HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ralph@falcon.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ralph Becker-Szendy)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: What ever happened to the AT&T XWindow backing store threat ???
Date: 22 Jul 92 18:02:48 GMT
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

Hope this is the right newsgroup to ask this ... if not please flame me.

What ever happened to the threat by AT&T (about 1.5 or 2 years ago) to
extract royalties from XWindow implementations using backing store,
due to an AT&T (Rob Pike et al.) patent which included (in rather
wishy-washy language) some form of backing storage for windows? I
don't remember hearing about the matter every being resolved (did AT&T
back down, or are major implementors paying some royalties), but I
haven't heard any outrage about it for a while. Just curious how the
question was settled.

Not that it matters much, now that AT&T and/or USL is sueing BSDI, for
matters which seem even more outrageously plucked from thin air (to
the legally uneducated mind I carry around in my head).

-- 
Ralph Becker-Szendy                          RALPH@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center                      RALPH@SLACVM.BITNET
M.S. 95, P.O. Box 4349, Stanford, CA 94309                    (415)926-2701
My opinion. This is not SLAC, Stanford U, or the US DoE speaking. Just me.
From: timlee@public.btr.com
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: LPF boycott list
Date: 26 Jul 92 23:47:11 GMT

Besides Apple, Lotus, and Xerox, what other companies (if any)
are there on the League of Programming Freedom boycott list,
and why (i.e. what specific action) are they being boycotted?
From: jbuck@forney.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU 56000 C Compiler
Date: 24 Jul 1992 20:39:52 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: forney.berkeley.edu
Keywords: GNU, QUERY, COST, MOTOROLA

In article <570@cow.ecs.oz> bmp@cow.ecs.oz (Bruce Paterson) writes:
>We have been looking for a C compiler for the Motorola 56001 DSP.
>Motorola tells us they have a GNU C compiler available for A$914
>and the source is available for a massive "handling" charge of A$250.

>Is Motorola really in a position to charge for this compiler when a GNU
>compiler is usually free except for distribution ?

Motorola can charge whatever they want; the GPL provides no limit.
When you buy the compiler, you get Motorola-proprietary tools (the
assembler and linker as well).  They only provide source code for
the Gnu-derived code.

If you don't want to pay, you can get it by anonymous FTP from
site nic.funet.fi [128.214.6.100], file
		~pub/ham/dsp/m56k-tools/g56k.tar.Z.

Note that the freely available software simply turns C code into
56000 assembly code; you'll still need an assembler and linker.

> Is this charge
>purely Motorola's charge for the documentation printed on Motorola
>letterhead paper, or does it represent some other special deal with
>the Open Software Foundation ?

Please, OSF != FSF.  OSF is a corporate partnership between Dec, HP,
and a number of other companies to prevent AT&T from controlling the
Unix market.



--
Joe Buck	jbuck@ohm.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: ehmeier@faui01.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Erich Meier)
Subject: GNU finger - FAUERN version on ftp.uni-erlangen.de
Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:16:28 GMT
Keywords: gnu, finger

Hello!

Due to many requests, here's the address of the ftp-server having the
version of GNU finger with enhancements made here by FAUERN (University
of Erlangen/Nuernberg in Germany).
The biggest change is the use of SunRPC instead the old cfinger-fingerd
communication (sending binary data).

	ftp.uni-erlangen.de[131.188.1.43]:
		/portal/utilities/finger/finger-FAUERN.tar.Z

Have fun with it. But remember: this version is not yet merged with any
official GNU version but I hope it will be soon.

Erich
---
Erich Meier	         e-mail: Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de
  "Sagt mal, muesst Ihr das am Tag machen?" - unbekannter CIP-Benutzer
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: paulf@w6yx.Stanford.EDU (Paul Flaherty)
Subject: What's in a name?
Organization: The Three Packeteers
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:43:50 GMT


Well, my Reed - Solomon error correcting coder is now out of beta, and the
only remaining issue is:

What to call it?

I had originally proposed "rs", in keeping with Unix tradition of short,
clipped names.  Critics have replied that this is too short, and that
something like "ecc-encode" and "ecc-decode", though that seems to be
pretty long and awkward.  As an interim, I'm using "rscode" with flags
to indicate the desired operation.

Sooooo...since Gnu's Not Unix, what will the command name philosophy be?

--
-=Paul Flaherty, N9FZX/5W1JX  |"Anyway, nothing can beat Good Old American
->paulf@Stanford.EDU          | Know - How." -- Harry Canyon, _Heavy Metal_
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: GNU Coding Standards
From: s_ebach@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de (Bernd Ebach)
Date: 22 Jul 92 12:33:06 GMT
Reply-To: s_ebach@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de
Organization: University of Ulm, Germany


Where could I get a copy of the GNU Coding Standards?

TschauTschau
		Bernd
-- 
      -----------------------------------------------
       Bernd Ebach, try s_ebach@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de
      -----------------------------------------------
From: IFF291@DJUKFA11.BITNET (Stephan Petersen)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Color separation on a SUN anybody?
Date: 30 Jul 92 09:26:19 GMT
Organization: KFA  Forschungszentrum Juelich

I'm asking this for someone without access to this newsgroup: Is there
anybody out there in the GNU-crowd doing something on color separation
programs for SUN workstations? If not, is there at least anybody who
could give me a hint on any kind of software related to this field?

Thanks for any hints,
Stephan



+------------------------------------------------+
| Stephan Petersen                               |
|                                                |
| Bitnet/EARN: IFF291@DJUKFA11                   |
| Internet:    IFF291@zam001.zam.kfa-juelich.de  |
+------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: bjork@telebit.com (Steven Bjork)
Subject: Money issues, was Re: Rating of gcc in Unix Review
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:55:52 GMT

In article <156eo7INN6d3@betty.cs.widener.edu> brendan@cs.widener.edu (Brendan Kehoe) writes:
>This month's issue of Unix Review compares four C compilers (MetaWare,
>GCC, Sun's unbundled C, and Lucid C).  They really trash GCC, giving
>it F's on Installation because it's distributed as source, and "N/A"
>on documentation, claiming it includes none.  (They define
>documentation as printed and bound books, not electronic, apparently;
>at least to the extent that Sun's Answerbook will fall under the
>umbrella.)  In the area of overall performance, they claim MetaWare
>and Lucid lead the pack, with GCC behind Sun's unbundled C.  Hmm.

(cynical mode on)
Of course any magazine will rate any (possible) advertiser's
product above any non-advertiser's product. 
(cynical mode standby)

--Steven
From: brendan@cs.widener.edu (Brendan Kehoe)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Date: 21 Jul 1992 08:48:50 -0400
Organization: Widener University Computer Science Dept, Chester PA
NNTP-Posting-Host: betty.cs.widener.edu
Keywords: BSDI AT&T

jeffrey@algor2.algorists.com wrote:
>the grounds being specified as "trademark infringement, false
>advertizing and unfair competition."

The irony is amazing: divestiture kept AT&T from being "too strong" in
the telecommunications field, and now they have the gumption to claim
BSDI is unfair competition?  Yeesh.

-- 
Brendan Kehoe, Sun Network Manager                      brendan@cs.widener.edu
Widener University                                                 Chester, PA
                                              At Bennigan's, EVERYONE gets it!
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,alt.religion.emacs
From: doom@elaine36.Stanford.EDU (Joseph Brenner)
Subject: Re: Anyone want to volunteer to "teach" elisp?
Organization: DSG, Stanford University
	<ROCKWELL.92Jul18204233@socrates.umd.edu>
Date: 22 Jul 92 09:55:15


I was saying: 
   There's been a little bit of discussion about the possibility of
   doing something like a course in Elisp.  

And rockwell@socrates replied:
   Sounds like you want a form a newsgroup.  You start out with your
   charter, and you establish that students are encouraged to tutor later
   newcomers.  Basically, gnu.emacs.lisp.help, with a decent charter.
   
   But, basically, you're just talking more newsgroups, and ftp
   directories.  I think.

This doesn't sound like a bad plan, and it might actually be
the way to do it, but mostly you're talking about the
traditional Usenet way of doing things.  The people on
alt.uu.future are at least talking about ways to do things a
little differently.  Maybe they shouldn't be written off
quite so quickly? 

(So far, one or maybe two people have volunteered to take
part of the teaching load for an elisp course via Internet.
It's going to take more people and a lot of administrative
work to coordinate them though, so maybe gnu.misc.discuss is
the way to go.) 




Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: amorgan@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Crunchy Frog)
Subject: Huh?
Originator: amorgan@Xenon.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Distribution: gnu
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 21:34:16 GMT

Whilest browsing through a list of acronyms I came across 

INSTITUTE       INSTITUTE's Name Shows That It's Totally Unrelated To EMACS

No doubt.  Does anyone have any idea what INSTITUTE *is*?  Is it one of
the FINE, JOVE, FRED family of editors?  Is it something even more
sadistic?

C Frog
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: jonathan@chpc.utexas.edu (Jonathan Thornburg)
Subject: Re: Rating of gcc in Unix Review
Summary: note they rated gcc 1.40, *not* gcc 2.0
Keywords: Unix Review C Compiler test rate evaluate gcc GNU 1.40 2.0
Organization: U of Texas at Austin / Physics Dept / Center for Relativity
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 23:14:11 GMT

Note that Unix Review tested gcc 1.40, *not* the new gcc 2.0.
This may account for their finding that gcc generated worse code
than Sun's C.

- Jonathan Thornburg
  <jonathan@einstein.ph.utexas.edu> or <jonathan@hermes.chpc.utexas.edu>
  University of Texas at Austin / Physics Dept / Center for Relativity
  and (for a few more months) U of British Columbia / {Astronomy,Physics}
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: marc@pxcl1.gi.rwth-aachen.de (Marc van Woerkom)
Subject: GCC Review
Organization: GNUs Not Usenet
Distribution: gnu
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:06:09 GMT

GNU Software is not available only available via FTP, it is amazing how fast
new releases spread to BBS systems. (Praise the highspeed modems :-)


Bye, Marc


Marc van Woerkom  ******  Aachen Center for Solidification in Space  *******
ACCESS e.V., Intzestr. 5                E-Mail: marc@pxcl1.gi.rwth-aachen.de
D-5100 Aachen, Germany                          Marc_van-Woerkom@ac3.maus.de
Fax: +49 241 38578        "Trust me, I know what I'm doing!" (Sledge Hammer)
From: bruner@sp15.csrd.uiuc.edu (John Bruner)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Date: 22 Jul 92 21:12:35 GMT
	<1992Jul20.211451.3051@algor2.algorists.com>
	<MIB.92Jul21111729@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
	<1992Jul22.155655.1596@wobble.uucp>
Distribution: na
Organization: CSRD, University of Illinois

dlu@wobble.uucp (Doug Urner) writes:
> mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) writes:
>> It's worth noting that one of the grounds of the suit is that BSDI's
>> phone numebr was advertised originally as 1-800-ITS-UNIX.  That's
>> pretty clearly trademark infringment.
> 
> Assuming that the "U-word" hasn't gone the way of klenex and other
> trademarks that have become plain old everyday words.  BSDI is not the
> first to use a phone number "expressable by the letters UNIX" nor,
> according to my online phonebook, are they the last.

Given the frequency with which papers and other documents written by a
wide variety of people remind us that "UNIX is a trademark of Unix
Systems Laboratories" (or, earlier "AT&T Bell Laboratories"), I doubt
that BSDI can successfully argue that it has become generic.

In this particular case, an advertisement that states "it's UNIX" in
describing BSDI's telephone number is clearly a violation of USL's
trademark.  After reading the available material, this seems to me a
very clear cut case of infringement.  (USL's other claims are
considerably more tenuous.)

By the way, "Kleenex" is a registered trademark of Kimberly-Clark.
--
(Dr.) John Bruner, Deputy Director			bruner@csrd.uiuc.edu
Center for Supercomputing Research & Development	(217) 244-4476 (voice)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign		(217) 244-1351 (FAX)
305 Talbot Laboratory; 104 South Wright St.; Urbana, IL  61801
From: burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU Fortran?
Date: 21 Jul 92 21:36:54 GMT
	<BURLEY.92Jul21113332@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
Organization: Free Software Foundation 545 Tech Square Cambridge, MA 02139
In-reply-to: burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu's message of 21 Jul 92 15:33:32 GMT

In article <BURLEY.92Jul21113332@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley) writes:

      Is there a GNU Fortran compiler in the works?

   Yes.

Sorry, I've been told that there are new readers who don't know the info (that
I occasionally post here).  So I'll post the usual info again.

The GNU Fortran compiler is nearing alpha test (as mentioned in the June 1992
GNUS Bulletin, or whatever it's called).  So it is not available yet.
Announcements concerning _beta_ releases will likely be made far and wide
on the network, but we will avoid overly publicizing alpha-related
announcements by sending status reports and such to a GNU Fortran mailing
list.  If you want this kind of info, ask to be put on the list by sending
e-mail to:

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

--

James Craig Burley, Software Craftsperson    burley@gnu.ai.mit.edu
Member of the League for Programming Freedom (LPF)
From: prg@dir.mcc.ac.uk (Pete Green)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Flex and Bison for the PC - best way forward ?
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:15:19 GMT
Organization: Network Unit, Manchester Computing Centre, England.

I would like to run Flex and Bison on my 386 PC. Two routes forward (three
if you count "forget PCs") have been suggested.

  1. Get hold of Flex and Bison source ported to Microsoft of Borland C.

  2. Compile Flex and Bison using GCC ported to compile for 386s.


Being new to the world of GNU, I would appreciate comments from anyone who
may have tried these routes.

Many thanks,

Peter.
From: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU finger
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:37:37 GMT
	<BrqB4M.KpH@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
	<Brspxt.19o@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
	<1992Jul23.024523.3091@reed.edu>
Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA

In article <1992Jul23.024523.3091@reed.edu> nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) writes:

   My impression is that GNU finger is dead. One version of the software
   was release, a long time ago, and it was totally buggy. No one's done
   any official work to make it better.

   It's a shame, because the basic idea is really nice. While I'm not a
   member of the FSF and don't have any right to say anything about this,
   I think that the world would be grateful if you released (and
   supported?) a working version of GNU finger. I guess you shouldn't
   call it GNU finger until you get the official stamp of approval.

A fair amount of work has been done since then, but it isn't yet good
enough to be distributed.  A paid staff member is working on making
GNU finger good for real.  When it is released, it will be much
better.  I'm sure the developer would welcome people's suggestions.
Mail them to bug-gnu-utils@prep.ai.mit.edu.

--
Michael I. Bushnell             |		Benedictus qui venit
+1 617 625 4518 (H)            -+-                       in
+1 617 253 8568 (W)             |                      Nomine
mib@gnu.ai.mit.edu              |                      Domini
From: kline@cs.arizona.edu (Nick Kline)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Rating of gcc in Unix Review
Keywords: Unix Review C Compiler test rate evaluate gcc GNU 1.40 2.0
Date: 30 Jul 92 22:45:48 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson


>that Sun's C compiler might generally be faster.  We're not stupid
>here, after all -- if we couldn't turn out better compilers (in the
>opinion of some number of compiler customers), we'd all go do
>something else.
>

No one says Sun is stupid.  But there are many many conservative 
companies that would buy sun's compilers even if it was demonstrably
inferior in price, performance and support.  I'm not saying that is
is inferior to gcc, but gcc is probably better in many, if not most
ways.

And when said companies see a (obviously misleading) review as was
printed recently in Unix Review, that just justifies their opinions.

-nick
kline@cs.arizona.edu
my opinion
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: c1dje@watson.ibm.com (David Edelsohn)
Subject: readline diverging?
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 21:10:51 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Keywords: gdb vs bash
Followup-To: gnu.misc.discuss

	Is the readline library diverging between the gdb and bash worlds?
The ChangeLog files contain different information and different bugs and
fixes occur in the two distributions.
					David
-- 
===============================================================================
David Edelsohn                                      T.J. Watson Research Center
c$dje@watson.ibm.com                                P.O. Box 218
+1 914 945 3011 (Tieline 862)                       Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
"If G-D had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates" -- Jay Leno
From: magidj@cellbio.duke.edu (Jonathan Magid)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GCC licensing issues.
Date: 22 Jul 92 18:48:06 GMT
Organization: Duke University Medical Center, Dept. of Cell Biology

hi,
the executables that gcc creates have no limitations in the
way that they are sold and/or copied, other than the ones
you apply in your own copyright, i.e. the GNU copyleft doesn't
effect it, as long as you don't link it with any gnu libraries.

if you do, than it is covered by the gnu library lisence which
requires taht you provide the object code for your modules and
the source for the library (so that one could modify the library
and relink if one desired)

jonathan.

-- 
Jonathan Magid     magidj@marimba.cellbio.duke.edu 
Virtual pizza Delivery (tm)::faxed in 30 cycles or less or you get it
----------------------------------------FREE!!!-----------------------
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,gnu.emacs.help
From: lfernand@ee.ryerson.ca (luis fernandes)
Subject: Two ideas for implementing repeat-last-command
Organization: Ryerson Polytechnical Institute, Toronto
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 21:18:24 GMT

The following two ideas for implementing repeat-last-command dawned 
on me while reading the GNU Emacs manual:

[1] Write a lisp program that parses output from 'view-lossage' and binds 
it to a key that will repeat-last-command.  Everything between either a 
C- or M- and RET.

[2] Modify emacs so that it is always in macro-record mode. Recording
would begin when either C- or M- was pressed and would end when RET was
pressed. The recorded sequence of commands whould then be returned by
repeat-last-command. A key could be bound to execute repeat-last-command. 
If a macro was being recorded, then 2 copies of the command would exist: 
one copy for the macro and the other for the benefit of repeat-last 
command.

Excuses for not trying to implement this myself:

   (i) I can't steal any CPU cycles to devote to this cause until 
       Jan. 93. It's true I don't have a life, but I do have other 
       hacking commitments until '93.

  (ii) I don't know lisp (don't worry, I will learn) so I have no idea 
       whether [1] is viable. (I do however, have my doubts about 
       this...)

 (iii) I haven't looked at the source to see how macro's are recorded, 
       etc. to know whether [2] is viable.

So, who's game ? Tennis anyone ?

zxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzx
Luis Fernandes  <lfernand@ee.ryerson.ca>
-Friendly Neighbourhood X Wizard's Apprentice
zxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxzx
From: dlu@wobble.uucp (Doug Urner)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Date: 22 Jul 92 15:56:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: wobble.1992Jul22.155655.1596
Organization: dlu UNIX Consultants

mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) writes:

>It's worth noting that one of the grounds of the suit is that BSDI's
>phone numebr was advertised originally as 1-800-ITS-UNIX.  That's
>pretty clearly trademark infringment.

Assuming that the "U-word" hasn't gone the way of klenex and other
trademarks that have become plain old everyday words.  BSDI is not the
first to use a phone number "expressable by the letters UNIX" nor,
according to my online phonebook, are they the last.

Perhaps we should be thinking of a new name for GNU?


-- 
Doug Urner, dlu@wobble   "They tear down our comrades like leaves from a tree,
1613 Moore Street         leaves from a tree, leaves from a tree, but the
Bellingham, WA  98226     tree still stands, its roots locked to the land."
206/676-5759                              -- Song of the Exile,  Barry Guilder
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: c1dje@watson.ibm.com (David Edelsohn)
Subject: Re: GCC licensing issues.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 21:42:13 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

	The LGPL specifically discusses providing object files so that the
application can be relinked with the library (possibly newer and/or
modified) at a later date.  If the system uses dynamic sharable libraries
which bind at runtime, is a relinkable version of the code necessary?  If the
user can install a different version of the library and the program will
recognize the new dynamic library, the intent seems to be satisfied.
	Also, in the case of Bison, must the programmer make all of the
source code available?  Is it acceptable to provide the user with access to
Bison, the original grammar, and relinkable versions of the other parts of
the program?  This provides the user with the same original access to the
FSF utility and ability to manipulate that aspect of the application as the
programmer.
					David
-- 
===============================================================================
David Edelsohn                                      T.J. Watson Research Center
c$dje@watson.ibm.com                                P.O. Box 218
+1 914 945 3011 (Tieline 862)                       Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
"If G-D had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates" -- Jay Leno