Re: Documentation formats
On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > If cgi is the reason for the need of a httpd then we should take a look at
> > the "new" version of lynx. It supports execution of local binaries.
>
> The CGI is the reason, but lynx doesn't help those who don't want
> to use lynx. We can't force everyone to use a particular browser.
If the user wants to use a browser of his choice in combination with
"info2www", he is only forced to install a httpd. As there are very small
httpd's out there (which can be restricted to the local machine), there is
no problem with this.
If he does not want to install a httpd, he can still use (is restricted
to) lynx. That's what I wanted to say.
> texi2html is the right way to avoid the CGI.
Yes, it is really nice. But as you said
> Debian packages should provide HTML versions of Info files
> as well.
in your previous mail I thought you want to provide the same information
in two different formats. But this takes up ~ 10MB disk space and
therefore my wish is to avoid "wasting" so much space.
-Winfried
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: