Linux-Advocacy Digest #473, Volume #29 Thu, 5 Oct 00 19:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
Aaron R. Kulkis [Off-Topic Idiot Tres Grande] ("David T. Johnson")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Josiah
Fizer)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Hotmail still runs BSD. ("Colin R. Day")
Re: 2.4! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("2 + 2")
Re: Aaron R. Kulkis [Off-Topic Idiot Tres Grande] (Monkeyboy)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Barry Margolin)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Off Topic Q. for Programmers: HTML renderer in C? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 18:05:07 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> El mié, 04 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
>> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >> >immortal = animate object that does not age
>
>> Ok, I suggest you use "ageless". Webster defines it as "not growing old or
>> showing the effects of age".
>
>Why the fuck should I, cretin? Haven't you ever been around political
>activists long enough to know they *do* call corporations immortal as
>a matter of course?
Richard, you are just hopelessly *bad* at making your point. Might I
suggest this re-write, as a courtesy:
"Yes, 'ageless' is quite close the concept I'm referring to. I have
been around many political activists who use the term 'immortal' to
describe the agelessness of corporations."
>> "Corporations ... are animate beings", you just said, if I agreed with that,
>> I would agree with the whole. I won't even guess what animate objects are
>> supposed to be, so I won't agree or disagree to that.
>
>Animation is not the same thing as beinghood.
"Beinghood" isn't any *thing* until you give us some more accurate,
consistent, or practical concepts on which to base our understanding of
what on christ's green earth you mean by "beinghood".
>Unless of course, you have
>a broad definition of will.
Roberto already said three posts back that your definition of will
sucks, and I agree with him, and you said 'too fucking bad'. So I don't
think it a broad definition of will, but a valid one, which might be at
issue. However, I don't believe that 'animate' has anything to do with
either beinghood or will.
>So in *my* case, animation might be the same
>as possession of will.
So, YOU are saying that you have a broad definition of will, to the
point where anything that is animate has will. Since that definition is
inaccurate, inconsistent, and impractical, I'd say it doesn't work in
*my* case, so too bad.
>In your case, since you "won't even guess" about
>what you're thinking ....
I don't know what tripe you're referring to, but you really have to stop
being an asshole Richard. I'm enjoying watching Roberto tie you in
knots far too much; its a guilty pleasure, because I don't think people
should act like you and Roberto do on Usenet. Its embarrassing.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "David T. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Aaron R. Kulkis [Off-Topic Idiot Tres Grande]
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 15:08:57 -0400
Aaron R. Kulkis has posted a total of at least 256 unique messages in
comp.os.os2.advocacy during the month of September, 2000 on five related
threads, none of which have anything to do with OS/2, OS/2 advocacy,
computer software, or even computers:
Public v. Private Schools
Global Warming
Sherman Act Vaguery
Bush vs. Gore on Taxes
Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It
When notified of his preliminary nomination for the title of "Off-Topic
Idiot," Aaron responded with rare humor and articulation using these
immortal words:
"F*ck off idiot"
For Aaron's astounding demonstration of a complete lack of ability to
find a suitable newsgroup (assuming one exists) for his turgid thoughts
as expressed 256 times during September, 2000, he is hereby awared the
title of <drumroll>
OFF-TOPIC IDIOT TRES GRANDE
September, 2000
Congratulations Aaron!!!!!!!
This in no way affects his eligibility for the October, 2000 title (for
which he is already a leading contender) or the much-coveted Year 2000
title. Keep those posts comin', fella!!!!!!!
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 18:09:11 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >provide. And *even* if I provided it, it just wouldn't be Unix and
>> >people are comfortable with Unix.
>>
>> Some do. Most couldn't care less, as long as it works and it doesn't
>> cost a lot.
>
>By that argument, Smalltalk should be extremely popular and Java
>should be dead, buried and rotted ... nay should never have existed!
'By that argument' should not be followed by prattling about personal
preferences in arcane technical matters. Your post should have never
existed!
>> So you're designing your own OS, and once its programmed, you're the
>> only one who's going to use it? Wow, you must really be brilliant.
>
>Anyone who wants to will be able to use it. So far, that means me.
>Like I've said before, if I get a thousand installations in 2010
>then I will be content.
Sounds wonderful. Good luck. Are you going to write all the apps, too?
Or is this going to be one of those 'doesn't have apps' kind of things?
>> When's it going to be done?
>
>In 5 to 10 years.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Josiah Fizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 15:13:34 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ZnU wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ZnU wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <8rbls4$4a2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "James Stutts"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Loren Petrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:8rb4ll$h19$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, STATIC66
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > >
> > > > > >>>> 3. Social Security
> > > > > >>>Unconstitutional. END IT NOW.
> > > > > >>Based on what ? Your opinion ? The opinions that count, legal
> > > > > >>opinions of those better qualified than yourself seem to
> > > > > >>contradict this.
> > > > > >SOCIALISM
> > > > >
> > > > > Nowhere does the Constitution mention that word.
> > > > >
> > > > > >>>> 4. Medicare
> > > > > >>>Unconstitutional. END IT NOW.
> > > > > >>See above.
> > > > > >SOCIALISM
> > > > >
> > > > > Nowhere does the Constitution mention that word.
> > > >
> > > > In both cases, it doesn't have to. I suggest you read the 10th
> > > > Amendment. If it isn't explicitly stated in the Constitution, the
> > > > Congress has no business doing it.
> > >
> > > Which reads "The powers not delegated to the United States by the
> > > Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the
> > > States respectively, or to the people."
> > >
> > > But article 1, section 8 gives Congress the power to, among other
> > > things, provide for the "general Welfare of the United States," and the
> > > power to make any laws necessary to do so.
> >
> >
> > GENERAL WELFARE... is such things as running a court system, jails,
> > etc. I.e. things which benefit society as a whole.
> >
> >
> > AFDC, WIC, Section 8 housing, etc. are INDIVIDUAL WELFARE....which
> > only benefits lazy free-loaders.
>
> Maintaining a minimum standard of living for everyone in society
> benefits the general welfare.
>
Whats more maintaining a minimum standard of living for everyone is a mandate
by the UN that the US has not yet met.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 18:17:05 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> No, he was there when he wrote a program that sold stock when shares are
>> going down; there was no 'decision' involved in the case of ABC shares
>> at the time of the transaction. That's an abstraction; a metaphor, if
>
>Metaphor != abstraction.
I'm afraid you're entirely wrong. A metaphor is an abstraction.
>And since EVERYTHING is an abstraction
>(except for raw sensory perceptions) calling it an abstraction
>is uninformative. "car" is an abstraction. So is "Max".
So is 'is'. Will you shut up now?
>At the time the automated stock trading software decides to sell
>ABC stock, there is a distinct concept in its database of "ABC stock"
>as distinct from any other stock.
I don't believe its possible for their to be a 'concept' in a
'database'. It seems to me that 'data' is all you'd find there.
>All the programmer is doing is writing a rule book for the machine
>to follow. The machine is the entity that applies these rules, not
>the programmer.
No, the guy who executes the program is the 'entity' that applies the
rules. Machines don't do things all by themselves; they don't have
will, if you will.
>> you will. The programmer 'decided' that the stock would be sold when he
>
>He decided no such thing! If the software runs on an unconnected machine
>then it makes empty decisions on meaningless data (it's *fantasizing*).
Oh it is, huh? Have you checked into a hospital lately?
>It's the corporation that connects the machine to a stock exchange so
>as to make those decisions meaningful, that turns fantasy into reality.
Do you think ghosts and goblins and space aliens are real, too? Are
there little men inside our cells, dragging molecules around from one
side to the other?
>> programmed the computer that later executed the instructions. The
>> program itself merely caused the computer to send out electrical
>> signals.
>
>So does your brain!
No shit. I though you believed in metaphysics and free will?
>> I didn't say what decisions I was performing; I merely meant to
>> indicate, in a humorous way, that I don't think you are capable of
>> making decisions. The decision I am now making is to stop pretending
>> you aren't an annoying clod. You're boring me.
>
><shrug> And you're an irritating solipsist idiot.
I'm neither solipsist nor an idiot. And I'm quite sure I'm not anywhere
*near* as irritating as you are (except to you, which I must say I quite
enjoy, being I think you are an idiot.)
>All things considered, I'd rather be me.
I am damn glad to hear that. Same goes here.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hotmail still runs BSD.
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 18:17:18 -0400
MH wrote:
> Oh god, another one of these. Yes, and Bill Gates reads Slashdot,.. and
> Ballmer runs his home network on Open Linux. Who gives a sh*t?
> Why are these assertions pertinent?
> To validate you? Over your use of a computer OS?
> Pathetic.
But not as pathetic as your response. Why are your trolls pertinent?
To validtae you?
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: 2.4!
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 23:27:16 +0100
> Only a Linux user would be proud of a hacked OS that just >got a feature that
> has been around on other OSes for quite some time.
>
> BTW, according to recent tests on www.tomshardware.com, >NVidia hardware runs
> OpenGL faster on Windows 2000 than under Linux.
>
> Why even use Linux??
>
> -Todd
OK, so windows has had usb support for a while. Let's just see windows
try multi-tasking!
So that's why people use Linux.
Tom
------------------------------
From: "2 + 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 18:26:02 -0400
Chad wrote in message ...
>
>"Matt Kennel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:54:00 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> :
>> :IBM's GREATEST MISTAKE was making a machine which anybody could
>> :copy in his garage.
>>
>> As I remember the story, they published all the hardware specification
>> and BIOS disassembly assuming that if anybody tried to make a 100% copy
>> that IBM could easily sue them out of business.
>>
>> Compaq did make a copy and IBM was shocked to lose the suit, and
>> the market thereafter.
>
>Compaq didn't make a copy, they reverse engineered it and proved
>that the engineers that reversed it had not looked at the IBM specs
>so there was no direct copying.
It's interesting to compare this kind of legal reverse engineering with
Netscape's copying of Moasic from the U. of Illinois's NCSA.
Of course, Netscape even took the name at first. :)
Of course, Netscape settled for 2-3 million. That was in PRE-WEB money.
The U. of Illinois took the cash rather than Netscape stock. Suddenly,
Netscape as the prototype web stock, was capitalized by the market at a
couple of BILLION dollars. This seemed an astounding sum, but would prove to
be chicken feed in web dollars compared to later IPOs.
2 + 2
>
>-Chad
>
>
------------------------------
From: Monkeyboy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Aaron R. Kulkis [Off-Topic Idiot Tres Grande]
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 22:35:59 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "David T. Johnson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Aaron R. Kulkis has posted a total of at least 256 unique messages in
> comp.os.os2.advocacy during the month of September, 2000 on five related
> threads, none of which have anything to do with OS/2, OS/2 advocacy,
> computer software, or even computers:
>
> Public v. Private Schools
> Global Warming
> Sherman Act Vaguery
> Bush vs. Gore on Taxes
> Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This seems to have something to do with "...computer software, or even
computers".
>
> When notified of his preliminary nomination for the title of "Off-Topic
> Idiot," Aaron responded with rare humor and articulation using these
> immortal words:
>
> "F*ck off idiot"
Maybe he is Greek. Are you Greek, Aaron?
(deletia)
M
--
Don't forget to vote for the "inventor" of the Internet.
------------------------------
From: Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 22:36:14 GMT
In article <8riv3k$cgd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2 + 2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It's interesting to compare this kind of legal reverse engineering with
>Netscape's copying of Moasic from the U. of Illinois's NCSA.
Netscape was founded by one of the authors of Mosaic, so they could hardly
argue that he'd used clean-room reverse engineering! And it seems very
likely that even if he started coding the new browser from scratch that he
would do many things the same way as he'd done them before; while this
isn't literal copying, it's probably close enough that they would have lost
a copyright infringement suit.
--
Barry Margolin, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Genuity, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 18:41:18 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> Someone makes the decision. Decisions don't surge out of a vacuum.
>
>Some cell has to create the thought. Thoughts don't surge out of a vacuum.
Cells don't have or deal with 'thought', just bio-chemical interactions.
Yes, as far as our consciousness is aware, 'thoughts' surge out of a
vacuum of sensory input whenever we perceive anything. The only time we
don't continue to have conscious thoughts is when we are no longer
receiving sensory input.
>You're a fucking moron.
Look, Richard, just because I'm not above using invective doesn't mean
that I can't point out that you say things like 'fucking moron', and
'imbecile' and 'cretin' far too often to be seen as a reasonable person.
I hate to engage in blatant Usenet therapy, but if I remember your
general conversation, you've claimed that you've experience some
unspecified form of child abuse (please correct me if I misread your
words) and from the last answer you gave Roberto, I'd agree that you
seem to have a distinct lack of empathy for your mother, while also seem
obsessed about turning metaphoric things into real things which you then
classify as psychotic, lacking in empathy. I'd like you to recognize
the fact that the reason you're so arrogant on Usenet is because you
need to convince yourself of your intellectual superiority to prove to
yourself that you've 'overcome' this issue you have. And the reason you
scream and yell at everyone who questions you is because, knowing how
unreasoning it makes people who were abused as children, you've finally
come to the point that you are ready to admit that you didn't overcome
anything, and you're hurting. This is reflected in your unreasoning
response to those who realize that corporations are metaphors,
analogies, legal abstractions, and they don't make decisions or think
and therefore cannot be psychopathic, except metaphorically. In the
same way, programmers don't hate users, and Linux UIs are not crappy,
though both could use improvement.
>How many times has it been that I've had to explain
>this? Corporate decisions are no more ascribable to individual humans than
>human thoughts are ascribable to individual neurons.
That is not a valid analogy. It is not an abstraction which works. It
is a metaphor. Stop using it; it sucks. Yes, corporate decisions are
all entirely ascribable to various individual humans, and groups of
humans. Perhaps you are confused that when something is put to a vote,
the 'decision' to do that thing is supposedly not ascribable to a human
being, and that is, metaphorically, true. Ethically, the decision is
ascribed to the one who decided to hold the vote, or the one that
implemented the result of the vote, etc. But other than that, it isn't
a decision of any abstract entity, in real life, though we again might
say that "the city" voted for something or "the committee decided" or
what have you. These are metaphors, Richard.
>And you STILL don't
>fucking get it! You STILL think that "all thoughts must be traceable to
>individual neurons or else thoughts can't possibly exist" <-- either that
>or you believe that human thought is *magical*. IMBECILE!
Nobody said 'all thoughts must be traceable to individual neurons' to
begin with. We said that thought has a physical reality. Cells don't
think. Stop trying to convince us you don't, either.
>> >Perhaps if you ever bothered thinking about what I write long enough
>> >to respond intelligently you would see the substance behind my words.
>>
>> I do think. I see smoke and insults. If it's because of my inadequacies or
>> yours, I leave to the public to decide.
>
>Someone has actually made a study showing that cretins never learn
>precisely because they refuse to believe they're cretins. Wish I had
>the clipping.
You ought to check a dictionary about the word "cretin". I don't think
it means what you think it means. I wished you'd saved the clipping,
too.
>> >The manager does not have any independent will in regards to these matters.
>>
>> Nonsense. He has the power to make certain decisions, other managers have the
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> power to make others. But those he makes, are his.
>
>This isn't any kind of meaningful power on the scale of the corporation,
>only enough to dominate people lower down in the corporate hierarchy.
>Even the CEO does not have the power necessary to remake a corporation
>for the better.
>
>But anyone who bothered to READ what I wrote would've understood that fact.
Everybody who reads what you wrote thinks you're a clod, an oaf, a boor,
as far as I can tell.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Off Topic Q. for Programmers: HTML renderer in C?
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 22:30:40 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
> HTML is a *text* format, editable by any text editor, even Notepad.
> Unless it's changing, it does not need to be generated, and I suspect
> that the bits that pop up dialog and list boxes (are you referring
> to an actual list box, or a drop-down combo?) can be static, or
> also dynamically generated (<SELECT ...><OPTION ...> ... </SELECT>)
> using some sort of form. (CGI or PHP[34], here. PHP in paticular
> looks quite intriguing.)
Thanks for the prompt feedback, by the way.
I thought you couldn't use CGI unless you were running a web server...?
Basically, I don't need the complete functionality of a web browser,
just the renderer, and something to handle click events (hyperlinking,
pop-up definitions/clarifications of a word). Since HTML is an
established standard for page browsing, I was hoping to go with that
instead of making my own.
> Or you are wanting to display HTML output under program control.
> One easy way to do that is to communicate in some fashion with
> Netscape
Thought of this, but it's too bloated for what I wanted to do.
> If you are using Java, a third option presents itself; there is a
> Swing widget that can perform most of the functions of a simple
> browser, including hyperlinking. (One drawback: rendering speed is
> not as fast.)
Not using java, yet, although it may come to that.
<shudder> I like C.
> As for popping up list or dialog boxes, you can either do that
> through Netscape's Javascript (if you're using that), or use native
> Swing or Gtk++/-- or Qt or even Lesstif. Pick the one that you
> like the most. :-)
If I'm not using Netscape as the viewer, doesn't that eliminate
Javascript as a possibility? Also, the problem isn't that I don't know
how to do a pop-up dialogue box, but that I don't know how to link that
pop-up dialogue box to the click ("activate"?) callback function of the
renderer, if it even works that way...
> You can also investigate Lynx. Lynx is a very limited browser,
> graphics-wise (and it doesn't do tables well), but within its limits
> can work rather well for simple tasks, such as displaying
> hyperlinked help text. It also has a light memory footprint.
> Combine that with an xterm ('xterm -e lynx http://blah.blah/blah')
> and off you go. :-)
It's a functional solution, but I'm hoping for something that I could
eventually package as a standalone application (shipped with GTK+
libraries and mozilla libraries (for gecko) if necessary), and so I'm
hoping for something a little more elegant.
> In any event, good luck with your project.
Thanks.
-ws
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
