Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #232073 > unrolled thread

Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????)

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-02-25 13:50 +0100
    Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-02-25 13:50 +0100
      Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-02-25 14:20 +0100
        Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-02-25 14:50 +0100
    Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) IL Ka <kazakevichilya@gmail.com> - 2021-02-25 14:00 +0100
      Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-02-25 14:20 +0100
        Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-02-25 14:30 +0100
          Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-02-25 15:50 +0100
      Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-02-25 14:40 +0100
        Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Kent West <westk@acu.edu> - 2021-02-25 14:50 +0100
          Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> - 2021-02-25 23:50 +0100
        Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2021-02-25 15:00 +0100
          Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) "James B" <portoteacher80@fastmail.com> - 2021-02-25 15:50 +0100
            Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-02-25 16:00 +0100
              Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-02-25 16:10 +0100
                Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) "James B" <portoteacher80@fastmail.com> - 2021-02-25 16:20 +0100
                Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-02-25 16:40 +0100
                  Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-02-25 16:50 +0100
                    Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-02-25 17:20 +0100
                    Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2021-02-25 23:50 +0100
                      Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-02-26 13:30 +0100
                        Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-02-26 14:50 +0100
                  Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-02-26 01:30 +0100
              Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Michael Howard <mike@dewberryfields.co.uk> - 2021-02-25 16:10 +0100
        Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-02-25 16:20 +0100
    Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-02-25 14:10 +0100
    Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2021-02-25 14:10 +0100
      Re: Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????) Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-02-25 14:40 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#232073 — Looking for a "text mode browser" (good description????)

Darac's answer to answer to a previous question led me to try
> https://html.duckduckgo.com/html?q=%2Bintitle%3Afaq%20site%3Adebian.org
which gave me the content I needed, but not in a convenient format.

I would like to pipe search results to a text processor.
Synaptic led me to "surfraw" and "w3m".
Documentation for "w3m" was more use user friendly, so I installed it.

Following a man page example I got:

> richard@defaultinstall:~$ $ w3m -M http://w3m.sourceforge.net
> bash: $: command not found
> richard@defaultinstall:~$ su
> Password: 
> root@defaultinstall:/home/richard# $ w3m -M http://w3m.sourceforge.net
> bash: $: command not found
> root@defaultinstall:/home/richard# 

Why? Suggestions to reach my goal?
TIA

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#232074

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2021-02-25 at 07:41, Richard Owlett wrote:

> Darac's answer to answer to a previous question led me to try
>
>> https://html.duckduckgo.com/html?q=%2Bintitle%3Afaq%20site%3Adebian.org
> which gave me the content I needed, but not in a convenient format.
> 
> I would like to pipe search results to a text processor.
> Synaptic led me to "surfraw" and "w3m".
> Documentation for "w3m" was more use user friendly, so I installed it.
> 
> Following a man page example I got:
> 
>> richard@defaultinstall:~$ $ w3m -M http://w3m.sourceforge.net
>> bash: $: command not found

You don't need to include the '$ ' at the start of the command.

When someone presents a command in the form

$ command --options arguments /path/to/filename

or

# command --options arguments /path/to/filename

the $ or # represents the shell prompt; a shell prompt ending in '$'
typically represents a command being run as an ordinary user, and a
shell prompt ending in '#' typically represents one being run as the
root user. The reason for including these is so that when one is
presenting both commands and command output, it's clear at a glance
which lines are commands and which are not.

Strip those parts out of your command, and see what you get.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232080

On 02/25/2021 06:49 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2021-02-25 at 07:41, Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
>> Darac's answer to answer to a previous question led me to try
>>
>>> https://html.duckduckgo.com/html?q=%2Bintitle%3Afaq%20site%3Adebian.org
>> which gave me the content I needed, but not in a convenient format.
>>
>> I would like to pipe search results to a text processor.
>> Synaptic led me to "surfraw" and "w3m".
>> Documentation for "w3m" was more use user friendly, so I installed it.
>>
>> Following a man page example I got:
>>
>>> richard@defaultinstall:~$ $ w3m -M http://w3m.sourceforge.net
>>> bash: $: command not found
> 
> You don't need to include the '$ ' at the start of the command.
> 
> When someone presents a command in the form
> 
> $ command --options arguments /path/to/filename
> 
> or
> 
> # command --options arguments /path/to/filename
> 
> the $ or # represents the shell prompt; a shell prompt ending in '$'
> typically represents a command being run as an ordinary user, and a
> shell prompt ending in '#' typically represents one being run as the
> root user. The reason for including these is so that when one is
> presenting both commands and command output, it's clear at a glance
> which lines are commands and which are not.
> 
> Strip those parts out of your command, and see what you get.
> 

*DUH*  {With 'egg on face' ;{
Can I blame it on a caffeine free diet ;/
Thank you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232085

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Feb 25, 2021, 7:13 AM Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

> On 02/25/2021 06:49 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
> > On 2021-02-25 at 07:41, Richard Owlett wrote:
> >
> >> Darac's answer to answer to a previous question led me to try
> >>
> >>>
> https://html.duckduckgo.com/html?q=%2Bintitle%3Afaq%20site%3Adebian.org
> >> which gave me the content I needed, but not in a convenient format.
> >>
> >> I would like to pipe search results to a text processor.
> >> Synaptic led me to "surfraw" and "w3m".
> >> Documentation for "w3m" was more use user friendly, so I installed it.
> ....
> >
>
> *DUH*  {With 'egg on face' ;{
> Can I blame it on a caffeine free diet ;/
> Thank you.
>

That caffeine excuse flies here 😊
One of the unmentioned differences between lynx and wget is that lynx can
be used in a full-screen, menu-like text-mode form. Whereas wget is only
command line. You will learn how fast an http/https browser can be if it
doesn't have to render bitmap graphics.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232075

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

>
>
> I would like to pipe search results to a text processor.
>
Do you want rendered results or plain HTML ?
In latter case you need ``wget``



> Synaptic led me to "surfraw" and "w3m".
>
There is also a browser named "lynx".
Not sure which one suits your needs best.
Try them all!


>
> > richard@defaultinstall:~$ $ w3m -M http://w3m.sourceforge.net
> > bash: $: command not found
>
"$" is part of your prompt, do not type it



> > richard@defaultinstall:~$ su
> > Password:
> > root@defaultinstall:/home/richard# $ w3m -M http://w3m.sourceforge.net
> > bash: $: command not found
>
I assume you need to install it i.e
$ sudo apt install w3m
or use Synaptic to install it.

Please read https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch02.en.html
<https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch02.en.html>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232081

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 03:50:32PM +0300, IL Ka wrote:
> >
> >
> > I would like to pipe search results to a text processor.
> >
> Do you want rendered results or plain HTML ?
> In latter case you need ``wget``

To expand on that, perhaps

  wget -O - <your URL here> | html2text

tries to make sense of the html (which isn't always possible) and
output some text version of it. The "-O -" tells wget to send its
output to stdout (instead of to a file).

You get html2text from the like-named package, html2text.

For duckduckgo, you'll get better results by using its non-Javascript
URL:

  https://html.duckduckgo.com/html?q=<your query string here>

(Duckduckgo will try to redirect your wget to that, but according to
some scant testing by me, it doesn't seem to work).

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232082

tomas@tuxteam.de (tomas@tuxteam.de) wrote:
> To expand on that, perhaps
> 
>   wget -O - <your URL here> | html2text
> 
> tries to make sense of the html (which isn't always possible) and
> output some text version of it. The "-O -" tells wget to send its
> output to stdout (instead of to a file).
> 
> You get html2text from the like-named package, html2text.

There are several other variants on this, depending on what's installed.
One of the most common (oldest) ones is lynx -dump "$url".

Most of the terminal-based web browsers have a similar output mode, I
think.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232090

On 02/25/2021 07:23 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> tomas@tuxteam.de (tomas@tuxteam.de) wrote:
>> To expand on that, perhaps
>>
>>    wget -O - <your URL here> | html2text
>>
>> tries to make sense of the html (which isn't always possible) and
>> output some text version of it. The "-O -" tells wget to send its
>> output to stdout (instead of to a file).
>>
>> You get html2text from the like-named package, html2text.
> 
> There are several other variants on this, depending on what's installed.
> One of the most common (oldest) ones is lynx -dump "$url".
> 
> Most of the terminal-based web browsers have a similar output mode, I
> think.
> 

Blindly copying that line (with appropriate url) gives something very 
close to where I was heading. I purposely kept my questions narrowly 
focused to avoid rabbit trails.
More reading to do.
Thank you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232084

On 02/25/2021 06:50 AM, IL Ka wrote:
> 
>>     I would like to pipe search results to a text processor.
> 
> Do you want rendered results or plain HTML ?
> In latter case you need ``wget``

I wish to be free of all HTML artifacts.
If dealing with only a single page Cntrl-A Cntrl-C and pasting into 
Pluma gives desired format.

> 
>>     Synaptic led me to "surfraw" and "w3m".
> 
> There is also a browser named "lynx".
> Not sure which one suits your needs best.
> Try them all!

Can someone recommend a newbie friendly intro to any of them.
Man pages can be less than "useful: to 1st time user.

> 
> 
>>      > richard@defaultinstall:~$ $ w3m -M http://w3m.sourceforge.net
>>      > bash: $: command not found
> 
> "$" is part of your prompt, do not type it
> 

Blaming that one on caffeine free diet ;/
Thank you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232086

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 7:34 AM Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

> On 02/25/2021 06:50 AM, IL Ka wrote:
> > There is also a browser named "lynx".
> > Not sure which one suits your needs best.
> > Try them all!
>
> Can someone recommend a newbie friendly intro to any of them.
> Man pages can be less than "useful: to 1st time user.
>
> Or links2, which is my usual go-to text-based browser.


-- 
Kent West                    <")))><
Westing Peacefully - http://kentwest.blogspot.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232125

Lynx is still under development, has an active mailing list, and allot of 
documentation.
Best thing might be to join the list and let others help you.  Speaking 
personally? Man pages are likely to be out of date.
as for links the chain, I would welcome discovering a mailing list too.
Still wondering if that browser supports cookies.
Karen



On Thu, 25 Feb 2021, Kent West wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 7:34 AM Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>
>> On 02/25/2021 06:50 AM, IL Ka wrote:
>>> There is also a browser named "lynx".
>>> Not sure which one suits your needs best.
>>> Try them all!
>>
>> Can someone recommend a newbie friendly intro to any of them.
>> Man pages can be less than "useful: to 1st time user.
>>
>> Or links2, which is my usual go-to text-based browser.
>
>
> -- 
> Kent West                    <")))><
> Westing Peacefully - http://kentwest.blogspot.com
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232087

Links, links2, and elinks (also install elinks-doc) as well as lynx,
surfraw, and w3m.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232089

Browsh was reviewed in one of the linux magazines recently.It uses firefox behind the scenes and renders the pages to ASCII for display in a terminal, which is a novel approach.I've tried it and it works well..

https://www.brow.sh/

-- 
  James B
  portoteacher80@fastmail.com

Em Qui, 25 Fev ʼ21, às 13:51, John Hasler escreveu:
> Links, links2, and elinks (also install elinks-doc) as well as lynx,
> surfraw, and w3m.
> -- 
> John Hasler 
> jhasler@newsguy.com
> Elmwood, WI USA
> 
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232094

On 02/25/2021 08:41 AM, James B wrote:
> Browsh was reviewed in one of the linux magazines recently.It uses firefox behind the scenes and renders the pages to ASCII for display in a terminal, which is a novel approach.I've tried it and it works well..
> 
> https://www.brow.sh/
> 

Maybe later. It isn't in repository and depends on Firefox.
I'm strongly pro-SeaMonkey ;}

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232095

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2021-02-25 at 10:02, Michael Howard wrote:

> On 25/02/2021 14:55, Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
>> On 02/25/2021 08:41 AM, James B wrote:
>> 
>>> Browsh was reviewed in one of the linux magazines recently.It
>>> uses firefox behind the scenes and renders the pages to ASCII for
>>> display in a terminal, which is a novel approach.I've tried it
>>> and it works well..
>>> 
>>> https://www.brow.sh/
>> 
>> Maybe later. It isn't in repository and depends on Firefox. I'm
>> strongly pro-SeaMonkey ;}
> 
> Err, where do think SeaMonkey evolved from?

As far as I'm aware, it's a lineal descendant of the Mozilla Suite, just
as Firefox and Thunderbird are - although, again AFAIK, only Firefox is
still an official Mozilla product.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232098

I'm not sure if Browsh works with SeaMonkey- there's many reasons why I imagine it should work, but it depends on whether or not the differences present would be critical.Would be interesting to know

-- 
  James B
  portoteacher80@fastmail.com

Em Qui, 25 Fev ʼ21, às 15:06, The Wanderer escreveu:
> On 2021-02-25 at 10:02, Michael Howard wrote:
> 
> > On 25/02/2021 14:55, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > 
> >> On 02/25/2021 08:41 AM, James B wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Browsh was reviewed in one of the linux magazines recently.It
> >>> uses firefox behind the scenes and renders the pages to ASCII for
> >>> display in a terminal, which is a novel approach.I've tried it
> >>> and it works well..
> >>> 
> >>> https://www.brow.sh/
> >> 
> >> Maybe later. It isn't in repository and depends on Firefox. I'm
> >> strongly pro-SeaMonkey ;}
> > 
> > Err, where do think SeaMonkey evolved from?
> 
> As far as I'm aware, it's a lineal descendant of the Mozilla Suite, just
> as Firefox and Thunderbird are - although, again AFAIK, only Firefox is
> still an official Mozilla product.
> 
> -- 
>    The Wanderer
> 
> The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
> persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
> progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw
> 
> 
> Anexos:
> * signature.asc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232101

On 02/25/2021 09:06 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2021-02-25 at 10:02, Michael Howard wrote:
> 
>> On 25/02/2021 14:55, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/25/2021 08:41 AM, James B wrote:
>>>
>>>> Browsh was reviewed in one of the linux magazines recently.It
>>>> uses firefox behind the scenes and renders the pages to ASCII for
>>>> display in a terminal, which is a novel approach.I've tried it
>>>> and it works well..
>>>>
>>>> https://www.brow.sh/
>>>
>>> Maybe later. It isn't in repository and depends on Firefox. I'm
>>> strongly pro-SeaMonkey ;}
>>
>> Err, where do think SeaMonkey evolved from?
> 
> As far as I'm aware, it's a lineal descendant of the Mozilla Suite, just
> as Firefox and Thunderbird are - although, again AFAIK, only Firefox is
> still an official Mozilla product.
> 

I date from era of Netscape Navigator.
SeaMonkey is true to its roots.
I *did* hint at a slight bias (didn't I :}

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232102

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2021-02-25 at 10:30, Richard Owlett wrote:

> On 02/25/2021 09:06 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
> 
>> On 2021-02-25 at 10:02, Michael Howard wrote:

>>> Err, where do think SeaMonkey evolved from?
>> 
>> As far as I'm aware, it's a lineal descendant of the Mozilla Suite,
>> just as Firefox and Thunderbird are - although, again AFAIK, only
>> Firefox is still an official Mozilla product.
> 
> I date from era of Netscape Navigator.

As do I; my first use of it was no later than the days when my family
was getting its Internet connection through dial-up with AOL 4.0. (And
maybe as early as 3.0.)

I eventually decided that I do prefer having the mail client (etc.)
split out from the Web browser, as happened when the Mozilla Suite split
into Firefox and Thunderbird, if only so that when one hangs the other
doesn't. Other than that, though...

> SeaMonkey is true to its roots.
> I *did* hint at a slight bias (didn't I :}

That unified-suite factor, and a few UI considerations which applied
last time I looked (though it's been some years), are why I don't go
with Seamonkey myself. I certainly understand why others would, though.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232108

On 02/25/2021 09:40 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2021-02-25 at 10:30, Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
>> On 02/25/2021 09:06 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
>>
>>> On 2021-02-25 at 10:02, Michael Howard wrote:
> 
>>>> Err, where do think SeaMonkey evolved from?
>>>
>>> As far as I'm aware, it's a lineal descendant of the Mozilla Suite,
>>> just as Firefox and Thunderbird are - although, again AFAIK, only
>>> Firefox is still an official Mozilla product.
>>
>> I date from era of Netscape Navigator.
> 
> As do I; my first use of it was no later than the days when my family
> was getting its Internet connection through dial-up with AOL 4.0. (And
> maybe as early as 3.0.)
> 
> I eventually decided that I do prefer having the mail client (etc.)
> split out from the Web browser, as happened when the Mozilla Suite split
> into Firefox and Thunderbird, if only so that when one hangs the other
> doesn't. Other than that, though...
> 
>> SeaMonkey is true to its roots.
>> I *did* hint at a slight bias (didn't I :}
> 
> That unified-suite factor, and a few UI considerations which applied
> last time I looked (though it's been some years), are why I don't go
> with Seamonkey myself. I certainly understand why others would, though.
> 

Those a pretty close to why stay with SeaMonkey. I even have occasional 
use for Composer though its HTML is dated, to say the least.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#232123

The Wanderer composed on 2021-02-25 10:40 (UTC-0500):

> Richard Owlett wrote:

>> I date from era of Netscape Navigator.

> As do I; my first use of it was no later than the days when my family
> was getting its Internet connection through dial-up with AOL 4.0. (And
> maybe as early as 3.0.)

> I eventually decided that I do prefer having the mail client (etc.)
> split out from the Web browser, as happened when the Mozilla Suite split
> into Firefox and Thunderbird, if only so that when one hangs the other
> doesn't. Other than that, though...

>> SeaMonkey is true to its roots.
>> I *did* hint at a slight bias (didn't I :}

> That unified-suite factor, and a few UI considerations which applied
> last time I looked (though it's been some years), are why I don't go
> with Seamonkey myself. I certainly understand why others would, though.

2.02 is where I'm from. Are there any email apps that will hunt down an open web
browser window and open an email link in a new tab in that open window instead of
some new window? The guarantee that that's what will happen is one reason I've
never considered migrating from SeaMonkey.
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion,
	is based on faith, not on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web