Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 19:30:20 +0900 From: "Akinori -Aki- MUSHA" <knu@idaemons.org> To: babolo@links.ru Cc: sada@FreeBSD.ORG, obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, tom@eborcom.com, girgen@partitur.se, cjh@kr.freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Introducing a netscape wrapper Message-ID: <86k8h82coz.wl@daemon.local.idaemons.org> In-Reply-To: In your message of "Sat, 6 May 2000 04:23:31 %2B0400 (MSD)" <200005060023.EAA10809@aaz.links.ru> References: <86k8ha19em.wl@localhost.local.idaemons.org> <200005060023.EAA10809@aaz.links.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At Sat, 6 May 2000 04:23:31 +0400 (MSD), Aleksandr A.Babaylov <babolo@links.ru> wrote: > > Akinori -Aki- MUSHA writes: > > At Thu, 4 May 2000 20:27:29 +0400 (MSD), > > Aleksandr A.Babaylov <babolo@links.ru> wrote: > > > 3 is the Bad Thing IMHO > > > look at ports/www/netscape-remote > > > > Why does it matter? Each netscape port already has a wrapper and the > > new one just takes its place as a meta-wrapper. All given command > > line options will be passed through to the netscape binary. > > > > Besides, I'd note that the netscape-remote is obsolete because > > netscape 4.x itself has the `-remote' option, which the new wrapper > > uses. > And 2.X and 3.X too. > netscape-remote is less so executes MUCH faster. And it will never conflict with the new wrapper. -- / /__ __ / ) ) ) ) / Akinori -Aki- MUSHA aka / (_ / ( (__( @ idaemons.org / FreeBSD.org "We're only at home when we're on the run, on the wing, on the fly" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86k8h82coz.wl>