Re: w3m -> standard, lynx -> optional
Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp> wrote:
> From: Thomas Dickey <dickey@saltmine.radix.net>
> Subject: Re: w3m -> standard, lynx -> optional
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:11:40 -0000
>> That's an apples & oranges comparison, btw. I see that lynx-cur (which
>> is what you should have cited) is built with ncurses rather than ncursesw
>> (a problem for this comparison).
> So I just uploaded lynx-cur 2.8.5-17 compiled with ncursesw.
>> lynx can, if it is packaged properly. For more than a year (2.8.5dev.7).
> I hope lynx-cur was packaged properly but if you noticed
> any problem please let me know.
Given the current situation with people wanting to use UTF-8, and that
Debian does have (since July) a package for ncursesw, yes - I think lynx
should be configured with it, e.g.,
configure --with-screen=3Dncursesw
That will let lynx display with UTF-8. It won't handle UTF-8 input (I'
simply haven't found time yet). To see UTF-8 input with ncursesw, look
at the dialog package - I'd like to do something like that in lynx for
post-2.8.5 work. One of the other packagers has been pushing to make
ncursesw a standard package, so that might be simpler than before.
I should have mentioned this before, but overlooked it, and was
irritated by some of the pro-elinks comments, e.g,. "lynx doesn't
follow standards", implying that elinks does...
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net
Reply to: