HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: laakkone@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tero Laakkonen)
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
Organization: University of Helsinki
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 08:19:21 GMT

In <mwalker-270193172005@mwalker.npd.provo.novell.com> mwalker@novell.com (Mel Walker) writes:

>Sure you can demand it. Whether or not anybody listens.... of course, there
>are no garuantees with GCC, either in this respect.

... in practice it turns out that GNU people listen to these
"demands" more readily.
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: mcampbel@io.nosc.mil (Mark Campbell)
Subject: Examples of CVS configuration management
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego, CA
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 19:14:53 GMT

I have installed CVS on a HP9000 for configuration management
of a large software development project.  I am now trying to 
find some good examples of how to properly use CVS.  None of 
the documentation that is readily available(Man pages, READMEs,
other CVS-1.3 included documentation) has any good examples.
I've also tried local tech book stores for any higher level
documentation.  Any and all pointers/references appreciated.

Please respond to mgregory@superc.nosc.mil

Thanks in advance!
Mitch Gregory
From: garp@isy.liu.se (Johan Garpendahl)
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software
Organization: Dept of EE, University of Linkoping
Distribution: gnu
Date: 25 Jan 93 21:25:38 GMT

mwalker@novell.com (Mel Walker) writes:

>Yes, it probably will force entrenched obsolete software out the market.
>Normal market forces do that, too. The problem with GNU is that it forces
>other companies out the market. This reduces the base of those with
>incentive to make the new software and spur innovation.

>Clearly, the only reasonable alternative under a GNU-utopia would be to
>take jobs in software maintenance.

1) There are still companies out there making money on their
   commercial compilers, even though some of them aren't very good.

2) Not every company has to write compilers. There are still plenty of
   areas which never will be interesting for the GNU people.
   I don't think I'll ever see the GNU Filter Design Toolkit unless I
   write write it myself.

3) Writing a compiler isn't really *that* inventive, is it?
   I mean, I've even seen books on the subject. :-)

	Johan



-- 
Johan Garpendahl                   | Email: garp@isy.liu.se
Linkoping University               | Phone: +46 - 13 - 28 13 24
Dept. of Electrical Engineering    | Fax  : +46 - 13 - 13 92 82
S-581 83  LINKOPING // SWEDEN      | May the Source be with you.
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: kjj@pondscum.phx.mcd.mot.com (Kevin Johnson)
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Tempe, AZ, USA
	<1993Jan25.145544.63165@cc.usu.edu> <1993Jan27.093855.17822@cv.ruu.nl>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 19:53:13 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.093855.17822@cv.ruu.nl> rvloon@cv.ruu.nl (Ronald van Loon) writes:

> In <1993Jan25.145544.63165@cc.usu.edu> sl1yn@millville.declab.usu.edu (869483 Denys Larry) writes:

> |"  I find it interesting that when a poster makes a very cogent point
> |"about how much better than GCC would a compiler have to be in order
> |"for you to purchase it, not one poster that has followed up has come
> |"up with an answer.

> A compiler needs to be a lot better than GCC - that has been said multiple
> times and I cannot agree more.

> |"All they do is harp about what a wonderful thing
> |"GCC is because it "ups the ante" or "establishes a floor" or weeds out
> |"the bad software out there.  But not one has answered the poster's point.
> |"That's because they cannot.  The point is true, as you would know if you
> |"took a single course in economics.

> The only reason that people need commercial compilers is support.
> GCC does not guarantee support, or even that it 'works'. If it doesn't work,
> you can send in a bug-report. It will eventually be fixed - hopefully. With
> commercial compilers you have paid a certain company to give you a working
> product - if it does not function as it should, you have the right to complain
> and demand that your problem is fixed ASAP. In other words, you get what you
------^^^^^^
> pay for.

Hmmm...
'demand'?
I think not.

--
#include <std_disclaimer>
"If it runs emacs it's a computer, otherwise it's a peripheral." - me
"I have two kitchen sinks: emacs and perl" - me
.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Kevin Johnson         kjj@phx.mcd.mot.com | ...!asuvax!mcdphx!pondscum!kjj  |
|                       qygt70@email.mot.com                                  |
| Information Technologies Network Administrator  Motorola MCG                |
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------------'
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
From: sl1yn@millville.declab.usu.edu (869483 Denys Larry)
Date: 25 Jan 93 14:55:43 MDT
Reply-To: sl1yn@millville.declab.usu.edu (869483 Denys Larry)
Distribution: world

In article <C1FBoE.Gy6@news2.cis.umn.edu>, ozzello@a1 (Anthony Ozzello) writes:

|>My whole take on this argument that its impossible to write good new
|>innovative compilers because of GNU is this: write your compiler and
|>integrate it with gcc and release it to the world free. Why does
|>everything have to be so profit oriented? You want to do something,
|>so just do it and we'll all marvel at your innovation and use it too.
|>What better payment could you ask for?
|>Tony


  Why does everyone have to be so profit oriented?
  I don't know.  Maybe it has something to do with the fact that
food costs money.  Maybe it has to do with the fact that very few 
programmers out there have the luxury of sitting around like bums 
and haveing a college foot the bill for their intellectual interests
and whims.
  I have a question for all you GNU/socialists/commmunists out there.
If the GNU idea is so great, why don't we apply it to other parts of the
economy?  Like, say, woodworking.  Think about it.  You're a cabinet
maker; you love to work with your hands and create works of art and use
out of wood.  Why should you do such a thing for as filthy a reason as
money.  Surely, you should just give away your work for free.  And how
about authors.  Authors must surely love what they do.  Why don't they
just give away copies of their work.  Don't forget manicurists.  Your
friendly neighborhood manicurist should just sit on a bench down town
and give free manicures to anybody who walks by.
  Let's take this to its logical extreme. We get Slick Willy to declare
that from now on we are a nation of artists.  There is art in everything
anybody does, from making sculptures to picking up dog doodee.  We just
let everybody work for universities and do whatever they please.  We'll
be one big, socialist family, giving away the fruits of our labor for
free.

  I find it interesting that when a poster makes a very cogent point
about how much better than GCC would a compiler have to be in order
for you to purchase it, not one poster that has followed up has come
up with an answer.  All they do is harp about what a wonderful thing
GCC is because it "ups the ante" or "establishes a floor" or weeds out
the bad software out there.  But not one has answered the poster's point.
That's because they cannot.  The point is true, as you would know if you
took a single course in economics.


Larry Denys
sl1yn@paradise.declab.usu.edu


Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: "John Morey" <p00103@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: Examples of CVS configuration management
Organization: Hitachi Telecom
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 12:59:59 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink-DOS (3.3)

I am also looking for good examples/information on CVS.  Could anyone
responding to the request please send a copy to me at p00103@psilink.com
or post to the net.

Thanks,
John Morey
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: jimlynch@netcom.com (Jim Lynch)
Subject: Re: FSF vs Apple -- please think again
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:13:41 GMT

In article <1j04m4INNn1d@early-bird.think.com> barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) writes:
>The goal of the boycott is to convince Apple to change its practices.  The
>hope is that some users will choose not to purchase Apple computers because
>GNU software isn't available for it, and other users will choose not to
>purchase Apple computers because they are actively participating in the
>boycott.

Right now, perhaps 95% (_My_ guess, so no flames)  of all apple users don't
know GNU from their gnee (oops, that's knee). I think Barry's assessment of
the boycott goal is correct. This wouldn't be cheap, but maybe the thing
to do is to let the apple users know about the boycott.
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
From: alanb@sdl.ug.eds.com (Alan Braggins)
Date: 25 Jan 93 17:44:47 GMT
Organization: Shape Data (Division of EDS), Cambridge UK
In-reply-to: tzs@stein.u.washington.edu's message of 24 Jan 1993 09:07:11 GMT

>>>>> On 24 Jan 1993 09:07:11 GMT, tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) said:

> tyrell@seaotter.micro.umn.edu (john drexler) writes:
>>*Sigh*. I suppose that in the long run, GNU will fizzle (or UNIX will die) and

> UNIX is going to be killed by NT.  After reading the latest UnixWorld, I
> believe that. 

So where did you hear about multi-user NT?
Xref: sparky gnu.misc.discuss:4593 talk.philosophy.misc:3396
From: zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: Profiteering at FSF (was: First GNU CD-ROM)
Date: 21 Jan 93 05:55:09 GMT
 <FRIEDMAN.93Jan19150916@nutrimat.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <930120.144723.7b4.rusnews.w165w@mantis.co.uk>
Organization: The Phallogocentric Cabal

In article <930120.144723.7b4.rusnews.w165w@mantis.co.uk> 
mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk> writes:

>friedman@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Noah Friedman) writes:

NF:
>>                             We believe most businesses can afford the $300
>> difference and will simply pay it to help fund us.  If they're going to be
>> dishonest about it, how would we know, anyway?

M:
>If I as an individual buy the CD-ROM for $100, and I as an individual then
>sell it to Mantis for $100, in what way is that "dishonest"?

I conjecture that Noah's notion of honesty would require you not to
undersell the FSF, thereby diverting Mantis' software acquisition
budget from its proper destination in the Foundation's charitable
coffers.

NF:
>Your terminology doesn't mesh with the "free" software rhetoric very well.

Oh yes, it does.  Read between the lines.

>mathew

cordially,
mikhail zeleny@husc.harvard.edu
"Le cul des femmes est monotone comme l'esprit des hommes."
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: ddk@beta.lanl.gov (David D Kaas)
Subject: Hurd?
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 04:46:04 GMT


Is there still a gnu project to produce a unix like
operating system?  If so is there any information 
available on it?

Thanks
Dave Kaas
ddk@lanl.gov
-- 
Dave Kaas 	- Boeing Computer Services Richland
		- D. O. E. Richland
ddk@beta.lanl.gov
From: chased@rbbb.Eng.Sun.COM (David Chase)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software
Date: 21 Jan 1993 21:28:09 GMT
Organization: Sun
NNTP-Posting-Host: rbbb

>Someone writes:
>>	I don't see how you have a company that markets its skills in maintaing
>>GNU code since the work they do  would be publically available.

In article <C17to2.K92@lysator.liu.se> pen@lysator.liu.se (Peter Eriksson) writes:
> [some reasons why it might work.]

Here's another reason:

It's not "publicly available" unless one of the two parties involved
(the maintainer or their customer) chooses to make it so.  It appears
that there is a market for maintenance of free software for in-house
use.  Cygnus Support has been in business for a few years now doing
just this (their customers are not all in-house users, but I know of
several that are.)

This may not work in all markets, but "not all" is clearly not the
same as "none".  I think it is less likely to work for "mass market
software", but I also don't think anyone has made a serious experiment
of it either.  (PC) Software vendors claim a great deal of illegal
software copying already goes on, yet the vendors still manage to stay
in business.  Thus, software copying does not necessarily mean that
the software producers cannot make money.

David Chase
Sun
Xref: sparky gnu.misc.discuss:4608 comp.sys.hp:15237
From: tml@tik.vtt.fi (Tor Lillqvist)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: Attaching gdb to a running process on an HP
Date: 23 Jan 1993 09:07:14 GMT
Organization: Technical Research Centre of Finland, Laboratory for Information
	Processing (VTT/TIK)
NNTP-Posting-Host: tik.vtt.fi
In-reply-to: earl@jade.ab.ca's message of Fri, 22 Jan 1993 22:48:51 GMT

>>>>> On Fri, 22 Jan 1993 22:48:51 GMT, earl@jade.ab.ca (Earl Locken) said:

>      We are using gdb 4.6 and gcc 2.2.2 on an HP (yes, I know there
> are newer versions of gcc, but we are using 2.2.2 for now).  Is there
> any way that we can attach gdb to a running process?  Will there ever
> be a way, or does HP prevent anyone from reading core files?

As HP's debuggers (adb and xdb) can do it, gdb should be able to, if
only somebody put in the necessary code. It's documented in ptrace(2).
--
Tor Lillqvist,
working, but not speaking, for the Technical Research Centre of Finland,
Laboratory for Information Processing (VTT/TIK).
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: amorton@cc.uow.edu.au (andrew morton)
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
Organization: University Of Wollongong
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 01:22:47 GMT

tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:

>UNIX is going to be killed by NT.  After reading the latest UnixWorld, I
>believe that.  I didn't before, but the article about Cutler convinces me.
>He's got the experience to write a good OS, and he's got the
>proper motivation: he thinks he was screwed by someone and wants to get
>back at them, and writing a very good OS is the way to do that.

Perhaps, but if he's such a smart cookie how come he designed an
OS that will only run on little-endian machines?
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: bogstad@moon-lite.cs.jhu.edu (Bill Bogstad)
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
Organization: Johns Hopkins Computer Science Department, Baltimore, MD
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 04:42:10 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.160144.63218@cc.usu.edu> sl1yn@millville.declab.usu.edu (869483 Denys Larry) writes:
>In article <1k1sf5INNbb5@almaak.usc.edu>, ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes:
>
>  Perhaps you can apply some of that ivory tower knowledge and answer the
>real question that runs through this thread:  Just how much better than
>GCC would a compiler have to be in order for people to pay, say, $100
>for it?  Would enough people buy it to justify development costs.

	You used the wrong number here.  It is probably worth my
employers money to pay someone else $100 to just ship me a shrink-wrapped
copy of GCC.  It might even be worth $100 a machine, but this is harder to say.
If I was doing anything other then hobbyist programming on my personal
computer, it would be easily worth $100 to me to get a compiler as good
as GCC, that I didn't have to fiddle with and for which I received support.
As for justifying development costs, I can't imagine any employer who would
prefer the hours of fiddling required to get the latest version and install it.
You are forgetting that the GNU license may allow people to make copies
without paying the original author anything, but it doesn't eliminate the
the use of resources that could be spend on other tasks.  Any resource
utilization can be translated to dollar value at rates which depend on the
circumstances.

				Bill Bogstad
From: hsu@cs.hut.fi (Heikki Suonsivu)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
Date: 28 Jan 1993 16:36:20 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
	<1993Jan25.211321.25055@netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: laphroaig.cs.hut.fi
In-reply-to: erc@netcom.com's message of 25 Jan 93 21:13:21 GMT


In article <1993Jan25.211321.25055@netcom.com> erc@netcom.com (Eric Smith) writes:
   a hobby, and should have another source of income so they can pay their

If programmers need to find other income for living, it clearly indicates
that there are too many programmers in the market.  In this case, there are
at least couple of different solutions to this problem:

1) If you can't compete, you loose.

Counterattack: Be the best, or find a job you are good in.

2) Create a similar subsidiary system to agriculture, where people pay
taxes to support ineffective software companies recreating the same work
thousands of times every year.  This also requires probhiting free software
way or another, to prevent it from eating the agriprogrammers' salary.

Counterattack: This will just make the problem worse.  Finnish agriculture,
which works as a anti-market economy inside a market economy clearly
indicates this, wasting more and more money every year, now reaching
ridiculous levels.

3) Create a mess of software patents and copyrights, which allows you to
protect everything from zero to santa claus, a'la USA, and everyone takes 
everyone to court.

Counterattack: First, this will case, similarly to agricultural solution,
keep eating more and more money.  Second, this will stop development,
because all the scientists/reserarchers will be duplicating the same work
over and over, because noone wants to release their research results until
its patented.  Third, this will eat the competitive ability of the country
in question, so in the long term, it will kill the industry there.

   them a decent living, are you saying you want them to retreat from it,
   make it a hobby, and go back to work for an employer?

No, nobody is telling anyone to stop writing commercial software, but I
wouldn't be too optimistic of its ability to compete with free software.
For customers, users of software, free software is a superior solution in
most cases.  Who would want to rely on closed software, when we have been
pressing the manufacturers for years to provide us with open hardware?

-
Heikki Suonsivu, T{ysikuu 10 C 83/02210 Espoo/FINLAND,
hsu@{otax.tky.hut,cs.hut,clinet}.fi  +358-0-8031121
/G=Heikki/S=Suonsivu/O=hut/OU=cs/PRMD=Inet/ADMD=Fumail/C=FI,
mcsun!hutcs!hsu, riippu SN, Email preferable.
From: mwalker@novell.com (Mel Walker)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
Followup-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 28 Jan 1993 00:21:55 GMT
Organization: Novell, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: chezmoto.ai.mit.edu

In article <KJJ.93Jan27125151@pondscum.phx.mcd.mot.com>,
kjj@pondscum.phx.mcd.mot.com (Kevin Johnson) wrote:
> In article <1993Jan27.093855.17822@cv.ruu.nl> rvloon@cv.ruu.nl (Ronald van Loon) writes:
>> The only reason that people need commercial compilers is support.
>> GCC does not guarantee support, or even that it 'works'. If it doesn't work,
>> you can send in a bug-report. It will eventually be fixed - hopefully. With
>> commercial compilers you have paid a certain company to give you a working
>>product - if it does not function as it should, you have the right to complain
>> and demand that your problem is fixed ASAP. In other words, you get what you
 ------^^^^^^
>> pay for.
> 
> Hmmm...
> 'demand'?
> I think not.

Sure you can demand it. Whether or not anybody listens.... of course, there
are no garuantees with GCC, either in this respect.

> --
> #include <std_disclaimer>
> "If it runs emacs it's a computer, otherwise it's a peripheral." - me
> "I have two kitchen sinks: emacs and perl" - me

"I often quote myself. It lends spice to my conversation." - Oscar Wilde

----------------------------------------------------------------
Mel Walker                                    mwalker@novell.com
All opinions expressed are of the author.
Novell, Inc. is not responsible for the content of this article.
From: bothner@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Per M. Bothner)
Subject: Re: gnu ar?
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 05:32:31 GMT

In article <SIM.93Jan25121628@mdtf14.fnal.gov> sim@mdtf14.fnal.gov (Jim Sim) writes:
>Is there a gnu version of ar?  If so, can it be configured to handle archive 
>member file names that are longer than 16 characters? 

Get binutils-2.0.tar.Z from your friendly GNU archive.
This support long filenames.  (There were some bugs in archive
support in 2.0.  These will be fixed in 2.1, which I'm afraid
we will not have time to release soon.)



Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: sab@radcode.uucp (Stefan Aberg)
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:03:03 GMT
	<1993Jan25.012247.7610@cc.uow.edu.au> <1993Jan25.103308.3145@alex.com>
Organization: RadCode


In article <1993Jan25.103308.3145@alex.com> bryan@alex.com (Bryan Boreham) writes:
   In article <1993Jan25.012247.7610@cc.uow.edu.au>, amorton@cc.uow.edu.au (andrew morton) writes:
   |> Perhaps, but if he's such a smart cookie how come he designed an
   |> OS that will only run on little-endian machines?

   I have heard this assertion before, but I find it very hard to believe.  
   Would someone like to back it up, e.g. citing the particular casts and
   unnatural unions that make the code little-endian-only?

   Bryan Boreham

In SunWorld June 1992 Dwayne Walker of Microsoft is quoted to say:
"There is nothing that prevents Windows NT from appearing on a significant
variety of hardware bases".
and also:
"I can't comment on the rumors that it is already running on SPARC, ..."

Not that it proves that NT can run on other than little-endian machines
but it would make Microsoft look pretty supid if it was true.
-- 

Stefan Aberg          radcode!sab@uunet.uu.net
Berkeley CA
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: harmful effects of gnu software II
From: sl1yn@millville.declab.usu.edu (869483 Denys Larry)
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:01:43 MDT
Reply-To: sl1yn@millville.declab.usu.edu (869483 Denys Larry)
Distribution: world

In article <1k1sf5INNbb5@almaak.usc.edu>, ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes:


|>Because software is special in that the cost of making one more
|>copy of gcc is 0.  Once a good program is written and placed in
|>the PD, it is like air: a public good.  From sound economics, then,
|>there IS a case for the funding of the creation of such public goods
|>using taxes.
|>

  So now we have gotten to the core of the matter.  You don't want to work
in private industry.  You want the government to just give you the tax
money of other Americans so you can have your fun doing whatever program-
ming project interests you.  This way all software can be designed by
committee in government buildings and the results can be distributed
freely for all.
  What about writing.  Surely we can give government jobs to writers.  And
what about film; it falls into the same category.  Surely the government
can spare a $100 million for Arnold's next film.  Let's not forget photo-
graphers and graphic artists.
  Hell, if the government foots the bill, then there is nothing that 
cannot be made that would not benefit the rest of society.  Cars, clothing,
Twix candy bars. (I cast my vote for this last as valid for government
expenditures.  Free Twix bars for all.)  This is all sound economics; just
ask officials of the former Soviet Union.


|>I'm a 5th year Ph. D. student in Economics.  :-)


  Perhaps you can apply some of that ivory tower knowledge and answer the
real question that runs through this thread:  Just how much better than
GCC would a compiler have to be in order for people to pay, say, $100
for it?  Would enough people buy it to justify development costs.

 And please none of these, well look at Sun and MIPS, and etc.  These
companies are not developing for the good of all, they are developing
in order to make their hardware more attractive and make, gasp, dare we
say such a filthy five letter word, money.

Larry Denys
sl1yn@paradise.declab.usu.edu