> Alex> Thank you, whilst I do appreciate constructive criticism, I will
> Alex> NOT tolerate people levelling insults at me, over this. I'm not
> Alex> going to change my mind until people starts being nicer and
> Alex> putting forward constructive criticism instead of calling me an
> Alex> "asshole", with an "one brain cell" to quote two people in this
> Alex> mailing list. That definitely doesn't achieve anything except
> Alex> piss me off big time, and especially when I've put a lot of work
> Alex> into this HOWTO-framebuffer (which _does_ work on a text
> Alex> browser) and this is what I get, a slap in my face.
>
> Whats insulting is that message your pages prints when people try to
> access the pages with a non-frames browser.
Although disappointing, I wouldn't say "insulting". It merely
reports that non-frames browsers aren't supported, however I used
LYNX to view the pages, and LYNX seemed to display the pages just
fine IMHO...
> I'd say you got two options: 1) make your pages stop printing that
> crap or 2) stop doing the HOWTO (a HOWTO on a frames-only page is
> useless).
A non-frames page would be nice, but I think that he is free to
do what he wants. Some people write documentation in a certain
format, say as an ASCII text file, or as HTML, and refuse to do
it in say SGML. That is their preference. It might be more
useful to everyone to have it done in SGML, as it can be easily
converted to many formats then, however if someone wants to
writea helpful document, but doesn't want to learn SGML, or
whatever, they just want to write it in a simple format they are
familiar with, does that mean that they shouldn't bother?
I think we should be more thankful to people that do things like
this for free. Nobody is stoping anyone from copying such a
HOWTO and putting it on their own NON-FRAMES pages.
Don't get me wrong, I don't care for frames pages much either,
however it is certainly not fair to complain about getting
something free. If I did a frames only page, and got treated
like this, I would do the same thing.
> Just a side note, most of the frame buffer code comes from the m68k
> port, however many m68k people do no run X because their boxes are too
> slow and besides that there is no official Netscape (nor M$ Internet
> Exploiter - fortunately) port for it.
That is unfortunate. Time for an upgrade eh? I don't know a
single person that has a computer that isn't capable of running a
frames enabled web browser.
> The only thing I know of that will be able to view your pages
> is Mozilla with Lesstif .....
Well then there shouldn't be any problem.
> Jes
>
> PS: This of course doesn't have anything to do with the fact that
> frames are a 43$@#$#@ pain in the a**.
Well *that* we can CERTAINLY agree with! ;o) There are some
useful web sites that use frames in a nice way though.
-- Mike A. Harris - Computer Consultant - Linux advocateEscape from the confines of Microsoft's operating systems and push your PC to it's limits with LINUX - a real OS. http://www.redhat.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html