On Fri, 01 Oct 1999, Alan Shoemaker wrote:
bay56 wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Alan Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] I found a link to 4.7 for linux 2.0 (glibc) (upgradeat
your own risk)
Alan Shoemaker wrote:
Axalon Bloodstone wrote:
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Eosnet Team wrote:
http://www.netscape.com/download/selectlanguage_1_702_411.html
Here is a link to the latest version of netscape. (maybe more stable?)
I wouldn't recommend it, it's just as broken as
- Original Message -
From: Alan Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] I found a link to 4.7 for linux 2.0 (glibc) (upgradeat
your own risk)
I wouldn't recommend it, it's just as broken as the 4.61. (everybody
bay56 wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Alan Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] I found a link to 4.7 for linux 2.0 (glibc) (upgradeat
your own risk)
I wouldn't recommend it, it's just as broken as
Well what is the story with netscape then? Someone has to know. Are they
programming the browser 100% in win32? and assuming that it will work on
linux??
Why is 4.x so crappy what went wrong?
- Original Message -
From: Alan Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 1999 3:17 AM
Subject: Re: [newbie] I found a link to 4.7 for linux 2.0 (glibc) (upgradeat
your own risk)
Iantake it easy. No, the default for the help files is a form of
