Brian Bailey wrote on 11 Feb:
> ... I'm not into guessology. # is not a British convention
> anyway so far as I am aware, for some 80ish years, it's a hindrance! Why
> put it there when it serves no useful purpose, I ask?
You'd think the software behind the bug-tracker could simply ignore
the "#"
On 13 Feb 2014 Jim Nagel wrote:
> You'd think the software behind the bug-tracker could simply ignore
> the "#" if people type it in this box. It would seem natural enough
> for a user to type it, since "#" is shown loud&clear in the Netsurf
> info box as part of the version number.
Well there
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 10:59:06 GMT Jim Nagel wrote:
> You'd think the software behind the bug-tracker could simply ignore
> the "#" if people type it in this box. It would seem natural enough
> for a user to type it, since "#" is shown loud&clear in the Netsurf
> info box as part of the version num
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 03:24:19AM -0800, Dave Higton wrote:
>
> I think Netsurf is alone in RISC OS applications in having a version
> number incorporating a hash.
It's not a version number, it is a test build number. And it's odd that
nobody complained about test build numbers beginning with "
Rob Kendrick wrote on 13 Feb:
> ...back then the same issue happened ("occurs in revision" field not
> accepting an "r") and yet nobody complained!
My point was just a general one that software needs to anticipate that
different users might input stuff in ways that are obvious with
hindsight.
I have just downloaded the current development version,
NetSurf-gcc-json-1718/zip and am in the throes of installing it on
several machines here.
Datestamps on the !Boot and !System folders and all their contents
were lost again sometime before 2014-02-04 (possibly before
2013-04-25, which is
In article <9b5f51d953@abbeypress.net>,
Jim Nagel wrote:
[Snip]
> Suggestion to the Netsurf team:
> Please, could you include an extra "Readme-date" file in the download
> zipfile that would simply state in plain text the date of the last
> actual change and words to the effect that "I
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:56:17PM +, Brian Jordan wrote:
> I work on the assumption that if a merge-boot or merge-system is required
> that NetSurf will let me know with an appropriate message. Otherwise I
> just let NetSurf get on with it. Am I under vigilant or are you over
> vigilant? It s
Brian Jordan wrote on 13 Feb:
> In article <9b5f51d953@abbeypress.net>,
>Jim Nagel wrote:
>> Suggestion to the Netsurf team:
>> Please, could you include an extra "Readme-date" file in the download
>> zipfile that would simply state in plain text the date of the last
>> actual change an
In message
Jim Nagel wrote:
> Brian Jordan wrote on 13 Feb:
>
>> In article <9b5f51d953@abbeypress.net>,
>>Jim Nagel wrote:
>>> Suggestion to the Netsurf team:
>
>>> Please, could you include an extra "Readme-date" file in the download
>>> zipfile that would simply state in
In article <53d954c84abrian.jord...@btinternet.com>,
Brian Jordan wrote:
> I work on the assumption that if a merge-boot or merge-system is required
> that NetSurf will let me know with an appropriate message.
Me too.
I only bother with the other stuff in the download if !NetSurf complains.
I noticed a couple of oddities that may just be the Atari version.
1. I opened an incomplete url and got a "bad url" error. So I
closed the Netsurf window and tried to open another.
Instead of an empty window I got the bad url error again. I had to
exit and restart Netsurf.
2. I tried to append s
Hi,
I am a newcomer to the list and have a problem with netsurf which I am unable
to solve.
I'm trying to use netsurf on a i386 Debian Jessie box.
If I start netsurf with the default homepage www.google.com and type a string
of 7 "a"s in the search field,
the cursor in the field moves slower than t
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:35:13PM +0100, pal...@inwind.it wrote:
> Hi,
> I am a newcomer to the list and have a problem with netsurf which I am unable
> to solve.
> I'm trying to use netsurf on a i386 Debian Jessie box.
There is no such thing. Do you mean Debian Testing? Sid? What version of
In article <53d83f69e8bbai...@argonet.co.uk>, Brian
wrote:
> In article <53d83d6e6ebrian.jord...@btinternet.com>, Brian Jordan
> wrote:
> > In article <53d83be5c4bbai...@argonet.co.uk>, Brian
> > wrote:
> > [Snip]
> > > Who'd have thought it?? Certainly not me. I'm intuitive but not that
15 matches
Mail list logo