In the elinks.conf.5 manual page, the text below the list of modes was
getting included in the last list item. This appears to be a design
error in AsciiDoc. Work around it by moving the text above the list.
elinks.1.in, elinkskeys.5, and elinks.conf.5 are included in the Git tree,
so they are initially in the srcdir, and that's were the new versions must go.
This ensures that no other string can have the same address. It
probably never was a problem though, because the strings to which it
can be compared either are allocated from the heap or are in
strings[][] which already has unshared storage.
On Dec 31, 2006, at 11:30am, Kalle Olavi Niemitalo writes:
>src/scripting/python/hooks.c (script_hook_url) calls hooks as
>goto_url_hook(new-url, current-url) and follow_url_hook(new-url).
>It has a comment saying that the current-url parameter exists
>only for compatibility and that the script can instead use
>elinks.current_url(). However, the current-url parameter was
>added in commit 87e27b9b3e and is
>not in ELinks 0.11.2, so any compatibility problems would only
>hit people who have been using 0.12.GIT snapshots. Can we remove
>the second parameter now before releasing ELinks 0.12pre1?
The decision isn't up to me, but I think this is a good idea. Here's a
patch that would update the documentation and hooks.py, as well as hooks.c.
FYI, if this patch is applied then anyone who's still trying to use a
goto_url_hook that expects a second argument will get a "Browser scripting
error" dialog box that says:
An error occurred while running a Python script:
TypeError: goto_url_hook() takes exactly 2 arguments (1 given)
It has no useful effect here, because Make runs the next command in
a separate shell process that does not inherit the working directory
from this one.
As commit 7db8abf6e7 does for Lua
and the document info box, change the Python scripting backend's
current_document and current_header APIs to use document->cached
instead of find_in_cached so the currently displayed document
will be used rather than the latest version of the document.
The numbering of document.dump.color_mode and terminal._template_.colors
is now the same regardless of compile-time options, unlike in previous
versions. Therefore this version of ELinks may interpret a configuration
file differently from previous versions even if compiled with the same
options. This is unfortunate but the alternatives (keeping the numbering
dependent on configuration options; defining separate options that use
the new numbering; starting the numbers from 10 or so and recognizing the
previous ones only for compatibility) seem even worse.
This does not conflict with querying the palette from xterm (bug 890)
because although those palettes would have to be modifiable, they
would be terminal-specific rather than global.
