[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev Observations on latest Win32 lynxes

From: vtailor
Subject: Re: lynx-dev Observations on latest Win32 lynxes
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 07:52:24 -0500 (CDT)

 >20-Oct-99 12:51 Victor Schneider wrote:
>> These comments are about the following and later versions under Win32:
>>>> Lynx Version 2.8.3dev.9 (13 Sep 1999)
>> Copyrights held by the University of Kansas, CERN, and other contributors.
>> Distributed under the GNU General Public License.
>> See and the online help for more information.
>> Compiled by Borland C++ (Sep 14 1999 12:21:53).
>> <<
>BTW, it would be nice for this screen to add list of libraries with their
>version numbers linked to lynx at compile time. As well as maikefile flags
>(now belong to LYNXCOMPILE_OPTS:/ page for configure-based platforms).
>> 1.  The mailto:address@hidden  doesn't work.  If I recollect from my
>> earlier work on porting lynx to win32, the lynx code for calling the
>> sendmail program has to be modified to include the appropriate fields.
>> Apparently, that hasn't been included in the latest win32 patches.
>for Japanese version (compiled with SH_EX)
>you may need using `-noblat' command line flag for that.
>Does we need changing this default value
>for convinience of most lynx users?
>At least this should be written in file
>supplied with win32 binary distribution.
You're right.  I tried the `-noblat' option in the callynx.bat file that
I use under Windows 98, and sendmail.exe worked.  It really is too bad
that you need -noblat to make sendmail.exe work, since that is the 
assumption of running lynx.exe under Windows as though it were running
under some form of Unix.  It would also be really nice if the distributed
version would come stripped, and would stop crashing under Windows 98 and
would not corrupt the screen for something simple and basic like calling
a viewer program.

Programs are not supposed to crash under Windows 98, especially programs
with mature code like lynx.  We really need to consider the monopolistic
position of Microsoft Corporation and the need to provide easy-to-use,
viable alternatives to their official programs.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]