From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Jan 24 05:19:53 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA10136 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 24 Jan 1998 05:19:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from terror.hungry.com (toshok@terror.hungry.com [169.131.1.215]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA10122 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 1998 05:19:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from toshok@Hungry.COM) Received: (from toshok@localhost) by terror.hungry.com (8.8.8/8.8.7) id FAA12225; Sat, 24 Jan 1998 05:19:49 -0800 (PST) To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Free netscape - good or bad ? References: <199801231527.HAA10770@hub.freebsd.org> From: Christoph Toshok Date: 24 Jan 1998 05:19:49 -0800 In-Reply-To: garman@phs.k12.ar.us's message of 23 Jan 1998 18:28:19 -0800 Message-ID: Lines: 22 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk garman@phs.k12.ar.us writes: > > Garance A Drosehn writes: > > > > I think it's a good move for Netscape. And to keep this somewhat > > relevent to the hackers mailing list, it will be certainly a good > > move for netscape on FreeBSD... :-) > > > Well, all that remains to be seen, then, is to see whether or not the > Netscape source code compiles with Lesstif :-) cheek...> > people have tried this before, with 0.81.. haven't heard of anyone trying 0.82 - it might perform better. 0.81 had undefined symbols. Frankly I would be surprised if lesstif is a viable alternative until some time after we release the code. We stress motif about as far as it can go. The navigator should provide *lots* of information on how particular motif functions work (and what bugs exist in them :) Christoph