It is alleged that Thomas Dickey once typed:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 04:30:35PM -0700, Bela Lubkin wrote:
[snip]
> > Ideally we would have:
> >
> > - ability to compile "-restrictions"-controllable functions right out
> > of the program (configure/compile options), to reduce the chance
> > that a tricky user might figure out how to get around runtime
> > restrictions. This currently exists in ad-hoc fashion for many, but
> > I think not all, of the restrictable functions.
> well, as I understood the request, it would allow the person compiling lynx
> to specify any combination of the restrictions that are currently compiled in.
That's certainly what I meant.
> Looking at the table in LYUtils.c for restrictions, it appears that about 2/3
> of the entries have corresponding definitions in userdefs.h right now. Making
That looks about right yes, being able to control the other 1/3 would
be ever so nice. As from an anonymous client point of view some of the
missing ones are rather important, e.g. suspend, shell, file_url etc.
> it consistent, all of those would be settable from the configure script,
> since the obvious way to implement the configure script's checks for available
> options would be to use the "CAN_ANONYMOUS_" names defined in userdefs.h.
For myself I don't much mind if it's scripted, alonglist of
"CAN_ANONYMOUS_" or a LYNX_RESTRICTIONs thing, whichever's easiest to
do really.
[snip]
--
Robm
873
"Ask not what I can do for the stupid,
but what the stupid can do for me" - Graeme Garden
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
