From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 11 13:03:55 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56F81B00; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:03:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Received: from sola.nimnet.asn.au (paqi.nimnet.asn.au [115.70.110.159]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC3CB9A8; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:03:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sola.nimnet.asn.au (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id r0BD3fQ5012710; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 00:03:41 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 00:03:41 +1100 (EST) From: Ian Smith To: Devin Teske Subject: Re: Reading the handbook from console In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20130111230822.G62930@sola.nimnet.asn.au> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Polytropon , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:03:55 -0000 In freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 449, Issue 9, Message: 25 [ pardon loss of threading ] On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 15:56:24 -0800 wrote: > > From: Polytropon [mailto:freebsd@edvax.de] [..] > > > > There is no text mode web browser in the base system. > > > > Installing one is easy: As the HTML files generated > > > > for the Handbook are good quality, they display nicely > > > > in lynx, links, and w3m (probably the most prominent > > > > three text mode web browsers). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I must know... > > > > > > What is Polytropon's favorite of those listed? (and perhaps also "elinks" ?) > > > > Hard to say, now that X is everywhere... :-) > > > > In the past, I've started using lynx because it was "the > > default". Somehow I even tend to remember that it was part > > of the default installation in around FreeBSD 4 or so... > > but that could be wrong. No that's right, it had been lynx since 2.2, if not earlier. Somewhere early in 5.x, by 5.2 at least, it had changed to links: ======= Options Editor Name Value Name Value ---- ----- ---- ----- NFS Secure NO Install Root / NFS Slow NO >> Browser package links << NFS TCP NO Browser Exec /usr/local/bin/links NFS version 3 YES Media Type Debugging NO Media Timeout 300 No Warnings NO Package Temp /var/tmp Yes to All NO Newfs Args -b 16384 -f 2048 DHCP NO Fixit Console serial IPv6 NO Re-scan Devices <*> Skip PCCARD NO Use Defaults [RESET!] FTP username ftp Editor ee Tape Blocksize 20 Extract Detail high Release Name 5.5-STABLE Use SPACE to select/toggle an option, arrow keys to move, ? or F1 for more help. When you're done, type Q to Quit. This is the browser package that will be used for viewing HTML docs ======= > > Later on I tried w3m and also found it usable. > > > > Today I'd say I prefer links for interactive text mode > > browsing. Still "lynx -dump" is a welcome tool in some > > of my scripts, and never change a running system. :-) I used to use lynx a lot, browsing the web through a 56k modem in the late '90s, however I made far more headway with links as it could deal reasonably well with basic functional javascript where lynx couldn't, at least then, and I seem to recall an issue with upstream maintenance. > Ok, the reason I ask is actually because I have this insane (?) idea of shoving > one of the aforementioned solutions onto the installation media so that (gasp) > we can have that functionality back like we had in the days of sysinstall. Shock horror! :) No, not insane at all. I can't believe the disconnect from newer FreeBSD users' needs that bsdinstall presently represents, especially those with less than the latest awesome kit, and I applaud you carrying on with bsdconfig and improving bsdinstall, about which I have far too many suggestions that might steal this topic :) > So naturally, my first question is "which one?" > > Thoughts? > -- > Devin Well I doubt links works any less well that it did, though it's probably not up to all the latest JS, CSS and other recent tricks 'out there'. Certainly for the stated purpose of rendering Handbook and FAQ it will do fine. It does (did then) weigh more than lynx but worth it, I feel: smithi on sola% ls -l `which links` -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 2959956 Oct 25 2006 /usr/local/bin/links smithi on sola% ls -l `which lynx` -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 1078068 Jul 26 2006 /usr/local/bin/lynx Polytropon concludes: > > However, The FreeBSD Handbook and the FAQ mostly contain > > text, I mean, that's what they are about, and for reading > > text I don't see a need for graphics. If I want graphics, > > I have X. :-) Exactly. Although regarding installing X on 9.1 before newer packages are available - and it IS painful or at least very slow to build on the likes of 1GHz laptops - I can't see any reason the X that was working as of mid-October would be any problem, unless there's been some major revision or security scare since? The 9.x ABI is constant. I grabbed: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-9-stable/Latest/en-freebsd-doc.tbz (dated 10/16/12 09:13:00) and pkg_add'ed it, and will do the same for X when I get 9.1 also going on my 'big' 768MB RAM ThinkPad. For those with the horsepower, sure, build X, KDE/GNOME, OpenOffice etc. cheers, Ian