Lynx in base system?

Denis Lagno wrote:
>>    A few weeks ago I saw a discussion where someone
suggested that Lynx
>> should be added to the base system. FWIW, I'm
connected to an university
>> network, which requires a http (actually https)
based login before I
>> gain access to the Internet.
> 
> It is not argument..

   Yes, it is. I used it as an argument (hence: it is an
argument).
Whether or not you agree is a different matter.

> I have wi-fi access point that requires java-script
enabled
> browser to administer it.  Let's include opera to the
base system.

   Why would you want Opera in the base system if all you
want
java-script? Wouldn't Links be a better choice?

   Anyway, the point wasn't that anyone should include lynx
in the base
system because of my reason alone, but rather I wanted to
add it to the
previous discussion.

-- 
Kind Regards,
Jan Danielsson
Te audire non possum. Musa sapientum fixa est in aure.

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 02:28:35PM +0100, Jan Danielsson
wrote:
> Denis Lagno wrote:
> >>    A few weeks ago I saw a discussion where
someone suggested that Lynx
> >> should be added to the base system. FWIW, I'm
connected to an university
> >> network, which requires a http (actually
https) based login before I
> >> gain access to the Internet.
> 
>    Anyway, the point wasn't that anyone should include
lynx in the base
> system because of my reason alone, but rather I wanted
to add it to the
> previous discussion.

Can you provide a pointer to this previous discussion?  

Btw, you can download files with ftp(1) (both from ftp://
and http://) if
you know the URL.  

	Geert

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 02:44:46PM +0100, Geert Hendrickx
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 02:28:35PM +0100, Jan
Danielsson wrote:
> > Denis Lagno wrote:
> > >>    A few weeks ago I saw a discussion
where someone suggested that Lynx
> > >> should be added to the base system. FWIW,
I'm connected to an university
> > >> network, which requires a http (actually
https) based login before I
> > >> gain access to the Internet.
> > 
> >    Anyway, the point wasn't that anyone should
include lynx in the base
> > system because of my reason alone, but rather I
wanted to add it to the
> > previous discussion.
> 
> Can you provide a pointer to this previous discussion? 

> 
> Btw, you can download files with ftp(1) (both from
ftp:// and http://) if
> you know the URL.  

But not https://, which is what he needed.

Could be possible to script with openssl's s_client.

Ben

Geert Hendrickx wrote:
>>>>    A few weeks ago I saw a discussion where
someone suggested that Lynx
>>>> should be added to the base system. FWIW,
I'm connected to an university
>>>> network, which requires a http (actually
https) based login before I
>>>> gain access to the Internet.
>>    Anyway, the point wasn't that anyone should
include lynx in the base
>> system because of my reason alone, but rather I
wanted to add it to the
>> previous discussion.
> 
> Can you provide a pointer to this previous discussion? 


   Sorry, no. I stumbled across it a while back when I was
looking for
something completely different. I did try to find it again
so I could
provide a reference, but I was unable to locate it in the
archives.

> Btw, you can download files with ftp(1) (both from
ftp:// and http://) if
> you know the URL.  

The problem is that I need https specifically.

   I guess the best solution would be if the network
administrators
would remove the login requirement -- but I doubt that will
happen any
time soon.

-- 
Kind Regards,
Jan Danielsson
Te audire non possum. Musa sapientum fixa est in aure.

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 02:28:35PM +0100, Jan Danielsson
wrote:
> 
>    Why would you want Opera in the base system if all
you want
> java-script? Wouldn't Links be a better choice?

possibly not - every time the subject comes up, I'm told it
"works",
but I have not seen a site for which this is true.  (I'm
probably
approaching this wrong: there is probably a site, but I'm
not likely
to use it 

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.n
et
ftp://invisible-island.net

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006, Jan Danielsson wrote:

I vote for including lynx (or links) too.

>> Btw, you can download files with ftp(1) (both from
ftp:// and http://) if
>> you know the URL.

> The problem is that I need https specifically.

And I guess you need to be able to submit forms too.  


   A small tool that will do (probably) just what you need,
by the way, is 
curl (www/curl).  You probably already know it, but still.

   (And no, i am most definitely NOT saying that curl should
go in instead 
of a small browser.  Shame on you people for even thinking
that.)


MAgnus

On 3/24/06, Magnus Eriksson <magetoofastmail.fm> wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2006, Jan Danielsson wrote:
>
> I vote for including lynx (or links) too.
>
> >> Btw, you can download files with ftp(1) (both
from ftp:// and http://) if
> >> you know the URL.
>
> > The problem is that I need https specifically.
>
> And I guess you need to be able to submit forms too. 

>
>
>    A small tool that will do (probably) just what you
need, by the way, is
> curl (www/curl).  You probably already know it, but
still.
>
>    (And no, i am most definitely NOT saying that curl
should go in instead
> of a small browser.  Shame on you people for even
thinking that.)
>
>
> MAgnus
>
>

I think a better option would be to link ftp with the
included ssl,
which would allow it to do https and ftps (bonus), expand
ftp to allow
for --header, --auth, and other http functionalty (that
would allow
filling-out forms), and make a link for ftp called 'http'
to avoid
confusion.  Maybe even split the programs.

If we added full recursion to ftp, it would also solve many
problems. 
(something curl doesn't do)

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006, matthew sporleder wrote:

>>    A small tool that will do (probably) just what
you need, by the way, is
>> curl (www/curl).  You probably already know it, but
still.

> I think a better option would be to link ftp with the
included ssl,
> which would allow it to do https and ftps (bonus),
expand ftp to allow
> for --header, --auth, and other http functionalty (that
would allow
> filling-out forms), and make a link for ftp called
'http' to avoid
> confusion.  Maybe even split the programs.

   Why would this be better, and better than what?  (I
honestly couldn't 
figure out what you were referring to.)  Having a minimal
browser still is 
a good thing, imho.

   Or do you mean it would be better than curl?  I don't
know, curl already 
does "all that", and comes under a nice
MIT-style license too.


> If we added full recursion to ftp, it would also solve
many problems.
> (something curl doesn't do)

   That might be nice.  But I'd probably still just use
wget...


MAgnus

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 02:28:35PM +0100, Jan Danielsson
wrote:
> Denis Lagno wrote:
> >>    A few weeks ago I saw a discussion where
someone suggested that Lynx
> >> should be added to the base system. FWIW, I'm
connected to an university
> >> network, which requires a http (actually
https) based login before I
> >> gain access to the Internet.
> > 
> > It is not argument..
> 
>    Yes, it is. I used it as an argument (hence: it is
an argument).
> Whether or not you agree is a different matter.
> 
> > I have wi-fi access point that requires
java-script enabled
> > browser to administer it.  Let's include opera to
the base system.
> 
>    Why would you want Opera in the base system if all
you want
> java-script? Wouldn't Links be a better choice?

It would, if Javascript support in links wasn't buggy.

	-is