On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 09:56, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2014/07/11 18:51, Brett Mahar wrote: >> On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:48:12 +0100 >> Stuart Henderson <st...@openbsd.org> wrote: >> >> | On 2014/07/11 01:18, Theo de Raadt wrote: >> | > > I too use gopher in lynx regularly, and would miss support. There > is = >> | > > still a surprisingly active community using gopher. (floodgap, et > al.) >> | > >> | > So install a package. >> | >> | Should we just move lynx to packages? >> | >> >> I find lynx really handy to have in base, e.g. installing on a new > machine, users can just go to openbsd.org and cut and paste a pkg_path > prior to installing anything, and read the faq. >> >> Using openbsd for the first time would have been a lot more painful > without a browser in base. >> > > Thing is, if we need another version of lynx in packages to support > gopher, having one in base as well just gets confusing..
No more than many versions of gcc in base and ports, I think. We could call it elynx. :) We have documentation in html format, so I think we need a basic text browser in base to view it.
