Excerpts from Wolf Tivy's message of Thu Oct 21 01:15:26 +0200 2010:
> IIRC, chromium is friendlier to static linking, being mostly static already.
> Is ths correct?
I think it's dynamically linked but ships it's own libraries (at least the
pre-built version on linux)
> Instead of going the NetSurf route, I would suggest to re-use the
> chromium source code, even if it's much more monstrous than webkitgtk.
> surf could become a headless chromium where each surf window behaves
> exactly like a chromium tab (+ some dashboard surf window on demand
> like for downl
On 20 October 2010 11:19, Nick wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:06 +0100, "Nick" wrote:
>> I wonder, has anyone looked at Hubbub/LibCSS, the HTML & CSS rendering
>> libraries of NetSurf? I gave them the briefest of glances today, and
>> they look pretty nice. They're certainly *a lot* smaller and
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:06 +0100, "Nick" wrote:
> I wonder, has anyone looked at Hubbub/LibCSS, the HTML & CSS rendering
> libraries of NetSurf? I gave them the briefest of glances today, and
> they look pretty nice. They're certainly *a lot* smaller and simpler
> than WebkitGTK.
Sorry, forgot per
So, we all know that Webkit is a mess, and GTK+ for that matter.
However, WebkitGTK does a reasonable job of rendering the mess of the
modern web, hence surf using it.
I wonder, has anyone looked at Hubbub/LibCSS, the HTML & CSS rendering
libraries of NetSurf? I gave them the briefest of glances t
