doubt there will be an OS4 version just at the time and place of Marcik`s choosing.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Yabba 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 16:54:28
#42 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 29-Jan-2004
Posts: 134
From: Unknown

Quote:
If Marcik has decided that all the work he's spent a year on this layer is too valuable to him to give away for free, then I say that's fair enough, provided he complies with the license (after all - a big chunk of it is still someone else's work), which it looks like he is if the KHTML part (not the MOS/MUI layer) is made a shared library.


Seriously, this is the whole point of GPL/LGPL! If you take something that someone else has spent a long time on and add something you value yourself, then you are required to share your work with others too. If this wasn't the case there would be no khtml sources to begin with.
Simple: If you take advantage of someone elses work, be prepared to share your own work too. If you don't like it, then don't use GPL / LGPL sources.

regards,
Stefan

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Chain-Q 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 17:21:03
#43 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 31-Jan-2005
Posts: 824
From: Budapest, Hungary

@Crumb
Quote:
Or at least he could send the sources to Chain-Q or any other friend with a microA1

Sigh. And here we go again... See my statement on MorphZone.org about this. I said no, and that's still standing, so will you please keep my name out of this discussion? Thanks.


_________________
MorphOS, classic Amiga, demoscene, and stuff
"When a bridge is not enough, build a Viaduct!"
"Strip the Amiga community of speculation and we can fit every forum on a 720k floppy" (by resle)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hattig 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 17:28:51
#44 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 11-Mar-2003
Posts: 340
From: Cambridge, UK

If, as it seems to be the case, the person has written their own closed source application that interfaces to a shared library that is provided under the LGPL, then the person only has to contribute back the changes to the LGPL portion of the application.

If the original library had been under the GPL license he would have had to share all his code. If the library is statically included in his application, he would have had to share all his code.

It isn't as if he distastefully did something such as taking a GPL application, and then run it as its own application and communicate with his own front-end via IPC/pipes/etc. This area is vague, but clearly distasteful and deliberately trying to work around the GPL.

You can argue all you like about the pros and cons of the closed source GUI, but GUIs aren't simple, and in terms of a web browser there's an awful lot of stuff there to code even if your renderer, css and javascript engine are provided in the LGPL libraries.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pixie 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 18:21:09
#45 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Mar-2003
Posts: 3115
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal

Quote:
Seriously, this is the whole point of GPL/LGPL! If you take something that someone else has spent a long time on and add something you value yourself, then you are required to share your work with others too. If this wasn't the case there would be no khtml sources to begin with.

Q: Is it possible to link lgpl with bsd?

If the answer is yes, there's no discussion, if the answer is no, the very next question would be:
How did Nokia been able to do it without no one (ie- FSF) going after them.

There's not really much to add but this...

Last edited by pixie on 15-Aug-2006 at 06:30 PM.


_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Yabba 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 19:18:11
#46 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 29-Jan-2004
Posts: 134
From: Unknown

Quite simple:
If you link your code + bsd licensed code + lgpl code together then you must publish your code.
If you link your code + bsd licensed code then you may keep your sources closed.

Just the fact that there are 2 licenses involved doesn't mean that you can hide yourself behind the lesser restricting license.

If you have a look at the architecture overview provided by Nokia you will see how they comply with the license. They even provide a reference UI for free :)

However, what most people would like to see I guess is the port to AmigaOS, ie all rendering etc. The actual gui is less interesting.

regards,
Stefan

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
itix 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 19:26:55
#47 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 22-Dec-2004
Posts: 3398
From: Freedom world

Quote:

If someone thought they could 'port IBrowse to PPC quickly' then they are in for a surprise. Sorry about that. But if someone could have done this quickly it would have been me and it never happened.


Pffft. I'm sure I could port it in less than week

But it is possible to use LGPL'd stuff in closed source development. I.e. KTHML engine could be used in IBrowse too without IBrowse becoming open source. SDL uses LGPL and there are billions of closed source SDL games. Silly discussion especially when there is nothing released...


_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pixie 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 19:58:10
#48 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Mar-2003
Posts: 3115
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal

If you can link to a licence which by it's own definition allow you to have the source code closed, then you can, period.. otherwise you would then have to choose other license who would forbid it.

Nokia might release their code, but they can explore two things that Marcik can not:
a) extended brand recognition
b) the hardware it runs on

Well Marcik would obviously get recognition, but not to the same amount as in Nokia


_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
hnl_dk 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 20:02:05
#49 ]
Super Member
Joined: 25-Mar-2003
Posts: 1786
From: Denmark

@itix

Quote:
But it is possible to use LGPL'd stuff in closed source development. I.e. KTHML engine could be used in IBrowse too without IBrowse becoming open source. SDL uses LGPL and there are billions of closed source SDL games. Silly discussion especially when there is nothing released...

Only if the LGPL library is linked dynamically (a shared library)... and all the sources of that shared library has to be released (all the code - no matter if it is LGPL or BSD)... you are able to use this shared library for close-sources projects... but the sources of the LGPL library has to be released (if requested).

If a company would link the library staticly to their commercial product, would they need to release all of the product.


_________________
Best regards,
hnl_dk - Henning Nielsen Lund [Denmark]

Please send no PM to me, email me if you want to contact me. See you somewhere else.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
hnl_dk 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 20:06:38
#50 ]
Super Member
Joined: 25-Mar-2003
Posts: 1786
From: Denmark

@pixie
Have you still not read a word of the license?


_________________
Best regards,
hnl_dk - Henning Nielsen Lund [Denmark]

Please send no PM to me, email me if you want to contact me. See you somewhere else.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
nine 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 20:13:16
#51 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 23-Aug-2005
Posts: 132
From: UK

@pixie

Quote:
Q: Is it possible to link lgpl with bsd?

If the answer is yes, there's no discussion, if the answer is no, the very next question would be:
How did Nokia been able to do it without no one (ie- FSF) going after them.

There's not really much to add but this...


Well, quite. I actually own one of the phones that Nokia have produced the browser for, and I haven't taken the time to see if they've actually released the source for the frontend (although the manual does acknowledge the license).

Apple most certainly haven't released the source for their frontend which links to WebKit - the Safari interface itself.

(this point is partly in response to @smithy also)

I'm not trying to belittle the achievement of Marcik either - bravo for taking on what is a fairly mammoth project (see the interview with the original Atheos author who ported KHTML in order to produce a KHTML-based browser for Atheos, now Syllable). My point is more of a moral one: Is it particularly moral for someone to take a whole bunch of people's achievements and good natured 100% opensource project and then dump a closed source interface on the front? Okay, okay, I know Apple have but we can't necessarily live by their example!

(I'm thinking in future I might keep quiet regarding licensing issues )

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pixie 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 20:13:17
#52 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Mar-2003
Posts: 3115
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal

@hnl_dk:
Nokia did it for me... just so that you see how important I am!

Last edited by pixie on 15-Aug-2006 at 08:23 PM.


_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
realize 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 20:16:36
#53 ]
Super Member
Joined: 14-Apr-2003
Posts: 1797
From: nyc

Yabba

Hmm.. you are so blameless and innocent is that it? Then why is it that you put code in Ibrowse to report MOS as OS4?? Please explain that.

What really makes me laugh is all you guys who said PEgasos and Morphos was the devil and now you are sweating MOS devs and the Peg hardware when you realize where Ainc and A1 got you...

realize

Last edited by realize on 15-Aug-2006 at 08:17 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
xeron 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 20:48:09
#54 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 22-Jun-2003
Posts: 2440
From: Weston-Super-Mare, Somerset, England, UK, Europe, Earth, The Milky Way, The Universe

Quote:

Then why is it that you put code in Ibrowse to report MOS as OS4?? Please explain that.


That is ridiculous! Stephan didn't put code to report MOS as OS4. He detected exec version >= 50 as OS4 (since OS4.x is V50 and V51 depending on prerelease). The fact that MorphOS copied the Amiga API and decided to use V50 for its exec is not Stephans fault or problem. AFAIK Stephan doesn't have MorphOS (or didn't then) and wouldn't have even known IBrowse reported MOS as OS4.

Quote:

What really makes me laugh is all you guys who said PEgasos and Morphos was the devil and now you are sweating MOS devs and the Peg hardware when you realize where Ainc and A1 got you...


I have no idea how the human body could sweat morphos developers and pegasos hardware, I'd imagine it would be a very painful process.

I never said Pegasos and MorphOS were the devil, but I have to say I never liked the attitude, or at least the "online persona" of Bill Buck and a few of Genesi's employees, and at least 2 of the MOS developers (No, I won't expand on that further, since I don't want to say negative things about specific people, especially as this is all pretty much in the past now). I admit, I did let that influence my decision to go with OS4, but really I don't regret it one bit, even if MOS gets a CSS capable browser first.

Last edited by xeron on 15-Aug-2006 at 08:48 PM.


_________________
Playstation Network ID: xeron6

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pixie 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 20:56:35
#55 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Mar-2003
Posts: 3115
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal

Quote:
Okay, okay, I know Apple have but we can't necessarily live by their example!

Oh no.. please don't... what you should do is exploring the fews that still program for amiga like OSs, and bring back the slavery on the way...

We have a reality that is different of Apple, still Apple did, but we can't as it is morally wrong.. maybe he should die on starvation while doing it also, that way you and many others would get your ethics right and be happy...


_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
marcik 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 21:12:42
#56 ]
Member
Joined: 27-Aug-2004
Posts: 35
From: Unknown

If you have a look at the architecture overview provided by Nokia you will see how they comply with the license. They even provide a reference UI for free :)

No, Nokia released first only WebCore part (LGPL, platform independand version) - WebKit (place where all the magic happens) part and browser based on it was closed for about half year (Apple's WebKit was closed for a few years). And it's not breaking LGPL. And even if WebCore part wouldn't be available as shared library (section 6 B of LGPL2.1), but linked to WebKit - it's still not breaking LGPL, as long as object files of WebKit and tools used to compilation are available so that anyone can relink it with self-modified version of WebCore (section 6 A writes about it).

BTW. MorphOS WebKit is 100% written by me. No code from Apple or Nokia WebKits that are BSD are used there, as they will be useless - it contains very platform-specific things.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Bean 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 21:21:31
#57 ]
Super Member
Joined: 4-Apr-2003
Posts: 1225
From: U.K.

This news item is getting a bit out of control. I don't think there has
actually been one post about the item in general it's just degenerated into
license wrangling, shots at the current Amiga browsers and now cheap shots
about whose OS / userbase is better. Come on guys snap out of it.

I'm interested in seeing this running and am wondering if the features will be
up to AWeb / IBrowse standard. By that I mean all the bits that surround the
browser - hotlists, ftp downloads, net status windows, javascript compatibility,
web history. etc, etc. We'll find out soon enough.

It's good to see some movement lately on the browser front on both platforms.


_________________
OS4.1 + SAM Flex
RIP my A1XE.. that used to have an appetite for batteries!

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Legion 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 21:44:59
#58 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 21-Apr-2003
Posts: 820
From: Fargo, ND, USA

Quote:
What really makes me laugh is all you guys who said PEgasos and Morphos was the devil and now you are sweating MOS devs and the Peg hardware when you realize where Ainc and A1 got you...



_________________
...wait... what?

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Yabba 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 21:46:18
#59 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 29-Jan-2004
Posts: 134
From: Unknown

Quote:
Hmm.. you are so blameless and innocent is that it? Then why is it that you put code in Ibrowse to report MOS as OS4?? Please explain that.


This is getting silly!!!!!
OS4 is detected by checking ExecBase version >= 50. I never ever even tried to detect that IBrowse was running under MOS.

Now you also owe me an appology!

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Vader 
Re: KHTML for MorphOS - update
Posted on 15-Aug-2006 21:48:13
#60 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 18-Sep-2003
Posts: 195
From: UK

Quote:
Yabba

Hmm.. you are so blameless and innocent is that it? Then why is it that you put code in Ibrowse to report MOS as OS4?? Please explain that.


No one put code in IB to report MOS as OS4, it simply checked the version (of exec iirc) was 50+ and reported OS4. As MOS also uses v50+ it reported it incorrectly as OS4, and was fixed in IB2.4 as soon as it was reported to us.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 )

[ home ][ about us ][ privacy ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright (C) 2000 - 2019 Amigaworld.net.
Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle