Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
Ubuntu better. However, I am closing it because the bug has been fixed
in the latest development version of Ubuntu - the Jaunty Jackalope.
If you need a fix for the bug in previous versions of Ubuntu, please
follow the instructi
** Changed in: elinks (Debian)
Status: Won't Fix => Fix Released
--
javascript support is disabled.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/64031
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lis
** Changed in: elinks (Debian)
Status: Unknown => Won't Fix
--
javascript support is disabled.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/64031
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@li
Upstream discourages enabling JavaScript support right now (0.11 and
0.12 series) because of several issues.
See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=428549#10
** Also affects: elinks (Debian) via
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=428549
Importance: Unknown
According to the elinks manual, it seems autoconf should be able to enable
javascript as long as libmozjs-dev is installed( in Debian), but it doesn't
seems to be the case in Gutsy.
I am trying to build elinks with javascript, but it seems autoconf could not
detect SpiderMonkey and keeps automa
Adding my vote that it would be nice to have that option available, if
an user want to enable it.
** Changed in: elinks (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Wishlist
Status: Unconfirmed => Confirmed
--
javascript support is disabled.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/64031
You received thi
Adding SpiderMonkey support would require an extra dependency (on
libmozjs0d)... but if people were worried about disk space, they'd use
elinks-lite instead.
--
javascript support is disabled.
https://launchpad.net/bugs/64031
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://list
Hi.
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 09:30:06PM -, Micah Cowan wrote:
>
> Yes; but in many cases, incomplete JavaScript support can be worse than
> none at all, for browsing the web. That's not usually the case for web
> spiders.
>
> For instance, sites that have both JavaScript and non-script suppor
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 20:36 +, Kenny Hitt wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 08:16:35PM -, Micah Cowan wrote:
> > Huh. I didn't know elinks had JavaScript support... that's... cool!
> >
> > If it's an experimental feature, though, it might be unwise to enable it
> > on the normal binary pack
Hi.
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 08:16:35PM -, Micah Cowan wrote:
> Huh. I didn't know elinks had JavaScript support... that's... cool!
>
> If it's an experimental feature, though, it might be unwise to enable it
> on the normal binary package... perhaps it could be made as a separately
> built pa
Huh. I didn't know elinks had JavaScript support... that's... cool!
If it's an experimental feature, though, it might be unwise to enable it
on the normal binary package... perhaps it could be made as a separately
built package (say, elisp-ecmascript).
--
javascript support is disabled.
https://
11 matches
Mail list logo
