Re: LYNX-DEV numbered linx: 2 suggestions

[Philip Webb]

970111 David Combs wrote:
> I still think using lynx.cfg for LOCAL options (ie for a given user)
> is user UNfriendly.  Why?  Because the user has to COPY the MAIN
> lynx.cfg to HIS OWN home directory, hack it with the personal option,
> and then get screwed when the system administrator puts up a NEW
> VERSION of lynx with a corresponding NEW VERSION of lynx.cfg --
> which action the USER might (a) not even know has happened
> and (b) when he does realize it, have to RE-copy and RE-hack
> the .cfg.  NOT real "friendly".

this raises a quite separate point, which i had planned to raise sometime
  & which i have strong feelings about (friendly grins, etc):

some of us -- me included -- are not sysadmins: maybe quite a few of us:
  maybe most or nearly all of the blind or partially sighted users of Lynx
  (which does not include me).

one of the things which is needed -- rather than even more patches & stuff --
  is separate installation packages for sysadmins & the rest:
  the rest of us don't need to bother about anonymous accounts, SSL, etc
  but we do want to put the binary, cfg & help files in our own directories.

isn't this really the way Lynx should be heading: something you DON'T have
  to ask your sysadmin to do for you ...
-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto
;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;