Branches
Comments
[»]
Arachne for DOS now GPL
by l.d. best - Jan 16th 2004 22:16:50
Keep your eyes open ... when you least expect it
there can be a new 'find' for Arachne.
--
-- DOSasaur to the end.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
is ther still life in Arachne ??
by glennmcc - Jan 16th 2004 20:23:38
Yes, there is !!!
http://www.cisnet.com/glennmcc/
--
glennmcc
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: is ther still life in Arachne ??
by igor2 - Mar 27th 2007 07:47:45
> Yes, there is !!!
>
> http://www.cisnet.com/glennmcc/
>
Hi,
Ok, I know a few years have passed since your post, but... well ;)
So here's arachne, finally a GPL version so I could try it out again.
Origianlly, before I migrated to free software, I used arachne for a
while (in the good old modem-times). After trying different
systems, i've finally choosen Debian GNU/Linux where I use w3m (80%),
dillo (15%) and mozilla (5%) for browsing. When I've found your post
and downloaded the code, I was thinking I could replace dillo with
arachne. However, this turned out not to be the case.
In this mail I will criticize the software, but not to offend the
authors
but to give (I hope) valuable freedback. If the project is not totally
dead
already, I hope these comments would help getting developers.
1. It doesn't compile. I had to spend more than a hour to get it to
compile.
Most of the problems are easy to fix and obviously caused by the fact
the packager doesn't really use *NIX. I think if a software supports
both
DOS and POSIX (or rather some POSIX systems with svgalib installed),
it
should be tested on both. Some of the easy problems: Makefile needs to
be
copied (I haven't found a Readme telling this), all filenames are
uppercase in the .zip (which should be tar.gz by the way) while all
references are lowercase, one file even lost a character due to file
name
length limit of the packager's system. A few not-so-easy problems are
lack of #ifdefs. It seems the code once worked with POSIX systems
but later features/bugfixes were added and noone tried it again on
POSIX
so some of the later changes simply don't work.
2. The source zip lacks config files. I had to download a binary
version
just to get some files stored in share/. I think it would be nice if
one could compile and immediatly run the software.
3. Lack of license. The only 2 references that tells this software is
GPL
was your post and your homepage. You should at least copy the GPL
text
in the root of the zip.
4. Lack of Readme/installation files. One downloads the zip and
he/she
doesn't know what to do.
5. Lack of info about version control. Is/was there a CVS or SVN or
whatever-version-control-system-you-prefer repository? Michael
mentioned
in his earlier posts that he doesn't see open source community would
invest
time in improving the software - which is sure a point if you don't
have version control. Who would spend time on creating a patch if
the above problems (from 2. to 5.) exist?
6. It's _not_ faster than dillo while dillo also renders better. I've
checked
only a few pages, and I am sure there are cases where dillo is worse
(probably with frames for example). Ok, it's not really something
you could easily fix, but I had to tell about it so the next
paragraph
will be more meaningful.
However, and this why I am actually spending my time on writing this
mail,
arachne supports svgalib (and the binary version also supports ggi?).
Dillo
doesn't. Actaully I do not know about any non-X, graphical, still
maintaned
web browser for *NIX. I think this is a gap in the free software
market.
Arachne could fill this gap if the ggi version was GPL, the released
source would really compile and there was at least a version
controlled
repository.
This post was not meant to be offensive.
--
bye
Igor2
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: is ther still life in Arachne ??
by Joe - Jun 13th 2007 02:34:39
>
> % Yes, there is !!!
> %
> % http://www.cisnet.com/glennmcc/
> %
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Ok, I know a few years have passed since
> your post, but... well ;)
>
> So here's arachne, finally a GPL version
> so I could try it out again.
> Origianlly, before I migrated to free
> software, I used arachne for a
> while (in the good old modem-times).
> After trying different
> systems, i've finally choosen Debian
> GNU/Linux where I use w3m (80%),
> dillo (15%) and mozilla (5%) for
> browsing. When I've found your post
> and downloaded the code, I was thinking
> I could replace dillo with
> arachne. However, this turned out not to
> be the case.
>
> In this mail I will criticize the
> software, but not to offend the authors
> but to give (I hope) valuable freedback.
> If the project is not totally dead
> already, I hope these comments would
> help getting developers.
>
> 1. It doesn't compile. I had to spend
> more than a hour to get it to compile.
> Most of the problems are easy to fix and
> obviously caused by the fact
> the packager doesn't really use *NIX. I
> think if a software supports both
> DOS and POSIX (or rather some POSIX
> systems with svgalib installed), it
> should be tested on both. Some of the
> easy problems: Makefile needs to be
> copied (I haven't found a Readme telling
> this), all filenames are
> uppercase in the .zip (which should be
> tar.gz by the way) while all
> references are lowercase, one file even
> lost a character due to file name
> length limit of the packager's system. A
> few not-so-easy problems are
> lack of #ifdefs. It seems the code once
> worked with POSIX systems
> but later features/bugfixes were added
> and noone tried it again on POSIX
> so some of the later changes simply
> don't work.
>
> 2. The source zip lacks config files. I
> had to download a binary version
> just to get some files stored in share/.
> I think it would be nice if
> one could compile and immediatly run the
> software.
>
> 3. Lack of license. The only 2
> references that tells this software is
> GPL
> was your post and your homepage. You
> should at least copy the GPL text
> in the root of the zip.
>
> 4. Lack of Readme/installation files.
> One downloads the zip and he/she
> doesn't know what to do.
>
> 5. Lack of info about version control.
> Is/was there a CVS or SVN or
> whatever-version-control-system-you-prefer
> repository? Michael mentioned
> in his earlier posts that he doesn't see
> open source community would invest
> time in improving the software - which
> is sure a point if you don't
> have version control. Who would spend
> time on creating a patch if
> the above problems (from 2. to 5.)
> exist?
>
> 6. It's _not_ faster than dillo while
> dillo also renders better. I've checked
> only a few pages, and I am sure there
> are cases where dillo is worse
> (probably with frames for example). Ok,
> it's not really something
> you could easily fix, but I had to tell
> about it so the next paragraph
> will be more meaningful.
>
> However, and this why I am actually
> spending my time on writing this mail,
> arachne supports svgalib (and the binary
> version also supports ggi?). Dillo
> doesn't. Actaully I do not know about
> any non-X, graphical, still maintaned
> web browser for *NIX. I think this is a
> gap in the free software market.
> Arachne could fill this gap if the ggi
> version was GPL, the released
> source would really compile and there
> was at least a version controlled
> repository.
>
> This post was not meant to be
> offensive.
>
>
Hi Igor.
Wow!!! For some years we have heard complaints about lack of Linux
support, yet nobody ever wanted to assist with this. You at least have
tried, so I commend you for that. We have no current Linux developer, but
if you'd like to restart the Linux branch, please join the existing
developers at groups.yahoo.com/group/ArachneDevelopment.
Cheers,
--
Joe.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
It is not very different from my plan
by Michael Polak - Nov 14th 2000 13:06:59
I definitely don't expect you or any other regular Linux
user to pay for Arachne. But forget about end users of personal computers.
Only very small percent of population
is actively using their PCs, using other productivity software than which
comes pre-installed, and this gap is going to grow in future. I am
definitely not concerned about those few end users, but about companies who
are going to sell hardware with pre-installed software and about future
application providers, who will replace current software vendors. Are they
willing to support open source - or just take advantage of its existence ?
There are two more reasons. My contracts prevent me from
releasing Arachne source code for certain period of time. If there are no
new contracts signed, I am going to open the code of course. But I am still
not convinced, that people will actively contribute to such open source
project. Arachne source code is currently open to small group of Arachne
users, who I can trust completely, and contribution
from this user group is in fact quite confusing. One good programmer, who
is actually submiting his changes to him, always focus on different
problems, than I would like to solve, there is problem with code forking,
with his understanding of my code and my understanding of his code, etc.
Now imagine if I had to receive more contribution to Arachne codebase! I
would totaly lose control, and numerous new bugs will be introduced. Some
of them may got fixed too, thats true.
Also note, that Arachne has to be backward compatible with
DOS, as it was intended to bring Internet to people not able to upgrade
their PCs. Few open source programmers can imagine, how hard is to write
well behaved DOS program, as there are many limitations (which doesn't
exist in neither Linux, other POSIX like systems or Win32). I am almost
sure that opening Arachne source code would result in something, which
won't be backward compatible with DOS.
I was quite surprised, that huge applications and libraries like
StarOffice, libQt, Mozilla or MySQL have moved from their special licenses
to GPL. Now I understand, that I will have to release Arachne under GPL one
day, if I the project to continue. But it is question of timing. I won't do
that until I know, that many people are waiting to say "Wow! So even
*Arachne* is now available under GPL!". This is exactly
what StarOffice, libQt, Mozilla or MySQL were waiting for. Maybe that
these applications would never exist without initial phase of commercial
development. GPL is maybe better license for abandonware, rather than for
phase of active development of the project, where one or more full-time
programmers have to outline shapes of entire project.
--
Michael Polak, Arachne Labs, http://arachne.cz/
http://browser.arachne.cz/ - WWW browser for DOS
and Linux
http://gnu.arachne.cz/ - various GPL and LGPL
licensed utilities
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: About Arachne from Arachne author
by Frédéric L. W. Meunier - Nov 13th 2000 23:49:34
OK, sorry about some parts of my comment. BTW, SVGAlib really bugs me and
many others.
I was thinking about Arachne as open source, but I cannot afford it.
Income from licensing Arachne source code is enough for me not to have any
other job, I have my own company where I can spend all my time doing
projects I like.
So, why not release the sources but still maintain the free for
non-commercial use. That's what ssh did. Most people don't care
if you license it like that, but do if you don't release the sources. Think
about Linux. Personally, I don't care about the licenses, but like to build
everything, and would for sure pay for anything I like.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
About Arachne from Arachne author
by Michael Polak - Nov 13th 2000 15:56:41
Some comments. I am not author of Arachne browser record
at Freshmeat - I was suprised to find Arachne already submited to
Freshmeat database. I wanted to add it when I found that MPEG TV, another
shareware for Linux, is also listed on Freshmeat. Before that, I thought
that Freshmeat is only for open-source software announcements, so I
haven't
announced Arachne for SVGA-lib/GGI myself. I am going to request change,
because current version for Linux is 1.66
beta. There was no stable release for Linux yet, BTW.
I am quite diappointed by the comment above. The README fragment is
misleading: I wanted to let people know, that I am not yet ready to receive
Linux bug-reports or help requests, because Arachne for Linux is beta
release, and I know about way too many bugs myself. The notion about
buying
Microsoft products was ironical - I am developing only DOS
and Linux software, I just want to avoid spending all my time receiving
bug reports. Arachne for Linux is in fact
quite stable, but in most Linux distributions, SVGAlib is shipped, but it
is not configured for any special video card
or monitor, only for 320x200x256 VGA mode used by games.
Arachne starts in 800x600xHiColor, which results in black
screen on most systems, or even in SVGAlib freezing entire
system. This is not Arachne fault, and I just wanted to warn people.
I was thinking about Arachne as open source, but I cannot afford it.
Income from licensing Arachne source code is enough for me not to have any
other job, I have my own company where I can spend all my time doing
projects I like.
I am writing some small projects under GNU license, but I am not ready to
release everything as open source. I am not Sun. I am not living from my
shareholders money, I am living from my customers money. I hope that they
will ask me to release source code one day, and that they will prefere to
buy services rather then source code. So far, there is little interest in
my services, companies want rather to license the source code or to make me
their employee (directly or indirectly). And I don't want to be
their employee, I want to be my own boss.
Parts of Arachne (eg. mail manager) were released under LGPL
license, but there is very little interest in porting them from DOS to
Linux, or rewriting them. I also don't expect
people being interested in keeping Arachne backward compatible with DOS,
which is on other hand very important,
because of all those old PCs which cannot be expected to
be upgraded to Linux.
--
Michael Polak, Arachne Labs, http://arachne.cz/
http://browser.arachne.cz/ - WWW browser for DOS
and Linux
http://gnu.arachne.cz/ - various GPL and LGPL
licensed utilities
[reply]
[top]
|
