Re: [dev] [surf] segmentation fault
On 22/01/13 11:52, m...@datameer.com wrote: > Regarding the note on the website `Compile your own webkit or expect > hell`... > Is it better or more stable to compile webkit as well? Why don't you just try it and find out? If you are asking me about my personal experience, I always compile surf from source. I maintain my own personal fork with my choice of patches and customizations at [1]. I never had any problems yet on Artix with compiling and using surf with Artix's precompiled webkit. When using binary packages, you are at the mercy of however the maintainers of your distro decided to compile it. When you compile software from source, you have (more) control over how the software is compiled. If the binary version of wekbit doesn't work, the only other thing you can try is compile it from source. If that fails too, raise the issue with the maintainers of your distro. [1]: https://git.sr.ht/~strahinja/surf signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] [surf] segmentation fault
m...@datameer.com wrote: > Does that mean I have to compile surf incl all dependencies with > https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages? > > Or do you have any other hint for me? Страхиња did show you the way : config.h is the user configuration file, distributions might also want packages with reasonable config.h letting other packages putting dependencies on i.e. surf, dmenu, st... Given the error message: > segfault at 570 ip 7f3e80b76a34 sp 7ffce08e3148 error 4 in > libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.55.5[7f3e806d+2387000] If you feel like there is something going wrong at surf level rather than webkit itself (such as wrong use or configuration of webkit), comparing how webkit is used in another browser could tell. Another thing to try: first compiling surf from git with the packaged webkit you already have, then check again to see if it still carshes. This will tell if the bug can be fixed on surf or webkit level.
Re: [dev] [surf] segmentation fault
Страхиња Радић wrote: > Compiling from source is the intended way to use suckless software. > > Suckless software is configured by editing config.h, rather than by using > configuration files. Yes, i'm used to compile my suckless software setup (when i have patches). In this case I hadn't patches. So ok, I will compile it. Regarding the note on the website `Compile your own webkit or expect hell`... Is it better or more stable to compile webkit as well? thx marko
