On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 02:26:11PM +0200, Jonas Fonseca wrote: > Maybe we should make some of this into a FAQ since you are not the first > one to point this out.
Oops, sorry, I guess I didn't dig deeply enough in the archives.... Thanks for replying. > ELinks' caching behaviour is not very conforming. Historically ELinks > has used a very agressive caching policy, once it even cached redirect by > default. This doesn't mean that we don't want to fix it at some point > but there are several things to be aware of such as usability. > > Over a year ago, I tried to work on it and it quickly got very annoying > for many pages to have it constantly reloading, partly because the > incremental rendering often will cause the current link to change if you > go back in history etc. I guess I don't quite understand the issue. It seems like the graphical browsers pretty much handle this properly these days. (Maybe there's an argument about going back to a cached copy of the page vs. a reload.) Would you say that mimicing firefox's behavior would be a good goal? I can tell you that the scenario I initially described, where a loaded page via a clicked link is out of date and I'm not even aware of it, seems to me like a bad thing. In any case, I can appreciate the possible difficulty of implementing this correctly, so I'm not complaining much! I didn't know before asking whether it was just me, a bug, a design decision, or what. > So that was my take on the status of ELinks' caching behaviour, it > doesn't help you very much and I am sorry about that. There is always > the link-follow-reload action which might help you to some degree. Oh, I wasn't aware of that. That sounds useful as a workaround, thanks. Reid _______________________________________________ elinks-users mailing list [email protected] http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/elinks-users
