Posts: 604
thriftee
Joined: 27 Feb 2009
#1
I'm trying to get a fast, lean,"light" browser working. What does that mean? My older machines don't have a lot of memory, and don't have super fast cpu's, so, since much of what I use them for is web based, if I had a web browser that didn't use much memory or cpu per tab that could do most normal search and display or play functions, I could open more tabs before being forced into swap memory, which is when things really slow down.

BTW, I need one that is at least a little bit user friendly. It needs to be graphically based and I don't really care if help is very limited, but at least I need to be able to easily find out what key does what if it doesn't have a menu, and hopefully the default key assignments are normal, for example, if they were similar to Firefox or Chromium, that would be great.

I came upon Netsurf as it was recommended by someone here as a light, fast browser, along with Midori, which wasn't very light by comparison. If someone knows of another"light", fast browser that might work instead, that might solve the problem easily.

Netsurf in the 2.9-2 version, at least on my machine, has problems that if I try to select text and copy it, the actual text that gets selected is about 1" away from what is highlighted, so its very difficult to guess what text you are going to get. I noticed that this is a version from May of 2012, and that a newer version 3.0 came out recently, but isn't in any repositories. I looked at the changelog, and see a copy/paste fix implemented, so then I tried installing the newer version using their quickstart install, since its setup for Debian, but it fails due to a libnspr difference in version, which is coming from the antix, and if I try to delete the library, it tealls me that many. many web programs are using it, so I didn't delete it. I looked at the manual install, and it looks daunting, so maybe the answer is I probably should just give up on it and to find a different program?

Any suggestions?

PS: here is the detail of the error. I have the same problem and error when I try to do i=the install manually. It appears to me that the package manager doesn't see the -dev library to match the version of the libnspr and that is part of whats included in libmozjs, but I really don't know ant=yr=thing about C programming.

Code: Select all

bobc@antiX132:~/netsurf/workspace/inst/lib
$ sudo apt-get install libmozjs-dev
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 libmozjs-dev : Depends: libnspr4-dev but it is not going to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
bobc@antiX132:~/netsurf/workspace/inst/lib
So I follow the trail...

Code: Select all

bobc@antiX132:~/netsurf/workspace/inst/lib
$ sudo apt-get install libnspr4-dev
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 libnspr4-dev : Depends: libnspr4 (<= 2:4.9.2-1+deb7u1.1~) but 2:4.9.6-1~bpo70+1 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
bobc@antiX132:~/netsurf/workspace/inst/lib
When I look at synaptic, there is no libnspr4-dev to match the version of the libnspr4 coming from antiX, I don't think.
Last edited by thriftee on 24 Apr 2014, 08:18, edited 1 time in total.
Posts: 1,028
SamK
Joined: 21 Aug 2011
#2
thriftee wrote:The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libnspr4-dev : Depends: libnspr4 (<= 2:4.9.2-1+deb7u1.1~) but 2:4.9.6-1~bpo70+1 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
This indicates that the version you are trying to install is unavailable in the repo you are using.

Are you using the Debian Stable repo? My guess is you are.

Code: Select all

apt-cache policy libnspr4-dev
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 2:4.9.2-1+deb7u1
  Version table:
     2:4.9.2-1+deb7u1 0
        500 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy/main i386 Packages
        500 http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates/main i386 Packages
Indicates whether the package is installed and the version that is available in the Stable repo.

2:4.9.6-1~bpo70+1 is the version that is currently available in the testing repo.


You might find it easier to understand by researching the approach Debian employs towards stable and unstable software packages. Understanding it is fundamental to working with antiX.

In brief
Stable
  • This repo contains packages that have been extensively tested and meet the Debian quality standard
  • During the lifecycle of the distro packages are not upgraded to include new features
  • Security releases are for apps released to the repo
The outcome is highly stable, dependable and predictable system performance, at the cost of newer interim versions of any individual package. The repo contains the latest officially released distribution of Debian. This is the production release, the one which Debian primarily recommend using.

Unstable
  • These repos contain packages that haven't been accepted into an official Debian stable release yet.
  • Depending upon bugfixes and development, the packages might eventually be added to the next Debian stable distro release, if they are able to demonstrate they meet the Debian quality standard
The outcome is less stable, less dependable and less predicatble system performance, with the benefit of newer interim versions of any individual package.

Mixed Stable & Unstable
Some users take the gamble of activating an unstable repo in order to install a package. This is done entirely at your own risk. Unfettered use of this will break a working system.

Backports
Another approach some users take is to activate the Backports repo. Backports are modified packages taken from the Debian Testing repo. They are often a more recent version of a package in the Stable repo. Backports are not tested as extensively as Debian Stable, and are provided on an as-is basis, with risk of incompatibilities with other components in Debian Stable.
Posts: 604
thriftee
Joined: 27 Feb 2009
#3
Sam,

Thanks for replying. I did think I understood the repo list's purpose, and have tried to be careful to not mess with it, since the last reinstall. I thought I saw last night that the installed version of the libnspr4 library came from antix stable and was used by chromium and flashplugin-nonfree and libreoffice packages. The antix stable repository is in front of debian wheezy stable. On the versions tab of it, both versions say stable, but I notice that it doesn't have the little Debian icon next to it on the list. The libreoffice was part of the antix standard install, I believe, as I didn't request it to be installed, nor did I see an option to not install it, but I guess I would like to have it available.

I noticed you didn't make any suggestion, which is a bad sign! Thanks at least for trying to explain to me nicely that I'm stepping into a black hole by trying to implement code that has parts that conflict with other things.

Well, given that, I tried uninstalling the libnspr4, and it uninstalled the other packages, and then I tried to force it to install the debian stable version, and it did that, but now says I have broken packages.

I went and looked around and tried the fix broken packages, it failed a number of times but this time I didn't get an error, so am installing libreoffice to see if it will or won't, and then will try reinstalling chromium and the flashplugin.

It looks like netsurf is a goner. Not being able to copy text is just too major of a problem to try to work around because if you don't mouse it just perfectly, you lose the tail end of the text very easily, and if I can't install the newer code without breaking other things, its just not worth the hassle. Sad, because they said it is written for Debian, but Debian is too big/slow for the old clunkers.

Ok, so, *MyGiveUp* on netsurf. If anyone can suggest a different"light/fast" browser that can handle things like javascript, please suggest __{{emoticon}}__
Posts: 4,164
rokytnji
Joined: 20 Feb 2009
#4
Dillo is there already. I use it from time to time.

It's a learning curve on Bookmarks and Cookies though.
I played with Links to teach myself how to use a console browser also.
It's already in the menu.

I have AntiX wheezy going on one of my IBM Laptops with low ram and cpu.
That is stable.
I will try a netsurf install later and see what is what.
Posts: 604
thriftee
Joined: 27 Feb 2009
#5
roky,

I am trying dillo again, now. I did try it before and wasn't happy enough with it to keep using it, but will give it another try. I immediately notice the loss of color etc vs chrome or iceweasel, but maybe that can be fixed easily.
Posts: 765
rust collector
Joined: 27 Dec 2011
#6
dillo is not as pretty as the big ones, but it is a good little browser, when you get used to it.

This is a scrot of my little install with me chatting on irc, with xchat, dillo browsing a forum, and htop running in urxvt... oh, and a second urxvt just to use half the screen to type"scrot" lol. as you can see in htop, it uses 36 mb of ram.
So Dillo is something I would try to get used to, for general browsing, when you don't need advanced features.

Image
Posts: 2,238
dolphin_oracle
Joined: 16 Dec 2007
#7
that libnspr4 error is due to antiX shipping with a backported iceweasel by default. the libnspr4 is hosted on the antix.daveserver I do believe.

If you try disabling the antix.daveserver repo and reload, you should pull the libnspr4 libraries from debian stable instead.
Posts: 604
thriftee
Joined: 27 Feb 2009
#8
Thanks for the suggestions. I've been giving dillo another try here.

Well, I agree dillo is light, but there are too many missing things. For example, colors. They help, I think, and I would prefer a browser that at least trys to use some sort of colors like the web author intended. Another is that the 2nd time here, after telling it to automatically login, it didn't and didn't do it and didn't remember my user id, so it means I'd need to remember and retype all those things everywhere. I also got a javascript error, because I'm guessing its not supported. That is something I really need because I can't control whether sites use it or not. Also, I could hardly read the help screen because the colors were pretty messed up.

It would be ok if I wasn't going to use it much, but I think I'll keep looking...

My plan is to try rekonq next...
Posts: 604
thriftee
Joined: 27 Feb 2009
#9
d.o.

I think that was what sam was trying to get me to think about. But if I start messing with that, how many other problems will I cause? And, I did try that, btw, but even after deinstalling all programs that used it, I couldn't get it to use the other version, so I gave up while I still had a system that ran, LOL.

rekonq is not light, as it causes all sorts of kde stuff to be loaded when you bring it up.

I was going to try this luakit. it sounded right, but literally there is no place to even enter a url let alone a help screen or bookmark. I really don't understand that one.

I fear I am running out of options...

Any other ideas? Thanks for the ones thus far. Chrome and iceweasel eat the little thing alive.
anticapitalista
Posts: 5,955
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
#10
thriftee - none of the modern browsers are lightweight. The genuine ones, like dillo have lots of modern features missing.

Maybe qupzilla?
Posts: 765
rust collector
Joined: 27 Dec 2011
#11
How about xxxterm?
Posts: 604
thriftee
Joined: 27 Feb 2009
#12
r.c., thanks for the idea. I did try xxxterm already, but will give it another go. I forget why I didn't choose it.

Anti, Thanks for taking time to respond. qupzilla isn't in the repos that I see, but I fould a debian version, and tried to install it. It is having a problem with libqt4 stuff... Any suggestions what to try? I was thinking to turn on wheezy backport repos, reload, and try again?

Code: Select all

Your choice (I/S/Q)? i
Installation of Debian packages needs to be done as root.
Enter command used to become root (default=sudo): 
 
Installing package...
[sudo] password for bobc: 
Selecting previously unselected package qupzilla.
(Reading database ... 152981 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking qupzilla (from .../qupzilla_1.6.4_i386.deb) ...
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of qupzilla:
 qupzilla depends on libqt4-sql-sqlite (>= 4.7.0); however:
  Package libqt4-sql-sqlite is not installed.
 qupzilla depends on libqt4-webkit (>= 4.7.0); however:
  Package libqt4-webkit is not installed.

dpkg: error processing qupzilla (--install):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Processing triggers for hicolor-icon-theme ...
Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils ...
Errors were encountered while processing:
 qupzilla
 
Done.  Press <return> to continue: 
Posts: 1,028
SamK
Joined: 21 Aug 2011
#13
thriftee wrote:The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libnspr4-dev

[...]

...the libnspr4 library came from antix stable and was used by chromium and flashplugin-nonfree and libreoffice packages.
Care must be exercised as you ar referring to two related but different packages that have similar names.

From 13.2-Stable inc flashplugin-nonfree and libreoffice, exc chromium

Code: Select all

apt-cache policy libnspr4-dev
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 2:4.9.2-1+deb7u1
  Version table:
     2:4.9.2-1+deb7u1 0
        500 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy/main i386 Packages
        500 http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates/main i386 Packages
apt-cache policy libnspr4
libnspr4:
  Installed: 2:4.9.6-1~bpo70+1
  Candidate: 2:4.9.6-1~bpo70+1
  Version table:
 *** 2:4.9.6-1~bpo70+1 0
        500 http://antix.daveserver.info/stable/ stable/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
     2:4.9.2-1+deb7u1 0
        500 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy/main i386 Packages
        500 http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates/main i386 Packages

When working with otherwise redundant hardware it is often the case that careful choice of software combined with judicious use will enable you to do the job you want to do. However it is not always possible to achieve your goal in the same way you do when using more powerful, modern hardware. Modern fully featured browsers have become demanding of resources to a degree that was not envisaged when lots of old kit was manufactured.

In the Windows world it is easy to become accustomed to performing everything within a single monolithic app, together with its attendant resource cost. It is not always feasible or desirable to do the same with kit that can no longer run a modern version of Windows. You may have greater success by changing your working habits - say by using multiple lightweight browsers in which each fulfills a particular role.

AntiX-13.2 ships a GUI web browser named Links2. It is extremely lightweight and is capable of copying text from a web page to say a Leafpad text document. However, it does not attempt to be fully featured, yet is capable of passing audio and video to external apps such Gnome-MPlayer which ships with the distro.

None of this comes without getting your hands dirty, yet you learn many things along the way.


Edit: Typos
Last edited by SamK on 21 Apr 2014, 15:44, edited 1 time in total.
Posts: 604
thriftee
Joined: 27 Feb 2009

20 Apr 2014, 19:15 #14

Yes, sam, it becomes obvious that with all the inter dependencies, that its likely a quick fall down a slippery slope if you install anything that wasn't packaged with the distro if it has inter dependencies that conflict. As for the list, I just wrote"libreoffice packages" because I was too lazy to type so many of them, and the browsers are very slow on that machine.

Could you tell me is there an easy way to find out what versions of what packages are available in which repos?

I guess its not likely anyone is working on porting netsurf 3.0 or a recent version of qupzilla for antiX 13.2 anyway, but its depressing to keep hitting that same wall.

Yes, I see links 2 is tremendously trim. I'll have to test and see if its something I can live with. Maybe luakit is the answer. At least its packaged in.

Anyway, thanks for helping __{{emoticon}}__ You are amazingly kind in your attitude and wording...

PS: it looks like libqt4* affects qdbus and wpagui, so that means installing qupzilla is also trouble, even though I think the right version might be out there (ie maybe the sid version uses the same version of qt4 libraries being used in 13.2). I'd be afraid to try it unless someone could tell me how to try safely, LOL.
Posts: 4,164
rokytnji
Joined: 20 Feb 2009
#15
rokytnji wrote:Dillo is there already. I use it from time to time.

It's a learning curve on Bookmarks and Cookies though.
I played with Links to teach myself how to use a console browser also.
It's already in the menu.

I have AntiX wheezy going on one of my IBM Laptops with low ram and cpu.
That is stable.
I will try a netsurf install later and see what is what.
I used the meta package installer to install netsurf just now. It shows install netsurf from testing.

Code: Select all

harry@biker:~
$ apt-cache policy netsurf
netsurf:
  Installed: 2.9-2
  Candidate: 2.9-2
  Version table:
 *** 2.9-2 0
        500 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
harry@biker:~
$ inxi -r
Repos:     Active apt sources in file: / etc/apt/sources.list.d/antix.list
           deb http://antix.daveserver.info/stable stable main
           Active apt sources in file: / etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian.list
           deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy main contrib non-free
           deb http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates main contrib non-free
harry@biker:~
$ inxi -Fxz
System:    Host: biker Kernel: 3.7.10-antix.7-486-smp i686 (32 bit gcc: 4.7.2) 
           Desktop: Fluxbox 1.3.2 
           Distro: antiX-13_386-full Luddite 01 June 2013 
Machine:   Mobo: IBM model: 2628TWU
           Bios: IBM v: KXET33WW (1.06 ) date: 09/05/2001
CPU:       Single core Pentium III (Coppermine) (-UP-) cache: 256 KB clocked at 1000 MHz
           flags: (pae sse) bmips: 1992 
Graphics:  Card: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] ATI Rage Mobility P/M AGP 2x
           bus-ID: 01:00.0
           Display Server: X.Org 1.12.4 drivers: ati (unloaded: fbdev,vesa) FAILED: mach64
           Resolution: 1024x768@87.0hz
           GLX Renderer: Gallium 0.4 on softpipe
           GLX Version: 2.1 Mesa 8.0.5 Direct Rendering: Yes
Audio:     Card Cirrus Logic CS 4614/22/24/30 [CrystalClear SoundFusion Audio Accelerator] 
           driver: snd_cs46xx bus-ID: 00:05.0 
           Sound: ALSA v: k3.7.10-antix.7-486-smp
Network:   Card-1: 3Com 3c556B CardBus [Tornado]
           driver: 3c59x port: 1800 bus-ID: 00:03.0
           IF: eth0 state: down mac: <filter>
           Card-2: Ralink RT2561/RT61 802.11g PCI
           driver: rt61pci v: 2.3.0 bus-ID: 06:00.0
           IF: wlan0 state: up mac: <filter>
Drives:    HDD Total Size: 20.0GB (-)
           ID-1: /dev/sda model: IC25N020ATCS04 size: 20.0GB
Partition: ID-1: / size: 18G used: 15G (87%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda1 
           ID-2: swap-1 size: 1.12GB used: 0.00GB (0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda2 
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 44.0C mobo: 41.0C 
           Fan Speeds (in rpm): cpu: 0 
Info:      Processes: 89 Uptime: 24 min Memory: 125.4/500.7MB 
           Init: SysVinit runlevel: 5 Gcc sys: 4.7.2 
           Client: Shell (bash 4.2.371) inxi: 2.1.18 
harry@biker:~