Re: [UPDATE] www/links+ 2.21 -> 2.22

Am Sun, 28 Mar 2021 16:18:02 -0400
schrieb trondd <trondd@kagu-tsuchi.com>:

> Simple update to 2.22. I don't think the terminal/console saving
> applies to OpenBSD. They are within a __LINUX__ define and I'm not
> sure what it does to know if it should be supported or not...
>
> Tim.
>
> === RELEASE 2.22 ===
>
> Sat Jan 23 18:11:41 CET 2021 mikulas:
>
> Save and restore the terminal using xterm escape codes
>
> Sat Nov 28 19:27:47 CET 2020 mikulas:
>
> Save and restore the console using "cons.saver" from
> Midnight Commander
>
> Sat Nov 28 11:05:42 CET 2020 mikulas:
>
> Support UTF-8 frames
>
> Sun Nov 22 17:20:29 CET 2020 Emir Yasin SARI <bitigchi@me.com>:
>
> Updated the Turkish translation
>
> Sat Aug 22 10:05:27 CEST 2020 Ing. Daniel G. Gionco
> <dggionco@hotmail.com>:
>
> Updated the Spanish translation
>
> Wed Aug 12 20:04:38 CEST 2020 mikulas:
>
> Fixed a bug in displaying non-printable characters
> (reported by Jean-Philippe MENGUAL <jpmengual@debian.org>)
>
>
>
> Index: Makefile
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/ports/www/links+/Makefile,v
> retrieving revision 1.69
> diff -u -p -r1.69 Makefile
> --- Makefile 17 Aug 2020 19:45:02 -0000 1.69
> +++ Makefile 28 Mar 2021 20:03:51 -0000
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> # $OpenBSD: Makefile,v 1.69 2020/08/17 19:45:02 bcallah Exp $
>
> COMMENT= graphics and text browser
> -VER= 2.21
> +VER= 2.22
> DISTNAME= links-${VER}
> PKGNAME= links+-${VER}
> CATEGORIES= www
> Index: distinfo
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/ports/www/links+/distinfo,v
> retrieving revision 1.39
> diff -u -p -r1.39 distinfo
> --- distinfo 17 Aug 2020 19:45:02 -0000 1.39
> +++ distinfo 28 Mar 2021 20:03:51 -0000
> @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
> -SHA256 (links-2.21.tar.gz) =
> 8OH9Exten/lDvMZn4KpjMQSHSa1LkhtvrdFOkZ2feaw= -SIZE
> (links-2.21.tar.gz) = 7076375 +SHA256 (links-2.22.tar.gz) =
> mR13zzUiOEef+8NuA6N+gjDFdXFjNQ4FupiKKJOeKEs= +SIZE
> (links-2.22.tar.gz) = 7078957
>

Works fine with my usual workflow, thanks!

--
greetings,

Florian Viehweger

Re: Primepower 250 vs Sunfire v215

> not really possible with the primepower 250 (hard to find any kind of SSD

There is industrial grade 80-pin SCA-2 SSD, Ultra320 by Hagiwara. Can be
limited to 73GB or 147GB usable on a Primepower 250.

They say and I quote: "Hagiwara specializes in industrial grade flash
storage and our customers pay a premium for extra endurance and
reliability."

On Sunday, September 20, 2020, Claudio Jeker <cjeker@diehard.n-r-g.com>
wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 08:00:45PM +0300, Kihaguru Gathura wrote:
>> > The Primepower is bigger and needs more power but if you find a box
with
>> > good CPUs and memory it should run faster than a V215
>>
>> How did the performance of the PrimePower 250 SCSI drives compare to Sun
>> Fire V215 SAS drives?
>
> Any spinning rust is slow compared to SSD disks. I run my Fire V215 with a
> NVME disk for the busy partitions (but boot from the SAS drives). This is
> not really possible with the primepower 250 (hard to find any kind of SSD
> for that system).
>
> --
> :wq Claudio
>