Luakit: Fast, small, WebKit-based browser framework extensible by Lua | Hacker News Reader

Luakit: Fast, small, WebKit-based browser framework extensible by Lua

luakit.github.io

92 pointsvmorgulis24 comments

Just yesterday I spoke with the creator of the Uzbl browser - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzbl + http://www.uzbl.org/ - who said that out of all the minimalist browsers out there, he thinks Luakit is the best, and even recommends it over his own.

I recently switched from LuaKit to Qutebrowser and haven't looked back:

https://qutebrowser.org/

The project is actively developed (author recently did some crowdfunding to work on the project full time: [1]), and work is underway to support QtWebEngine as a backend (Blink/Chromium-based rendering engine).

[1]: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/qutebrowser-a-keyboard-fo...

Wow - that's brilliant. I have used firefox + pentidactyl for ages, on and off, but usually end up removing it as it mucks up web dev stuff too frequently.

But this for a daily browser and then firefox for heavyweight stuff looks cool.

Thanks!

FWIW, I'm currently trying out VimFX (largely because vimperator has yet to be ported forward to work with latest firefox nightlies) - and while I'm not certain I like all the decisions the project makes (I probably want more of a vi(m) monster) - the project is well thought out, and the decisions are motivated - not random. And it appears a much simpler, more compact and self-contained project that vimperator/pentadactyl (note, I've only seriously looked at modifying VimFX - and the dev documentation is excellent):

https://github.com/akhodakivskiy/VimFx

https://github.com/akhodakivskiy/VimFx/blob/master/documenta...

This project has been dead for some time, unfortunately.

As has the more interesting idea the idea of a lua-based mail-client using Luakit: http://dieter.plaetinck.be/post/luamail_a_mail_client_built_...

That said I did write a console-based mail-client with lua support:

https://github.com/lumail/lumail2/

Why do you think it's dead? Most recent update is 3 days ago.

Even if Luakit itself is getting commits, last I checked the underlying webkit code it's based on doesn't get security updates, so as much as I would like to use it; it's really not a good idea: https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/02/01/on-webkit-secu...

It appears that mason-larobina has ressurected it. There are a bunch of commits then it's nothing until 2014.

Yes, there were a few commits recently, but doesn't look like it's suddenly awesome again.

That said, I really have to try it again.

I used to use it extensively (1-2 years ago) as one of my off-browsers (prefer that to profiles) but at some point most bigger websites (like Facebook) were wonky.

True, but not a lot of contributors these days it seems.

Its an interesting project - so encouraging people to check it out, even if its 'antiquated', means there's a higher likelihood of someone checking it out, and then contributing to the project to bring it forward .. so while its good to know that there are delinquencies in how far back the code goes vis a vis security fixes, its still a positive thing to encourage people to check it out - and possibly contribute. I, for one, welcome the luakit revival that may happen as a result ..

there was a talk about the state of luakit recently and the original author has created its dedicated organization and migrated the codebase. So there's some new interests in developing it future, adding webkit2 supports etc. this fork at https://github.com/aidanholm/luakit has seen some new developments on the webkit2 front.

The project seems to be quite dead? My favorite is dwb, which is not dead yet (tm) but not that active, too: http://portix.bitbucket.org/dwb/

QuteBrowser is a good replacement for dwb. It's [very] actively developed and also uses QtWebkit instead of Webkit-gtk.

https://github.com/The-Compiler/qutebrowser

I've used a number of these lightweight webkit / vim browsers. I really enjoy them but they don't seem to last very long. I've probably used 5 different ones in the past.

Same. And I also do this with distros, window managers, etc. I find myself bouncing back and forth between convenience and simplicity - the grass is always greener.

For those who prefer simple code along with a simple interface, there is surf [1], a thin C wrapper around WebKitGTK+.

[1] http://surf.suckless.org

I'm in love with the hypothetical browser that has the security features of xombrero and lacks GTK.

Is xombrero still being developed? I used it for quite a while and liked it but the lack of updates made me think it was probably falling behind on security. Granted WebKit is the biggest part of that.

> Is xombrero still being developed?

AFAICT, no. I actually did some work on the build process to sanitise it for fixing some stuff later (use bmake on tree root and use a single platform.h with ifdefs instead of cd $OS && make stupidity, which the author of xombrero seems to like; tested only on freebsd tho), but I didn't have any spare time for that yet.

Is that sarcasm? Xombrero has broken TLS validation that's vulnerable to MitM script injection.

No it's not, that vulnerability is a WebKit vulnerability, AFAIK fixed in WebKit. The browser has nice features for controlling script, cookie, plugin use and data exposed to servers, that is what I refer to as "security". I don't know if it's still affected by that bug or not.

It seems rather dishonest to push a few commits to an unmaintained project and then pander for attention on Hacker News.

Maybe its an attempt to gain like-minded contributors? I'm certainly interested in pushing the project forward, and wouldn't have thought about it if it weren't for a HN article about it today .. or is HN only supposed to be about the cool, finished, new stuff, always and only?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com