Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:35:40 -0700
On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 12:16:32AM +0000, David Faure wrote:
> That's in fact the _goal_ of this change, as suggested George on kfm-devel.
> The _browser_ supports SSL, even if we're currently in a non-SSL connection.
> This might be used by some servers to redirect us to the SSL web pages.
Eek. No. More abuse of the useragent string. *sigh*
spamming pristine http headers. *SIGH*.
Mind you, accurately reporting whether or not the https slave is installed
is fine with me.. but to use it to propogate stupidity... grr.. and what
if https is installed afterwords? Should the https tarball include http
as well? Hrm.