Alternative Browser apps?

Moem

There is the Demo browser, it's not quite finished but you might like it. Some people do. I have no idea on whether it looks like Chrome.

kugiigi

There are alternatives but all use the same engine (QtWebEngine). And none with the same number of features as Morph.

nero355

We need something like Fennec (Previous version of Firefox for Android) for Ubuntu Touch

Or... if I may dream a bit...

Pale Moon for Ubuntu Touch

arubislander

@nero355 "Make it so!"

A Former User

@nero355 @arubislander This is certainly an interesting endeavor to attempt. Would either of you be willing to entertain starting a group on the matter?

Another interesting idea would be to fork Morph and change/add some new features.

flohack

@nocturn-adrift do not fork Morph please, instead contribute with pull requests to its progress. There is no sense in competition when we have so few resources.

A Former User

@flohack Isn't Morph under the GNU GPLv3? You may just include the changes into Morph upstream if it really came to it. We're all in this together, obviously.
This is coming from a person not heavily involved with UT from a development standpoint. I just use the OS everyday.

To reiterate, I'm not being completely serious with my post. I am just entertaining the potential benefit of having a separate browser to "go crazy" on.

domubpkm

@nocturn-adrift said in Alternative Browser apps?:

Another interesting idea would be to fork Morph and change/add some new features.

Do you know Onion Surf and that is already a fork of Morph-browser ? And you should read this and all about Onion .

flohack

@nocturn-adrift The license of the browser has nothing to do with our effort to prevent any forking, as this creates unnecessary overhead for a small community. Forks are never technically needed but express the dissent and struggle on a social an political level. Developers that do not find a compromise or consent in what they want to do are open to forking, but its like a divorce: A last measure when a relationship is at end

A Former User

@flohack The Fuseteam has managed to get firefox working for them. I think that's a great achievement and I'm very grateful for it. Maybe Firefox will become standard one day?

nero355

@dpitti
Do you mean a Native Firefox version for Ubuntu Touch ?!

That would be GREAT !!

Even with todays shortcomings of Firefox across any platform...

6mv

Hi @dpitti,
What and how, pls.

A Former User

@6mv yes firefox click.

flohack

@Fuseteam please comment here ^^

TotalSonic

The beta of the Firefox 88 click does not correctly call the on screen keyboard yet, so is of limited use on mobile devices until this issue is fixed.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

domubpkm

@totalsonic said in Alternative Browser apps?:

The beta of the Firefox 88 click

beta FIrefox click ?? WHERE is the click ??

Fuseteam

@flohack who what where how when?

A Former User

@fuseteam the Download Link from firefox click please

Fuseteam

ah the cat's out of the bag; i wouldn't even call what i have a beta at this point, it is an pre-alpha click package.
basically i'm downloading the firefox deb package with apt, extracting it and packaging that result as a click.

It does not pop up the keyboard, it has no touch support out of the box and it does not integrate at all with the os. it just launches and the interface is somewhat scaled.
It is also unconfined due to needing xmir atm, which not available to confined apps.

to get the keyboard to pop up we need to either get maliit-inputcontext-gtk3 working in the click or ship it with the rootfs.

i'm currently more focused on generalizing my work so others can benefit of it. the build script is based off work by mateo salta, maciek sopyło and my crackle script altered to fit the needs of a custom clickable builder

the firefox click can be found at gitlab.com/debclick/ufirefox.
i created the debclick group to organize all similar experiments under one umbrella, if anyone wants access hit me up

the clicks build from the master branch do not launch as they lack proper wayland support.
the clicks from the xmir branch do launch and are unconfined, and suffers from all the issues associated with xmir

Fuseteam

ok i think i generalized the firefox repo to the limit;

the meat of the builder is in builder.sh.
the template files are placed in the correct location with the specific name while the environment for building is setup with prebuild.sh (hmmm maybe i can move that to build.sh)

the package specific stuff are saved in pkg.d

the actual package to build is specificied in clickable.json any package in the ubuntu repos can be specified, no command line apps tho those won't magically launch in the terminal (i ain't a magician sorry :P)
package maintainer info can be set in manifest.json, the package name will be set with prebuild.sh
apparmore permissions can be set in apparmor.json

Limitations:

as mentioned earlier it needs to be unconfined due to needing xmir, as such only the xmir branch has an actual working click, the master branch would launch on wayland but this particular version has broken wayland support, if the package has wayland support confined may be possible
any package which has an all package as a dependency will fail to build, cause i'm a noob
no command line apps! we have crackle for that nudge nudge
no touch (so far), no OSK (so far), no content hub, no media hub
no per device scaling, currently scaling is set with the environment variable GDK_DPI_SCALE=2
i have no idea how to handle the above 2
i also have no idea how to handle settings schema's at all