That works, I suppose my point was, if you are going to be adminning from a box with a webbrowser anyways, why not just use that aforementioned webbrowser to check www.g.o? what is the benefit of news/ over that?
On 10/31/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:08:19 -0500 Dan Meltzer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | WRT links in file updates, this seems completely backwards. If a user > | was admining over ssh, it would be far easier for them to load www.g.o > | in their browser vs. copying link from terminal to their browser, but > | for that matter, why is ssh relevent wrt links in files, but not when > | we are talking about it being lightweight? If a user is not expected > | to have a browser to recieve the news, how can they be expected to > | have one to view doc's about it. > > The user isn't expected to have a browser on the system on which the > news item is being displayed. For example, I have a router box which > does not have lynx or X or anything like that which would still be > generating news item hits -- expecting me to install a browser on that > system to read HTML or XML content is unreasonable. However, admin work > on the router is done over ssh, and it's trivial to copy and paste a > link from the output of some command on a remote box into a firefox > window on my desktop. > > Perhaps I should add a note that news items should not simply be of a > "see this link" form, and that any links which are used should only be > for reference, not the primary source... > > -- > Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) > Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org > Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm > > > -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
