*** Henry Nelson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote in the Lynx list on...: :) I think we've been over this ground before, but in simple terms what :) does your patch offer over functionality already in available in Lynx, :) such as the "." and "c" commands?
This statement is not 100% accurate. "." does not allow you to include the web page in your comment, nor "c" allows you to edit/add headers, use your address book, nor use a smtp server if you need to. One of the motivations for making this patch is so that people can use the interface that they know when composing messages, and have the full functionality that they have when using their e-mail program. The patch uses all the work done by Lynx to construct headers in the message and hands that to a mailer, instead of handing it to an editor. Why do you think that using your own e-mail program is not a desirable thing to do?. I suspect that the interface that Lynx offers by default must be very similar to the one that most people in this list use, and therefore most of you don't care about the interface, but in real life, not all people use the same interface (e.g. The original poster of this thread and me). Moreover, the default in the patch is to use the default interface in Lynx, not to use an e-mail program, so for most of the people, this should not be a problem. This is an enhancement, it lets you do everything as you used to do before, but it allows you to do the same in a better way. :) It's also possible to set up a "lynxcgi://" for reading and a :) "lynxprog://" for replying to html'ized mail. The archives on how to :) to this are probably 4 or more years old. That's very vague, can you find it and give us the reference, please?. If that's the case, maybe I could rewrite the patch so that this feature is used for mailto: links. If you know how to configure lynxcgi and/or lynxprog to accomplish this, maybe you can post it?. The bottom line is that there should be a feature in Lynx that will call the e-mail program with all the parameters (like to:, subject: and body input file), which should be possible to configure in an easy way, and which can be activated when activating the link. Do lynxcgi and lynxprog get added out of the box (just issuing ./configure only, or do they need to add a --enable-cgi-links or something of that sort?). :) More directly, why would someone want to mail from Lynx with Pine (or :) Mutt or Elm)? Why not just mail with Pine straight off? There are two main reasons, one is the interface, and another is because the e-mail program has features that Lynx does not have, which could be useful when composing the message that you intend to send. Those are two reasons I can think of, maybe other people have some other reasons that they may wish to add. -- Eduardo http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/personal.html ; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
