Re: Proposal: new alternatives links
In article <[🔎] 20010805174146.77902534.dbarclay10@yahoo.ca>,
David B. Harris wrote:
>On Sun, 5 Aug, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> wrote:
>> Eduard Bloch wrote:
>> > html-browser
>> > x-html-browser
>>
>> I would rather see us make a concerted effort to support ESR's new
>> proposed standard unix environement variable. I forget what it is, but
>> this, like EDITOR, is something you really want tunable on a per-user
>> basis.
>>
>> Not that we couldn't do both of course.
>
>I like the fact that the proposal differentiated between an X-based
>browser and a non-X-based browser. While this may not be necessary for
>other types of applications, I think we can all agree that X browsers
>usually have an extraordinarily large number of features not available
>in text/console-based browsers. As such, I think the differentiation is
>warranted.
ESR's $BROWSER proposal already allows for that; you set the variable to
a colon-separated list of commands, which are tried in turn until one
succeeds.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: