Re: [Netsurf-develop] Weird error saying NetSurf is running out of memory
by John-Mark Bell
On Sun, 14 May 2006, Paul Vigay wrote:
Is there any reason why you persist with sending bug reports to this
mailing list and not reporting them on the bug tracker as we've requested?
There are very good reasons for reporting things on the tracker:
a) All bug reports are in one place, so you can determine whether
something you wish to report has already been reported.
b) It avoids us losing bug reports.
c) It doesn't irritate me due to users not following instructions ;)
> When you try to visit
> http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/12/12699/pensions_shakeup_confuses_old_folk
> NetSurf gives an immediate error saying it is running out of memory and you
> should free some memory before viewing the page.
This is fixed. However, the site won't work as it's abusing the HTTP 401
response - it fails to send a WWW-Authenticate header with the response
and it doesn't appear to actually be using HTTP authentication, anyway (so
shouldn't be using a 401 response at all).
John.
15 years, 5 months
[Netsurf-develop] Web reget?
by Simon Smith
Occasionally, when downloading, one gets a message saying 'transfer
closed with xxxx bytes remaining'. I know that in the world of FTP, a
reget command exists that allows you to pick up an interrupted
download partway through. Does an equivalent feature exist for web
downloads?
I thought I'd ask before making a feature request.
Simon Smith
--
When we went outside, what did we viddy but a silly Devotchka lying
in the gutter. One thing I could never stand is to see a silly
Devotchka, going blerp, blerp, about how she would thcweam and
thcweam and thcweam until she was thick . . . - A Clockwork William
15 years, 5 months
[Netsurf-develop] Wakefield presence
by charles
In message <20060514051233.CE2461267A(a)sc8-sf-spam2.sourceforge.net>
netsurf-develop-request(a)lists.sourceforge.net wrote:
> Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 07:02:37 +0100
> Subject: [Netsurf-develop] NetSurf at Wakefield
>
> This is a last-minute reminder that NetSurf will have an area at today's
> Wakefield show.
It was good to see you there. Thanks for all you achieve for us.
--
Charles
tel 020 8949 0708 / mob 079 5620 0176/ fax 087 1243 9075
15 years, 5 months
Re: [Netsurf-develop] Vigay.com
by James Scholes
In message <4e2489a9ealists-nospam(a)vigay.com>
Paul Vigay <lists-nospam(a)vigay.com> wrote:
>
> In article <Marcel-1.53-0507165650-06c9GWx(a)riscpc.local>,
> Mike Gilbert <admin(a)lewisgilbert.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> This site is unusable in NetSurf. All I get is links saying "Enable
>> <panel>" and telling me I must have cookies enabled.
>
> I've just reversed the operation of the cookies on vigay.com so if you've
> got cookies disabled (or unsupported) you'll get all panels toggled ON
> (instead of OFF), which means the default operation is for everything to be
> visible instead of disabled.
Great. That's what graceful degradation should be like, if you'll
pardon the expression (o:
>
> Hope this helps people who don't want cookies enabled.
...or don't want to mess around attempting to fix them. By the way,
your 'fix' would have, of course, removed all cookies from other sites
that were working just fine.
--
Opinions expressed here are probably my own, but you can't be too
careful, can you?
15 years, 5 months
Re: [Netsurf-develop] Re: NetSurf corrupting binary downloads
by Peter Naulls
In message <4e2466028alists-nospam(a)vigay.com>
Paul Vigay <lists-nospam(a)vigay.com> wrote:
>
> In article <cf4d64244e.tim(a)south-frm.demon.co.uk>,
> Tim Powys-Lybbe <tim(a)powys.org> wrote:
>
> [Snip]
>
> > I would recommend that you, Peter, try to avoid arguments against the man
> > (the (a) type) and stick to arguments against the words (the (b) type).
>
> As it so happens, Peter was wrong on both counts.
I'm afraid not.
>
> My 'assumption' was that NetSurf was corrupting binary downloads, which
> Peter confirmed by his last sentence.
No, I didn't. I said it was uncompressing them. It's not corrupting
them.
> Therefore it was perfectly reasonable. It /was/ corrupting binary
> downloads in that it was changing them from the original source
> without notifying me. Thus, as far as my server was concerned, they
> /were/ corrupted files.
No. The interpretation of corruption was on your part. The files were
intact. And your server (and by that, you really mean one specific
program) would certainly have understood them if you had, for example,
renamed them. Not what you expect is not the same as corrupt.
> No browser should automatically try to process file downloads, at
> least without warning the user first and giving the option to not
> 'gunzip' them.
Close, but once again, not entirely correct. In some circumstances
gunzipping really is the most appropriate and useful thing to do. I
agree that it wasn't ok in this case. Moreover, it isn't the browser
doing the gunzipping - it's the server, on the browser's request.
And so, given these further assertions that you haven't checked, as well
as recent outbursts on your part elsewhere with things you could have
just put a bit more effort into getting correct (e.g, the ridiculous
banner on riscos.org), you'll certainly understand if I stand by both my
original comments.
--
Peter Naulls - peter(a)chocky.org | http://www.chocky.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RISC OS Community Wiki - add your own content | http://www.riscos.info/
15 years, 5 months
Re: [Netsurf-develop] Re: NetSurf corrupting binary downloads
by Andrew Hodgkinson
Paul Vigay wrote:
> [...] at least without warning the user first and
> giving the option to not 'gunzip' them.
>
> I'll submit bug in the bug tracker accordingly.
My guess is that it's actually happening at the HTTP transport layer,
because of content type negotiation. Servers can store things like GZip'd
HTML and the HTTP layer is supposed to transparently pass the unzipped
result back to the browser without the browser having to know that this
occurred. Transparent compression and decompression over the wire doesn't
make as much sense as it once did, given the greater available bandwidth
these days, but it's still a neat idea even if not widely implemented.
I don't know enough of the relevant bit of the HTTP 1.1 specification to
be sure, but it could be that the *server* isn't quite behaving properly
when it sees a tar.gz file. Maybe it specifies things in its response to
NetSurf that makes the latter believe it should transparently decompress
the file with upper layers of the application unaware that this has taken
place. It would be interesting to see what content type the HTTP layer
passes back in such cases - assuming that this is indeed what's going on.
Browse supported this feature of HTTP 1.1 many moons ago - you would know
it was in action when the reported data transfer rate was several times
higher than that supported by your connection. I too saw this happen with
.tar.gz files on the odd occasion from certain servers.
--
TTFN, Andrew Hodgkinson
Find some electronic music at: All sorts of other bits and pieces at:
http://www.ampcast.com/pond http://pond.org.uk/
15 years, 5 months
[Netsurf-develop] Proxy Logon with password
by Gary Locock
Delighted to see the improvements in NetSurf's choices; well done!
Now that they include a Connection section, I've been able to test properly,
where I was groping in the semi-dark before. (Reported 17.3.06) I promised to
let you know how I got on.
There is indeed an issue here with proxies, in that NS can't cope with a
proxy server which requires individual logons, AFAICS. It isn't a problem
with handling the logon and password, because this will happen successfully
if "No Proxy" is set, provided the NS home page is set to the proxy's
address. Unfortunately, being a no-proxy connection of course, access is
limited to data held on the proxy itself; you can't go to addresses beyond
it on the 'real' internet, which defeats the point somewhat.
OTOH, if any of the 3 proxy types are set, the logon dialog is not presented,
and NS complains that a name and password must be supplied (in the
configuration, so it can't be done per user); Catch-22!
(If only one user and password is required, this can be done via the config
page. The problem arises when multiple users access the same proxy via the
same copy of NS)
It sounds as though this isn't a heavyweight programming issue, just a
matter of allowing the right combination of functions so that NS can supply
the logon dialog when a proxy connection is set.
HTH
Gary
--
Gary Locock, Network Manager, Bablake Junior School
Coundon Road, Coventry CV1 4AU
School Website: http://www.bablakejs.co.uk
Private mail: g a r y (at) l o c o c k . c o . u k
---
[This E-mail has been scanned for viruses but it is your responsibility
to maintain up to date anti virus software on the device that you are
currently using to read this email. ]
15 years, 5 months
Re: [Netsurf-develop] NetSurf corrupting binary downloads
by Peter Naulls
In message <4e233f3bcclists-nospam(a)vigay.com>
Paul Vigay <lists-nospam(a)vigay.com> wrote:
>
> I've just discovered that NetSurf seems to be corrupting binary
> downloads....
>
> I've just downloaded autoconf-2.59.tar.gz from
> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/autoconf/ and automake-1.9.6.tar.gz from
> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/automake/ using NetSurf.
>
> I didn't have SparkFS loaded or anything, and literally saved to the hard
> disc and then copied to my Linux box via FTPc. However, gunzip then
> wouldn't de-zip the file, saying it was an invalid header.
>
> I then repeated the exact same process using Oregano and it worked fine -
> so for some reason when I save .tar.gz files from NetSurf it's failing
> somewhere, or corrupting the download.
Always a bit too ready to make assumptions, aren't we Paul? I think
you'll find that the file is intact, except gunzipped during download.
However, this isn't really something that NetSurf should be doing.
--
Peter Naulls - peter(a)chocky.org | http://www.chocky.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RISC OS Community Wiki - add your own content | http://www.riscos.info/
15 years, 5 months
Re: [Netsurf-develop] NetSurf corrupting binary downloads
by John-Mark Bell
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Paul Vigay wrote:
> I've just discovered that NetSurf seems to be corrupting binary
> downloads....
Peter's already explained what is causing this. Please report the issue on
the bug tracker - reporting things here is likely to result in your bug
report being lost.
John.
15 years, 5 months
