On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:20:53AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 05:02:58PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 08:51:12AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote: > > > So the following patch seems to make webkit 1.4.2 mostly usable. > > > > > > This doesn't fix all issues with epiphany or xxxterm. I have been > > > making updates to xxxterm to work around some issues. I started working > > > with the upstream guys but they are less than interested because "linux > > > works". The core of the issue is that they reset ulimit values despite > > > being set properly by the browser. > > > > Why not fixing that code instead ? Do you have references to the discussion > > with upstream ? > > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.os.opendarwin.webkit.gtk/575 > > That is the public debate.
Yeah, so why not trying the approach given in http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.os.opendarwin.webkit.gtk/603 ? That looks to make sense, it shouldnt override the values given (which are NOT ulimits..) - make a proper bug report so that it's not lost ? > > > Secondly web sockets keep half open > > > connections around longer because they never issue a close and it is > > > trivially simple to run out of file descriptors. > > > > What about adding that close() properly instead, through a proper bug > > report ? > > I have been told this is a function of libsoup + web sockets that can't > be fixed. When the remote site sends a close libsoup does (can?) not > receive an event so the connection lingers using up a file descriptor. > I am unaware of any awesomeness web sockets brings us btw. My non > scientific observations seem to confirm that disabling websockets makes > the browser a little more snappy. > > > > > You're trying to slip disable-link-prefetch in, wasnt it supposed to be > > a pref exposed through the api ? > > No. It is disabled by default what I am trying to do is to keep it > that way. Pointless.. > > And what is the other patch ? Is it reported somewhere upstream ? > > Sent it to the mailing list. Haven't heard back. I am not sure this is > an OpenBSD only issue either. Sending the patch to a mailing list is the best way to make sure it gets lost, when everything happens in bugzilla... Landry
