[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: lynx-dev update

From: Michael Sokolov
Subject: Re: lynx-dev update
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 00 01:06:41 CDT

Henry Nelson <address@hidden> wrote:

> Can I expect your code to build on NetBSD-1.4.2?

Yes. Before I started hacking on Lynx (and this is what got me started!), it
had reasonably good Makefile targets for FreeBSD and NetBSD, a totally busted
one for BSDI, an Ultrix target that was in reality specific to MIPS Ultrix, and
nothing for pure BSD or VAX Ultrix. At that time I lived in Cleveland, OH and
had a shell account on a BSDI-based ISP, had pure BSD plans in my head, and ran
Ultrix on a VAX at CWRU. I realized that the working Makefile targets for
FreeBSD and NetBSD really didn't / had no need to care about the Free/Net part,
it's the BSD part that matters. And so I created the new BSD target to cover
pure BSD, its derivatives like FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and BSDI, and VAX
Ultrix. At that time it was still untested for pure BSD. This weekend I learned
that pure BSD is much stricter for Lynx than a generalized BSD target can be,
so now I have two targets: BSD for one single pure BSD (9-track tape from CSRG
or from me bootstrapped on a VAX) and BSDish for systems like Free/Net/OpenBSD,
BSDI, and VAX Ultrix that are BSDish, but not adamantly BSD.

All I need to do now before I throw out the old FreeBSD, NetBSD, and BSDI
targets is to provide -ncurses and -slang flavors for the BSDish target, which
I currently don't have. (Only for BSDish and not for BSD because the pure
original BSD UNIX obviously has the pure original K&R C compiler, and ncurses
and slang are spoiled and require ANSI C. Free/Net/OpenBSD and BSDI, OTOH, use

> Do you plan to integrate some of the useful features now found in
> Lynx2.8.3dev like editing of form textareas with an external editor,
> improved CJK handling [...]

I don't want to lie to you, so I have to say no unfortunately. As it is right
now, Lynx is a very low-priority project for me, and right now I can commit
only to doing the absolute necessary minimum, which in reality translates into
keeping it buildable.

> [...] NLS [...]

If you mean GNU-ideology NLS like in TD's version, absolutely not, as I cannot
tolerate any GNU ideology.

> [...] security bug fixes [...]

What security bug fixes? I don't think there are any security bugs in Fote's
True Lynx, I think security bugs exist in the code that the rest of you are
using as a side effect of it being cannibalized after Fote's departure.

> Will you continue the tradition of having a Lynx which is configurable
> to be safe for public (anonymous) access?

Of course, Lynx puts so much emphasis on this that it would no longer be Lynx
without it. :-)

> Will you provide hooks to make an SSL-capable Lynx?

Oh, in Lynx v2.7.2MS the option of compiling and linking with SSL is present in
the standard distribution, there is no need to replace files like you did
before. The IFCTF is a militant revolutionary freedom-fighting force fighting
against and seeking to overthrow the imperialist regimes that make their
imperialist intellectual slavery laws, so we obviously don't honor them.

Michael Sokolov                         Harhan Computer Operation Facility
Special Agent                           615 N GOOD LATIMER EXPY #4
International Free Computing Task Force DALLAS TX 75204-5852 USA
                                        Phone: +1-214-824-7693
                                        ARPA TCP/SMTP: address@hidden

reply via email to

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