Thomas Dickey:
hmm - I wonder where that "pre" came from...
Gentoo version numbering. I think it doesn't like "dev" because
it doesn't know how to sort it to decide what's most recent.
Here, it's built from lynx-2.9.0_pre12-r2.ebuild but "lynx -version" says:
Lynx Version 2.9.0dev.12 (02 Jan
Karen Lewellen wrote:
Further I have sent this same file, several times in fact, without
triggering this error.
Was that to the same destination system? Because each system has its own
different size limit, so a message which sends just fine to most people
may then fail to arrive to a new rec
can tell these ignorants so they may learn
something?
Claudio Calvelli
___
Lynx-dev mailing list
Lynx-dev@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lynx-dev
Paul Gilmartin writes:
> On Nov 29, 2008, at 02:34, David Woolley wrote:
[...]
> > Most browsers would give up after just a few minutes!
> >
> > I believe there is an HTTP response (Status 100???) which allows
> > one to say "please wait". If that's right and Lynx supports it, a
> > better ap
Doug Kaufman wrote:
> Please check your lynx.cfg file. It sounds as if you have
> "COOKIE_STRICT_INVALID_DOMAINS" set. You probably want
> "COOKIE_LOOSE_INVALID_DOMAINS" or "COOKIE_QUERY_INVALID_DOMAINS".
They are all commented out in lynx.cfg (and the corresponding lower
case names are set to em
(I looked throught the mailing list archives but I can't see anything
about this, most of the discussion seems to be about cookie paths
rather than domains)
I noticed this trying to log in to https://launchpad.net/ with 2.8.7dev.8
(and older versions). The server tries to set a cookie, but lynx
d
