Windows Firefox just happily updated itself under Wine to 1.5.0.3. Nice that an uncommon code path worked fine.
Firefox is solid for my uses lately. Performance could use some work (reading the wine-devel archive index gets annoying towards the end of the month when it's long, as firefox takes a long time to fetch it (?)). - Dan
-- Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv
On Wed, May 3, 2006 12:00 pm, Dan Kegel said:
Windows Firefox just happily updated itself under Wine to 1.5.0.3. Nice that an uncommon code path worked fine.
Indeed. Funny you mention it, it just updated here too. It worked fine on Windows as well :)))
Firefox is solid for my uses lately. Performance could use some work (reading the wine-devel archive index gets annoying towards the end of the month when it's long, as firefox takes a long time to fetch it (?)).
Hm, AFAIK 1.5 should cache rendered pages when you go back. In fact, it is the first version of any brower on Linux that I can confortably use to read LKML archives, all others would take way too long to render it every time I went back to the index. (Sadly, IE was always much faster at this particular task).
On 5/3/06, Dimi Paun dimi@lattica.com wrote:
Firefox is solid for my uses lately. Performance could use some work (reading the wine-devel archive index gets annoying towards the end of the month when it's long, as firefox takes a long time to fetch it (?)).
Hm, AFAIK 1.5 should cache rendered pages when you go back.
It's when the cache is stale and new data is downloading that it's particularly painful. This is often. - Dan
On Wed, May 3, 2006 12:45 pm, Dan Kegel said:
It's when the cache is stale and new data is downloading that it's particularly painful. This is often.
But is it any faster on Windows in such cases?
On 5/3/06, Dimi Paun dimi@lattica.com wrote:
It's when the cache is stale and new data is downloading that it's particularly painful. This is often.
But is it any faster on Windows in such cases?
Yes, I think it's about 2x or 3x faster. It certainly is on Linux (without wine). - Dan
-- Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv
On Wednesday, May 03, 2006 12:23, Dimi Paun wrote:
Firefox is solid for my uses lately. Performance could use some work (reading the wine-devel archive index gets annoying towards the end of the month when it's long, as firefox takes a long time to fetch it (?)).
Hm, AFAIK 1.5 should cache rendered pages when you go back. In fact, it is the first version of any brower on Linux that I can confortably use to read LKML archives, all others would take way too long to render it every time I went back to the index. (Sadly, IE was always much faster at this particular task).
Including Konqueror? On my machine at least, the initial render in Konqueror is quite a bit faster than Firefox 1.5. Cached pages are both pretty much instantaneous.
- Neil
On Wed, May 3, 2006 2:30 pm, Neil Skrypuch said:
Including Konqueror? On my machine at least, the initial render in Konqueror is quite a bit faster than Firefox 1.5. Cached pages are both pretty much instantaneous.
It may be, I haven't used Konqy in many years (5+). Nonetheless, FF is the main non-IE browser, I'm happy is now fast for doing this, it's sad it took so long to get there.
On Wed, 03 May 2006 14:37:55 -0400, Dimi Paun wrote:
It may be, I haven't used Konqy in many years (5+). Nonetheless, FF is the main non-IE browser, I'm happy is now fast for doing this, it's sad it took so long to get there.
True, but on the other hand the engineering required to make this work is considerable. The "bfcache" was a major 1.5 piece of work ... it basically caches the DOM/calculated layout trees or something like that, which can go really weird on pages that expect to be reset when users navigate to them. There's tons of hairy logic involved in not breaking web pages when you optimize out the page refresh :(
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 08:42:56PM +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
On Wed, 03 May 2006 14:37:55 -0400, Dimi Paun wrote:
It may be, I haven't used Konqy in many years (5+). Nonetheless, FF is the main non-IE browser, I'm happy is now fast for doing this, it's sad it took so long to get there.
Number of konqueror affecting security problems in the last 2 years (by CVE entry): ca 10. Number of firefox security problems in the last 2 years (by CVE entry): ca 100.
(Just go to http://cve.mitre.org/cve/ and look for yourself.)
One reason I hate Firefox.
Ciao, Marcus
On 5/3/06, Marcus Meissner marcus@jet.franken.de wrote:
Number of konqueror affecting security problems in the last 2 years (by CVE entry): ca 10. Number of firefox security problems in the last 2 years (by CVE entry): ca 100.
(Just go to http://cve.mitre.org/cve/ and look for yourself.)
I wonder how much of that is due to the differences in popularity vs the differences in engineering? (a disturbing number of Firefox exploits are based on its platform features like XUL/XBL). Konq just isn't as interesting a target for security "researchers".
Safari has quite a lot of exploits available for it too and it's based on KHTML ....
One reason I hate Firefox.
I've just come to accept that web browsers are exploit-zones all round - their entire purpose in life is to download and manipulate extremely complex data structures and code from the net at high speeds. Pretty much a textbook case of where you'd expect to find security problems.
My dissertation is on splitting software into modules using a fast form of local RPC so they can be confined using AppArmor/SELinux .. the idea is you could try and split things like the renderer out of a web browser so it runs with no privileges (except perhaps minimal X server access). The architecture of Firefox, where the entire program basically runs inside the rendering engine, makes that rather tricky, but the same principles apply to things like image decoders.
thanks -mike
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 09:05:59PM +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
On 5/3/06, Marcus Meissner marcus@jet.franken.de wrote:
Number of konqueror affecting security problems in the last 2 years (by CVE entry): ca 10. Number of firefox security problems in the last 2 years (by CVE entry): ca 100.
(Just go to http://cve.mitre.org/cve/ and look for yourself.)
I wonder how much of that is due to the differences in popularity vs the differences in engineering? (a disturbing number of Firefox exploits are based on its platform features like XUL/XBL). Konq just isn't as interesting a target for security "researchers".
Its more of feature bloatedness and codesize vs small (but full necessary ) featureset and clean programming ;)
The 5000 (?) US$ challenges might have helped to poke holes in it.
Safari has quite a lot of exploits available for it too and it's based on KHTML ....
But they are not konqueror issues. The konqueror developer look at the Safari fixes. ;)
One reason I hate Firefox.
I've just come to accept that web browsers are exploit-zones all round
- their entire purpose in life is to download and manipulate extremely
complex data structures and code from the net at high speeds. Pretty much a textbook case of where you'd expect to find security problems.
Yeah similar to this strange emulator program where users actually download .exe files and run them under Linux :)
My dissertation is on splitting software into modules using a fast form of local RPC so they can be confined using AppArmor/SELinux .. the idea is you could try and split things like the renderer out of a web browser so it runs with no privileges (except perhaps minimal X server access). The architecture of Firefox, where the entire program basically runs inside the rendering engine, makes that rather tricky, but the same principles apply to things like image decoders.
helix-dbus-server is a good start (although for 64 <-> 32bit interop), imgsep a nice idea, seccomp a too restricted idea ... and so on. ;)
Ciao, Marcus
On 5/3/06, Marcus Meissner marcus@jet.franken.de wrote:
Its more of feature bloatedness and codesize vs small (but full necessary) featureset and clean programming ;)
Yeah, maybe. I can't really compare. I have passing familiarty with Gecko and they're cleaning it up a lot, but it's still very very complicated.
Yeah similar to this strange emulator program where users actually download .exe files and run them under Linux :)
Heh, yeah but who cares about security problems in Wine :) If you are running the EXE well, it already has full privs. Problem solved!
helix-dbus-server is a good start (although for 64 <-> 32bit interop), imgsep a nice idea, seccomp a too restricted idea ... and so on. ;)
Yes the work was inspired by Walters imsep. Except DBUS is not really a great transport for this kind of thing. I was able to get something like a 8-10x speed improvement over MS-RPC (tested on Wine of course :) which isn't too bad .... the other main benefit of the RPC system I built is it's very easy to use, no IDL or language neutrality issues, you can pass pointers to structures allocated on the stack, in a shared heap etc and it all "just works" :)
thanks -mike
Dimi Paun wrote:
On Wed, May 3, 2006 12:00 pm, Dan Kegel said:
Windows Firefox just happily updated itself under Wine to 1.5.0.3. Nice that an uncommon code path worked fine.
Indeed. Funny you mention it, it just updated here too. It worked fine on Windows as well :)))
Firefox is solid for my uses lately. Performance could use some work (reading the wine-devel archive index gets annoying towards the end of the month when it's long, as firefox takes a long time to fetch it (?)).
Hm, AFAIK 1.5 should cache rendered pages when you go back. In fact, it is the first version of any brower on Linux that I can confortably use to read LKML archives, all others would take way too long to render it every time I went back to the index. (Sadly, IE was always much faster at this particular task).
Firefox in Wine is faster than IE on Windows.
On 5/3/06, Segin segin2005@gmail.com wrote:
Firefox in Wine is faster than IE on Windows.
Depends on the benchmark, I think. I'm using
"Time to first download and render http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2006-April/thread.html "
and Firefox on Wine does much worse on this than Firefox on Linux. I haven't tried Firefox on Windows or IE on Windows with a stopwatch, as I don't have a dual boot system handy.
* On Wed, 3 May 2006, Dan Kegel wrote:
Windows Firefox just happily updated itself under Wine to 1.5.0.3. Nice that an uncommon code path worked fine.
And how it does with 1.5.0.4 update?
Firefox is solid for my uses lately.
BTW, Dan, would you be so kind as to check Firefox for ablility to validate Wine installation as Genuine Windows?
Just some minutes ago I've tried to download "Windows Installer 3.0 Redistributable", and the page [*] required my client to begin Windows validation.
As I have no Win32 FF installed (which is required for the 1st way, for validation plug-in to install), I've chosen 2nd way to do this: I ran some older GenuineCheck.exe under wine, it generated me some code and finally I was able to download the needed stuff :)
So, maybe the plug-in would work in Wine also?
Oh yes, as newest GenuineCheck.exe crashes, newest WGAPluginInstall.exe may fail also. For this reason I've put online older versions of both: [2]
[1] http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=7b9ba261-7a9c-43e7-... [2] http://193.219.43.130/~winetester/bin/win32/WindowsValidation/20060517/
On 6/9/06, Saulius Krasuckas saulius2@ar.fi.lt wrote:
BTW, Dan, would you be so kind as to check Firefox for ablility to validate Wine installation as Genuine Windows?
Still fails with wine-0.9.15:
dank@lappy:~/Desktop$ ~/wine/wine WGAPluginInstall.exe fixme:advapi:DecryptFileA "C:\windows\temp\IXP003.TMP\" 00000000 fixme:advapi:CheckTokenMembership ((nil) 0x7fd44950 0x7fb8fddc) stub! A dialog comes up saying "Installation information unavailable". - Dan
Hello!
Oh yes, as newest GenuineCheck.exe crashes, newest WGAPluginInstall.exe may fail also. For this reason I've put online older versions of both: [2]
[1] http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=7b9ba261-7a9c-43e7-... [2] http://193.219.43.130/~winetester/bin/win32/WindowsValidation/20060517/
Well, GenuineCheck.exe works for me on wine-0.9.15 with a fresh wine install. I wanted to install MDAC, so I applied [3] as proposed by dan and downloaded it from [4]. This is where I had to pass the GenuineCheck and it workd just fine, even with a fresh wine install. Have a look at [5] as a proof *g*
Ciao,
Olaf
[3] cat >> $HOME/.wine/system.reg <<"_EOF_"
[Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer] "Version"="6.0.2900.2180" _EOF_
[4] http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=de&FamilyID=...
-
Dan Kegel -
Dimi Paun -
Marcus Meissner -
Mike Hearn -
Neil Skrypuch -
Olaf Leidinger -
Saulius Krasuckas -
Segin