[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Package "luwak"

From: Philip Kaludercic
Subject: Re: Package "luwak"
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2022 09:05:49 +0000

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>   > The name "eww" is also unhelpful.  Perhaps
>   > the merger should be under the name "lynx".
> Does EWW work using lynx?  If so, that would be a good idea.  We would
> replace two unhelpful package names with one name that would be
> helpful and easy to remember.

No it doesn't, EWW uses shr (Simple HTML Renderer) to display websites.

> If EWW does not work using lynx, then renaming it to `lynx' would be
> misleading at one level.  We might rather make a different choice.

EWW has been around for a while (I belive 24.4), I don't think it is
viable to rename it now.

> What other packages do we have for looking at web pages?  I see there
> is `browse-url'.  Is that an alternative to EWW, or just a higherlevel
> confugurable interface to EWW and other options?

No, browse-url is a generic system for requesting a URL be opened in
some browser, be it Firefox, Chrome, EWW, or whatever the default
settings are on a system.

> Are there any more web-browsing packages that we should consider in
> this planning?

None that I know of.

reply via email to

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