Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 00:03:21 +0000 From: spellberg_robert <emailrob@emailrob.com> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Bounties Message-ID: <49B1B9C9.5050501@emailrob.com> References: <200903061346.n26Dk9K5057916@lurza.secnetix.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
mr. fromme almost gets to the point that i am about to make.
every so often, some one posts a complaint about another entity's browser.
it can't do this, it can't do that, "blah, blah, woof, woof"
[ the quote is from jimi hendrix; monterey, 1967, iirc ].
question: if the "browser_products" of other entities are --so-- problematic,
just --how-- difficult would it be to "roll our own" ?
note that this question is --not-- the same as asking
how long it would take to code all of the whiz_bangs
that the marketing_department_dweebs want to advertise.
it doesn't have to do everything,
but, what it does do must be done well; reliably, predictably.
i would want it to do things "the bsd way", e. g., search by reg_ex.
it would be totally divorced from anything "gnu".
i don't care about animation [ images hog bandwidth, big_time ].
here is a concept about which i have fantasized for quite some time.
i have been writing a book_keeping app that is
designed to do certain things that i have not found to exist in
any of the pre_fab, out_of_the_box, point_and_click thingies,
which are available for purchase
[ "ask about our multi_user_license program" ]
at the big_box store.
for quite some time, off_and_on, admittedly,
i have been researching how to write a "browser".
it is my understanding that,
once i can recursively render tables, the rest is comparitively easy.
i have not, just yet, figured_out how to do the secure_http thing
[ this is where i am stalled ].
i want a program
that, either, is or, to the outside_world, appears to be a "browser"_like thingy and
which is --programmable--,
so that it may, in co_ordination with my book_keeping app,
log in to any account,
>----> to which i am already authorized access, <----<
such as my bank or my electric_utility,
in the middle_of_the_night, while i am asleep,
to down_load transaction_events or other postings,
to up_load bill_payment schedulings or other instructions,
so that i don't have to use my waking moments to
do these routine, but, necessary, time_consuming chores.
this is an example of the bsd approach, "routine tasks should be scripted".
further, i want this "browser" to be a "logging" "browser",
making a disk_copy of --every-- page that comes in,
text, image, --everything--,
so that i do not have to remember to "save" a copy of the page,
even from so_called "secure" sites
[ i have confidence in my ability to
secure sensitive information and to manage log_files
].
to get to the topic of "bounties",
it is with deep regret that i inform all readers that,
"for the duration" of the global_economic_depression,
presently being engineered by the american donkey political_party,
with the able assistance of their front_man, the "magic_messiah"
[ for whose failure, i pray several times per day ],
i will be unable to supply any funds to the "bounty" program
[ surely, there is a better word, isn't there ? ].
however, especially after the book_keeping app is working,
i anticipate having more time available.
as my bsd skills continually improve,
my confidence in, one day,
being able to make a credible contribution to the freebsd project
improves commensurately.
[ an aside to mr. stokely.
regarding a dialogue in which you took part about a month ago,
i am pleased to learn that your need is for author people, not mark_up people.
i frequently find myself making copies of files,
e. g., "man" pages or "info" docs,
then, amending them to
add examples or explanations,
fix spelling, grammar and punctuation
[ the comma is great for setting_off subordinate clauses ] errors,
rewrite tortured phrasing and,
sometimes, correct content errors.
"fixing things" may be where i may be of initial service.
as an example [ this one is current ],
have any of you ever tried to teach yourself m4(1),
with only the "man" page available ?
i wanted a general_purpose macro_instruction processor.
on faith, i assumed that "m4" wouldn't be included, if it wasn't useful.
further, i assumed that it was a "current" tool, because,
if "m4" was a "legacy" tool, another tool, "for new designs", would exist.
i had never before been able to make "m4" work "right",
but, this time, considering the above reasoning,
i decided to stick with it for more than a few hours
[ now, i know why: i am line_oriented ].
having some initial success, i kept at it, grumbling frequently
[ if it hadn't been for the "-dV" option,
i would, probably, have given_up --very-- early on;
the quoting approach is --not-- intuitively obvious
].
i went three full weeks before i discovered that
the "info" doc is in "/usr/local", not "/usr/share",
where i had found the "cc" and "as" "info" docs.
"make" was with it [ surprise ! ].
shouldn't those all be in one place ?
to make things worse,
the "man" page and the "info" doc assume --opposite-- defaults.
further, the "info" doc describes feat^H^H^H^Hcharacteristics
which, in fact, do not exist
[ perhaps, stallman recruited that author from a redmond marketing firm ].
after several more weeks of hacking,
i have, for the most part, figured_out what does work and what does not work.
i have even developed techniques to
insert nearly arbitrary white_space into my macroes,
rendering them amazingly readable.
this past monday, i installed sendmail [ the latest one; 8_14_3, i think ],
so that i can see examples of actual use.
i haven't needed to translate between looping and tail_recursion
since my fortran days.
i realize that this is a "gnu" product, so, i put the blame there.
however, it illustrates my point.
but, i digress.
]
sorry to go on at such length.
perhaps, if i were to post more frequently, my posts would be shorter.
when i started this, i thought i would type only about one paragraph,
asking the "roll our own" question.
for ready reference, i enclose the relevant portions of mr. fromme's post.
rob spellberg
Oliver Fromme wrote:
> Matt Olander wrote:
> > james michael wrote:
[ snip ]
> > > ... but I don't
> > > think the problem is that people aren't willing to do the work, its
> > > that places like adobe has closed its software so that we can't
> > > really create anything.
> >
> > Actually, Flash9 on FreeBSD 7.x is working pretty good now with Linux
> > emulation.
>
> Unfortunately only with Firefox, and it's far from perfect.
>
> I tried to get Flash9 working the past few days with the
> latest RELENG_7 and the latest ports. This is on a UP
> i386 machine, so nothing special.
>
> - Native Opera: No go. It segfaults.
>
> - Linux Opera: Works somewhat, but hangs often, leaves
> lots of dead processes behind. Generally unusable.
>
> - Native Firefox3: Works most of the time. Problems
> with youtube (hangs quite often). Most other sites
> seem to work better.
>
> - Linux Firefox: Didn't try because the port is marked
> "forbidden" due to security issues.
>
> I definitely prefer Opera for normal browsing because it's
> faster and has more useful features, so I use it most of
> the time. I only start up Firefox when I need to visit
> a site that requires Flash, which doesn't happen too
> often, fortunately.
>
> Certainly, I wouldn't mind if someone improved the existing
> nspluginwrapper to work better with native Opera, or write
> a new software from scratch that enables using Flash with
> native Opera.
[ snip ]
> Best regards
> Oliver
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49B1B9C9.5050501>