Clarence Verge wrote: > > Enough exposure to hate links - and any other application > that requires ESC then F then X then Yes (or enter) to get > the hell out of it !
You can also exit links by pressing Q (same as lynx). > Don't get me wrong, I'm not panning Baslinux, I didn't like > links from first time I tried it - when PygmyLinux switched > to it from Lynx. :(( I chose links over lynx because it does a *much* better job with tables and frames. Also, links responds to a mouse. > NOT enough to find the links executeable in less than 5 > minutes by going thru every directory I could find You can shorten your search by doing: ---------- echo $PATH ---------- That gives you four directories to look in. Or, you can locate it immediately by doing: ------------------- find / -name links* ------------------- The / means: begin searching in the / directory and work down through the subdirectories (the / can be left out if you are already in the / directory). The -name means: search for a file with the following name. And links* matches any file starting with links (the actual name of the executable is links-0.90). > I wanted to see if you could afford to lose links and add mc. Sure, no problem. In fact there is enough space free (850kb) to keep links and add mc. > Midnight Commander: 368k. Hmmm. The BasicLinux mc (downloadable from the site) is 319k. > Lynx: 249k Hmmm. Is that bad ? > Would there be 720k available if links disappeared ? Sure. 850kb + 425kb = 1275kb. This is the space available for the libc5 version of Arachne. > Could I do it myself ? I mean, could I mount my HD and lift > mc and lynx out of Dragonlinux ? First, ldd those files in Dragonlinux to see which libraries they use. If all listed libraries are in BasicLinux (/lib), then you are good to go. I suspect the mc in Dragon uses an extra library for the mouse. This library is not currently in BasicLinux (although it can be added). Alternatively, the mc on the BasicLinux site has been compiled for BasicLinux, so no additional library is needed. > I see you are doing a lot with busybox. I'm guessing it's sort > of a translator ? Could you explain ? It's a multi-call collection of common commands. Busybox jams a whole bunch of simplified commands into the smallest possible space. > but why the heck does "ls" take 59k ? Actually, I could have saved this space by using the simplified version of ls in Busybox, but it lacks the fancy formatting capability I wanted. Thanks for the feedback, Clarence. Cheers, Steven
