Hi,
Why not use Mozilla instead of KHTML? There exists an opensource activex control based on mozilla which is fully compatible with IWebBrowser. The only difference is that the name is MozillaBrowser. There's even a little tool that can convert a IWebBrowser app to a MozillaBrowser app by changing the CLSID. Likely this control can be somehow recompiled using winelib and native mozilla.
Check this page: http://www.iol.ie/~locka/mozilla/mozilla.htm
Roderick Colenbrander
On Tuesday 03 December 2002 11:46, Ender wrote:
Hi all, I'm just posting a quick update on my various WINE work for those intrested.
I currently have a working HTML Help viewer, which seems to work pretty well on everything I've tested so far. It does however need some more work to conform to the way the real HTML Help system works in Windows (eg, I havn't written an ActiveX control for it yet).
Currently the HTML Help viewer requires an IWebBrowser interface, and only really works with an Internet Explorer installation - so I don't believe it should be commited into WINE proper yet. We don't want applications in our own CVS that require native dlls :)
That brings me to my other WIP, de-QT'ing KHTML and turning it into a working browser implementation for WINE. So far this is actually coming along quite well, and besides a few points it definatly makes an effective browser and IE compatability seems to generally be good enough to keep the majority of IWebBrowser using applications happy. I've since abandoned my earlier hopes to keep the changes minor (in order to make it easier to backport fixes from the main KDE cvs), simply because it was making the code quite messy.
Hopefully I'll have some beta code ready in a week or two, depending on how my free time goes.
I have a few questions however, mostly I'd like to hear from Alexandre on whether he'll consider accepting this into CVS. A working IWebBrowser implementation is, in my opinion, a must - and my HTML Help work does require it - but there are a few points to consider:
- It is C++. So far, all of WINEs dlls are plain C. Is this really a
rule, or just a result of the current areas of focus? I can't really de-C++ khtml and co, but I'm unsure as to whether it's okay to add a requirement for a working C++ compile environment on core dll's.
- It is somewhat big, several megabytes of new code. Hopefully I can chop
it down after removing a lot of the unneeded KDE and QT code I currently have #ifdef'ed and commented out.
Cheers, Ender