12 ms·

I tried Servo

356 points by robtherobber 1y ago

jqpabc123 1y ago
It's still baffling to me that Mozilla threw out Firefox's technical future Very little about Mozilla makes sense --- until you follow the money.
- olalonde 1y ago
  What do you mean? Doesn't most of Mozilla's revenue come from Firefox?
  - ObscureScience 1y ago
    How do you think Firefox is making money, since it has no payed features? Hint: it has Google search as the default search engine.
    - olalonde 1y ago
      That's my point... The fewer people use Firefox, the less money they get from Google. If you follow the money, it doesn't make sense for them to neglect Firefox.
      - jqpabc123 1y ago
        The fewer people use Firefox, the less money they get from Google. You obviously haven't been following the money. The statistical global marketshare of Firefox is very close to that of Internet Explorer --- within a single rounding digit. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-google-keeps-paying-mozilla-s-firefox-even-as-chrome-dominates https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-go...
        GoblinSlayer 1y ago
        Firefox users just block trackers, that's why you don't see them.
        thoroughburro 1y ago
        No. Check Mozilla’s own numbers if you don’t believe tracking stats. https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity
        drsnow 1y ago
        Firefox users also tend to disable telemetry and any kind of phoning home whatsoever.
        jqpabc123 1y ago
        Possible perhaps --- but definitely not easy and thus highly unlikely on a broad scale. And this is by design. The most *easy* and sustainable way to achieve this is by using a fork of Firefox --- aka LibreWolf. https://github.com/K3V1991/Disable-Firefox-Telemetry-and-Data-Collection https://github.com/K3V1991/Disable-Firefox-Telemetry-and-Dat...
      - konart 1y ago
        Tops make goods money as is. All they need to do is to keep Fx the way it is. And Google won't be paying more if Firefox becomes something bigger than Chrome. Google has no interest in it. All they need is a spoiler effect.
        olalonde 1y ago
        But Google did pay Mozilla even when Firefox was bigger than Chrome.
        echelon 1y ago
        Mozilla is simply an antitrust litigation sponge. Google knows it shouldn't be developing a browser. This paltry pocket change protects their pane of glass moat.
      - 0x000xca0xfe 1y ago
        > The fewer people use Firefox, the less money they get from Google This is not reflected in the numbers, at least from what I've found: 300m/year in 2011[1], 400+m/year in 2020[2], 485m/year in 2025[3]. [1] https://www.computerworld.com/article/1543269/google-to-pay-mozilla-300m-yearly-in-new-search-deal-says-report.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/1543269/google-to-pay-... [2] https://www.pcmag.com/news/mozilla-signs-lucrative-3-year-google-search-deal-for-firefox https://www.pcmag.com/news/mozilla-signs-lucrative-3-year-go... [3] https://nerdschalk.com/85-of-mozillas-revenue-at-risk-firefoxs-survival-threatened-by-potential-loss-of-google-search-deal/ https://nerdschalk.com/85-of-mozillas-revenue-at-risk-firefo...
        DoctorOetker 1y ago
        Is mozilla being rewarded if the user base provably falls?
      - kaoD 1y ago
        Google does not need Mozilla to have a sizable market share. They just need it as a semblance of competition in the browser space.
        lioeters 1y ago
        I can't believe how this is common knowledge, this arrangement between Google and Mozilla as a weak and incompetent "competitor" propped up to avoid being accused of monopoly and anti-competitive practice. Why isn't it considered a form of fraud, not even with extra steps - a direct relationship. Maybe there's enough plausible deniability that it's hard to prove criminal intent. In the browser space, what Apple is doing is awfully manipulative of the market too. It's almost like this situation is being willfully ignored and effectively encouraged by regulators.
      - thoroughburro 1y ago
        You’re the one who didn’t follow the money: they’ve made more from Google as their market share has decreased. Neat incentive, huh?
  - atoav 1y ago
    Nope it comes from Google.
  - sirwhinesalot 1y ago
    Mozilla is basically paid by Google to have a multi-platform non-Blink browser around they can point to when accused of being a monopoly. Having a quality browser is not required, merely it existing. So why waste money on novel web engine experiments when you can have AI conferences in Zambia?
    - jqpabc123 1y ago
      Living large and loving life --- by selling out.
  - nextaccountic 1y ago
    I think people are implying that Google told Mozilla to drop Servo, to make sure Firefox wouldn't leapfrog Chrome. And since Google funds Mozilla almost entirely, Mozilla had to comply. Almost no technical aspect of Firefox have anything to do with how much money Google pays them.
- camdroidw 1y ago
  It's wrong to name names without prood but after a point you start doubting your understanding of the world and at this point I'm beginning to suspect Mitchell Baker is a plant
  - bobajeff 1y ago
    I think without Mitchell Baker there would probably not have been a Mozilla. I'm fuzzy on the history but I believe she was the lawyer who originally set up the organization.
    - badsectoracula 1y ago
      AFAIK she also wrote the MPL, but the thing is, people change and doing good stuff 30 years ago doesn't mean they'd keep doing good stuff decades later. In any case it doesn't really matter much anymore since apparently she left Mozilla around February.
- Gualdrapo 1y ago
  I still strongly believe Servo can be a real counterpoint to Chrome/Chromium's hegemony in the long haul. Not sure why Mozilla ditched it nor why The Linux Foundation gives little to no support at all to it.
  - johnisgood 1y ago
    Because Mozilla benefits from Google's donations (the majority comes from Google), and being a counterpoint to Google's Chrome is bad for Google, which means less or no donations to Mozilla. Google holds the key here. They have leverage over Mozilla.
    - fhd2 1y ago
      They don't get donations from Google, but get paid to include Google as the default search engine, right? No important difference though. Mozilla tried to switch to Yahoo a few years back and backpedaled. In terms of what users expect, they don't have a lot of options. Google OTOH could do without the users Firefox has left. And I've personally observed Google strong arm "partners". Not sure I see a conspiracy here, but I'm pretty sure that if Google asks for concessions, Mozilla will see what they can do.
      - johnisgood 1y ago
        You are right, it is not a "donation", more like a business arrangement or something. I am not sure it is limited to "be the default search engine" though.
        LtdJorge 1y ago
        It is
  - f311a 1y ago
    WebKit is a nice competitor, too. Look at Orion browser, it's a pretty decent competitor. Although they only target macOS, WebKit can be used on Windows and Linux, too.
- StopDisinfo910 1y ago
  The string of departures and how people communicated around them let me think it’s something a lot less nefarious: Mozilla looked like an extremely political company at the time. Servo was extremely good at communication with their very frequent news letter and Rust had a lot of wind in its sails, I wouldn’t be surprised if that ruffled the wrong feathers. Mozilla is very much still managed by what remains of its old guards - by that I mean what hasn’t been poached - especially at the top. That would be pure incompetence from the top management but not malice.
  - xpe 1y ago
    A lot of things look like incompetence at a distance, but get really fascinating up close. Does anyone know care to share what they know about the particular personalities, drives, and visions?
  - jqpabc123 1y ago
    That would be pure incompetence from the top For which they are compensated very well. It just doesn't make sense does it?
    - nicoburns 1y ago
      No, but it's not mozilla-specific. It's true of almost every large corporation.
  - bornfreddy 1y ago
    The way this world is going, you shouldn't attribute to incompetence what can be attributed to malice.
- xpe 1y ago
  The end of Pocket is just another sad example. As an April fools joke, Mozilla should announce that they are discontinuing Firefox in order to focus on their core business, which is a beautiful abstraction: the Platonic ideal of discontinuing popular products.
  - paulryanrogers 1y ago
    Strange. I remember reading nothing but complaints about Pocket when they bought and integrated it. I guess it grew on people.
    - Octoth0rpe 1y ago
      Even if you dislike Pocket, its purchase/deprecation is an example of Mozilla failing to effectively use its capital.
    - windsurfer 1y ago
      They integrated Pocket as a proprietary service in their open source product 2 years before Mozilla acquired it. Removing the integration required editing about:config. The complaints were mostly during that time.
    - chimeracoder 1y ago
      > Strange. I remember reading nothing but complaints about Pocket when they bought and integrated it. I guess it grew on people. They bought Pocket to assuage complaints from people that they were "selling out" by including an optional button in Firefox (which never even loaded any code until it was clicked) that allowed you to set up an integration with your Pocket account and send articles there. They were clear that no data was sent to a third party unless you explicitly clicked it and went through the steps to set it up. Despite that, purists were unhappy that Firefox was doing literally anything at all with a third party, so Mozilla decided to buy Firefox in an attempt to put those complaints to rest, since it would no longer be a third party. In the end, those purists didn't stop complaining - they just moved on to different complaints. If you're curious to see for yourself, you can look up the conversations on HN and cross-reference the usernames against other topics involving OSS purism and Firefox. In the end, everyone lost: longtime Pocket users lost a product that they had enjoyed because it got acquired by a company that never really had an active interest in the product itself, Firefox lost because of the negative PR which contributes to their declining market share, and Mozilla lost because of the massive waste of money this was.
- Certhas 1y ago
  I think Mozilla makes a lot of sense if you consider the following long term strategic goal: Become independent of Google money. None Google income has grown to 150M$ in 2023, up from 80M$ the year before. Mozilla has used dramatically more of the Google money to build up assets than it spends on advocacy or other projects that irl some people so. In 2023 they had 1B$ in investments. Net assets have been going up by 100M+ per year. They are not yet in striking distance to truly become independent, but they are making significant steps in that direction. The share of Google money in their revenue went from 90% in 2020 to 75% in 2023. I don't think following the money actually shows what you think it does. As a postscript: Damned if they do, damned if they don't. There were plenty of people at the time arguing that Firefox maintaining one independent browser engine was idiotic and they should just switch to Chromium like everyone else. People like to lambast Mozilla over relatively minor advocacy spending stuff and cry that it should just focus on Firefox, but insist it should have obviously continued with Servo. Even though Servo probably wouldn't have made a substantial difference to Firefox post Quantum for a very long time.
  - skinkestek 1y ago
    The majority of Mozilla’s revenue came through Firefox—their flagship product and by far their most recognized project. And yet, somehow, they still struggle to secure adequate funding for Firefox itself, while millions are allocated to executive salaries and various advocacy initiatives.
    - cozzyd 1y ago
      Wait until you see executive salaries at other companies that make browsers.
    - Certhas 1y ago
      What do you even mean? They have adequate funding. Financially they are doing extremely well.
  - lesuorac 1y ago
    At what point could FireFox had just invested the money from Google into the SP500 and then just ran the company off of passive income? Like for 150M$ I bet you could fund browser development for at least a decade and that was just 1 year of income. (of course also burn the entire $150M).
- cropcirclbureau 1y ago
  Every day I login into Hacker News. Every day, I see Mozilla FUD.
ObscureScience 1y ago
While it's hard to know what comes of it, there is also https://ladybird.org/ https://ladybird.org/ to challenge to monopoly of Blink.
- willi59549879 1y ago
  I hope it succeeds. Now they allow direct donations, so people who want it to succeed can help. I am sure these donations go directly into the development of the browser unlike with mozilla.
  - robin_reala 1y ago
    Worth pointing out that you can also sponsor Servo development: https://github.com/sponsors/servo https://github.com/sponsors/servo
- YmiYugy 1y ago
  I just don't get the point of ladybird. They have full time engineers and are soliciting donations, so it's clearly more than a hobby project. Maybe my assumptions are off, but I just can't imagine they could ever become competitive in terms of features, security and performance with the big engines. Blink is setting the pace, Webkit is barely able to keep up and Gecko is slowly falling behind. All of these teams are orders of magnitudes larger than the Ladybird team. If you think that Blinks dominance is a thread to the web it's not enough to have an alternative engine you need enough adoption of that engine so web devs make sure their site is compatible with that engine. Most of this also applies to Servo, but at least their technical project goals (embeddable, modular, parallel, memory safe) sound at least moderately compelling. Maybe Ladybird has similar goals, but at least their website doesn't really state any technical goals.
  - f311a 1y ago
    What's wrong with Webkit? It's super fast. I tested Orion browser recently.
    - 1y ago
sdcoffey 1y ago
All-time opener
kookamamie 1y ago
> The Dogemania test ran at a smooth 60 FPS on my M4 Pro MacBook Pro until reaching around 400 images I ran Dogemania on Chrome until 1400 images at steady 60 FPS at which point I got bored and closed the tab.
- specproc 1y ago
  Wow, just did this myself. The difference between Firefox and Chromium was depressing. I'm getting >100 FPS almost consistently all the way up to 1,000 in Chromium, FF barely made it above 500 before dropping below 60. Probably not a completely fair test, I've no extensions etc. on Chromium and only use it for the odd stubborn website, but that was quite a lesson in their comparative performance.
  - empath75 1y ago
    Chrome has thousands of developers working it. That is a lot of man hours for small optimizations.
  - lvass 1y ago
    For me it was stable 120fps on firefox at 2200 and 60fps at 3200, using 200W in my RX 6750XT. Chromium hit below 60fps at around 4000 and below 30fps at 6000 but used my integrated intel GPU all the time.
    - kookamamie 1y ago
      Hehe, I threw my 9950x3D+RTX5090 combo at it.
- bravesoul2 1y ago
  If dogemania keeps the images still after animation isn't it embarrassingly optimizable? Why cant an Amiga do infinity of these?
  - kookamamie 1y ago
    It did! Infinite bobs.
nicoburns 1y ago
> The current roadmap lists Shadow DOM and CSS Grid as priorities I've been working on the CSS Grid support. About to land "named grid lines and areas" support which should make a bunch more websites layout correctly. I'm biased because it's my project, but IMO the approach Servo is using for CSS Grid is pretty cool in that the actual implementation is in an external library (Taffy [0]) that can be used standalone and is widely used accross the Rust UI ecosystem, including in the Blitz [1] web engine (which also uses Taffy for Flexbox and Block layout), the Zed [2] text editor, and the Bevy [3] game engine. I'm hopeful that this approach of breaking down a web engine into independently usable modules with public APIs (which builds upon Servo's earlier work on modular libraries such as Stylo and html5ever) will make it easier for people to get involved in web engine development (as they can understand each piece in isolation), and make it easier for people to create new web engines in future (as they won't have to start completely from scratch). [0]: https://github.com/DioxusLabs/taffy https://github.com/DioxusLabs/taffy [1]: https://github.com/DioxusLabs/blitz https://github.com/DioxusLabs/blitz [2]: https://zed.dev https://zed.dev [3]: https://bevy.org/ https://bevy.org/
- fouronnes3 1y ago
  Does having experience implementing a web browser engine feature change the way you write HTML or CSS in any way? Do you still google "css grid cheatsheet" three times a week like the rest of us?
  - rockwotj 1y ago
    To me, this is like asking if having built a sql engine if you write SQL differently. I think the answer is yes. Having a strong understanding of the underlying engine helps you debug and optimize more quickly Needing reference stuff never changes unless it’s so frequently used.
  - nicoburns 1y ago
    > Does having experience implementing a web browser engine feature change the way you write HTML or CSS in any way? I think I'm more concious of what's performant in CSS. In particular, both Flexbox and CSS Grid like to remeasure things a lot by default, but this can be disabled with a couple of tricks: - For Flexbox, always set `flex-basis: 0` and `min-width: 0`/`min-height: 0` if you can without affecting the layout. This allows the algorithm to skip measuring the "intrisic" (content-based) size. - For CSS Grid, the analogous trick is to use `minmax(0, 1fr)` rather than just `1fr`. (I also have a proposal for a new unit that would make it easier to get this performance by default, but I haven't managed to get any traction from the standards people or mainstream browsers yet - probably I need to implement it and write it up first). > Do you still google "css grid cheatsheet" three times a week like the rest of us? Actually no. The process of reading the spec umpteen times because your implementation still doesn't pass the tests after the first N times really ingrains the precise meanings of the properties into your brain
zellyn 1y ago
> the MacRumors home page crashed after some scrolling I know there’s a ton going on, with GPUs and rendering and all kinds of things, but I guess because Rust’s memory safety and “no null pointers!” are so constantly hyped (especially in conversations about Go), that I’m always surprised when you fire up a Rust app and do something and it crashes out… [To be clear, I’m a big fan of modern sum types, and like to imagine an alternate reality where Go had them from the start…]
- IshKebab 1y ago
  When they say "it crashed" they probably mean it panicked or just failed to render; not a segfault. Most languages have a way of saying "I haven't handled this case yet; just exit the program if you get here".
  - jpc0 1y ago
    Rust also doesn’t consider DOS a failure condition. Reading an invalid index, thats a panic.
- empath75 1y ago
  It can also get oomkilled
oaiey 1y ago
Describing Servo as "new" is a stretch ;)
- timbit42 1y ago
  It started later than the other engines and it seems to have a number of great ideas the other engines haven't adopted yet.
AdmiralAsshat 1y ago
I feel like Mozilla is going to join the annals of history with the likes of Xerox in the category of "Companies that created the technology of the future and casually tossed it to the wayside for competitors to scoop up" with Rust and Servo. It's mind-boggling that for a company so often seemingly playing catch-up with Google, Mozilla actually leapfrogged Google in the browser development space for a time, and then...decided it wasn't worth pursuing any further.
- godshatter 1y ago
  If Mozilla decides to dump Gecko, then it's time for a hard fork and an abandonment of Mozilla. Maybe it's time now. edit: I mean dumping Gecko for Chromium, not Servo.
  - goku12 1y ago
    Honestly, dumping gecko would be a suicide for Firefox. Much of Firefox's minuscule userbase consists of knowledgeable nerds who are holdouts from the Blink monoculture.
    - dralley 1y ago
      So start replacing bits of Blink with Rust, instead of bits of Gecko. Maybe their primary addressable market is nerds, but I guarantee more people quit using Firefox because of websites not working correctly or Google's marketing than because of any of the things that HN loves to complain about.
    - sbstp 1y ago
      Using WebKit (even JavaScriptCore) and working with Apple wouldn't be the worst thing to my eyes as a Firefox/FOSS user. Duopoly isn't great but it's better than a monopoly.
    - zavec 1y ago
      My main concern is manifest v3, I would be incredibly annoyed if I had to switch to a browser that broke ublock.
ninetyninenine 1y ago
I feel guis have taken a wrong turn. We need a simple composable language. I want entire theorems built from the least amount of axioms possible. HTML and css is not it. The sheer complexity is what causes all the bs.
- dmytrish 1y ago
  Show us the way!
  - ninetyninenine 1y ago
    Form a design team to reduce the amount of primitives in html such that I can do everything that html + css does but with the minimum amount of primitives.
    - Klaster_1 1y ago
      Something tells me with that approach you'd get emergent complexity that different people handle in a different manner, eventually leading to strong incentive to add new, higher level primitives. That's one of driving forces behind current state of HTML and JS and why JQuery and TABLE layouts went out of fashion. Sounds like a people thing, not a technical one.
      - ninetyninenine 1y ago
        There will always be stronger incentive to create higher level entities. It’s just you need to create an initial set of primitives such that those higher level entities can be formed as a composition of the initial set of primitives. So maybe not even start with html. Create the set of primitives such that I can create custom tags that does exactly what html does. Like react is the sort of a framework that allows for composition of tags. But the problem is we have too many primitives.
bataleon 1y ago
Please bring this to iOS. WebKit is broken.
- samtheprogram 1y ago
  If you think WebKit is broken, you should actually download a build of Servo and try it out.
fHr 1y ago
[flagged]
postalrat 1y ago
I thought it was more like: rust made for the web browser Servo.
rrgok 1y ago
> This is a danger to the open web in more ways than one. If there is only one functioning implementation of a standard, the implementation becomes the standard. I still don't understand why this is a problem. As long as the engine implementing the spec - governed by committee formed by entities other than Google itself - is open source. The problem and the waste of resource is how we are behaving now. The browser engine should become as the Linux Kernel: one engine and different distros.
- mrob 1y ago
  I disagree. The more browser engines in use the less damage any one security exploit can do. This matters even with memory safe languages, because logic errors can be just as damaging, e.g. the Log4j exploit.
  - charcircuit 1y ago
    Bugs are proportional to lines of code. More browser implementations with result in many more bugs. All the effort of reimplementing multiple times would be better put towards security a single browser engine if security is what you are trying to go after. Also you don't need a single exploit due to defense in depth of browser engines. You have to chain multiple exploits together.
- merelysounds 1y ago
  In theory yes. In practice, only when the interests of the sole maintainer are aligned with the interests of the users; since these can change, it’s best to avoid a monopoly. Case in point, recent manifest v2 deprecation is generally disliked by the community and no long term blink based alternative exists (that I know of).
  - charcircuit 1y ago
    >is generally disliked by the community It is disliked by a vocal minority, and of that minority even fewer actually have their own opinion based off the current version of mv3 as opposed to mindlessly parroting others. If it was a true issue then others would be maintaining mv2 support long term. In regards to monopolies in terms of control what is important is the product, browser, market share itself as opposed to that of the browser engine.
Rakshith 1y ago
its really sad to see what mozilla turned into. a competitive browser company to activism. no wonder its core product started to wane
Perz1val 1y ago
[flagged]
- qwertycrackers 1y ago
  Things get Rust advertised in the title because the Rust community is somewhat on a quest to assert itself. There are certain things that the language will only be allowed to do if it becomes seen as one of the "big" languages, and advertising the language in a million small projects is a collective shove toward that aim.
- hu3 1y ago
  The terms you're looking for are: vocal minority and bubble.
1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago
"Most sites have at least a few rendering bugs, and a few are completely broken. Google search results have many overlapping elements, and the MacRumors home page crashed after some scrolling. Sites like Wikipedia, CNN Lite, my personal site, and text-only NPR worked perfectly." Like many HN readers, I have read countless accounts of web browsers and web browsing over the years. Unfortunately, I cannot recall even one that took an account such as this one and concluded something like, "We need to modify the Google and MacRumors pages so they work with Servo." Unfortunately, the conclusion is usually something like, "We need to fix Servo so it works like Chromium/Chrome." The reason I believe this is unfortunate is that (a) it ultimately places control in an ad services company and (b) it creates the wrong incentives for people who create web pages. Pages could be modified to conform to what Wikipedia, CNN Lite, the author's personal site and text-only NPR have done. This is not difficult. In fact, it is easier than modifying Servo to do what Chromium/Chrome is doing. IMO, the "standard" web browser should not be effectively defined by an ad services company (including its business partner, Mozilla) nor should the standard for a web page be defined by the "most popular" web browser, To me "popular" and "standard" are not necessarily the same. Web _pages_ (cf. web _browsers_) should work with unpopular browsers and popular browsers alike, According to OP, Wikipedia, CNN Lite, the author's personal site, and text-only NPR may meet the standard. In sum, fix web pages not web browsers. As a hobbyist, I still compile and experiment with w3c's original libww library and utilities. Below is short script I use to compile static binaries. With a TLS forward proxy these utilities, with few modifications, if any, can still work very well for me for retrieving web pages on today's web. (I am only interested in learning www history and optimising text retrieval, not graphics.) This library is generally "ancient" on the www timescale and yet it still works 30 years later. That's useful for www users like me, but maybe not for the online ad services companies and sponsored web browsers optimised for data collection and surveillance. Internet is supposed to be a public resource not a private one, i.e., highest priority of www pages and www browsers should be to serve www users not online ad service providers. # previous: download and compile w3c-libwww-5.4.2 pwd|grep "w3c-libwww-"||exec echo wrong directory export x=$(pwd) export examples=$x/Library/Examples export linemode=$x/LineMode/src export commandline=$x/ComLine/src export robot=$x/Robot/src y=" libwwwinit.a libwwwapp.a libwwwhtml.a libwwwtelnet.a libwwwnews.a libwwwhttp.a libwwwmime.a libwwwgopher.a libwwwftp.a libwwwdir.a libwwwcache.a libwwwstream.a libwwwfile.a libwwwmux.a libwwwtrans.a libwwwcore.a libwwwutils.a $x/modules/md5/.libs/libmd5.a -lm" cd $x/Library/src/.libs for z in head libapp_1 libapp_2 libapp_3 libapp_4 init chunk chunkbody LoadToFile postform multichunk put post trace range tzcheck mget isredirected listen eventloop memput getheaders showlinks showtags showtext tiny upgrade cookie do gcc -s -static -O2 -Wall -o $examples/$z $examples/$z.o $y done gcc -static -s -O2 -Wall -o $linemode/www $linemode/www-HTBrowse.o $linemode/www-GridText.o $linemode/www-ConView.o $linemode/www-GridStyle.o $linemode/www-DefaultStyles.o $x/PICS-client/src/.libs/libpics.a $y gcc -static -s -O2 -Wall -o $robot/webbot $robot/webbot-HTRobot.o $robot/webbot-RobotMain.o $robot/webbot-RobotTxt.o $robot/webbot-HTQueue.o $y gcc -static -s -O2 -Wall -o $commandline/w3c $commandline/w3c-HTLine.o $y # next: symlink binaries to a folder in $PATH # or export PATH=$PATH:$examples:$commandline:$robot:$linemode
Degenerative 1y ago
I'm hearing Servo got rebooted because Valve giving $ to Igalia to reboot Servo project. Can anyone confirm this?
jdongsu 1y ago
I’m afraid Servo is to be another Hurd.

356 points by robtherobber 1y ago

It's still baffling to me that Mozilla threw out Firefox's technical future Very little about Mozilla makes sense --- until you follow the money.

olalonde 1y ago
What do you mean? Doesn't most of Mozilla's revenue come from Firefox?
- ObscureScience 1y ago
  How do you think Firefox is making money, since it has no payed features? Hint: it has Google search as the default search engine.
  - olalonde 1y ago
    That's my point... The fewer people use Firefox, the less money they get from Google. If you follow the money, it doesn't make sense for them to neglect Firefox.
    - jqpabc123 1y ago
      The fewer people use Firefox, the less money they get from Google. You obviously haven't been following the money. The statistical global marketshare of Firefox is very close to that of Internet Explorer --- within a single rounding digit. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-google-keeps-paying-mozilla-s-firefox-even-as-chrome-dominates https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-go...
      - GoblinSlayer 1y ago
        Firefox users just block trackers, that's why you don't see them.
        thoroughburro 1y ago
        No. Check Mozilla’s own numbers if you don’t believe tracking stats. https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity
        drsnow 1y ago
        Firefox users also tend to disable telemetry and any kind of phoning home whatsoever.
        jqpabc123 1y ago
        Possible perhaps --- but definitely not easy and thus highly unlikely on a broad scale. And this is by design. The most *easy* and sustainable way to achieve this is by using a fork of Firefox --- aka LibreWolf. https://github.com/K3V1991/Disable-Firefox-Telemetry-and-Data-Collection https://github.com/K3V1991/Disable-Firefox-Telemetry-and-Dat...
    - konart 1y ago
      Tops make goods money as is. All they need to do is to keep Fx the way it is. And Google won't be paying more if Firefox becomes something bigger than Chrome. Google has no interest in it. All they need is a spoiler effect.
      - olalonde 1y ago
        But Google did pay Mozilla even when Firefox was bigger than Chrome.
        echelon 1y ago
        Mozilla is simply an antitrust litigation sponge. Google knows it shouldn't be developing a browser. This paltry pocket change protects their pane of glass moat.
    - 0x000xca0xfe 1y ago
      > The fewer people use Firefox, the less money they get from Google This is not reflected in the numbers, at least from what I've found: 300m/year in 2011[1], 400+m/year in 2020[2], 485m/year in 2025[3]. [1] https://www.computerworld.com/article/1543269/google-to-pay-mozilla-300m-yearly-in-new-search-deal-says-report.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/1543269/google-to-pay-... [2] https://www.pcmag.com/news/mozilla-signs-lucrative-3-year-google-search-deal-for-firefox https://www.pcmag.com/news/mozilla-signs-lucrative-3-year-go... [3] https://nerdschalk.com/85-of-mozillas-revenue-at-risk-firefoxs-survival-threatened-by-potential-loss-of-google-search-deal/ https://nerdschalk.com/85-of-mozillas-revenue-at-risk-firefo...
      - DoctorOetker 1y ago
        Is mozilla being rewarded if the user base provably falls?
    - kaoD 1y ago
      Google does not need Mozilla to have a sizable market share. They just need it as a semblance of competition in the browser space.
      - lioeters 1y ago
        I can't believe how this is common knowledge, this arrangement between Google and Mozilla as a weak and incompetent "competitor" propped up to avoid being accused of monopoly and anti-competitive practice. Why isn't it considered a form of fraud, not even with extra steps - a direct relationship. Maybe there's enough plausible deniability that it's hard to prove criminal intent. In the browser space, what Apple is doing is awfully manipulative of the market too. It's almost like this situation is being willfully ignored and effectively encouraged by regulators.
    - thoroughburro 1y ago
      You’re the one who didn’t follow the money: they’ve made more from Google as their market share has decreased. Neat incentive, huh?
- atoav 1y ago
  Nope it comes from Google.
- sirwhinesalot 1y ago
  Mozilla is basically paid by Google to have a multi-platform non-Blink browser around they can point to when accused of being a monopoly. Having a quality browser is not required, merely it existing. So why waste money on novel web engine experiments when you can have AI conferences in Zambia?
  - jqpabc123 1y ago
    Living large and loving life --- by selling out.
- nextaccountic 1y ago
  I think people are implying that Google told Mozilla to drop Servo, to make sure Firefox wouldn't leapfrog Chrome. And since Google funds Mozilla almost entirely, Mozilla had to comply. Almost no technical aspect of Firefox have anything to do with how much money Google pays them.
camdroidw 1y ago
It's wrong to name names without prood but after a point you start doubting your understanding of the world and at this point I'm beginning to suspect Mitchell Baker is a plant
- bobajeff 1y ago
  I think without Mitchell Baker there would probably not have been a Mozilla. I'm fuzzy on the history but I believe she was the lawyer who originally set up the organization.
  - badsectoracula 1y ago
    AFAIK she also wrote the MPL, but the thing is, people change and doing good stuff 30 years ago doesn't mean they'd keep doing good stuff decades later. In any case it doesn't really matter much anymore since apparently she left Mozilla around February.
Gualdrapo 1y ago
I still strongly believe Servo can be a real counterpoint to Chrome/Chromium's hegemony in the long haul. Not sure why Mozilla ditched it nor why The Linux Foundation gives little to no support at all to it.
- johnisgood 1y ago
  Because Mozilla benefits from Google's donations (the majority comes from Google), and being a counterpoint to Google's Chrome is bad for Google, which means less or no donations to Mozilla. Google holds the key here. They have leverage over Mozilla.
  - fhd2 1y ago
    They don't get donations from Google, but get paid to include Google as the default search engine, right? No important difference though. Mozilla tried to switch to Yahoo a few years back and backpedaled. In terms of what users expect, they don't have a lot of options. Google OTOH could do without the users Firefox has left. And I've personally observed Google strong arm "partners". Not sure I see a conspiracy here, but I'm pretty sure that if Google asks for concessions, Mozilla will see what they can do.
    - johnisgood 1y ago
      You are right, it is not a "donation", more like a business arrangement or something. I am not sure it is limited to "be the default search engine" though.
      - LtdJorge 1y ago
        It is
- f311a 1y ago
  WebKit is a nice competitor, too. Look at Orion browser, it's a pretty decent competitor. Although they only target macOS, WebKit can be used on Windows and Linux, too.
StopDisinfo910 1y ago
The string of departures and how people communicated around them let me think it’s something a lot less nefarious: Mozilla looked like an extremely political company at the time. Servo was extremely good at communication with their very frequent news letter and Rust had a lot of wind in its sails, I wouldn’t be surprised if that ruffled the wrong feathers. Mozilla is very much still managed by what remains of its old guards - by that I mean what hasn’t been poached - especially at the top. That would be pure incompetence from the top management but not malice.
- xpe 1y ago
  A lot of things look like incompetence at a distance, but get really fascinating up close. Does anyone know care to share what they know about the particular personalities, drives, and visions?
- jqpabc123 1y ago
  That would be pure incompetence from the top For which they are compensated very well. It just doesn't make sense does it?
  - nicoburns 1y ago
    No, but it's not mozilla-specific. It's true of almost every large corporation.
- bornfreddy 1y ago
  The way this world is going, you shouldn't attribute to incompetence what can be attributed to malice.
xpe 1y ago
The end of Pocket is just another sad example. As an April fools joke, Mozilla should announce that they are discontinuing Firefox in order to focus on their core business, which is a beautiful abstraction: the Platonic ideal of discontinuing popular products.
- paulryanrogers 1y ago
  Strange. I remember reading nothing but complaints about Pocket when they bought and integrated it. I guess it grew on people.
  - Octoth0rpe 1y ago
    Even if you dislike Pocket, its purchase/deprecation is an example of Mozilla failing to effectively use its capital.
  - windsurfer 1y ago
    They integrated Pocket as a proprietary service in their open source product 2 years before Mozilla acquired it. Removing the integration required editing about:config. The complaints were mostly during that time.
  - chimeracoder 1y ago
    > Strange. I remember reading nothing but complaints about Pocket when they bought and integrated it. I guess it grew on people. They bought Pocket to assuage complaints from people that they were "selling out" by including an optional button in Firefox (which never even loaded any code until it was clicked) that allowed you to set up an integration with your Pocket account and send articles there. They were clear that no data was sent to a third party unless you explicitly clicked it and went through the steps to set it up. Despite that, purists were unhappy that Firefox was doing literally anything at all with a third party, so Mozilla decided to buy Firefox in an attempt to put those complaints to rest, since it would no longer be a third party. In the end, those purists didn't stop complaining - they just moved on to different complaints. If you're curious to see for yourself, you can look up the conversations on HN and cross-reference the usernames against other topics involving OSS purism and Firefox. In the end, everyone lost: longtime Pocket users lost a product that they had enjoyed because it got acquired by a company that never really had an active interest in the product itself, Firefox lost because of the negative PR which contributes to their declining market share, and Mozilla lost because of the massive waste of money this was.
Certhas 1y ago
I think Mozilla makes a lot of sense if you consider the following long term strategic goal: Become independent of Google money. None Google income has grown to 150M$ in 2023, up from 80M$ the year before. Mozilla has used dramatically more of the Google money to build up assets than it spends on advocacy or other projects that irl some people so. In 2023 they had 1B$ in investments. Net assets have been going up by 100M+ per year. They are not yet in striking distance to truly become independent, but they are making significant steps in that direction. The share of Google money in their revenue went from 90% in 2020 to 75% in 2023. I don't think following the money actually shows what you think it does. As a postscript: Damned if they do, damned if they don't. There were plenty of people at the time arguing that Firefox maintaining one independent browser engine was idiotic and they should just switch to Chromium like everyone else. People like to lambast Mozilla over relatively minor advocacy spending stuff and cry that it should just focus on Firefox, but insist it should have obviously continued with Servo. Even though Servo probably wouldn't have made a substantial difference to Firefox post Quantum for a very long time.
- skinkestek 1y ago
  The majority of Mozilla’s revenue came through Firefox—their flagship product and by far their most recognized project. And yet, somehow, they still struggle to secure adequate funding for Firefox itself, while millions are allocated to executive salaries and various advocacy initiatives.
  - cozzyd 1y ago
    Wait until you see executive salaries at other companies that make browsers.
  - Certhas 1y ago
    What do you even mean? They have adequate funding. Financially they are doing extremely well.
- lesuorac 1y ago
  At what point could FireFox had just invested the money from Google into the SP500 and then just ran the company off of passive income? Like for 150M$ I bet you could fund browser development for at least a decade and that was just 1 year of income. (of course also burn the entire $150M).
cropcirclbureau 1y ago
Every day I login into Hacker News. Every day, I see Mozilla FUD.

ObscureScience 1y ago

While it's hard to know what comes of it, there is also https://ladybird.org/ https://ladybird.org/ to challenge to monopoly of Blink.

willi59549879 1y ago
I hope it succeeds. Now they allow direct donations, so people who want it to succeed can help. I am sure these donations go directly into the development of the browser unlike with mozilla.
- robin_reala 1y ago
  Worth pointing out that you can also sponsor Servo development: https://github.com/sponsors/servo https://github.com/sponsors/servo
YmiYugy 1y ago
I just don't get the point of ladybird. They have full time engineers and are soliciting donations, so it's clearly more than a hobby project. Maybe my assumptions are off, but I just can't imagine they could ever become competitive in terms of features, security and performance with the big engines. Blink is setting the pace, Webkit is barely able to keep up and Gecko is slowly falling behind. All of these teams are orders of magnitudes larger than the Ladybird team. If you think that Blinks dominance is a thread to the web it's not enough to have an alternative engine you need enough adoption of that engine so web devs make sure their site is compatible with that engine. Most of this also applies to Servo, but at least their technical project goals (embeddable, modular, parallel, memory safe) sound at least moderately compelling. Maybe Ladybird has similar goals, but at least their website doesn't really state any technical goals.
- f311a 1y ago
  What's wrong with Webkit? It's super fast. I tested Orion browser recently.
  - 1y ago

sdcoffey 1y ago

All-time opener

kookamamie 1y ago

> The Dogemania test ran at a smooth 60 FPS on my M4 Pro MacBook Pro until reaching around 400 images I ran Dogemania on Chrome until 1400 images at steady 60 FPS at which point I got bored and closed the tab.

specproc 1y ago
Wow, just did this myself. The difference between Firefox and Chromium was depressing. I'm getting >100 FPS almost consistently all the way up to 1,000 in Chromium, FF barely made it above 500 before dropping below 60. Probably not a completely fair test, I've no extensions etc. on Chromium and only use it for the odd stubborn website, but that was quite a lesson in their comparative performance.
- empath75 1y ago
  Chrome has thousands of developers working it. That is a lot of man hours for small optimizations.
- lvass 1y ago
  For me it was stable 120fps on firefox at 2200 and 60fps at 3200, using 200W in my RX 6750XT. Chromium hit below 60fps at around 4000 and below 30fps at 6000 but used my integrated intel GPU all the time.
  - kookamamie 1y ago
    Hehe, I threw my 9950x3D+RTX5090 combo at it.
bravesoul2 1y ago
If dogemania keeps the images still after animation isn't it embarrassingly optimizable? Why cant an Amiga do infinity of these?
- kookamamie 1y ago
  It did! Infinite bobs.

nicoburns 1y ago

> The current roadmap lists Shadow DOM and CSS Grid as priorities I've been working on the CSS Grid support. About to land "named grid lines and areas" support which should make a bunch more websites layout correctly. I'm biased because it's my project, but IMO the approach Servo is using for CSS Grid is pretty cool in that the actual implementation is in an external library (Taffy [0]) that can be used standalone and is widely used accross the Rust UI ecosystem, including in the Blitz [1] web engine (which also uses Taffy for Flexbox and Block layout), the Zed [2] text editor, and the Bevy [3] game engine. I'm hopeful that this approach of breaking down a web engine into independently usable modules with public APIs (which builds upon Servo's earlier work on modular libraries such as Stylo and html5ever) will make it easier for people to get involved in web engine development (as they can understand each piece in isolation), and make it easier for people to create new web engines in future (as they won't have to start completely from scratch). [0]: https://github.com/DioxusLabs/taffy https://github.com/DioxusLabs/taffy [1]: https://github.com/DioxusLabs/blitz https://github.com/DioxusLabs/blitz [2]: https://zed.dev https://zed.dev [3]: https://bevy.org/ https://bevy.org/

fouronnes3 1y ago
Does having experience implementing a web browser engine feature change the way you write HTML or CSS in any way? Do you still google "css grid cheatsheet" three times a week like the rest of us?
- rockwotj 1y ago
  To me, this is like asking if having built a sql engine if you write SQL differently. I think the answer is yes. Having a strong understanding of the underlying engine helps you debug and optimize more quickly Needing reference stuff never changes unless it’s so frequently used.
- nicoburns 1y ago
  > Does having experience implementing a web browser engine feature change the way you write HTML or CSS in any way? I think I'm more concious of what's performant in CSS. In particular, both Flexbox and CSS Grid like to remeasure things a lot by default, but this can be disabled with a couple of tricks: - For Flexbox, always set `flex-basis: 0` and `min-width: 0`/`min-height: 0` if you can without affecting the layout. This allows the algorithm to skip measuring the "intrisic" (content-based) size. - For CSS Grid, the analogous trick is to use `minmax(0, 1fr)` rather than just `1fr`. (I also have a proposal for a new unit that would make it easier to get this performance by default, but I haven't managed to get any traction from the standards people or mainstream browsers yet - probably I need to implement it and write it up first). > Do you still google "css grid cheatsheet" three times a week like the rest of us? Actually no. The process of reading the spec umpteen times because your implementation still doesn't pass the tests after the first N times really ingrains the precise meanings of the properties into your brain

zellyn 1y ago

> the MacRumors home page crashed after some scrolling I know there’s a ton going on, with GPUs and rendering and all kinds of things, but I guess because Rust’s memory safety and “no null pointers!” are so constantly hyped (especially in conversations about Go), that I’m always surprised when you fire up a Rust app and do something and it crashes out… [To be clear, I’m a big fan of modern sum types, and like to imagine an alternate reality where Go had them from the start…]

IshKebab 1y ago
When they say "it crashed" they probably mean it panicked or just failed to render; not a segfault. Most languages have a way of saying "I haven't handled this case yet; just exit the program if you get here".
- jpc0 1y ago
  Rust also doesn’t consider DOS a failure condition. Reading an invalid index, thats a panic.
empath75 1y ago
It can also get oomkilled

oaiey 1y ago

Describing Servo as "new" is a stretch ;)

timbit42 1y ago
It started later than the other engines and it seems to have a number of great ideas the other engines haven't adopted yet.

AdmiralAsshat 1y ago

I feel like Mozilla is going to join the annals of history with the likes of Xerox in the category of "Companies that created the technology of the future and casually tossed it to the wayside for competitors to scoop up" with Rust and Servo. It's mind-boggling that for a company so often seemingly playing catch-up with Google, Mozilla actually leapfrogged Google in the browser development space for a time, and then...decided it wasn't worth pursuing any further.

godshatter 1y ago
If Mozilla decides to dump Gecko, then it's time for a hard fork and an abandonment of Mozilla. Maybe it's time now. edit: I mean dumping Gecko for Chromium, not Servo.
- goku12 1y ago
  Honestly, dumping gecko would be a suicide for Firefox. Much of Firefox's minuscule userbase consists of knowledgeable nerds who are holdouts from the Blink monoculture.
  - dralley 1y ago
    So start replacing bits of Blink with Rust, instead of bits of Gecko. Maybe their primary addressable market is nerds, but I guarantee more people quit using Firefox because of websites not working correctly or Google's marketing than because of any of the things that HN loves to complain about.
  - sbstp 1y ago
    Using WebKit (even JavaScriptCore) and working with Apple wouldn't be the worst thing to my eyes as a Firefox/FOSS user. Duopoly isn't great but it's better than a monopoly.
  - zavec 1y ago
    My main concern is manifest v3, I would be incredibly annoyed if I had to switch to a browser that broke ublock.

ninetyninenine 1y ago

I feel guis have taken a wrong turn. We need a simple composable language. I want entire theorems built from the least amount of axioms possible. HTML and css is not it. The sheer complexity is what causes all the bs.

dmytrish 1y ago
Show us the way!
- ninetyninenine 1y ago
  Form a design team to reduce the amount of primitives in html such that I can do everything that html + css does but with the minimum amount of primitives.
  - Klaster_1 1y ago
    Something tells me with that approach you'd get emergent complexity that different people handle in a different manner, eventually leading to strong incentive to add new, higher level primitives. That's one of driving forces behind current state of HTML and JS and why JQuery and TABLE layouts went out of fashion. Sounds like a people thing, not a technical one.
    - ninetyninenine 1y ago
      There will always be stronger incentive to create higher level entities. It’s just you need to create an initial set of primitives such that those higher level entities can be formed as a composition of the initial set of primitives. So maybe not even start with html. Create the set of primitives such that I can create custom tags that does exactly what html does. Like react is the sort of a framework that allows for composition of tags. But the problem is we have too many primitives.

bataleon 1y ago

Please bring this to iOS. WebKit is broken.

samtheprogram 1y ago
If you think WebKit is broken, you should actually download a build of Servo and try it out.

fHr 1y ago

[flagged]

postalrat 1y ago

I thought it was more like: rust made for the web browser Servo.

rrgok 1y ago

> This is a danger to the open web in more ways than one. If there is only one functioning implementation of a standard, the implementation becomes the standard. I still don't understand why this is a problem. As long as the engine implementing the spec - governed by committee formed by entities other than Google itself - is open source. The problem and the waste of resource is how we are behaving now. The browser engine should become as the Linux Kernel: one engine and different distros.

mrob 1y ago
I disagree. The more browser engines in use the less damage any one security exploit can do. This matters even with memory safe languages, because logic errors can be just as damaging, e.g. the Log4j exploit.
- charcircuit 1y ago
  Bugs are proportional to lines of code. More browser implementations with result in many more bugs. All the effort of reimplementing multiple times would be better put towards security a single browser engine if security is what you are trying to go after. Also you don't need a single exploit due to defense in depth of browser engines. You have to chain multiple exploits together.
merelysounds 1y ago
In theory yes. In practice, only when the interests of the sole maintainer are aligned with the interests of the users; since these can change, it’s best to avoid a monopoly. Case in point, recent manifest v2 deprecation is generally disliked by the community and no long term blink based alternative exists (that I know of).
- charcircuit 1y ago
  >is generally disliked by the community It is disliked by a vocal minority, and of that minority even fewer actually have their own opinion based off the current version of mv3 as opposed to mindlessly parroting others. If it was a true issue then others would be maintaining mv2 support long term. In regards to monopolies in terms of control what is important is the product, browser, market share itself as opposed to that of the browser engine.

Rakshith 1y ago

its really sad to see what mozilla turned into. a competitive browser company to activism. no wonder its core product started to wane

Perz1val 1y ago

[flagged]

qwertycrackers 1y ago
Things get Rust advertised in the title because the Rust community is somewhat on a quest to assert itself. There are certain things that the language will only be allowed to do if it becomes seen as one of the "big" languages, and advertising the language in a million small projects is a collective shove toward that aim.
hu3 1y ago
The terms you're looking for are: vocal minority and bubble.

1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago

"Most sites have at least a few rendering bugs, and a few are completely broken. Google search results have many overlapping elements, and the MacRumors home page crashed after some scrolling. Sites like Wikipedia, CNN Lite, my personal site, and text-only NPR worked perfectly." Like many HN readers, I have read countless accounts of web browsers and web browsing over the years. Unfortunately, I cannot recall even one that took an account such as this one and concluded something like, "We need to modify the Google and MacRumors pages so they work with Servo." Unfortunately, the conclusion is usually something like, "We need to fix Servo so it works like Chromium/Chrome." The reason I believe this is unfortunate is that (a) it ultimately places control in an ad services company and (b) it creates the wrong incentives for people who create web pages. Pages could be modified to conform to what Wikipedia, CNN Lite, the author's personal site and text-only NPR have done. This is not difficult. In fact, it is easier than modifying Servo to do what Chromium/Chrome is doing. IMO, the "standard" web browser should not be effectively defined by an ad services company (including its business partner, Mozilla) nor should the standard for a web page be defined by the "most popular" web browser, To me "popular" and "standard" are not necessarily the same. Web _pages_ (cf. web _browsers_) should work with unpopular browsers and popular browsers alike, According to OP, Wikipedia, CNN Lite, the author's personal site, and text-only NPR may meet the standard. In sum, fix web pages not web browsers. As a hobbyist, I still compile and experiment with w3c's original libww library and utilities. Below is short script I use to compile static binaries. With a TLS forward proxy these utilities, with few modifications, if any, can still work very well for me for retrieving web pages on today's web. (I am only interested in learning www history and optimising text retrieval, not graphics.) This library is generally "ancient" on the www timescale and yet it still works 30 years later. That's useful for www users like me, but maybe not for the online ad services companies and sponsored web browsers optimised for data collection and surveillance. Internet is supposed to be a public resource not a private one, i.e., highest priority of www pages and www browsers should be to serve www users not online ad service providers. # previous: download and compile w3c-libwww-5.4.2 pwd|grep "w3c-libwww-"||exec echo wrong directory export x=$(pwd) export examples=$x/Library/Examples export linemode=$x/LineMode/src export commandline=$x/ComLine/src export robot=$x/Robot/src y=" libwwwinit.a libwwwapp.a libwwwhtml.a libwwwtelnet.a libwwwnews.a libwwwhttp.a libwwwmime.a libwwwgopher.a libwwwftp.a libwwwdir.a libwwwcache.a libwwwstream.a libwwwfile.a libwwwmux.a libwwwtrans.a libwwwcore.a libwwwutils.a $x/modules/md5/.libs/libmd5.a -lm" cd $x/Library/src/.libs for z in head libapp_1 libapp_2 libapp_3 libapp_4 init chunk chunkbody LoadToFile postform multichunk put post trace range tzcheck mget isredirected listen eventloop memput getheaders showlinks showtags showtext tiny upgrade cookie do gcc -s -static -O2 -Wall -o $examples/$z $examples/$z.o $y done gcc -static -s -O2 -Wall -o $linemode/www $linemode/www-HTBrowse.o $linemode/www-GridText.o $linemode/www-ConView.o $linemode/www-GridStyle.o $linemode/www-DefaultStyles.o $x/PICS-client/src/.libs/libpics.a $y gcc -static -s -O2 -Wall -o $robot/webbot $robot/webbot-HTRobot.o $robot/webbot-RobotMain.o $robot/webbot-RobotTxt.o $robot/webbot-HTQueue.o $y gcc -static -s -O2 -Wall -o $commandline/w3c $commandline/w3c-HTLine.o $y # next: symlink binaries to a folder in $PATH # or export PATH=$PATH:$examples:$commandline:$robot:$linemode

Degenerative 1y ago

I'm hearing Servo got rebooted because Valve giving $ to Igalia to reboot Servo project. Can anyone confirm this?

jdongsu 1y ago

I’m afraid Servo is to be another Hurd.