HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: No bootlegging hurts Unix
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 19:35:52 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.031439.797@ksmith.uucp> keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith) writes:
> In article <id.I5OO.0VG@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> >With groups like the SPA going after companies and suing them for big bucks
> >over this, I don't expect this will last long.

> Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

> That's a good one Peter.  Be real, How and WHY do you think the majority
> of PC BBS's and User's groups get started.

I *am* real. There are several such groups out there and they've started
putting the bite on companies big time. And companies are responding. Here
at Ferranti, if you want to bring your personal PC in to work you have to
provide your original software disks or receipts for the company to put
into escrow.

> Enter Mr. Software policeman with Warrants to search
> your building and ALL your employee's houses on the odd chance that they
> MAY be able to even locate (much less get an ACCURATE count) of all the
> machines you have software on, and what not?

They generally don't hit home machines, but they do check every PC in the place
to see what commercial packages are installed. Then it's up to you to provide
the proof of purchase.

> Meanwhile, rest assured if LOTUS starts this shit
> the company will simply shut down all the pc's and probably NEVER EVER
> buy another lotus product.

LOTUS won't do it. The SPA will, and they'll hit you for every program you
have no matter what the vendor is.

> Software is very similar. [to music]

Companies, radio stations, restaurants, and so on are hit by BMI and ASCAP
all the time.

> Hell, I have some "pirate" software here.  I NEVER USE it.

So why don't you erase it? I just bought a used Mac, and the 10-20 disks of
pirated software the guy threw in made for perfectly usable blanks. If your
client can't afford to buy a second copy, get 'em to pay your lawyer's
retainer.
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:2045 comp.unix.sysv386:8612
From: merlin@neuro.usc.edu (merlin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Date: 13 Apr 1992 22:48:55 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: neuro.usc.edu

>>> It may be relevant if the current SCO UNIX is not specially targeted for
>>> single-user systems. I haven't used it so I don't know. 
>>That's the whole point of the distinctions between "SCO UNIX" and "SCO Open
>>Desktop". ODT is a single-user version.

ODT 1.1 is NOT a single user system  ODT differs from SCO UNIX in that it
bundles several products (base, tcp/ip, nfs, and X11R4) into one package
at a reduced cost.  ODT 1.1 is therefore an inexpensive SUPERSET of SCO
UNIX 3.2r2.0.  There is a SERVER upgrade option which allows unlimited
user logins to SCO ODT 1.1 -- exactly like the SERVER upgrade which makes
the original two user SCO UNIX BASE system into an unlimited system.  Do
not believe for a minute that SCO ODT 1.1 is not intended as a multiuser.

Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:2069 comp.unix.sysv386:8672
From: bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Date: 15 Apr 92 11:56:25 GMT
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden

In article <id.19WO.JCH@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <1992Apr13.180422.6106@lth.se> bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson) writes:
>>[SCO UNIX vs SCO ODT single-user]
>
>> All right. But I suppose the software is sold the same way to both?
>
>Probably is, but it shouldn't be.

Another poster says that SCO ODT is not a single user system at all?

>This leads to the  point is that there is nothing inherently wrong with UNIX
>on the desktop. It's a superior operating system design to any of the
>alternatives currently available in this market. The problem is that the
>implemantations suck. THAT is what needs to be addressed.

That seems to have been my point. 

>> Lots of religious statements.
>
>No, experience. I can make religions statements on the topic as well if
>you like, but when you present anecdotal evidence ("Those using... may
>disagree") you can't legitimately fault me for replying with more of the
>same.

Nonsense. In a newsgroup a religious statement is something stated as
a fact that is only based on personal preferences. Experience hasn't
much to do with it. Witness all the Amiga zealots in
comp.sys.amiga.advocacy. 

What is your definition of a "religious statement"? 

Bengt Larsson.
-- 
Bengt Larsson - bengtl@maths.lth.se
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 14:27:45 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.180422.6106@lth.se> bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson) writes:
> >That's the whole point of the distinctions between "SCO UNIX" and "SCO Open
> >Desktop". ODT is a single-user version.

> All right. But I suppose the software is sold the same way to both?

Probably is, but it shouldn't be.

> Please state your point then.

One point is that there are structural level problems with modern UNIX
implementations that make them inappropriate for the single-user desktop.
This is reflected in the poor market share of UNIX, and the high price of
applications, no matter how much one might claim otherwise.

Good desktop UNIX implementations have existed. They didn't do well because
they hit the market too early and the hardware cost was too high. The companies
involved (AT&T, HP, ...) dumped them rather than work on the price problem,
so now that the hardware is cheap they're gone.

This leads to the  point is that there is nothing inherently wrong with UNIX
on the desktop. It's a superior operating system design to any of the
alternatives currently available in this market. The problem is that the
implemantations suck. THAT is what needs to be addressed.

> >> Besides, those using Turbo Pascal or the equivalent may disagree.
> >  [ about the quality of UNIX tools ]

> >I've used Turbo Pascal. UNIX is a *way* better development environment.
> >A UNIX program is *way* easier to implement than a DOS version, let alone
> >a Mac one. For one thing, you don't have to rewrite the operating system.

> Lots of religious statements.

No, experience. I can make religions statements on the topic as well if
you like, but when you present anecdotal evidence ("Those using... may
disagree") you can't legitimately fault me for replying with more of the
same.
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.sys.sun.misc
From: dave@rsd.dl.nec.com (Dave Rogers)
Subject: Re: No bootlegging hurts Unix
Organization: NEC America, Radio Software Development, Dept.
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 14:07:08 GMT

I have worked for numerous companies on a contract basis over the last
ten years and my experience is that bootlegging of software is at least
as common in the UNIX world as in the VMS or PC/MAC world.  As a matter
of fact I have not yet worked for any company that has not *knowingly*,
illegally used software.  This is fundamentally a management issue.  In
most cases, management has asked me to install or use software in an
illegal manner. In one case I walked out and wrote a *serious* memo to
the individual's boss. This had almost no effect. 

Bootlegging is much easier in the VMS and UNIX worlds than the PC/MAC
world because it is trivial to load a copy on the server and let
everyone use it. DEC has a License Management Facility (LMF) which is
trivial to circumvent and only serves to make system manager's jobs
more difficult.

===============================================================================
Dave Rogers                    				        Morgan 30/2 #60
M & R Software, Inc					        USYRU 37296
Internet:   dave@rsd.dl.nec.com
On contract to: NEC America, Radio Software Dept

Don't take life too seriously; you're not going to get out of it alive anyway.
From: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (John G Dobnick)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: Looking for fuzzy-diff
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:26:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: uwm.1992Apr16.232616.29286
Reply-To: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Originator: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

From article <1992Apr13.133828.4621@walter.cray.com>, by page@cray.com (Michael Page):
> Hi,
> 	Has anyone seen or heard of (or better yet, know where I
> can get) a utility that someone described to me as "fuzzy-diff"?
> It is a diff type utility that allows one to scann two ascii files
> and flag any differences in character strings but allows a settable
> tolerance when comparing numerical data.

That's "spiff", available in the comp.sources.unix archives, volume 16.

-- 
John G Dobnick                          ATTnet: (414) 229-5727
Computing Services Division             INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee     UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd

"Knowing how things work is the basis for appreciation,
and is thus a source of civilized delight."  -- William Safire
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: wayne@backbone.uucp (Wayne Schlitt)
Subject: Re: "Open Systems"
Followup-To: alt.folklore.computers
Organization: The Backbone Cabal
	<-=sjwfg@lynx.unm.edu>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 07:22:57 GMT

In article <-=sjwfg@lynx.unm.edu> techs@triton.unm.edu (Erik Fichtner) writes:
> In article <1992Apr8.231518.13501@cirrus.com> dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
> >In <ku6mpuINNm80@alhena.usc.edu> ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes:
> >
> >>DOS is not Unix.
> >
> >UNIX is a DOS, however.
> But unix is much much more than that..  drop the D. Unix is an operating system.
> it operates the COMPUTER.   DOS is a a disk OS. It controls the disks, pretty
> well, but it does a poor job of running the computer.


no, unix is a dos.  a disk-based operating system, as opposed to a COS
or a TOS (card or tape based operating system).  before card based
operating systems, you had to use toggle switches and stuff to get
your computer to boot up.  DOS's tended to be much bigger, and they
had the luxury of being able to do a seek to re-read some part of the
operating system.  

to the best of my knowledge, IBM still sells dos.  dos/vse was the
last version I used.  this is the only operating system on a mainframe
computer that makes ms-dos look fancy.  


-wayne
From: bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: pc unix (was Re: whining about ...)
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:08:11 GMT
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden

In article <BMnpHB.7zn@world.std.com> madd@world.std.com (Bob Nagle) writes:

Why do you call yourself Bob Nagle?

>Personally I don't know how they could even make a POSIX environment
>out of NT's process model.  Until I see the POSIX environment
>first-hand I won't believe it works -- and if it does work I'll stand
>agape at the programming talents that made it happen because it's
>going to be damned difficult.

Could you expand on NT:s process model? In what way is it very different?

Bengt Larsson.
-- 
Bengt Larsson - bengtl@maths.lth.se
From: bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: Any comments on `Unix-Lite'?
Date: 9 Apr 92 05:55:24 GMT
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden

In article <id.E5OO._NG@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <1992Apr5.155921.22198@lth.se> bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson) writes:
>> My background is VAX/VMS. And from that viewpoint, security as
>> *implemented* in common Unixes leaves much to be desired. Examples are
>> "." in roots path, "+" delivered in hosts.equiv, pty:s that can be
>> defeated, NFS that can be spoofed, etc. 
>
>That's all true for BSD based systems. None of those particular problems
>exist in System V (not that there aren't some... but then there are problems
>in VMS as well... the method of specifying files outside your cluster
>is really dangerous, for example: embedding a password *in* the filename?
>Give me a break!), and I dare say there are more System V systems out there
>than BSD ones.

I always suspected you meant System V when you said UNIX. Alas, I haven't
used SysV much (only on a 3B2 with SVR3) so I can't say much about it.
I haven't tried PC Unix.

Embedding the password is not a great feature for security to be sure.

Bengt Larsson.
-- 
Bengt Larsson - bengtl@maths.lth.se
From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: NeXT WP gripes (was Really Misleading Subject)
Date: 14 Apr 92 07:10:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.5r7H*m2q6
	<ae4Ht_ek6@cs.psu.edu> <id.I3RO.I0L@ferranti.com>
	<1992Apr12.180723.4076@news.rn.com>
	<EIGENSTR.92Apr12134437@nyssa.cs.rose-hulman.edu>
	<&#7Hu*!o6@cs.psu.edu>
	<EIGENSTR.92Apr13215520
Distribution: na
Organization: Penn State Computer Science


In article <EIGENSTR.92Apr13215520@nyssa.cs.rose-hulman.edu> eigenstr@nyssa.cs.rose-hulman.edu (Todd R. Eigenschink) writes:

   Well, yeah...I would guess that they don't support it because they
   don't give it away free anymore...at least when it was free, you got
   what you paid for.  And I guess I might have been exaggerating.  11
   minutes.  Tops.

Hmmm.  I wrote a >10 page report with WriteNow about a year and a half
ago under NeXTstep 1.0 and WriteNow didn't crash once.  WriteNow is
sorely lacking some features, but I've never heard anyone else
complain about it being buggy.  It uses the same 68000 code from the
Mac version.

      You are most definitely clueless.  BSD 4.3 is indeed running on top of
      Mach.  Most people will never know the difference.

   You're right...call me clueless.  I always thought that BSD #.# was an
   operating system just like Mach, and that one didn't run on top of the
   other.  Oops.  Most people will never know the difference, true.  But
   the people that give a damn, will.  I happen to give a damn.

Mach just contains the basic OS functions (e.g. memory and process
management).  BSD 4.3 is layered on top.  That includes the file
system, most of the Unix tools, and the libraries.

Btw, what features are missing that you "give a damn about"?

   I'd rather be a devout Sun weenie than a NeXT-o-nut...at least Suns
   don't come in such morbid colors (without the obnoxious logo plastered
   in an obnoxious position on the mouse).

You are talking religious nonsense.  How about a few technical reasons
why you don't like the machine?

   We probably don't understand much about computers, either.  That's why
   they bought all those NeXTs in the first place.

Try to overcome your religious attachment to Suns.  It has clouded
your judgement.

-Mike
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.arch
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: CISC vs RISC compilers (Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...))
Followup-To: comp.arch
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 19:33:15 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.064325.7459@leland.Stanford.EDU> fangchin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Chin Fang) writes:
> For some reasons, some CISC machines have very good compilation speed.  Like
> NeXT (68040) compiles faster than SPARC 1+ on many occations.  

I would guess that the compiler doesn't have to do quite as aggressive a job
of optimisation to produce acceptably fast code. Prototype on a CISC machine
cross-compiled from a RISC, and then switch to RISC for production? (yes, I'm
kidding).

Comp.arch folks... is this a real effect or just imagination?
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 22:34:00 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.110639.20351@news.rn.com> larry@news.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> >Yeh, but it's a typical price. Word Perfect costs just as much.

> Word Perfect for Unix can be had for around $300.

Where? I've been unable to find it for less than $500.

> Not bad for a first
> class well supported Word Processor with excellent support --

OK, and where are the $56 products?

> Where can you find an office full of users who know how to use the "Pee
> Sea" word processor?

Who cares? Give me an office full of users and I'll be the first in line with
a UNIX box and a Word Perfect server license. Give me a single user and it's
really hard to justify UNIX. Unfortunately.

Too bad AT&T dumped the 7300.
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:1971 comp.unix.sysv386:8259
From: martelr@kallisti.wtfd.orst.edu (Raphael Martelles)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Summary: UNIX Word Processor?  I've got money riding on this one!
Date: 7 Apr 92 05:18:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: talon.1992Apr7.051813.748
Distribution: na
Organization: Weatherford Hall, Oregon State U.

In article <id.L5OO._ZG@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <ADAMS.92Apr6022007@PDV2.pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de> adams@pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de (Adams) writes:
>> In article <id.VWLO.MOE@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

>> >   But even with that, your price for a single data point, MS Word for SCO
>> >   in a single-user configuration, is still $200-$350 over the same class
>> >   of product for PCs. It's twice the price for Microsoft Word for the
>> >   Macintosh. And where are the $18, $56, and $37 products?
>
>> On Internet, waiting to be repacked and distributed ;->.
>
>OK, where? Where on the net is a good, reliable, small, and easy-to-use
>basic word processor? I'll ftp it tomorrow if you can find one.
>Not a TEXT processor: I've already got *roff, TeX, and Lout. A word
>processor.

Hey, ditto for me!  All of us here at Weatherford Networking would LOVE a 
cheap/free UNIX word processor--I hate using nroff/troff, and TeX is workable
but painful--right now we download all our ascii stuff to the school's PC's
and use Microsoft Word.  (Shudder, all you UNIX people!)  If you or anyone can
show us a basic word processor, we'd all love it.  Please post on this one--
I'm sure there's a LOT of interest...  Hope I don't sound too mean--I'm NOT
taking sides, and all flames go to /dev/null, I would simply love to see a
UNIX word processor, especially one with text formatting capabilities (you
know, something capable of spitting out postscript, and that you can tell 
what type and style of font you want?)  


Raph
The Iron Monk
--
martelr@kallisti.wtfd.orst.edu
Weatherford Networking--the best Net on campus.  We guarantee it!
Installation of the week:  Xtank for the Wyse 50.     :-)
Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:1979 comp.unix.questions:5948
From: josiah@cm.deakin.oz.au (Josiah Chun-Fai Poon)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Wanted: YACC or related info
Date: 6 Apr 92 00:09:39 GMT
Followup-To: comp.unix.misc
Organization: Dept. of Computing & Mathematics, Deakin University, Australia

I posted this one earlier on, but it seemed it was lost, it did not
appear in the post, so I re-post again. Sorry if this annoys you...


I am a research student in the Computing Department of Deakin University
in Australia. I am at the moment developing a specification language to
model the relationship between programs and parameter-files. My supervisor
told me that I could simply use YACC in unix to do the job.

Can anybody in the net tell me what YACC can do? Where can I find the info?
(I have use MAN YACC in unix, but it is a very high level 2 pages desc on
my machine). I need detail info so that I can code my BNF to YACC.Also
what will it output? Thanks for your attention.

Josiah 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Josiah Poon
Department of Computing and Mathematics
Deakin University,
Geelong, VIC 3217,
AUSTRALIA.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: moconnor@pms704.pms.ford.com (Mike O'Connor)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: "Open Systems"
Date: 12 Apr 92 16:52:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: fmsrl7.1992Apr12.165200.25399
Reply-To: Mike O'Connor <mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com>
Organization: "Fordz"
X-Disclaimer: Not an official spokesperson for Ford Motor Co.

In article <ku6mpuINNm80@alhena.usc.edu> ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes:

:Today, the word "Open" means close to nothing apart from identifying
:you as marketing slime.  The word "Unix", on the other hand still
:means something.  A system is Unix if and only if it will compile and
:run everything on prep.ai.mit.edu without restrictions.  So: No, VMS

<laughs>  So you're basing your definition of an "open system" on what
the FSF has at the time? 




-- 
 Mike O'Connor                     |  Ford Motor Company, USA
 Applications Systems Analyst      |  CPD P&MS ECC Core Software
 Phone #:  +1 (313) 390-4008       |  P.O. Box 2053, ECC MD-7
 Fax #:    +1 (313) 845-0576       |  Dearborn, MI  48121-2053
From: holsberg@pilot.njin.net (Peter J. Holsberg)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: TCF'92
Date: 6 Apr 92 18:34:16 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


The Trenton Computer Festival 1992 will be held at Mercer College on
Saturday, April 11 (9-6) and Sunday, April 12 (10-4). 

This year's festival features:
	- The world's largest outdoor personal computer FLEA MARKET
	- Over 170 National Vendor and Commercial Booths, featuring AST,
          Adobe, Aldus, Borland, Microsoft, Lotus, Corel, Micrografx,
	  Toshiba, Hewlett-Packard, WordPerfect, Intel, Symantec, 
	  Software Publishing, and local vendors.
	- More than 125 FREE Seminars, Forums and Talks on all aspects of
	  computing.
	- Thousands of dollars worth of door prizes, including an AST 386SX
	  notebook computer, an HP color printer and an HP color scanner.
	- Saturday evening banquet features keynote speaker, Paul Grayson,
	  CEO of Micrografx. Tickets are $20 each.
	- Admission:
		General: $7 for both days; $5 for Sunday only
		Students and Seniors: $3 for both days
		Preschoolers accompanied by adult: FREE
		Other Children Under 12 accompanied by adult: $3 for both days,
			FREE on Sunday only

Files with all kinds of good information are available for anonymous
ftp from pilot.njin.net (128.6.7.38) in pub/TCF/tcf.  They include:

	what.is.TCF - history and description of TCF
	gen.info - general info about TCF, directions, parking, etc.

Pete Holsberg
TCF 92 Steering Committee
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.sys.sun.misc