From: David S. <da...@at...> - 2002-09-19 20:07:24
|
On Thu, 19 Sep 2002 12:01:15 -0700, ijb...@li... wrote: >From: Andreas Oesterhelt <oe...@oe...> >To: Privoxy List <ijb...@li...> >Cc: eolco <eo...@ea...> >Subject: Re: [privoxy-users] OS X Distribution -- Sophomoric Hack > >Hal, > >..thanks for setting this straight. I'd like to add that not all >occurrences of "soft" become "suck", but that only "Microsoft" becomes >"MicroSuck", plus that the label of the "fun" filter is "Text replacements >for subversive browsing fun!". So whoever turns it on shouldn't complain. >[...] >Regards, >--Andreas Ah, but you get the fun filter no matter what when you ask for 'advanced' actions settings. eloco didn't enable it directly... it came for free along with 'advanced'. I'd advocate not turning it on by any default we ship - we can either turn fun back off, or comment out the MicroSuck filter. - David |
From: Hal B. <hbu...@be...> - 2002-09-19 20:24:38
|
On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 04:06:31PM -0400, David Schmidt wrote: > > Ah, but you get the fun filter no matter what when you ask for 'advanced' > actions settings. eloco didn't enable it directly... it came for free > along with 'advanced'. I'd advocate not turning it on by any default > we ship - we can either turn fun back off, or comment out the MicroSuck > filter. I'd propose something else ... standard.filter only has three profiles now. There is no reason we can't have more. So we go: cautious politcally-correct (we could really annoy some people with this :) medium aggressive hell-bent-for-leather (or maybe full-metal-jacket ) Anyway <j/k>, maybe another profile? ;-) -- Hal Burgiss |
From: Andreas O. <oe...@oe...> - 2002-09-20 09:53:20
|
Hi Hal, > I'd propose something else ... standard.filter only has three profiles > now. There is no reason we can't have more. So we go: Why not? OTOH, unlike its name suggests, the "Advanced" profile can and does break things, so maybe just rename it to "Radical". Whoever complains after clicking "Radical" can be safely ignored. Note to self: There should be a way to annotate the profiles with short comments that are visible in the web-based editor. Best regards, --Andreas |
From: Beartooth <vze...@ve...> - 2002-09-24 20:47:07
|
In article <Pin...@ra...>, "Andreas Oesterhelt" <oe...@oe...> spake unto the electronic multitude, saying : > maybe just rename it to "Radical". Whoever complains > after clicking "Radical" can be safely ignored. > > Note to self: There should be a way to annotate the > profiles with short comments that are visible in the > web-based editor. As one near the opposite of Alpha Plus Technoid (APT) status and a mere grateful user, I *like* the way youss guyss's minds work -- and I think both the above are good ideas, which would help. (Of course, I also like the original hack, sophomoric or not. <grin>) And with the well-earned praise, a plea: where do I get help figuring out why I can't run Privoxy and Opera both at once under OSX? They do fine in RH 7.2. (I only just got YDL online; will try that tonight -- too pooped last night to remember to download Privoxy, alas!) Must've misconfigured my OSX version somehow.Is this the place?? -- Beartooth the Stubborn <karhunhammas (at) lserv.com> double retiree, linux hatchling: RH 7.2, YDL 2.2, OSX 10.1.5 Pine 4.43, Pan 0.11.2; Privoxy 3.0.0, Opera 6.03, Galeon 1.2.5 Delenda est MegaSleazo! http://www.linuxmall.com/refund/ |
From: Hal B. <hbu...@be...> - 2002-09-24 23:38:11
|
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 04:49:51PM -0400, Beartooth wrote: > > And with the well-earned praise, a plea: where do I > get help figuring out why I can't run Privoxy and Opera > both at once under OSX? They do fine in RH 7.2. (I only > just got YDL online; will try that tonight -- too > pooped last night to remember to download Privoxy, > alas!) Must've misconfigured my OSX version somehow.Is > this the place?? Maybe :) But you will need to post some details (eg error messages, log excerpts, etc). AFAIK, there is no known problems specific to Opera like you describe. Personally, I don't know a thing about OSX, but there are other users around that do, and David Schmidt does the Privoxy OSX development stuff (not sure he is on this list though). -- Hal Burgiss |
From: Beartooth <vze...@ve...> - 2002-10-28 22:53:11
|
In article <200...@fe...>, "Hal Burgiss" <hbu...@be...> quoth unto the electronic multitude, saying : > On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 04:49:51PM -0400, Beartooth wrote: >> >> And with the well-earned praise, a plea: where do I >> get help figuring out why I can't run Privoxy and Opera both at once >> under OSX? They do fine in RH 7.2. (I only just got YDL online; will >> try that tonight -- too pooped last night to remember to download >> Privoxy, alas!) Must've misconfigured my OSX version somehow.Is this >> the place?? > > Maybe :) But you will need to post some details (eg error messages, log > excerpts, etc). AFAIK, there is no known problems specific to Opera like > you describe. Personally, I don't know a thing about OSX, but there are > other users around that do, and David Schmidt does the Privoxy OSX > development stuff (not sure he is on this list though). I just happened to re-discover yesterday that I was supposed to put 127.0.0.1 where I had put simply "privoxy"; it works now. Fwiw, that's *just* the kind of detail people like me are going to fail to remember, and not realize we've goofed. Might could installing it put in the correct datum as a default somehow?? Those who know intuitively that an IP address (if that's what it is) has to stand there could always still tweak it to such another, should they have reason to. I don't thin I have ever even gotten around to learning *how* to tweak my RH 7.2 version; all the other defaults are plenty good enough, unless and until I ever actually get to wrapping my mind around these questions. Thanks once more for producing it in the first place! |
From: Hal B. <hbu...@be...> - 2002-10-29 00:54:49
|
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:53:09PM -0500, Beartooth wrote: > > I just happened to re-discover yesterday that I was supposed to put > 127.0.0.1 where I had put simply "privoxy"; it works now. > > Fwiw, that's *just* the kind of detail people like me are going to fail > to remember, and not realize we've goofed. Might could installing it put > in the correct datum as a default somehow?? Those who know intuitively > that an IP address (if that's what it is) has to stand there could always > still tweak it to such another, should they have reason to. Are you talking about the browser config for proxy address? This is not really possible, and not worth the effort to even try IMO. Some of the many reasons: There are many browsers, and probably each is different. This would have to be done by the installer, and again we have many. At least for NS and Mozilla based browsers, I am pretty sure this data is in a file that is read when the browser starts, held in memory, and then written when closed. So this would never work if tried when the browser is in use. It would have to be done for every user (and only non-system users), on *nix type systems. For LAN installations, it would be impossible to reach the browsers. Mozilla supports multiple profiles, and you'd have "guess" how these are named. etc, etc, etc.... -- Hal Burgiss |