mirror of
https://github.com/benbusby/whoogle-search.git
synced 2026-04-25 04:05:57 +03:00
[GH-ISSUE #1257] [BUG] Response from Mullvad Leta needs cleanup #740
Labels
No labels
Fixed (Pending PR Merge)
Stale
bug
enhancement
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
keep-open
needs more info
pull-request
question
theme
unfortunate
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
starred/whoogle-search#740
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @erusc on GitHub (Oct 4, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/benbusby/whoogle-search/issues/1257
Describe the bug
It seems that the HTML response from Mullvad Leta is currently injected directly in to the page without cleanup.
As a result, the browser renders the page in quirks mode and sends requests for nonexistent resources such as
/fonts/OpenSans-Regular.woff2,/fonts/SourceSans-Semibold.woff2.To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
Deployment Method
runexecutableVersion of Whoogle Search
Desktop (please complete the following information):
@Don-Swanson commented on GitHub (Oct 5, 2025):
Thanks for this. Would you consider this to be a major or critical flaw that prevents this stopgap release from continuing to operate until a better solution is developed?
@meijkl commented on GitHub (Oct 8, 2025):
Since there is no answer from @erusc just my comment - for me it's not a major or critical flaw, I'm happy to still being able to use Whoogle!
Thanks for your efforts!
Klaus
@Don-Swanson commented on GitHub (Oct 8, 2025):
@meijkl
Can you please elaborate how this is a major flaw and what it is preventing?
To me this appears to be cosmetic and an annoyance. Since this is only considered to be a stopgap release, do you think time should be spent on this instead of development of a permanent solution?
@meijkl commented on GitHub (Oct 8, 2025):
I think you misunderstood my comment - for me it is NOT a major flaw!
What I typically need works with the current version!
Time should be spent for the development of a permanent solution.
@Don-Swanson commented on GitHub (Oct 8, 2025):
My apologies, that’s what I get when I check my emails too early.