Forwarded message:
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 09:21:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: buttles@wsb.champlain.edu
To: BLIND-L@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU
Cc: doslynx-dev <doslynx-dev@raven.cc.ukans.edu>
Subject: Doslynx
I figured I better get this message out before I got snowed in with email.
Development on some sort of lynx for DOS is not dead.
My message was misinterpreted. What I said was: what did people want
more, a 386+ dos version or a win95/nt version. What I meant was: if
someone were to make an attemt at seeing what happened during a test
port of real lynx for a non unix/vax machine which would be preferable.
The question arose from a failed attempt at testing the portability of
lynx2-6 for plain dos straight out of the box. It is just too large in
spots to be compiled and I wanted to see if it would work from other
approaches. lynx2-6 has been found to be compilable for 386+ and 95/nt
and someone else is furthering that effort, so I am back to looking at
plain DOS solutions.
Wayne
--Steve Jacobson National Federation of the Blind 3M Company Internet: SOJACOBSON@MMM.COM
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:04 PST