lynx-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: 2.8.3dev.8 patch 3 (was: lynx-dev RFC959 non-compliance)


From: Klaus Weide
Subject: Re: 2.8.3dev.8 patch 3 (was: lynx-dev RFC959 non-compliance)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 14:37:34 -0500 (CDT)

On Tue, 7 Sep 1999, Gregory A Lundberg wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 07, 1999 at 11:31:07AM -0500, Klaus Weide wrote:
> 
> > Below is a patch for the most recent lynx development code (2.8.3dev.8).
> > Most of it is stuff that I had already done before your message and was
> > planning to send to lynx-dev.  Among other things, one major purpose was
> > ending the control conversation cleanly, at least in the normal case, to
> > get rid of the "221 You could at least say goodbye.." responses from
> > wu-ftpd servers and resulting RST traffic.
> 
> One comment here, having glanced through your patch:
> 
>   You should not depend upon ANYTHING in the response code, other than the
>   first digit.
    [ ... ]

Ok, I'll study those comments later...
Basically I wasn't trying to redesign or systematically cleanup lynx's
HTFTP.c, just fix some things that I had noticed.

> > Could you please try lynx with this patch.
> 
> I'll give it a shot, but I've found Lynx to be singularly difficult to get
> to behave (mutt was much easier).  The only versions I've been able to
> semi-use (and those not to well) are the official Redhat versions .. even
> with them , the screen display is often messed up and unreadable.  Luckily,
> I'm an FTP geek and rarely go to the web. :P

I dare say that's most lynx users' experience...  It seems you are having
some display problems - wrong curses library, wrong terminfo or something
liek that.  (If you just mean you you don't like the way lynx displays
some web pages, then that's not relevant for testing how well the FTP
protocol client works.)

> If you try against ftp.wu-ftpd.org and see a directory listing, I'd say
> you're doing well.  If you can actually view a README file, you're fixed.

Yes, I visited ftp.wu-ftpd.org and it worked.  There was no problem with
retrieving files (as opposed to directories) anyway, or am I wrong?

I'd like to know whether you notice any other differences, positive or
negative, in the protocol traffic, apart from the fixed hang.

   Klaus


reply via email to

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