Talk:Links (web browser)
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Links (web browser) article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
The PSP port of Links2 breaks the GPL in that source code is closed and not available to the public. Liquidtenmillion 01:09, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Why not then include both points? It is indeed praised, BUT this is a bad thing because it violates the GPL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Added a little something
Added a little something: Although the browser is by far not the best for web standards, it is praised on the PSP for superior text input methods and quick loading times.
Are you guys cool with that?
Programming style section
The editor is obviously talking about links2 with graphics support ;-) The size of the executable i have observed with various configurations is always a bit less than 3 MB (stripped) though, while links(1) or elinks are always around 1MB. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I agree with previous suggestion that editor was referring to Links2: http://links.twibright.com/features.php Text-mode Links binaries are much smaller: v0.81 (324KB) - v0.99 (885KB): http://www.jikos.cz/~mikulas/links/download/binaries/linux-glibc2/ JonathanCross (talk) 10:16, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
The article lists several forks of links (ELinks, Hacked Links, Linkx, BeOS and PSP ports). Of this only ELinks is still active and received at least some mention (though surprisingly low, compared to its popularity). May be we should get rid of the stale efforts? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Merge ELinks here
I propose to merge ELinks article here, as these two topics are very close and it is more practical to cover them together: ELinks is essentially a set of patches to Links 0.x series, and the common description of these browsers (though currently lacking/incomplete in both articles) would not differ. Though I acknowledge that ELinks may be more popular then all other Links' forks and flavor combined, still the main topic seems to be Links, given the history of projects and coverage in sources. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:14, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Do not merge ELinks here
I propose against merging Links and ELinks articles:
- Elinks and Links are two distinctly different efforts - even if of common root. Elinks is to create an advanced text based browser. Links is first a prretty advanced text based browser too, but then a base for a console browser able to display graphics.
- When a surfer is looking for ELinks, then it is ELinks not Links or Links2 ("links -g"). And again, if it is Links browser that a surfer is looking for, then it is not ELinks - it is about Links or Links2 ("links -g").
- I Agree with User:Browser-do, elinks and links should not be merged. While elinks is a derivative work, it is not the same thing. Furthermore, there is no reason to mislead those into thinking they are the same. It's understandable that, to the casual or new user, they may appear to be similar; after all, the edit distance in the commandline is 1 char. They are clearly, to completely separate programs with, after so many changes and additions, a dissimilar codebase. I would be in favor of a text browsing history page, that would be the perfect place for the proposed merges. --17michaelt (talk) 17:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC)