qutebrowser general

>written in Python
>uses and old shitty insecure renderer by default (and the new backend is still experimental and extremely buggy)

File: Pale-Moon-logo.png (84KB, 256x256px)

84KB, 256x256px

Some UI's problem on Ubuntu and HTML/CSS/JS rendering engine is late. Use Palemoon instead if you want productivity.

Im using it right now, but i saw they want to Switch bookmarks and shit from plaintext format to some goddamn database.
With decisions like that im afraid qute might not be a browser for me much longer

>>61334945
>>61334957
>>61334994
>t. shills

>>61335008
Hey, I'd love a browser to replace firefox+vimperator but qutebrowser is just awful.

>>61334924
>PyQt
>QT
>Qtwebkit/Qtwebengine
no thanks, I'll stick to my google-chrome binary that doesn't have all this bloat as dependencies.

>>61334924
QtWebEngine is already supported for a while, but v1.0 will make it the default.

>>61334945
There's https://github.com/annulen/webkit/wiki which is an updated QtWebKit. What's "experimental and extremely buggy" about the new backend?

>>61334994
Only the history (because you just start running into performance issues if you have a plaintext file with some hundred thousand lines), and to sqlite which is hardly a full-fledged database.

>>61335041
Why?

>>61334924
I use qutebrowser as my main browser but I gotta say this seems a little hyperbolic.

> fully featured
That's arguable. I use chrome to get some video sites to work and and the uMatrix addon blows qb's blocklist shit out of the water.

> lightweight
Does this mean minimal ui? Because it has some sizeable requirements and doesn't use much different ram than the major browsers.

>qtwebengine
Not convinced that the qt build of this is being updated in a timely manner.

>gnu dead
Hahaha

>>61334945
What's wrong with being written in python?

>>61334994
Same here, something to do with syncing settings between disk and in-app settings being easier.

>>61335084
>What's "experimental and extremely buggy" about the new backend?
Frequent crashes and limited integration

>>61334924
Been using as my main browser for a couple months, but have always needed to have firefox or chrome installed alongside it so that I can access webpages that cause it to randomly crash. The random crashes can be quite irritating at times

>>61335084
>Why?
Because it gets worse with every new release.
And both Vimperator and Pentadactyl can't keep up anymore.

>>61335092
>What's wrong with being written in python?
Nothing.

They're assmad because they think a web browser should be programmed in C/C++ or else it's automatically shit.

They get double mad if it's made in Python, since it's an easier language to use compared to C/C++.

>>61335092
> That's arguable. I use chrome to get some video sites to work and and the uMatrix addon blows qb's blocklist shit out of the water.

With QtWebEngine, make sure your distribution (or you) compile it with support for proprietary codecs enabled. With QtWebKit, make sure you have the necessary GStreamer codecs installed.

>Not convinced that the qt build of this is being updated in a timely manner.

It gets updated to a new upstream Chromium with every Qt release (once all ~6 months), and then security fixes are backported with each patch release (around once per month with Qt 5.9) - see https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/project:qt/qtwebengine-chromium,n,z

> Same here, something to do with syncing settings between disk and in-app settings being easier.

Yeah - with the new completion (which is much faster and allows searching the entire history), it definitely needs to be sqlite in memory. If it still was a plaintext file on disk, start up would take some 2-10 seconds longer, which definitely isn't acceptable. Bookmarks and everything else are still plaintext files.

>>61335095

I haven't had a crash in months, QtWebKit was a lot worse before it was updated. And the only missing major features are caret navigation and pdfjs. If you do get a lot of crashes with QtWebEngine, get a C++ stacktrace and report them at https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/issues

>>61335115
What backend are you using? Legacy QtWebKit (before 5.212 from https://github.com/annulen/webkit/ ) is quite buggy (v0.11.0 shows a warning about it, and v1.0 will drop support). With an updated QtWebKit or QtWebEngine, you should have crashes very rarely if at all.

>>61335144
Dunno, looking at the changelog it seems to get better every release. What's getting worse?

>>61335183
What in Firefox's changelog makes it look like it's getting better instead of worse?

>>61335175
I very well may be using the legacy qtwebkit, ill try running it with --backend -webengine and see how it goes

>>61335189

I was referring to this from >>61335008:

> but qutebrowser is just awful.

Swiss scammer raking thousands of euros on clueless vimtards. Glorious.

>>61334924
I do use it, but I also think it's far from being the 'superior' browser.

I'm don't follow the development, but last I heard it was supposed to be about redoing configs? I didn't really get the point and would much rather have caret mode, pdf.js and other annoying features working on --backend-webengine. Maybe it has something to do with performance issues, and part of me wants to delay that stuff for later instead.
Of course, I don't know much about programming browers so I could be totally unreasonable without knowing it. Would mean finding bottlenecks later might be more difficult or testing will be hell? Somebody tell me if there might be more to it than I know.

>>61335344
Worth every cent though. Hands down the best browser for me, I really feel like I've found an oasis in the desert of internet browsers.

>>61335044
> my google-chrome binary that doesn't have all this bloat as dependencies

Care to share Anon ?

>>61335357

Currently two big things are going on for v1.0:

- Work on the new config. The problem with the old config code was that it was buggy as hell, much too complex, and didn't really allow adding per-domain settings (which will allow for NoScript/uMatrix like things too). Ripping that out and replacing it by something more sane really was necessary.

- Work on the new completion. A contributor was working on this for the past year or so, and that's definitely a performance thing, apart from also making adding new completions much easier and fixing various related bugs. The old completion slowed down to a crawl when trying to show more than a few 100 items in the history for the :open command.

I still hope someone will pick up pdfjs and caret browsing for QtWebEngine, as it involves writing a lot of JavaScript, which isn't really my favourite language. Some people started some work on both, but I haven't heard back in a long time...

>>61335441
stop shilling your shitty project

>>61335450
I didn't start this thread. I do answer to threads I happen to find, and you won't stop me.

>>61335344
Literally not a scam.

>>61335462
And I'll keep bitching about it and you won't stop me.

>>61335379
>>61335466
See you on the next fundraiser!

>>61335044
>prefers monolithic proprietary bloat binary to free software packages
>scared of installing packages
>what are package managers?

Go back to your screenfetch thread so you can brag about how few packages you have installed and how """minimal""" your system is because of that.

File: 300px-Uriel.png (51KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 300x225px

>>61335792
Dynamic linking is disgusting.

File: 1494775623394-co.png (55KB, 416x163px)

55KB, 416x163px

>all this hipster contrarians arguing about what shitty browser is less shitty because Firefox is too mainstream for them

Vimperator or vimfx?

>>61335835
>Dynamic linking is disgusting.
Oh so you enjoy having 200MB executables for every single program, instead of using a single library and have a dozen of programs use it, thus eliminating 70% of your bloat?

>>61334924
To lazy to configure with all my emacs keybindings and I don't use vim.

>>61335909
No, I wouldn't use bloated as fuck shit that would need 200MB as a static binary.
Hiding your bloat in dozens of libraries doesn't make the bloat go away.

>>61335909
> thinking dynamic linking reduces overall file size
It doesn't because libs don't have unnecessary methods pruned. What it does is save on ram and allow for security updates without having to recompile every fucking binary.

>>61335404
>>61335792
I use LFS and compiling an usable browser is a pain in the ass, QT is bloated as fuck compared to gtk and it's easy to install chrome binary, the extra dependencies I need are
>gtk2/3
>gconf
>cups
>atk

so no I don't see the point in running your shit tier browser that has all this useless trash as dependencies

>>61336159
>LFS
>chrome
Hmm, you think you're too good for w3m?

>>61335092
>I use chrome to get some video sites to work and and the uMatrix addon blows qb's blocklist shit out of the water.

just pipe that shit to MPV nigga

install chrome

>inb4 botnet
>inb4 sjw

>>61334924
I used and disliked the following about qutebrowser:
-No proper caret mode like in Vimfx addon(firefox) or Surfingkeys extension(chrome)
-Certain things that work within browser, in popular browsers require roundabout ways to be used. In my case adding torrents to transmission, and using an online radio.
-On ubuntu in order to get the backend(which I needed for a certain website to display correctly) you need to do a pretty weird installation through tor.
-A website I frequent performed worse than firefox when I compared them side by side

>>61336390
It's a site that syncs up video for everyone watching you simple minded moron.

It's literally just a Python GUI for Chrome's engine.

>>61336330
no I just want a real browser and not some placebo trash stuck in the 90's

>>61336583
>placebo trash stuck in the nineties
> Linux from scratch
Yeah that checks out.

>>61336615
my LFS is bleeding edge, every package is the latest available or directly from git repo. I do LFS for fun, it doesn't mean that I have to be autistic and use some meme browser, same goes for init, I just use systemd because it's fast and allows me to stay away from grub

>>61336677
>same goes for init
>names a meme init

File: f78500800.png (175KB, 365x383px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 365x383px

>>61335900
liked vimfx more than vimperator but IIRC development of vimfx has halted, so even if it is better right now it may be better skipping for the long term. Notable features it has are combining hints for same links to make them shorter(which in very rare cases can be a problem), hints for caret mode, vim-like marks for scrolling, is more integrated with firefox than other alternatives who example have their own bar and everything.

>>61336677
Systemd is a good OS but it lacks a good init system

>>61338328
>binary logs
>XML
>dbus
>no LISP
>good OS

C-x C-c yourself

>>61334924
I use Chrome because it's the best web-browser on the market.

>>61338429
Then you're in luck. It's based on Chrome.

>>61335882
>fireshit
it's a laggy piece of shit. If you are a twitter user, you can't even scroll without freezing like your mom's cunt. Fuck you.

>>61338520
Twitter is a fucking awful website though.

How do I force https ?

I know the option open -s but it's rather annoying.

You don't need a fucking general for a damn browser

>>61338870
No other way currently. You can rebind 'o' to add -s to open though, something like ':bind -f o set-cmd-text -s open -s'.

File: wp_ss_20170708_0001 (2).png (122KB, 716x500px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 716x500px

>>61338973
You don't know my life

>>61335092
>What's wrong with being written in python?
It's less lightweight than if it would have been written in a low level language

>>61339484
If a browser is using an usable engine (WebKit, Chromium, Servo), it's not going to be lightweight anyways.

>>61339574
It's also not going to be lightweight when it's written in Python

>>61336159
>using a binary is easier than compiling
no shit