[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
lynx-dev Lynx for Dos
From: |
kifox |
Subject: |
lynx-dev Lynx for Dos |
Date: |
Thu, 14 May 1998 14:19:09 +0200 |
>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
> [Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
>
> Re: lynx-dev Re: Lynx for DOS
> _________________________________________________________________
>
> * To: address@hidden
> * Subject: Re: lynx-dev Re: Lynx for DOS
> * From: address@hidden (Michael Sokolov)
> * Date: Mon, 11 May 98 10:29:25 -0400
> * Cc: address@hidden
> * Reply-To: address@hidden
> * Sender: address@hidden
> _________________________________________________________________
>
>Doug Kaufman <address@hidden> wrote:
>> My understanding is that for DOS applications, each application has its
>> own built-in TCP/IP stack, as opposed to Windows applications that share
>> a stack. The WATTCP stack is built into all the DOS binaries. What you
>> need is a packet driver to interface with your system. For a serial
>> dial-up connection, DOSPPP works well. For other connections, see the
>> CRYNWR packet driver collection (ftp://ftp.crynwr.com/drivers/).
>
>DOS apps that behave like this (e.g., the DJGPP version of Lynx) are COMPLETELY
>MISGUIDED. This is NOT the proper way to write network software! I'm currently
>working on a de jure specification that will standardize the interface between
>DOS network apps and the system-wide TCP/IP stack and end the nonsense Mr.
>Kaufman is so fond of.
Utter nonsense. Your "specification" as yet doesn't exist, so either quit
flaming people like Doug who have managed to create a working DOS port of
Lynx with little or no help from you or shut up untill you have actually
created the "interface" you keep ranting about.
Personally, I doubt it'll ever see the light of day.
>
>Sincerely,
>Michael Sokolov
>Phone: 440-449-0299
>ARPA Internet SMTP mail: address@hidden
> _________________________________________________________________
>
> Follow-Ups:
> * Re: lynx-dev Re: Lynx for DOS
>
> * From: Doug Kaufman <address@hidden>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
> * Prev: Re: lynx-dev pdcurses versus slang under 386DOS
> * Next: Re: lynx-dev pdcurses versus slang under 386DOS
> * Index(es):
> + Main
> + Thread
> _________________________________________________________________
>
> Lynx mailing list archives
>
> [FLORA HOME]-[IMAGE] [LYNX Home]-[IMAGE]
> [FLORA HOME]-[IMAGE] [LYNX Home]-[IMAGE]
- lynx-dev Lynx for Dos,
kifox <=