[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: lynx-dev Re: lynx2.8.4dev.2.patch.gz

From: Klaus Weide
Subject: Re: lynx-dev Re: lynx2.8.4dev.2.patch.gz
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 16:48:28 -0500 (CDT)

On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Doug Kaufman wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Klaus Weide wrote:
> > Possible answers:
> >  Because it allows NLS on platforms without installing gettext separately,
> >  even where having a pr-existing gettext installation would be highly
> >  unusable (if at all possible), for example DOS.
> I don't think that there is a problem with gettext on DOS, although I
> haven't used it extensively. The DOS lynx binary that I distribute is
> linked with libintl.a and seems to work properly with the .mo files
> that I tried. Binaries of the GNU gettext package are available from
> any DJGPP mirror site, so there isn't any need for a compiler.

On further thinking about it, my reference to DOS was inappropriate.
Users of lynx on DOS get download binaries and not source (I don't think
there are may who would compile for themselves), and they don't need
any library files at runtime (there is not dynamic linking or DLLs
afaik, the libintl.a code is part of the lynx binary).  So it's only
a question for the builder of the binary whether he uses the libintl
code compiled from source bundled with lynx, or from a separate
source tree.  It doesn't matter to the end user.  (If I'm wrong here,
please correct.)

So I understand even less what good bundling the libintl source
with the lynx source does.


; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden

reply via email to

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