basilisk-dev
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by basilisk-dev
-
-
On 12/31/2024 at 10:08 PM, Mathwiz said:
OK, the Web has officially jumped the shark. Web sites are dictating processor architecture now? How the heck is that supposed to work if you have an ARM processor, or one of Apple's new processors, or really, anything but Intel / AMD?
The site works fine for me on both ARM MacOS and aarch64 Linux.
1 -
1 hour ago, Mark-XP said:
Hello @basilisk-dev, i report an issue here which i found in latest may-releases of 64-bit Basilisk, both Win (Archive) and Linux (x68): the (vertical) tabs on the tools -> preferences page aren't accessible any more!
I am working on a fix right now. You are welcome to contact me here or on the Basilisk GitHub mirror if you are unable to contact me on the Pale Moon Forum or Pale Moon repo. There is also an official subreddit at https://old.reddit.com/r/basiliskbrowser
2 -
On 2/19/2024 at 6:53 PM, VistaLover said:
on that note, it's sad that Basilisk-Dev has admitted elsewhere that he's withholding on purpose to publish Bk code in its master branch until "the very last moment", so that "we" here be incapable of using it "ahead of time"...).
I am not doing this, I considered doing it to prevent buggy code being pushed to roytam1's users, but I never decided to actually go forward with it.
What's sad is that roytam1 continues to release code to his users that has not been verified as production ready. Code in the master branch of upstream UXP or upstream Basilisk is not always production ready. I have seen issues reported on MSFN for roytam1's builds because he was pulling code from master branches before they were ready. He is doing a disservice to his users by giving them potentially buggy code.
5 -
Basilisk releases use the date for the version, for example "2023.11.05" is the most recent release of Basilisk. Basilisk release builds are compiled with "export BASILISK_VERSION=1" in the .mozconfig.
Internally Basilisk releases present themselves to addons as "52.9.date" rather than just "date". This ensures that Basilisk works with extensions that were developed for Firefox 52.
The 52.9.date internal version as well as the date version number comes from the confvars.sh shell script: https://repo.palemoon.org/Basilisk-Dev/Basilisk/src/branch/master/basilisk/confvars.sh
You can also set BASILISK_VERSION to a date if you want to specify a date. For example, if you do "export BASILISK_VERSION=2023.12.01" then the Basilisk version number will be 2023.12.01. This functionality is in the above shell script as well.
If "export BASILISK_VERSION=1" is not present in the .mozconfig then the version defaults to 52.9.0. This is the reason that Serpent uses 52.9.0 as the release number.
52.9.0 comes from the txt files in the basilisk/config directory:https://repo.palemoon.org/Basilisk-Dev/Basilisk/src/branch/master/basilisk/config
5 -
1 hour ago, j7n said:
Does the main page or archive . org result in a white screen in New Moon and Serpent for you? My configs are far from vanilla now to work around different issues.
This happens for me even in Basilisk. I was never able to figure out why, sometimes archive.org works for me and sometimes it doesn't.
0 -
2 hours ago, VistaLover said:
Yes, there's a list of them
, that I reported some months ago...
Here you are:
https://repo.palemoon.org/Basilisk-Dev/Basilisk/commit/894aab8cb56b34f1396c2471e5d792ba6fee893a
https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/Pale-Moon/pulls/1928
After seeing all of these domains that are having issues with the Goanna slice I'm now wondering if I should just configure Basilisk to never send the Goanna slice at all.
2 -
3 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:
Heck, I wonder if UXP still "supports" <marquee>? And if so, throw it out also.
Support for the marquee element was removed in UXP issue #1525.
https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/UXP/issues/1525
0 -
9 hours ago, VistaLover said:
... You can add:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/
to the list of online dictionary "services" that don't properly load on UXP-based browsers, due to them not "sanctioning" the Goanna useragent slice
I've submitted a PR to Pale Moon to add a User Agent Override for this site: https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/Pale-Moon/pulls/1927
I've also added a User Agent Override to Basilisk: https://repo.palemoon.org/Basilisk-Dev/Basilisk/commit/54ebc66d9d00449d0ad89572f912cef9a8e87d84
10 hours ago, Milkinis said:what other web browsers do you use besides Basilisk ?
On my personal machine I use Basilisk, Pale Moon, LibreWolf. I do have Ungoogled Chromium installed but I only use it if I run into a site that does not work in any of the aforementioned browsers.
On my work machine I use Librewolf and Ungoogled Chromium.
On my phone I use Mull and the version of Chromium included with Calyx OS.
On my Windows 2000 machine I use Serpent and MyPal 68.
4 -
On 8/2/2023 at 8:31 PM, dmiranda said:
I congratulate the new owner of basilisk, @basilisk-dev, for setting the stage for this change, and Moonchild for having reformed its development team into a more amicable gang that what used to be the case long (hopefully) ago.
Thank you, although I don't think there's anything to congratulate me for. Being nice to others, even if you disagree with them or the things that they do, is not a difficult task (unless your name is Matt A Tobin).
2 -
On 7/19/2023 at 7:05 AM, feodor2 said:
Good to know, but what about the actual developer Moonchild or you are is he if i did not know.
I am the developer of Basilisk as of about a year ago. Moonchild is no longer involved with Basilisk directly.
On 7/19/2023 at 7:05 AM, feodor2 said:What do you all think? What about Waterfox classic or Basiliks?
I think you should focus on MyPal 68 for now until you think it is stable enough to divide time between two browsers. Until then people can always use Serpent if they need a Firefox 52 type browser for Windows XP. I use Serpent on my Windows 2000 gaming PC with the BWC extended kernel.
I'm obviously biased since I am the developer of Basilisk, but it would be cool to see Centaury continue or restart development at some point in the future if you ever have the time.
6 -
On 7/13/2023 at 6:24 PM, feodor2 said:
Why, i told that if i shall build new Centaury it will be upon waterfox classic, but still why, only for older xul extensions.
I understand your desire to focus on MyPal rather than having your time split between two browsers, but if you ever have the desire to continue Centaury development you have my full permission to do so.
4 -
17 hours ago, VistaLover said:
OT2: @basilisk-dev : I honestly hope you're not located in those parts of The States afflicted by record high temperatures... If you are, I can surely empathise, since from July 12th a very intense and prolonged heatwave, originating from Northern Africa/The Sahara Desert, will find its way towards my area of the world... Anyone still thinking "Climate Change" is safely many years to come?
I'm not in the southeastern part of the US, but where I live it is hotter than usual for this time of year. My family who lives in those areas has told me that it's so hot that they basically have to stay inside 24/7, going outside for even 5 minutes is unbearable.
2 -
-
9 minutes ago, VistaLover said:
The OS is definitely Win7 SP1 x64, with ample RAM... As for MS Visual Studio, either 2015 or 2017, no newer...
I see, according to the UXP issue MS Visual Studio 2017 works with C++14. If they decide to upgrade to C++14 then Visual Studio 2017 can continue to be used.
If they go with C++17 then I only see two routes forward:
* Switch to mingw/fix mingw builds
* backport changes from upstream to work on C++14
For some background on their decision for switching to a newer C++ standard, a major reason that they switched to Visual Studio 2022 in the first place was so that they could switch to newer C++ versions.
2 -
13 hours ago, roytam1 said:
so upstream may want to raise the hurdle to newer C++ standard, which may finally break my builds.
https://repo.palemoon.org/MoonchildProductions/UXP/issues/2262
What build environment are you using? What OS/MSVC/etc?
0 -
3 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:
The menu would tell you how far to fast-forward the tape "counter" for the start of Ghostbusters, for example. The real Ghostbusters from '84 and '89, not whatever you call these "remakes".
Off topic, but not too long ago 3 year old kid decided to play with our Apple TV remote (my wife uses an Apple TV for media streaming) and was hitting random buttons on the remote. He purchased GhostBusters: Afterlife for $30 before I realized that he had the remote as I was in the next room over washing some dishes.
The movie was definitely not worth the $30 he spent on it. It was terrible. Needless to say I enabled the parental controls on the Apple TV after that.
3 -
1 minute ago, VistaLover said:
... Well. "I" took that to mean he's offering to facilitate any infrastructure migration of the Roytam1 projects, should the existing infrastructure (GitHub repositories, binaries hosting server, etc.) becomes blocked by the HK regime; not as contributing actual code to those projects; but, of course, I'm not basilisk-dev myself...
What I meant here is that I can help roytam1 with whatever assistance he may need to continue Serpent and any of his other XP browser projects.
Some examples could include paying for a server to host a git repo that is accessible in China/HK, providing mirrors of his builds, or providing him with a mirror of the UXP/Pale Moon/Basilisk/etc codebases that is accessible from China/HK, etc.
12 hours ago, Milkinis said:I wish @roytam1 and @basilisk-dev could concentrate their efforts on Mypal 68 rather than having them working on 3 different projects at a time
MyPal 68 is not compatible with XUL extensions. I have no interest in non-XUL based Firefox browsers.
7 -
19 hours ago, roytam1 said:
in worst case, Hong Kong will become another DPRK so VPN won't work.
If there is anything I can do to help feel free to let me know.
7 -
On 12/21/2021 at 3:39 PM, Mathwiz said:
As I mentioned elsewhere, in the particular case of spoofing "official" Basilisk, you should spoof a 64-bit browser on a 64-bit OS (option 1 above), because it's only available as a 64-bit build. And the Windows version should be at least 6.1, because that's the oldest Windows version "official" Basilisk will run on. (Serpent, in contrast, is available in both flavors, and will run on anything from XP forward.)
This is false. I release both 32 and 64 bit builds of Basilisk for Windows.
Edit: sorry for reviving an old thread, I wasn't paying attention to the dates. Ignore me
3 -
2 hours ago, Egorkaru said:
roytam1, please add:
- in Serpent 52: support for Firefox 53+ themes from https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/themes;
- in New Moon 28.10.6a1: support for Pale Moon extensions and themes that require Pale Moon 29.x, 31.x and 32.x.
The Serpent and New Moon browsers missing extensive capabilities for interface customizing.
17 minutes ago, roytam1 said:You should ask Basilisk team if they have such intention to do so.
@Egorkaru No need to spam this forum topic.
It is possible to convert themes from the Mozilla addons site to Serpent 52/Basilisk format, but it will not be easily possible to make them installable directly without converting them first as they are in WebExtension format.
New Firefox themes are essentially just personas. In this Pale Moon Forum topic jobbautista9 provides an example of a theme from the Mozilla addons site that he converted into a persona. If someone is interested in the conversion process, it would be useful to review his converted persona and compare the source code of his persona to the same theme on the Mozilla addons site.
You'll see in my comment on that topic I provided a link to an old version of the Mozilla addons site on archive.org that has some older themes archived. Some of those themes will install on Serpent 52 and Basilisk.
7 -
8 minutes ago, Milkinis said:
no way will I be using a single-process capable browser ever again. it's a nightmare to me.
it's ok if you don't think it's safe for you but you should let the end users decide for themselves.
https://msfn.org/board/topic/182876-360-extreme-explorer-modified-version/page/129/#comment-1242047
It is already removed. There is nothing to decide.
3 -
Just now, Milkinis said:
if Serpent is a fork and can actually run on XP I want to guess Basilisk might achieve the same goal or am I missing something ?
so you will also cut Win7/8 support out once the UXP devs team decides to do so.The UXP team has already said they have no intention of dropping Windows 7/8 support right now, but if it came down to it yes that is correct. I wouldn't expect that to happen for at least 5+ years.
2 -
21 hours ago, Milkinis said:
all your posts in this forum are here in this thread.
Correct.
I think it's beneficial for Serpent users here and for developers of Windows XP UXP applications to have a direct line of communication with people involved in upstream development. There have been very negative interactions between MSFN members and Pale Moon forum members in the past. I think it is time to move past that and embrace the fact that we all are using code that comes from a shared history and to work towards a common goal of creating browsers that break away from Google's monopoly of the web, regardless of if that code runs on Windows XP or Windows 10 or Linux.
21 hours ago, Milkinis said:why don't you backport Basilisk to XP
This was a consideration when I took over the Basilisk project. I eventually decided that it would not be feasible to do this. Basilisk is an application built upon the upstream Moonchild Productions UXP platform. The upstream UXP platform has no XP support and the UXP development team have no interest in XP support, therefore Basilisk will not have XP support.
That being said, if you need Basilisk on XP you can consider Serpent an officially recommended option from my perspective. I appreciate roytam1's work in maintaining Serpent and try to be active in this thread since Serpent is a fork of Basilisk. It is very likely that Serpent bugs will also affect Basilisk.
21 hours ago, Milkinis said:and why doesn't Basilisk support multi process mode by default ?
Two reasons:
1 - It was removed from the UXP platform.
2 - There were multiple security vulnerabilities in the multi process implementation that Mozilla was using around the time Firefox 52 was released and UXP was created. Mozilla's current implementation is in Rust so the fixes cannot be backported.
There is no plan to add this back at this time.
3 -
1 hour ago, Jody Thornton said:
Holy Crap! Look at this Basilisk thread, where I guess someone from here went to the Pale Moon Forum and dared to mistakenly ask about Serpent. It's not about the right or wrong I'm concerned with: it's the snotty nature that Moonbat conducts himself with. Just a p***-poor way to talk about people:
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=28657&start=40#p237935
Agreed. The behavior in that thread was unacceptable. I locked the topic and made it clear that I won't allow that behavior in the forum section for my project. If you see something like this in the Basilisk section of the Pale Moon Forum again feel free to let me know directly.
10
; could this be, hopefully, backported to also cover Serpent 52.9.0, please? 
My Browser Builds (Part 5)
in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes
Posted · Edited by basilisk-dev
This is incorrect. Pale Moon was always intended to be a browser that was utilized newer CPU optimizations to increase performance. Your claim that it was done with the explicit intention of running on older CPUs is false, although that is an unfortunate side effect of enabling the AVX instruction set.
There is absolutely a noticeable performance improvement when comparing the AVX builds to the pre-AVX builds.
I disagree with the requirement to have AVX instruction support to run Pale Moon and I think it was a bad move on Moonchild's part, but basically every claim here that you've made is either false or misguided.