> Can someone remind me why putting everything on one command line > (which doesn't work for all platforms anyway) is supposed to be better > than editing the file userdefs.h? I put that stuff into a script (since I expect to run it again), e.g., for my ISP copy: #!/bin/sh cfg-ncurses \ --with-screen=ncurses \ --enable-persistent-cookies \ --enable-gzip-help \ --with-zlib \ --enable-nsl-fork \ --enable-default-colors \ --disable-internal-links \ --enable-color-style \ --enable-prettysrc \ --enable-source-cache \ --enable-addrlist-page \ $* I've a to-do item to add a switch to make all experimental stuff enabled (as in ncurses). That should reduce the clutter (I don't see any reason to change the experimental status of any of the current options). > Klaus > -- Thomas E. Dickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Philip Webb
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Henry Nelson
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Philip Webb
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Henry Nelson
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Klaus Weide
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Klaus Weide
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Philip Webb
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Klaus Weide
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Larry W. Virden
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Henry Nelson
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Klaus Weide
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Doug Kaufman
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Henry Nelson
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Henry Nelson
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: Doug Kaufman
- Re: lynx-dev (patch) userdefs.h & lynxcfg: T.E.Dickey
- lynx-dev userdefs.h vs config (was different) Philip Webb