On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 05:10:08PM -0800, Louis Santillan wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 10:16 AM, FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de> wrote:
>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016 17:50:05 +0000
>> Nick <suckless-dev_AT_njw.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Nick,
>>
>>> I try not to keep too abreast of things like GTK and WebKit, for the
>>> sake of my sanity, but I read this[0] today which was a pretty scary
>>> read, really.
>>
>> I also read this article a while ago.
>>
>>> One thing that is particularly important is that webkitgtk2 is
>>> receiving security updates, whereas webkitgtk1 is not, and hasn't
>>> for quite a while. I was not aware of this. Web browsing is a
>>> dangerous thing, and I didn't realise quite how many known
>>> vulnerabilities I have been surfing with, and would like to reduce
>>> that number.
>>
>> Thing is, to use the only sane backend we would have to port surf
>> to GTK3. I am not that deeply involved in surf development, but given
>> there are other backends around (the Chrome blink backend for example
>> and others) it's not an easy decision to make.
>> In my humble opinion, I like the Chrome backend because they cut out
>> considerable amounts of Apple legacy stuff, whereas the normal webkit
>> a bit more crufted (all webkit versions are bloated).
>
>When you say Chrome backend, are you speaking of CEF3 [0][1][2][3]?
>
> One of the things I don't like about the Chrome (and specifically v8)
> codebase is how google-centric the build process is. By that I mean the
> build basically assumes you're a googler with dozens of cores and TBs of
> RAM and infrastructure to throw at the build process. And if you're trying
> to build on your laptop, fine, it'll work, but it'll take an hour or two.
> Heck [3] says bring 6GB RAM & 40GB of disk to build a browser. :P
That's really bad, I only have 1GB RAM here on rpi2.
--
_____________________________________
< Do what you like, like what you do. >
-------------------------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||
Received on Fri Feb 05 2016 - 08:49:09 CET