On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 8:57 AM, Soren Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 08:43:28AM -0500, James Dinkel wrote: > >> 2) the whole idea that "it's a browser", therefore "it's a huge >> security hole." > > Sorry, I'm having trouble detecting sarcasm over e-mail. Is this a joke > or a serious comment? >
Not so much sarcastic, nor serious, as it is a realization of the subconscious affect of being bombarded with constant IE and Firefox security warnings. > > See, you happen to need to access documentation that's stored in man > page format. Others are in a situation where the packages they use store > their documentation in html format. Without an html interpreter they're > screwed. In this context, groff and w3m are exactly the same, so if we > remove one, why not the other? > > I already admitted to pandering to myself. And if groff is gone, then I wouldn't be heart-broken. I would just include it in my standard server set up, or install the package who's man page I need to read on one of my handy-dandy test servers. James James -- ubuntu-server mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
