Re: lynx-dev suggested addition to lynx.cfg

[Vlad Harchev]

On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Vlad Harchev wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:
> > 
> > > I suggest the following be added at the end of lynx.cfg:
> > > [ ... ]
> > > #INCLUDE:~/.lynx.cfg
> 
> ...and there is some conversation prompting me to that suggesting
> archived under <http://www.debian.org/Bugs/db/pa/llynx.html>,
> Vlad please read #16214.

 OK, before reading that background I had the question "Why?" - not what the
name it should have.

>[...] 
> in addition to removing (mostly) VMS-specific text.  (For the exec/cgi
> stuff it's just making the "safer" defaults explicit by uncommenting
> them.)  You can find the diff here:
> <http://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/unstable/main/source/web/lynx_2.8.2-1.diff.gz>.
 
 Seems wise guys are making Debian... Nevertheless, seems that users that
switch between distributions very often move ALL their private setup - even 
$HOME - so entire lynx.cfg will be replaced (by using $LYNX_CFG or
replacing the file phisically), so seems the statement you suggest won't make
the effect you wish to achive (ie helping people moving from one distribution
to another).

 BTW, if debian distribution is so secure, seems adding explicit
'INCLUDE:~/.lynx.cfg' line will make it less secure from some POV.
 
> >  IMO this proposal breaks several traditions (eg 2 different configuration
> > files for in one directory for one software package, but agree that 2nd 
> > file 
> > is allowed not to exist).
> 
> One file (.lynxrc) is a file created and maintained by lynx, at least
> that's what it's meant to be.  The other (.lynx.cfg in my proposal)
> is maintained by the user if he/she wishes so.  They are not configuation
> files in the same sense.

 This is not bad idea to allow users to use configure more settings of lynx.
But it seems to me that the best solution to add the text you propose,
commenting last line (the very INCLUDE line) - so it won't break something and
it will notify users about the powerful approach they can use.
 
>[...]
> 
> It's also inconvenient to have to set LYNX_CFG.  (Try to describe in one
> sentence to a new user which files to modify, taking all possible
> login shells into account.)

 I agree that modifying LYNX_CFG is a bad hack.

> > IMO we should start README.packager (IMO better to have it at the top of
> > tree) file and describe there what are recommended switches to configure, 
> > what
> > are recommended default lynx.cfg settings - in 'for impatient' manner - this
> > will help packagers a lot.
> 
> Good idea, please do so.  Although one would hope that packagers notice
> differences in lynx.cfg ...

 I hope we will add this file :) Seems we have a lot of time before 2.8.3 is
released.
 
>[...] 

 So, my conclusion: we can add this text, but IMO commenting the very INCLUDE
line.

 Is your clock correct, Klaus? 

 Best regards,
  -Vlad