HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: niko@iastate.edu (Nikolaus E Schuessler)
Subject: ** Question about binutils/GNU binutils
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 13:33:56 GMT

I got the binutils (1.94-beta) to compile as a cross compiler for
680x0 platforms.  Here is my configuration line:

 configure -target=m68k-sony-bsd mips-dec-ultrix4.2

I also have gas configured as as68, or the 68000 assembler...

So, I now can ask my questions:

1) Are there any docs on the assembly syntax used by gas? I was told by
   someone that it is a pseudo-mit syntax.... I'm not familiar with
   the mit format however...

2) Are there docs on the object format that gas/gld produce... it is possible
   to get header structs, etc, from the gld source, but it isn't exactly
   clear what's going on there....

3) gld -r obj1 obj2 obj3  is supposed to keep the relocation info, right?
   Is it supposed to even though all the references resolve? I don't seem
   to be getting any relocation info...

4) On UNIX systems, do all programs get compiled to run at one address,
   whereafter memory mapping/hardware stuff is used to do the translation
   as opposed to the loader? If so, what affects the decision on what
   that address is? does it matter?

Thanks in advance ...

-- 
Niko Schuessler               
Project Vincent Systems Manager              email: niko@iastate.edu
Iowa State University Computation Center     voice: (515) 294-1672
Ames IA 50010                                snail: 272 Durham 
Xref: sparky gnu.misc.discuss:3273 comp.os.linux:12950 comp.unix.bsd:7132
From: preece@urbana.mcd.mot.com (Scott E. Preece)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Suggestions for the free Unix projects
Date: 7 Oct 92 14:13:58 GMT
	<1992Oct7.040347.425@fcom.cc.utah.edu>
Organization: Motorola MCG, Urbana Design Center

In article <1992Oct7.040347.425@fcom.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes:

|   The mastering system is used to take data and lay it out in the correct
|   file format; it has a "CD Emulator" (2 disks) and a DAT drive for writing
|   the master, plus all hardware and software to deal with the creation of
|   the master tape.  This is not something you can do without unless you
|   work somewhere that already bought one and they will miraculously let you
|   use it, or you own the company (volunteers, anyone?).
---
Perhaps I'm missing something not quoted in the response, but...

This analysis assumes the full cost of the mastering system is allocated
to a single CD.  Why would you do that?  You could subcontract the
mastering to someone who has a mastering system, if you were only
producing a single disk; if you were producing a series of disks the
cost would get spread over the series, radically lowering the unit cost.
--
scott preece
motorola/mcg urbana design center	1101 e. university, urbana, il   61801
uucp:	uunet!uiucuxc!udc!preece,	 arpa:	preece@urbana.mcd.mot.com
phone:	217-384-8589			  fax:	217-384-8550
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: "mike frisch" <mike.frisch@canrem.com>
Subject: os/2 support
Reply-To: "mike frisch" <mike.frisch@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: gnu
Date: 12 Oct 92 21:12:25 EST


In a previous message, John Paul Morrison writes...

JPM> that's all I can think of, there's probably more.

     Thanks very much, John!  I've got GCC/EMX installed and working on
my system.  Now I've got to take a look at some source and see what I
can learn <GRIN>

JPM> commentary: if you want a lot of UNIXisms without the scary prospects of
JPM> Linux or BSD/386, OS/2 is a pretty safe and CHEAP alternative.

     I am quite happy with OS/2 on my system.  Performance and features
are great!

Mike.

+----------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Mike Frisch                  Usenet:  mike.frisch@canrem.com  |
|  Newmarket, Ontario, Canada                                    |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+

---
  OLX 2.2  What we have here is a failure to communicate.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: asherman@fmrco.com (Aaron Sherman)
Subject: What GNU Wants (song parody)
Reply-To: asherman@fmrco.COM
Organization: I-Kinetics, 19 Bishop-Allen Dr., Cambridge, MA
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 02:59:04 GMT


What follows is a parody of a song called "What God Wants" by Roger Waters.
I've taken a large amount of liberty with the song, and it now resembles
the GPL more than a pop song ;-)

Actually, you should keep in mind that I sacrificed some reality for
good rhymes :-)

What GNU wants GNU gets GNU help us all
What GNU wants GNU gets
The kid with a modem looked at the list
And fingered his off white Japanese keyboard
The list said
GNU wants hackers
GNU wants rights
GNU wants FORTRAN
GNU wants a low price
What GNU wants GNU gets
Don't look so surprised
It's only data
J R Hacker cried
The users and the coders
Took the standards from a book
RMS was in the corner
Writing LISP that no one grokked
What GNU wants GNU gets GNU help us all
GNU's not UNIX
GNU's on the net
GNU's got POSIX
GNU's not done yet
What GNU wants GNU gets
GNU wants compilers
GNU wants TeX
GNU wants freedom
GNU hates the DAT tax
What GNU wants GNU gets
Don't look so afraid
I was only joking
The corporation lied
The hackers and the users
Put the word out on the net
The lawyers in the courtrooms
Took what they could get
What GNU wants GNU gets
GNU wants standards
GNU wants docs
GNU wants a kernel
GNU wants X apps
What GNU wants GNU gets
GNU wants PostScript(TM)
GNU wants texi
GNU wants LISP
GNU wants standardized C
GNU wants protests
GNU wants boycott
GNU wants MIPS
GNU wants megs
What GNU wants GNU gets

Filked by Aaron Sherman (asherman@i-kinetics.com)
From "What God Wants" by Roger Waters
--
--------
Disclaimer: I am solely responsible for the content of this message.
The views expressed here may not be the views of I-Kinetics, Fidelity,
any of the Fidelity-owned corporations or my mother.
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: djm@eng.umd.edu (David J. MacKenzie)
Subject: Re: Making Mach build with non-CMU tools (suggestions)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 03:51:05 GMT
Organization: Project GLUE, University of Maryland
	<MIB.92Oct6135734@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <BvyC1u.87G@sci.kun.nl>
	<MIB.92Oct14142050@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu>

      >If CMU
      >decides to use our Makefiles, that's great--but it isn't worth much.
      >Our makefiles need to be conformant to the GNU Coding Standards, and
      >CMU's will probably never be.

      Is there a specification of those coding standards? If so, where
      can I get it?

   Write gnu@prep.ai.mit.edu.

Or ftp standards.texi and/or standards.info and/or autoconf-1.2.tar.Z
from prep.ai.mit.edu or another GNU archive site . . . .
Xref: sparky gnu.misc.discuss:3258 comp.os.linux:12823 comp.unix.bsd:7066
From: fink@et.msc.edu (Paul Fink)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd
Subject: distributing linux on floppies
Date: 7 Oct 92 16:44:02 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5


I think it might be more appropriate for linux distribution to be done
by a user group rather than a for profit company.

The only user group I belonged to was a Mac group back when Macs were new.
and part of its function was distribution of PD software on floppies.

If we could get a Linux user group going in a community with sufficient
resources they could handle making a set of master floppies and
arranging for bulk copying.

I have not heard of any Linux groups but I would be glad to help organize
one.

Paul
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: mnarayan@bmerh484.bnr.ca (Brian Larmour)
Subject: GAWK
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:05:36 GMT


Does anyone out there have a version of GAWK (GNU AWK) for the HP425. Please let me know.

Is there an ftp site that holds GNU binaries ?

Thanks.

Malur
-----

Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd
From: adrian@ibmpcug.co.uk (Superuser)
Subject: Re: distributing linux on floppies
Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 10:00:55 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.164402.29427@uc.msc.edu> fink@et.msc.edu (Paul Fink) writes:
>
>I think it might be more appropriate for linux distribution to be done
>by a user group rather than a for profit company.
>

Well, being the systems manager of the IBM PC User Group in Britain,
I guess I could do it. Could some kind soul out there tell me what
they would expect from such a distribution. (i.e. number of disks,
where I can get the images from, etc.)

This User Group charges 4 UKP per disk normally. Add on top of that
VAT (so we dont have to muck around with export charges) at 17.5% and
postage and packing (i.e. if you are abroad, call for a price first),

There is a special offer for 386BSD (since it arrives on 40 3.5" disks!)
of 50 pounds + VAT + postage.

Postage is free within the Uk.

Adrian
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adrian Hall					Connect Systems Manager
A.Hall@ibmpcug.co.uk				The IBM PC User Group
Tel: +44 81 863 1191				Harrow, London, UK
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: eggert@twinsun.com (Paul Eggert)
Subject: Re: Commercial RCS
Keywords: Profit, copyright protected?
Organization: Twin Sun, Inc
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:22:00 GMT

MKS licensed an ancient version of RCS directly from Walter F. Tichy,
its original author.  Since then, I believe they've developed their RCS
independently of the free version.  As far as I know, MKS is in
compliance with their license and they haven't violated the GNU GPL.
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd
From: bradleyt@spot.Colorado.EDU (Todd Bradley)
Subject: Is Fortran dead?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 00:05:13 GMT

Well, I just recently subscribed to this newsgroup (about a week
ago), so forgive me if this is a dead topic.  I remember some
talk about a year ago that there was some GNU work being done
to integrate the f2c program, which was recently (a year or so ago)
made public domain, into the GNU C compiler.  However, I haven't
heard a thing about it since then.  Is anyone working on it still
or has the subject been dropped? 

Todd.

-- 
| Todd Bradley -- Official Microsoft Spokesman
| 
| WARNING/GUARANTEE: This message contains material which a truly
| free Society would neither fear nor suppress.
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd
From: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin N9ITP)
Subject: Re: distributing linux on floppies
Reply-To: hpa@nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin)
Organization: You must be kidding!
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 08:47:17 GMT

In article <1b27slINNj2f@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> of comp.os.linux,
  edguer@ces.cwru.edu (Aydin Edguer) writes:
> 
> When the distributer sells a copy of software covered by the GPL to a
> retailer, they are transferring a copy.  When the retailer sells a copy
> of software covered by the GPL to a customer, they are transferring a
> copy.  Money can be made from the sale and distribution of software
> covered by the GPL.
> 
> The important thing a distributor and retailer must keep in mind is that
> they must distribute the source code, or provide a method of obtaining
> the source code for up to three years, and that they cannot limit the
> redistribution of the software.  If a local user group wants to purchase
> a copy of the distribution and sell duplicates for less than the retailer
> or distributor, the retailer or distributor may not stop them from
> competing.
> 

M-x armchair-lawyer-mode

From my viewpoint, it seems perfectly legal for a retailer to sell a
GPL-covered product, at a markup, as long as it comes in a box with a
little mail-in card saying:

	Source Code Distribution
	------------------------

	If you would like to acquire the source code for this product
	as provided for by the General Public License, please mail
	in this card with a check or money order payable to
	SOFTWARE SHRINKWRAPS, UNLTD:

		___ copies: 3.5" HD (20 disks)  @ $60.00
		___ copies: 5.25" HD (24 disks) @ $60.00

		    Shipping & fondling...         $7.00

	Name/Address/Phone/Mother's Maiden Name/Father's Maiden Name/etc

... assuming, of course, that the cost of the package is at least $3/disk
when you buy it.

	/hpa


-- 
INTERNET:  hpa@nwu.edu   TALK:      hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
BITNET:    HPA@NUACC     IBMNET:    16331@IBMX400
HAM RADIO: N9ITP         NeXTMAIL:  hpa@lenny.acns.nwu.edu
Most inappropriatly named startup command, winner:  Microsoft Windows
From: gthaker@fergie.dnet.ge.com (Gautam H. Thaker)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Making Mach build with non-CMU tools (suggestions)
Date: 7 Oct 92 20:57:48 GMT
Followup-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Organization: GE Advanced Technology Laboratories

In article <STEINARB.92Oct4172851@hagtorn.idt.unit.no> steinarb@idt.unit.no (Steinar Bang) writes:

[article raises many excellent points about difficulties of working with
 CMU makes, etc. It suggested alternatives, but raised the following question.]

   The question: is who is going to do it? CMU don't have any incentives
   for the time being. OSF? FSF? I don't know.

   - Steinar

Can someone from the CMU mach project please post their plans for MACH work
over the next year or so? In which areas will we see significant
activities?  Is the MKnn count for releases likely to continue in to
foreseeable future?  Will the center of activities ever shift to OSF? FSF?
If it is OSF than the new licensing issues will severly hamper access by
the research community.

Gautam H. Thaker (gthaker@atl.ge.com) 609-866-6412 (fax x6397. Dialcom 8-777)
GE Adv. Tech. Lab., MS 145-2; Route 38; Moorestown, NJ 08057.  767-4396 (home)
--
Gautam H. Thaker
From: george@ve7frg.UUCP (George Farris)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Ghostscript and Cannon BJ-300 - work?
Date: 9 Oct 92 06:19:50 GMT
Organization: Arbutus Systems
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

I'm thinking of buying a Cannon BJ-300 bubblbe jet printer which I would
like to be able to use with Ghostscript.  I notice that the support for
Cannon printers only includes the BJ-10e.  Has anyone used the BJ-300 am
I looking for trouble with this printer.  I guess if I can't print
postscript stuff it's not worth the money.  Any other comments are
encouraged.


==========================================================================
George Farris - VE7FRG   Internet  :  george@ve7frg.ampr.org
                          Amprnet  :  george@ve7frg.ampr.org
Sidney, B.C.                 UUCP  :  uunet!sol.uvic.ca!ve7frg!george
(604) 656-0342             Packet  :  VE7FRG@VE7VBB.#ISLAND.BC.CAN.NOAM
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell)
Subject: Re: Making Mach build with non-CMU tools (suggestions)
Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA
	<MIB.92Oct6135734@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <BvyC1u.87G@sci.kun.nl>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 19:20:50 GMT

In article <BvyC1u.87G@sci.kun.nl> gip200@sci.kun.nl (gip2 course) writes:

   How did you do that? I'm not a make wizard and it took me more than
   15 minutes to figure out for instance that Makeconf wasn't a
   makefile on it's own...

I mean that, having figured it out myself (which took a while), it
only takes about 15 minutes to change the makefiles for a new release.

   >On the other hand, updating the tar file on
   >alpha.gnu.ai.mit.edu takes significantly longer--which is why the tar
   >is stoll MK68.  I will update it today.  I promise.  

   Nice!

It turns out my promise isn't worth much.  I got sidetracked and
didn't get it there (and the Hurd tar I put there that day got deleted
by some unknown person).  I'll do it *today*, I promise.  ;-)

   >Modifying GNU make to have the CMU make features is not going to
   >happen; ask Roland McGrath for the hairy details of why.

   I would like to know why, but I don't know Roland's e-mail address.
   Maybe it's of interest to more people?

I don't know if it is or not.  His address is `roland@gnu.ai.mit.edu';
ask him to post an explanation to gnu.misc.discuss so he doesn't have
to repeat it so many times.

   >If CMU
   >decides to use our Makefiles, that's great--but it isn't worth much.
   >Our makefiles need to be conformant to the GNU Coding Standards, and
   >CMU's will probably never be.

   Is there a specification of those coding standards? If so, where
   can I get it?

Write gnu@prep.ai.mit.edu.

--
Michael I. Bushnell            Gaude, virgo, salutata Gabriele nuntio.
+1 617 625 4518 (H)      |     Gaude, mater jucundata Jesu puerperio.
+1 617 253 8568 (W)     -+-    Gaude, conresuscitata resurgente filio.
mib@gnu.ai.mit.edu       |     Gaude, tua sublimata prole plena gaudio.
25 Belknap St Apt 1      |     Gaude, sumpta et locata cum Jesu in solio.
Somerville MA 02144            Esto nobis advocata in magno judicio, O Maria.
From: burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Is Fortran dead?
Date: 12 Oct 92 03:42:27 GMT
Organization: Free Software Foundation 545 Tech Square Cambridge, MA 02139
In-reply-to: bradleyt@spot.Colorado.EDU's message of 12 Oct 92 00:05:13 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.000513.10001@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> bradleyt@spot.Colorado.EDU (Todd Bradley) writes:

   Well, I just recently subscribed to this newsgroup (about a week
   ago), so forgive me if this is a dead topic.  I remember some
   talk about a year ago that there was some GNU work being done
   to integrate the f2c program, which was recently (a year or so ago)
   made public domain, into the GNU C compiler.  However, I haven't
   heard a thing about it since then.  Is anyone working on it still
   or has the subject been dropped? 

GNU Fortran is now in alpha test.  It isn't an integration of f2c code,
rather a whole new front-end on top of the common back end shared by
GNU C, GNU C++, and GNU Objective-C (plus GNU Pascal, GNU Ada, whatever
else comes along).  But it does currently expect a run-time library
compatible with f2c libraries for linking programs output by GNU Fortran.

If you want to keep up on info regarding GNU Fortran prior to the
announcement of beta test (a public release), send email asking to be
added to the GNU Fortran Mailing List to:

    info-gnu-fortran-request@prep.ai.mit.edu

As far as an answer to the question "Is Fortran dead?", I can only
suggest that if the availability of GNU Fortran doesn't kill it,
nothing will!  :-)
--

James Craig Burley, Software Craftsperson    burley@gnu.ai.mit.edu
Member of the League for Programming Freedom (LPF)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd
From: ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu (Edward J. Hartnett)
Subject: Re: Suggestions for the free Unix projects
Organization: CIRES, University of Colorado
	<1992Oct12.042518.19839@serveme.chi.il.us>
Date: 12 Oct 92 09:53:59

In article <1992Oct12.042518.19839@serveme.chi.il.us> joeg@gagme.chi.il.us (joe grosch) writes:

   I recently spoke to the owner of Walnut Creek CD on the phone. His
   company is distributing a CD of the GNU and X source code. He charges $40.00 
   for this CD. The company I am contracting for is interested in distributing
   a product on CD and I was researching costs. The owner of Walnut Creek CD
   quoted figures very simular to the above figures, execpt he indicated that
   a number of the larger pressing plants will take a tar of the data on 
   8mm and do the mastering for you. If I remember right he said the mastering
   charge was $200.00 or $300.00. That is a lot less than buying your own 
   mastering system at ~$20,000.00 a pop.


I only followed this thread sporatically. Did someone suggest that you
have to buy a mastering system? That's crazy. I recently (two years
ago) produced a CD of meteorological data for a research project I was
working on. I can't remember the exact costs, but they were quite
reasonable. I think I bought a trial version of the CD (pre-master I
think they called it) for $500. Plus maybe another $300 processing
cost. After getting the trial version and making a bunch of changes, I
had 150 copies made for two or three bucks a copy. I think we charged
people $35, which mostly covered all costs (including documentation of
microfische). Of course, we weren't trying to make a profit, or even
necessarily cover costs totally either, we had funding for this stuff.
I sent the CO ROM people my data on 6250 bpi 9-track mag tapes, in tar
format. I got the very strong impression that they could handle pretty
much any media. In fact, I think the guy mentioned that a lot of
people sent in a hard drive with the data, and that was the easiest of
all. So it's quite easy to get the CD made. (Of course, it's a little
more difficult to ensure there are no mistakes on it! As someone else
pointed out, it can be a lot of work, and that cost money too.)
--
Edward Hartnett			ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu

Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: gip200@sci.kun.nl (gip2 course)
Subject: Re: Making Mach build with non-CMU tools (suggestions)
Reply-To: peter@global.hacktic.nl
Organization: University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 10:05:53 GMT

In <MIB.92Oct6135734@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) writes:

>In article <STEINARB.92Oct4172851@hagtorn.idt.unit.no> steinarb@idt.unit.no (Steinar Bang) writes:

>Changing the Makefiles isn't too tough: took me about 15 minutes to
>update to MK78.

How did you do that? I'm not a make wizard and it took me more than 15 minutes
to figure out for instance that Makeconf wasn't a makefile on it's own...

>On the other hand, updating the tar file on
>alpha.gnu.ai.mit.edu takes significantly longer--which is why the tar
>is stoll MK68.  I will update it today.  I promise.  

Nice!

>The copy of Mach that you get with GNU will always be compilable on
>GNU.

That's good.

>It would be nice if that meant that we could use the CMU
>makefiles, but it isn't essential.

If it is easy to change the makefiles, then you are right.

>Modifying GNU make to have the CMU make features is not going to
>happen; ask Roland McGrath for the hairy details of why.

I would like to know why, but I don't know Roland's e-mail address. Maybe it's
of interest to more people?

>If CMU
>decides to use our Makefiles, that's great--but it isn't worth much.
>Our makefiles need to be conformant to the GNU Coding Standards, and
>CMU's will probably never be.

Is there a specification of those coding standards? If so, where can I get it?

>And now, I'm off to update the source on alpha.gnu.ai.mit.edu.  
Good.
From: khera@cs.duke.edu (Vivek Khera)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Commercial RCS
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:46:04 GMT
Organization: Duke University CS Dept., Durham, NC
In-reply-to: bhso@fou.tr.statoil.no's message of 14 Oct 92 12:47:44 GMT
X-Md4-Signature: f85cd5db2d161a085ee9af7ee0d1e573

In article <1992Oct14.124744.12589@statoil.no> bhso@fou.tr.statoil.no (Bjorn Halvor Solberg) writes:

   I just saw an ad for a product called MKS RCS. Has anyone heard of it
   before?  I thought RCS was copylefted under GNU. I don't know if MKS has
   developed their RCS from scratch or what, I have only seen the ad. It
   supposedly has the same functionality as GNU's (W.F. Tichy's) RCS. Does
   anyone know where/what MKS is?

RCS is currently distributed under GNU copyright.  This was not always
the case.  MKS has been selling RCS for a long time, and I believe
their version started with an older RCS distribution.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vivek Khera, Gradual Student/Systems Guy  Department of Computer Science
Internet:   khera@cs.duke.edu             Box 90129
            (MIME mail accepted)          Durham, NC 27708-0129 (919)660-6528