On Sun, May 11, 2025 at 07:11:36PM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 12:43:06AM +0200, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > > Hi, > > > > lynx only supports the old 301/302 redirection codes, > > not the new 307/308 ones whose semantics are more useful; > > unsure (I’ve not tested it) whether 303 is supported right. > > > > 301/302 may change the request method from POST to GET > > (IIRC lynx asks interactively which is good), whereas > > 308/307 (in this order) are the same but require the client > > to resend exactly the same request to the redirection target. > > > > There’s more explanation and a short summary of the other > > codes in both answers (together) of > > <https://stackoverflow.com/q/42136829/2171120> for reference.
It's kind of long - it would help if you pointed out the specific
case which you believe is mishandled, and a URL which can demonstrate
the problem.
> > Please add support for 307/308 to the next lynx (basically
> > same as the existing redirect sans the interactive question).
>
> I don't see a patch.
Also, I didn't see a site which was reported to be handled incorrectly.
I looked for a suitable site, and found this (which doesn't rely upon
JavaScript):
https://demo.cyotek.com/statuscodes/index.php
...and lynx appears to be working as intended (the odd handling of 304
is intentional). Lynx's handling of 308 was improved in
2024-01-15 (2.9.0)
* treat HTTP 308 permanently redirected the same as HTTP 301 permanently moved
(Debian #1041686).
--
Thomas E. Dickey <[email protected]>
https://invisible-island.net
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
