Thanx anyway,
will look after other static bins (elinks, links2).
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:38:07PM +0000, David Woolley wrote:
> Y P wrote:
> >Hi:
> >
> >On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 08:07:49AM +0000, David Woolley wrote:
> >>Seems to me that you can use a dynamically linked version, as long as
> >>you have an appropriate LDLIBRARYPATH.
> >
> >I don't know ! I'm webmaster, not the server-admin. I don't know so much
> >about rpm-based sysstems, I don't use such myself at home.
>
> LDLIBRARYPATH has nothing to do with RPMs. Its fundamental to Unix
> shared libraries.
>
>
> >
> >>Even if there wwe some reason
> >>why you couldn't have shared objects, you could static link private
> >>libraries and dynamic link system ones.
> >
> >The system doesn't authorizes to have a personalized .htaccess for Apache,
> >and so more, so I won't ask them what -except paying enough for
>
> .htaccess has nothing to do with whether you use .so or .a libraries.
>
>
> Generally though, I doubt that there is a sufficient demand for static
> linked versions of Lynx, for anyone to have one available for download
> for your platform.
>
>
> --
> David Woolley
> Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
> RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
> that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
--
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1 :
Micro$oft has a majority market share in the new desktop PC marketplace.
This is a bug, which Ubuntu is designed to fix !
http://www.ubuntu.com/
_______________________________________________
Lynx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lynx-dev
