On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:
> Everyone who compiles on/for Unix uses the configure script. So all
> those folks shouldn't edit userdefs.h?
>
> Well maybe the "typical" user is better off doing either one or the
> other. (Which on Unix means "don't touch userdefs.h".) I still don't
> see why mixing should be actively discouraged.
There are still a number of settings which are generally configured
in userdefs.h, even after configure is used, and which can not be set
in lynx.cfg (unless I am confused, which is certainly possible). I
believe that "NO_ANONYMOUS_EMAIL" is only in userdefs.h, along with
default "TEMP_SPACE" setting.
Doug
__
Doug Kaufman
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Klaus Weide
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Klaus Weide
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Philip Webb
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Klaus Weide
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Larry W. Virden
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Henry Nelson
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Klaus Weide
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Doug Kaufman
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Henry Nelson
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Henry Nelson
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Doug Kaufman
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- lynx-dev userdefs.h vs config (was different) Philip Webb
- Re: lynx-dev userdefs.h vs config (was different) Doug Kaufman
