Beta Lightweight2


To the screenshot on the first page: You better use an own (copy of the) screenshot on the first page. Currently you only see the bookmark-manager.
 
I have tried this browser and it works good. Compared to Midori 0.3.3, Lightweight even displays Sites like google maps correct.
But I discovered a huge Problem with Lightweight. It gets unusable over the time, maybe it is releated to the huge ammount of cache files it generates into the appdata folder i had over 500 files in the /html folder thing. This seems to kill all movement of this browser, after a while you can't even reach google without waiting for ages. Deleting appdata folders helps. But it would be better if Lightweight don't produce such a mess onto the SD card. Private browsing doesn't prevent it for producing masses of this files.
Bug or Feature?
 
fusion_power said:
I have tried this browser and it works good. Compared to Midori 0.3.3, Lightweight even displays Sites like google maps correct.
But I discovered a huge Problem with Lightweight. It gets unusable over the time, maybe it is releated to the huge ammount of cache files it generates into the appdata folder i had over 500 files in the /html folder thing. This seems to kill all movement of this browser, after a while you can't even reach google without waiting for ages. Deleting appdata folders helps. But it would be better if Lightweight don't produce such a mess onto the SD card. Private browsing doesn't prevent it for producing masses of this files.
Bug or Feature?

In general this should be afeature...
In Versions prior to 1.8 The maindeveloper had the cachesize set to 1024MB. That really is too much. Which version did you try? The 1.9 pnd should have a cachesize of max. 128 MB.
These settings can be tweaked though. Maybe 16 MB could be enought too. Or no disccache at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Esn said:
What exactly does it cache? Does it remember passwords?

In any case, 128mb does seem like too much to me...

usually a cache just stores the webpages on your disk. and then if you revisit a webpage, it is only fully downloaded again if it was modified (using some simple date checks normally)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So maybe in the next update I can lower that to 16 MB Or has anybody some magic number, that is known to be good?
I think passwords are not remembered.
 
Is there a browser on the Pandora that does remember passwords for webpages? It's not strictly necessary, but it does make navigating around the internet a bit more convenient.
 
personally i think 128 or 256 MB are good magic numbers :)

16mb are way too low. a good cache is very important, specially because of the wifi problems around - pages are loading slow and if you reduce the cache size to such a tiny amount, pages you visit often are getting downloaded over and over again which otherwise would've been cached ...
 
How much space does a site take, anyway? Anyone know what the cache size is in Links2? There's a very comfortable size there, but it doesn't slow the browser down at all (though that could be a function of the browser - I've noticed that it's the most stable browser on the Pandora of those I've used, as in it's the only one that's never crashed or had issues).
 
mcobit said:
In general this should be afeature...
In Versions prior to 1.8 The maindeveloper had the cachesize set to 1024MB. That really is too much. Which version did you try? The 1.9 pnd should have a cachesize of max. 128 MB.
These settings can be tweaked though. Maybe 16 MB could be enought too. Or no disccache at all.
I use the latest version of course.
Is there a config File where I can change the cache size? Actualy the cache shouldn't make the browsing slow at all but maybe Lightweight always checks the entire cache dir before opening a site. And as more files there are, as longer it takes. I had these 500 files after 3 days by the way. Maybe using google maps isn't a good idea. :D
It could help if the cache is emptied during closing the browser. But the best would be to only use the RAM as far as possible. Not all Pandora browsers generate that much files in their appdata dir. Besides this, Lightweight2is a nice Browser, no worries.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have a script that will clear Lightweight2's cache after you close the PND. I'll post it in a few minutes when I'm less pressed for time.

EDIT: Here. Assuming you have sebt3's new pnd_run, save this as "PND_post_script.sh" and put it in Lightweight2's appdata.

Code:
rm -rf /media/PANDORA1/pandora/appdata/lightweight2/http  /media/PANDORA1/pandora/appdata/lightweight2/https  /media/PANDORA1/pandora/appdata/lightweight2/.lightweight2

If you wanna keep your cookies, you can remove that third path.
 
The cache is done by QtWebKit.
For 1.10 i have added a command-line option to chanche the cache-size for the started session.
 
lightweight2 cannot download pnds from repo still? it just fetches the php file?
 
I think this is a problem with the webserver: A Webserver should not send a php file to download.
I have testet it: The webserver sends the PND named "download.php". But it actuallay is the PND as far as i can see.
 
cpttom said:
I think this is a problem with the webserver: A Webserver should not send a php file to download.
I have testet it: The webserver sends the PND named "download.php". But it actuallay is the PND as far as i can see.

yes it is a working pnd. i'm only using lightweight and never had any problems downloading pnd (well download.php) files.

i think this is just a glitch in lightweight2 that it doesnt honor some html headers that usually are there to give the file that is downloaded another name than the page it comes from.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cpttom said:
I have testet it: The webserver sends the PND named "download.php". But it actuallay is the PND as far as i can see.
Maybe that's related to why Links2 wants to save any Repo file as "download.pnd", no matter what the actual name of it is. The File Archive works as it should, on the other hand.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've just checked the repo page's html header and it contains the "content-disposition; filename" line, so this is perfectly valid from the pages side;

seems to be a lightweight2 problem, dunno who's gonna fix this, though.
 
I do use the correct headers, all other browsers seem to see this information so I think its something that isn't implemented with lightweight 2.
 
Back
Top