HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bill@unixland.natick.ma.us (Bill Heiser)
Subject: Re: DELL SVR4 - separate /usr and /var filesystem?
Keywords: dell svr4 filesystem
Organization: Unixland Public Access Unix  (508) 655-3848
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 00:34:07 GMT

larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>>> DELL includes the MERGE along with their product (i.e. it is a "nuts and
>>> bolts complete" release).  
>>IF you want Merge. But why would I want Merge?

>If you want it, then just type dos.  If you don't, you get to
>delete it or remove it.
>At least you have a choice.

Yeah, but you get to PAY for it whether you want it or not!

-- 
bill@unixland.natick.ma.us                      ESIX Mailing List Moderator
Public Access UNIX/USENET/E-MAIL!  UUCP Accounts Available! Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: DELL SVR4 - separate /usr and /var filesystem?
Key
From: duane@intermec.com (Duane Charron)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Interactive Unix & Dos
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:54:00 GMT
Reply-To: duane@intermec.com ()
Distribution: world
Organization: Intermec Corporation, Everett, Wa.


 We are getting Interactive Unix for A project I am working on.  I know
that it will soon be phased out, but for the price it seemed a 
good alternative.  We also use a number of suns here. And Sunsoft told
me we can upgrade to solaris when it is available.  The question I
have is: does Interactive allow a Dos boot from a partition the way
SCO does.  If so does it have the 32MB partition size limitation?

					Duane.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: root@shawn.uucp (Mark Jeghers -- UNIX/X/Motif Contractor)
Subject: How to get ISC 3.0 to see DOS drives on IDE disk #2 ?
Reply-To: root@shawn.uucp (Mark Jeghers -- UNIX/X/Motif Contractor)
Organization: Mark Jeghers -- UNIX/X/Motif Contractor
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 04:37:11 GMT

UNIX is booted on the first IDE drive, then all the rest of the
UNIX file systems are on SCSI devices.  The remaining 
partitions on the first IDE drive are DOS logical drives,
and they are always mounted and available to UNIX.

I've added a second IDE drive for more DOS storage.  I cannot find a
way in sysadm to set up the kernel and device files to 
support the second IDE drive.  Therefore, I cannot mount them
under UNIX.  Any ideas or experience on this matter?

Any help appreciated.

Mark Jeghers
UNIX/X/Motif Contractor
408-281-4823 [voicemail]

Xref: sparky comp.unix.sysv386:14156 comp.windows.x:16296 comp.os.linux:10120 comp.os.mach:1198 comp.unix.bsd:5263
From: brtmac@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu (Brett McCoy)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,comp.windows.x,comp.os.linux,comp.os.mach,comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Free software and the future of support for Diamond products
Date: 7 Sep 92 19:13:38
Organization: Kansas State University
	<lalqmgINNa96@needmore.cs.utexas.edu>
	<1992Sep7.133347.4433@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
	<1992Sep7.204537.26238@mv.mv.com> <Bu8Drt.2Ls@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: maverick.ksu.ksu.edu
In-reply-to: pereckas@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu's message of Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:11:51 GMT

In article <Bu8Drt.2Ls@news.cso.uiuc.edu> pereckas@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (pereckas michael s) writes:

>>I have also had to boot MSDOS just to run the diagnostics on nearly every
>>card.
>
>Just think of MS-DOS as a super ROM monitor that isn't in ROM, or a
>special hardware diagnostic/configuration mode.  :-) :-) :-)

Here's an idea.  Make new boot ROMS for intel based boxes that have a
Sun like boot monitor *and* MS-DOS.  If you use 1M flash ROMS it should
be easy to fit it all and easy to upgrade.  That way all the MS-DOS
executables for configuring and testing hardware can be run easily
without have to degrade the machine by installing MS-DOS on it.

++Brett;
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org (Christoph Badura)
Subject: Re: is there a 'df' bug with ufs?
Organization: Guru Systems/Funware Department
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 18:05:12 GMT

In <1992Sep9.074452.166@mcopn3.dseg.ti.com> bmyers@mcopn3.dseg.ti.com writes:
>[About ufs problems]
>right now, I see when I do a 'df' command, that I have over 950,000 blocks
>free, but less than 6000 files.

There is a bug in the SVR4 ufs mkfs command. It incorrectly calculates
the parameter that controls inode allocation for large file system.

Run "mkfs -F ufs -m /u1" and look at the parameters. Then rerun mkfs
on the filesystem by hand.

-- 
				Christoph Badura  ---  bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org

ISO? Nicht immer, aber immer M-vfter.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: HELP!!!
Summary: There is a way out of this.
Organization: VideOcart Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 20:53:28 GMT

In article <22069@optima.cs.arizona.edu> dsiegel@optima.UUCP (Dave Siegel) writes:
>> I have a small problem.  Somehow, either someone changed or
>> the password file was trashed on our AT&T 386WGS UNIX v3.2.2
>> computer system.  Only 1 login now works and automatically
>> loads and runs a program.
>> 
>
>In the case that there's no root acct, you may be able to boot off of a tape,
>or possibly floppy, boot a miniroot, then mount the file systems, and take
>off.  possibly, from a floppy, you could untar, or copy via cpio, the passwd
>file over to /etc/passwd.

You should be able to boot from floppy disk and mount the root partition,
then edit what is required.  However, editing is REAL clumsy without any
editors :-) 

I've had to do this, and yes it can be done.  It is a hellish mess though.

If AT&T's Unix won't allow you to get to a "#" prompt from the install disks
then you can proabably use the boot disks from someone else's i386 Unix
release such as ISC.  They should be compatible enough to see and mount the
filesystems in question.

--
Karl Denninger 		Inet:  kdenning@hq.videocart.com
VideOcart Inc.		Voice: (312) 987-5022
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: kdenning@portal.hq.videocart.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: framemaker
Summary: Don't do it!  Drug abuse alert! :-)
Organization: VideOcart Inc.
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 17:54:43 GMT

In article <Bu7oqB.2w2@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>is anyone playing with framemaker?
>
>I'm in the process of loading it off the Dell distribution
>tape - to see how it looks and feels -- TeX is also on the tape,
>but I'm afraid it might take all my disk space on root -- unless
>it (Tex) like framemaker gives you the option of where to install
>it -- 

Having used Frame, I can say this authoritatively:

DON'T DO IT! :-)

You'll be quite sorry if you do.  Frame is the be-all and end-all of desktop
publishing packages IMHO.  If you load it, and use the demo, you'll likely 
fall in love and insist on having it -- which will set you back roughly 
$1k. :-)

I was both ecstatic and morose when I saw that Dell had included the demo on
the 2.2 release tape.  It meant that I was going to have an excellent DTP
package on Unix, but it also meant that I was going to be $1k poorer.

The demo will do everything >except< save files.  Therefore, you can really
get yourself in up to your neck with this one.

I've resisted temptation so far, but it is not easy.  It really is as nice
as I remember it from the Sun environment; enough to make me give up
Pagemaker on the PC or MAC.

--
Karl Denninger 		Inet:  kdenning@hq.videocart.com
VideOcart Inc.		Voice: (312) 987-5022
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch)
Subject: Re: HOW WILL DOS BE HANDLED UNDER SVR4.2 ??
Organization: Somewhere just far enough out of Toronto
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 04:13:17 GMT
Keywords: DOS VP/ix?? merge??

In article <BuB4xs.FMr@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>corey@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (william.c.brown) writes:

>>	Do current UNIX systems, i.e. ESIX, DELL, etc... have good
>>	support for DOS type program??? I suspect a dual boot
>
>Dell ships DOS Merge in their base product
>
>ESIX doesn't come with DOS Merge --

This wonderful marketbabble, but fails to answer the question --
a real surprise coming from Larry, ain't it? I hope that Dell has
shipped him a new set of pom-poms by now, the first ones have no doubt
worn out...

ESIX, Dell, SCO and many of the other R4s have full support for
DOS-under-UNIX. Dell bundles it, ESIX and the others don't. SCO
bundles it in Open Desktop but not in UNIX.

The level of bundling chosen by a vendor's marketing department says
nothing about the quality of support for this functionality supplied
in the respective vendors' base kernels.

As I recall it, SCO Xenix, Interactive 3.2, Dell 3.2 and ESIX 3.2
supported Interactive's VP/ix. SCO UNIX and all the R4s support Locus
Merge 386. The current Interactive product, which is still 3.2,
continues to support VP/ix.

-- 
 Evan Leibovitch, Sound Software Ltd., located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
         evan@telly.on.ca / uunet!utzoo!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504
   "This Used To Be My Playground" -- Madonna, singing about mens' washrooms
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: richardg@ssd.intel.com (Richard Griffiths)
Subject: Re: HOW WILL DOS BE HANDLED UNDER SVR4.2 ??
Keywords: DOS VP/ix?? merge??
Organization: Supercomputer Systems Divison, Intel Corp.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:14:22 GMT

In article <BuB4xs.FMr@gator.rn.com>, larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
|> corey@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (william.c.brown) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> >	Do current UNIX systems, i.e. ESIX, DELL, etc... have good
|> >	support for DOS type program??? I suspect a dual boot
|> 
|> Dell ships DOS Merge in their base product
|> 
|> ESIX doesn't come with DOS Merge --

THANK GOD!  I prefer to have a choice.
I run VP/ix under ESIX 4.04a.   VP/ix allows me to add IEM's (Installable Emulation
Devices) which can be used from Unix or VP/ix.  DOS Merge only allows Direct Device
Attachment (DDA).  I wrote an IEM for a midi device driver so I can access the midi
port from Unix or run my favorite DOS based midi applications.

I think ESIX is great.  It meets my needs affordably and allows for a flexibility in
configuration that I find most satisfactory.

There I feel much better now. :-)

Richard
From: pickens@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (David B. Pickens)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: HELP!!!
Date: 14 Sep 92 18:05:59 GMT
Organization: Dept. of CS Ball State University Muncie IN


I have a small problem.  Somehow, either someone changed or
the password file was trashed on our AT&T 386WGS UNIX v3.2.2
computer system.  Only 1 login now works and automatically
loads and runs a program.

The question: How can I reset the password for root or
otherwise get around the system password feature?

I don't want to reload the operating system from scratch!  There
are somethings on the drive I cannot replace.

Any ideas?

.sig {no fancy stuff here}

            e-mail:  pickens@bsu-cs.bsu.edu
            voice:  317.285.1827

            Center for Information and Communication Sciences
            Ball State University
            Muncie, IN  47306
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: tkevans@eplrx7.es.duPont.com (Tim Evans)
Subject: Dell SVR4: Forcing 'stty -lcase'?
Reply-To: tkevans@eplrx7.es.dupont.com
Organization: DuPont Engineering Physics Laboratory
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 20:07:10 GMT

My Dell SVR4 insists on immediately switching to UPPER CASE on all
incoming dial-up connections--including UUCP and SLIP dial-in's--
but does not do it every single time.  It does happen most of
the time.  This is hard to deal with in chat scripts.  Is there
some way to prevent this?  The system dialing in is a Sun.
-- 
Tim Evans                     |    E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.
tkevans@eplrx7.es.dupont.com  |    Experimental Station
(302) 695-9353/7395           |    P.O. Box 80357
EVANSTK AT A1 AT ESVAX        |    Wilmington, Delaware 19880-0357
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: is there a 'df' bug with ufs?
From: bmyers@mcopn3.dseg.ti.com
Date: 9 Sep 92 07:44:52 CST
Organization: Texas Instruments Defense Systems & Electronics Group

I  have a Consensys V4 system, which is the shrink-wrap version of AT&T 
SVR4.  I need to know if this is a bug or if I need to redo my 2nd drive...

I created a single partition on my 2nd drive (a 676 mb ESDI disk), and have
it as a ufs file structure mounted on '/u1'.  I went with Consensys' (or
should it be AT&T's) sysadm defaults for creating the 2nd file structure.

right now, I see when I do a 'df' command, that I have over 950,000 blocks
free, but less than 6000 files.

Since I'm using this drive primarily for usenet news spooling, I need to
verify the i-node information.

any input welcome...

-bob
From: corey@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (william.c.brown)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: HOW WILL DOS BE HANDLED UNDER SVR4.2 ??
Keywords: DOS VP/ix?? merge??
Date: 9 Sep 92 02:24:50 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T


	I have read, and heard, from different sources that 
	SVR4.2 will be able to run DOS, WINDOWS, programs, etc...

	Will SVR4.2 use VP/IX or DOS MERGE to do the task, or
 	can we expect something new and improved??? 

	Do current UNIX systems, i.e. ESIX, DELL, etc... have good
	support for DOS type program??? I suspect a dual boot
	set-up is probably what I will have to settle for.

	Can anyone shed some light on this subject??

	--Corey


/* -----							*/
/* Corey Brown  (WB0RXQ): 20m, 15m, 2m(146.82) 70cm(443.65)     */
/* AT&T NSD							*/
/* Alpharetta, Ga 30202						*/
/* (404)750-8071						*/
/*			-----------------			*/
/* att!alphlk!wcb          | They're history in terms of the	*/
/* attmail!wcbrown         | future! (lws-91)			*/
/*							  ----- */
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: advice on DAT drives
Date: 9 Sep 92 18:00:15 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <Bu5G3C.1Bv@constant.demon.co.uk>, slangley@constant.demon.co.uk (Simon Langley) writes:

| I know very little about tape drives so could someone help me with a bit
| of advice;
| 
| 	1)	bearing in mind that my main criterion is tape size, is my
| 		choice of DAT sensible?

  You can use DAT, Exabyte, or 525MB QIC tape. The last may use some
compression scheme, but it doesn't matter because I think DAT is the
best choice.
| 	2)	will any DAT drive work on my SVR4 486 system (in theory)?

  We've used both Archive and WangDAT, and they seem to work on multiple
systems including multiple o/s vendors.
| 	3)	am I likely to be able to swap tapes with other users who have
| 		DAT and restore them on my machine?

  If you don't use compression in the drive, yes.
| 	4)	what drives are out there that are cheap but work?  (BTW I
| 		shall probably be buying from the US as prices are much lower
| 		so a US supplier would be fine.)

  We have only used the brands I mentioned. Neither is cheap, most
places that discount one discount the other, and prices are similar.
Expect to pay about $1000 for a drive.
| 	5)	Will I necessarily need a SCSI interface for a DAT drive?

  I don't know of non-SCSI interfaces.

-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    I admit that when I was in school I wrote COBOL. But I didn't compile.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch)
Subject: Re: SVR4.2 (Was Re: Dell SVR4 (and Dell hardware))
Organization: Somewhere just far enough out of Toronto
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 17:27:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.201351.19083@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
	dwex@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (david.e.wexelblat) writes:

>In article <1992Sep2.192037.23954@lgc.com> danson@lgc.com (Doug Anson) writes:

>> .. anybody know when SVR4.2 is due to be out?

>The standard blurbs all report that Univel will have end-user packages
>out by the end of the year.

Confirmed, from Univel itself.

Consensys is presently working on 4.2, and intends to announce it ready to
ship at UNIX Expo in New York. The company is certainly committed in
that direction.

>There's a blurb
>in this week's Open Systems Today that mentions a SVR4.3, which merges
>the Desktop, Enhanced Security, and Multiprocessor versions of SVR4.2
>(I didn't know there WERE separate versions until I read that :->).

Unlike the previous USL MP code, I believe this stuff includes the
technology obtained from Sequent. USL appears to have orphaned a
significant amount of earlier MP R&D in favour of it, causing
significant delays in its time to market, but the wait may prove
to have been worth it.

>This
>will reportedly be released by USL by the end of the year.  Maybe the
>VARs are waiting for that.

It's my feeling that the present R4 market leaders -- Dell and ESIX --
won't rush into 4.2, especially since both had previously announced (but
are likely reconsidering) their support for Solaris 2. But the smaller
guys, Consensys and Microport and UHC and MST -- have little to lose and
much to gain by being quick to market with the new stuff.

If the 4.3 source comes out of USL the end of this year the sub-licencees
won't likely have binary product until mid-93. I don't think any of them
will stand pat that long -- especially once Novell enters the fray.

SCO has recently announced that it plans to support NetWare protocols.
Before it hit the streets, Univel already produced a response of how
SCO's implementation was not enough for a truly seamless integration of
an SCO system into a Novell environment. Further salvos from all sides
are sure to come in abundance.

The winter of 92/93 promises to be a *very* interesting season for the
Intel UNIX marketplace. Stay tuned...
-- 
 Evan Leibovitch, Sound Software Ltd., located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
         evan@telly.on.ca / uunet!utzoo!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504
   "This Used To Be My Playground" -- Madonna, singing about mens' washrooms
Newsgroups: comp.unix,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.ultrix,cocomp.unix.wizards
From: williamf@umbc4.umbc.edu (TheBigBopper)
Subject: Help with defining the default Unix mail editor
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:48:54 GMT

 I am a Unix novice so if anyone can help with this question please couch
 your response as simply as you can to help me.

 I am attempting to mail a letter to someone.  I invoked Mail and used the
 tilde ~r to include a file.  Next, I tried to edit the file using ~e  
 Trouble is I keep getting a message saying permission denied.  I have checked
 the PATH variable in the .cshrc file and the path indicated there is the 
 correct one for Emacs (which is what I want to invoke).  I placed the
 statement 'set EDITOR = /usr/local/bin/emacs in the .cshrc, logged out and 
 in and tried again to edit the file from w/in mail w/o success.  I also tried
 using setenv EDITOR /usr/local/bin/emacs and this string showed up in response
 to the 'printenv' command but the mail editor still didn't default to emacs.
 
 Is there some other way to alter the default editor in mail?  Curiously, the
 same thing happens in News where the default editor's path points to VI.  I
 can change this on the fly by just typing in the correct path in RN but the
 same isn't true for mail.  If anyone can offer any help please e-mail me the
 answer and I'll post a summary of the answer if it solves the problem.
  Thanks 
      TheBigBopper
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
From: mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us
Subject: Re: Software psychology and the role of temperment in the programming team
Organization: :
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:56:36 GMT

In article <-191179993@hpopd.pwd.hp.com>, ajp@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Andy Pearce) writes:
 
> ...  A key ingredient in any team (IMO) is respect for one another,
> and willingness to communicate and collaborate to achieve a common
> well-defined goal.

Let me repeat Andy's statement:

	...  A key ingredient in any team (IMO) is respect for
	one another, and willingness to communicate and collaborate
	to achieve a common well-defined goal.

This is one of the few things that costs nothing and benefits every
team member(*), and the team as a whole, just as soon as it is provided.

(Why the asterisk?  Because it doesn't benefit BS artists who hide
behind their `dignity' to conceal their negative worth.  But those
tend to be almost rare enough ...)

Vic Vyssotsky (have I misspelled his name?) somewhere notes that
functional organizations are efficient, while product organizations
are effective and flexible.  For development, you need the latter.
And the functional organization, by dividing work into little bits
owned by different players and preventing any individual from seeing
the whole process, works against communication, collaboration, and
mutual respect.  (``Throw it over the wall.  It doesn't matter; the
specs we got were wrong and They will chuck our work and redesign it
anyhow so whatever we did get right will get _totally_ flogged up.'')
-- 
 (This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end				Mark Terribile

 mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ
Xref: sparky comp.software-eng:3407 comp.sys.sun.apps:1867 comp.unix.misc:3606 comp.unix.questions:10870 comp.lang.c:13409 comp.lang.misc:2986
From: jacob@latcs1.lat.oz.au (Jacob L. Cybulski)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: DOD-STD-2167a (and other SRS standards)
Date: 10 Sep 92 01:17:56 GMT
Organization: Comp Sci, La Trobe Uni, Australia

The printed version of the standard is available in the book by
Dorfman and Thayer, Standards, Guidelines and Examples on System and
Software Requirements Engineering, IEEE Computer Society Press. You'll
also find many other standards in the same book (e.g. IEEE, ESA, NASA, etc.).

Jacob

=============================================================================
Jacob L. Cybulski,  Deputy  Director,  Amdahl  Australian  Intelligent  Tools
Programme,  Dept of  Comp Sci  &  Comp Eng,  La Trobe  University,  Bundoora,
Vic. 3083, Australia. Ph: +613 479 1270, Fax: +613 470 4915, Telex: AA 33143,
E-Mail: jacob@latcs1.lat.oz.au.                                     ... G'Day
=============================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
From: nigel@ietech.demon.co.uk ("Nigel G. Backhurst")
Subject: Object Oriented Program Size
Distribution: world
Organization: IE Technical Services Holland
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:18:30 +0000



I am trying to find some information/source material on the use
of CRC cards in O-O Analysis and Design.  I recall seeing an article
on this about a year ago in an American Computer Magazine, but now
no longer have access to the notes made at that time.

If anybody can provide any pointers as to where I should look, or
the address of any source documentation available by ftp, I would
be grateful.

Nigel

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Nigel Backhurst ( nigel@ietech.demon.co.uk )
c/o 88 Ashburton Road, Hugglescote, Coalville, LE6 2LX, U.K.
p/a IE Technical Services Holland, Deventerstr 150, 7321 CE Apeldoorn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: monteiro@edda.nl (Francisco Monteiro,207)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: In article 2SEP199221211809@aardvark.ucs.uoknor.edu, rkohli@aardvark.ucs.uoknor.edu (Why was our guide liquidated?) writes:
Date: 15 Sep 92 10:09:53 GMT
Reply-To: monteiro@edda.nl
Organization: Geco Prakla .

>Greetings all,
>     Is there a FTP site/sites where technical papers on Software-Engineering 
>are archived? If it does exist can please post/e-mail me the address.
>
>If this is a FAQ then rather than posting it you could e-mail me and I could 
>compile a listing for further reference.
>
>Thanks for your attention.
>:-) ranjan 
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>     	      The vain attempt to avoid errors by inactivity.
>                               Ranjan Kohli.
>                       Student Software Consultant,
>                          University Of Oklahoma.
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Please mail me if one is available

Keywords: 
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng