HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jamieyn@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Jamie P Yoon)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: HELP!!: A4 & GSOS (Second Request)
Date: 16 Aug 92 14:30:26 GMT
Organization: University of Western Australia

Please! Somebody! Anybody!

Since getting my IIgs, I have NOT been able to print from any GS/OS
printer drivers onto A4 paper (8" X 11.6"). Setting the pagelength at
the setup box does not work: the paper always formfeeds to the page
length set in the printer's rom (8.5" X 11"). There is no option on my
printer's dipswitches to set it to A4 pagelength, only 11" and 12" long
paper.

I'd love to use AppleWorks GS, GraphicWriter III, but I can't print to
it! It's driving me nuts!

I've seen ImageWriters successfully handle A4 paper when linked to
Macintoshes, so I know it can be done!

I never had such problems in the 8 bit world, where with programs like
AppleWorks 3, I could either manually set the pagelength via the options
menu and telling Appleworks not to send formfeeds. Or I could send an
init string of <ESC>H1680, which would tell the printer to set its
formlength to 11.6". This way, AppleWorks could use formfeeds.

It must be a simple case of patching the printer driver to send a
<ESC>H1680 command to the printer...

Please, anybody HEEELLPPP!!!


Regards, Jamie

--
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
* JAMIE YOON                                                       #
# GS SIG CO-ORDINATOR          How fast does a Mac go?             *
* WAppleII Australia            => 9.8 metres/sec/sec :)   _-_|\   #
#_Supporting the Apple II in WA_     Apple II forever!    / OZ  |  * 
* ==>jamieyn@tartarus.uwa.edu.au          I live here ==> X_.-._/  #
# ==>JAMIE.YOON@f254.n690.z3.fido.zeta.org.au                      *
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#

 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
From: jamieyn@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Jamie P Yoon)
Subject: Re: Revenge of the Bobs: Warning
Organization: University of Western Australia
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:21:42 GMT

Umm, couldn't you just have typed CTRL-OPTION-RESET, and totally reset
the B-Ram values?


Regards, Jamie
From: rogden@uceng.UC.EDU (Rob Ogden)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Looking for terminal prog w/Super Serial
Date: 18 Aug 92 14:29:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: College of Engineering, University of Cincinnati

Hello,

Could someone email me a one liner as to what & where is
a resonable terminal emulation (VT100) program for
Apple //e, w/Super Serial card, PRO-DOS.

I can get KERMIT from Columbia. But what else?

Thanks
-Rob
---
Rob Ogden
rogden@uceng.UC.EDU
Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics, ML70
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221   513/556-3549
From: bazyar@teal.csn.org (Jawaid Bazyar)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Moderation: good, bad, or what...
Date: 16 Aug 92 05:08:18 GMT
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.

payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:

>Give it careful consideration. It seems almost impossible to unseat
>a moderator once enthroned. If they die without notice, or get a life
>or something, but do not want to give the responsibility to someone
>who is willing and able, the group is SOL, and dead.

  Haven't they been discussing just this subject on news.groups?  It's
_not_ impossible to do.  If the moderator dies, moderation can probably
be removed or transferred in very little time (i.e., a new RFD/CFV is
not necessary).  This is especially true since comp.binaries. moderated
has three backup moderators.

-- 
 Jawaid Bazyar              |   Ask me about the GNO Multitasking Environment
 Procyon, Inc.              |   for the Apple IIgs!   
 bazyar@cs.uiuc.edu         |   P.O Box 620334
 --Apple II Forever!--      |   Littleton, CO 80162-0334   (303) 933-4649
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
From: isc10327@nusunix3.nus.sg (ONG TAT-WEE)
Subject: Re: Sluggo III
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 05:41:51 GMT

tbc@netcom.com (Mike Garvey) writes:
: Burger Bill has already built and uses an external device that allows you
: to interface a game machine (SNES, Genesis, etc.) to an Apple IIGS'
: parallel port, called the "Sluggo III". With this device, you can read and
: play cartridges and optionally write to 'blank' cartridges that you can get
: as a developer.
: 
: Because of the legal issues, this is usually only available to developers
: but when I spoke with Bill (in a GEnie RTC), he seemed more than willing to
: sell to interested parties at the time. The cost is a little steep (c.
: $1,000) but again, this reflects the target audience. He also mentioned
: that for best results, you should use an AE (yuck) Parallel Pro with the
: Sluggo.
: 
: (Wanders off mumbling something about and you can connect an SNES/Genesis
: to most GS compatible RGB monitors such as the Sony KV-1311CR, Amiga 1084s,
: etc. You just need the proper cable specs)
: 
: Be seeing you...
: -- 
: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
: =  The Black Cursor (c) & TM  -=-  Sysop: Valhalla -- an Ogg-Net BBS  =
: =  Internet: tbc@netcom.com   -=-  (415) 221-4370  300-14,400bps 8N1  =
: =  GEnie: TBC   "No sir, I don't like it." - The Ren and Stimpy Show  =
: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Just a question, can we run the SNES software with Sluggo III on the
Apple IIgs?  If so, Burger Bill should market the product.

- DOTW - :)
From: pauley@VNET.IBM.COM ("P. H. Benson ", Paul)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: TWGS speedup
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:06:37 GMT
Organization: The Internet

I have been waiting patiently for a detailed explanation on how to fix the
TWGS to run at 14 MHz.  But, I also require some other info about it, so
any help is appreciated.
First of all, what is the phone number (again) to order this part, and do
they send you a detailed outline on how to upgrade (I'd heard that they did)?
Second, is the external cache required?  I wouldn't think so, but then there
may be such a performance hit at this speed that it is wise to get the cache.
Third, how hard would it be to make my own cache expansion 'card'?  Is there
any special logic on the thing, or is it just some wire connections?  Any
help here would be great.  It would be a shame to have to buy the cache
expander from AE, only to throw away the cache RAM.
Fourth, a step-by-step process to make the change would be great.

Thanks,
Pauley
GEnie: P.Benson1
From: jeffh@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Jeff Hunsinger-MUX_Tech)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Apple ][ FAQ?
Date: 18 Aug 92 14:38:17 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc.  Austin, Tx.

Is there an Apple II FAQ floating around somewhere? If not, here's a few
questions from an (obviously) new Apple IIe user:
1. What anonymous FTP sites are available?
2. Is there a way to read IBM format disks on the Apple 5 1/4 drives?
3. What magazines are still devoted to the II?
4. What mail-order stores still support it?
5. What accellerators are available?
6. How is the IIe enhanced to the 65C02? Just a simple processor swap?

By the way, my current system is:
Apple IIe, 128K, 2 5 1/4" drives, Microsoft Z80 softcard, and a mouse card
(though no mouse.) This leads me to the next question:
7. What kind of mouse can be used with the Apple mouse card?

Thanks,

Jeff

jeffh@apache.sps.mot.com
Please reply to the above address, otherwise I'll never get my mail...
From: djredick@bluemoon.rn.com (Darrin J. Redick)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: How many files in a ProDOS directory ?
Date: 12 Aug 92 01:30:14 GMT
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])

david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) writes:

> gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...) writes:
> >Hmm, you just gave me a thought, which prompts me to create a
> >subdirectory of infinite size, using that nice tool we know as
> >recursion....  How many files would be printed before the system
> >crashes? :-)
> 
> If you use recursion you will run out of path length (/X/X/X.....).
> Iteration will be sufficient (/X/X00000 /X/X00001 .....).
> 
> It is quite easy to calculate where this will run out. A 32MB disk (65535 blk
> has 16 blocks for the bit map, 2 for booting from & 4 for the volume director
> Creating a subdirectory uses another block. Each file we create in that
> directory (assuming we make them as small as possible) will use 1 block and
> each 13 will require an extra subdirectory block. This works out at about 608
> files and will take a very long time to complete (the directory will be 4680
> blocks long and searched linearly).
> 
> No - I do not intend trying this out to verify my calculations :-).
> -- 
> David Wilson				(042) 21 3802 voice, (042) 21 3262 fax
> Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong	david@cs.uow.edu.au

Yea, good luck in getting Cat Doctor to catalog it!  It will NOT catalog
any directory which has more than 255 files in it.  I had this happen to 
me a few days ago, so I know from personal experience about this.  AGATE
craps out as well.  Don't know about ProTERM, though.  Copy II Plus works.

djredick@bluemoon.rn.com

  _______________________________________________________________________
 |                                                                       |
 | Internet: djredick@bluemoon.rn.com                                    |
 |_______________________________________________________________________|
 |                                                                       |
 | FutureNet : #129@#02 #021@#03  #041@#05  #011@#08  #032@#09  #001#@10 |
 |             #041@#14 #067@#15  #131@#16  #043@#19  #126@#22  #247@#25 |
 |_______________________________________________________________________|
 |                                                                       |
From: kittlitz@osf.org (Ned Kittlitz)
Subject: Re: KSR curiosity
Keywords: CACM
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 13:35:26 GMT

In article <1992Aug11.214207.16247@tera.com> bob@tera.com (Bob Alverson) writes:
>Having just read Gordon Bell's article on supercomputers in the latest
>CACM, I have to ask: Is Bell financially associated with KSR?

Bell and Henry Burkhardt III (founder, and until recently, chairman of KSR)
were both involved with Encore. I believe they were both founders.  During
the period I worked at KSR, Bell showed up several times. On the other
hand, I believe Bell also showed up at Thinking Machines from time to time.

I don't know about any financial association Bell has with KSR or TMI.

There was an article in a magazine called (I believe) "Upside" in the last
year. The magazine appeared to be oriented towards technology-following
venture capitalists. My recollection of the opinions from that article
(glad to hear any others):
 - the original Connection Machine architecture was neat, using many many
   simple processors
 - the KSR architecture is neat, using a smaller number of more complex
   processors
 - the CM5 is a betrayal of the original CM architecture
 - insults were offered by Bell, Burkhardt, and Hillis
 - some other heavy (Grosch?) was quoted; I believe also anti-CM5
 - there is some kind of "bet" (involving Bell) about which machine type
   will triumph

I found the opinions expressed in the article to be amazingly "hard"; I
didn't see that they were justified. (However, I'm no visionary, and there
aren't any giants nearby who will let me stand on their shoulders.)
Certain people like to make wild long-shot predictions and
characterizations: if they are right, then the people point back to the
prediction, and are dubbed prescient; if they are wrong, well... who's
counting how often they are wrong?

There have also been several articles about KSR in the Boston Globe
business section where somewhat similar opinions were voiced.

According to the quarterly report I just received, KSR has delivered the
second level interconnection and has run a system of 128 CPUs. I believe
Cornell will have two 32-processor groups connected by a second-level
interconnect.

(I obviously have some financial interest in KSR, but nowhere close to
the America-3 level...).

-----
E. N. Kittlitz                                          kittlitz@world.std.com
contracting at OSF, not representing their positions.   kittlitz@osf.org
From: desprez@schnaps.ens-lyon.fr (Frederic Desprez)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
Subject: T9000 machines projects?
Date: 14 Aug 92 07:39:36 GMT
Reply-To: desprez@schnaps.ens-lyon.fr (Frederic Desprez)
Organization: Ecole Normale Superieure de Lyon, France


	Hi,

	I'm looking for informations about projects of parallel 
	machines using T9000 processors and C104 routing chip.

	I only have some informations about Parsytec's Giga Cube.

	Thanks in advance.

	Frederic
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
From: elias@fitz.TC.Cornell.EDU (Doug Elias)
Subject: Re: KSR curiosity
Organization: Tech. Integration Group
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 14:57:52 GMT

The KSR1, delivered to the Cornell Theory Center late in '91 and put
through Acceptance in May '92, did indeed achieve 513 MFLOPS for a
1000x1000 Linpack, and was informally reported to have achieved
~517 MFLOPS on an in-house machine (in Waltham) prior to the actual
Acceptance Test performed here on ours.

As previously posted, we are at this time awaiting final tuning of our
64-node machine (2 rings of 32 processors with a level-1 interconnect,
in KSR-speak "a Search-Group 1 comprised of two Search-Group 0's")
before beginning the Acceptance Test for that system.

doug
--
#  ____    |Internet:   elias@.tc.cornell.edu
#dr _|_)oug|USmail:     Sci.Comp.Support/Cornell Theory Center
#  (_|     |            737 TheoryCtrBldg/C.U./Ithaca/N.Y./14853-3801
#  (_|__   |MaBelle:    607-254-8686   Fax: 607-254-8888
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
From: fineberg@win31.nas.nasa.gov (Samuel A. Fineberg)
Subject: Re: KSR curiosity
Keywords: CACM
Organization: CSC, NASA Ames Research Center, NAS Division
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 17:16:29 GMT
Reply-To: fineberg@nas.nasa.gov

What I found amusing in Bell's article was the claims that KSR had proven
that its architecture was scalable to 1088 nodes.  At a talk I heard they
had never tried constructing a machine with more than 128 nodes, and have
little experinece with machines larger than 64 nodes.  Thats a long way
from 1088.  It reminds me of the claims TMC has made about the CM5's 
scalability to 16K nodes.

Sam
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
From: lamaster@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster)
Subject: Re: KSR curiosity
Keywords: CACM
Organization: RIACS, NASA Ames Research Center
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 02:10:34 GMT

In article <1992Aug11.214207.16247@tera.com>, bob@tera.com (Bob Alverson) writes:
:
|> Also, there appears to be an error in Table 1b of the article.  It lists
|> the KSR 1 as achieving 513 Gflops on Linpack 1000, with 32 processors.
|> Maybe it should be 513 Mflops--does anyone know for sure?
:

The table is clearly mistaken, because in the previous table, it is clear
that each processor is capable of 2 floating point operations per clock, 
and there are a maximum of 1088 processors at 20 MHz.  32 processors would
give a peak of 1.28 GFLOPS.  So, the listed 513 GFLOPS is clearly an
error.  513 MFLOPS would be consistent, although I don't know if it is
correct.


-- 
  Hugh LaMaster, M/S 233-9,     UUCP:      ames!lamaster
  NASA Ames Research Center     Internet:  lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov
  Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000  Or:        lamaster@george.arc.nasa.gov 
  Phone:  415/604-1056                     #include <usenet/std_disclaimer.h>
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
Subject: Re: KSR curiosity
Keywords: CACM
Date: 13 Aug 92 16:33:10 GMT
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA

In article <1992Aug12.171629.2858@nas.nasa.gov> fineberg@nas.nasa.gov writes:
>What I found amusing in Bell's article was the claims that KSR had proven
>that its architecture was scalable to 1088 nodes.  At a talk I heard they
>had never tried constructing a machine with more than 128 nodes, and have
>little experinece with machines larger than 64 nodes.  Thats a long way
>from 1088.  It reminds me of the claims TMC has made about the CM5's 
>scalability to 16K nodes.

A similar early claim was made for the CMU Cm* as being capable of having
almost 16K processors (50 were made, just a matter of how much you wanted
to spend).  You can tell how many bits were used for processor
addressing using this number (right?).  That's "Design" and "Engineering."
"Proving" you can build it is "Manufacturing." 8^)

Steve Lundstrom over at Stanford believes that unless you build to the maximum
designed size then sell off the pieces, you won't discover all the problems
(i.e. physical world) inherent in a design.  Other "weird" [typically not
powers of 2] numbers have their reasons in the world (the PEPE had a weird
number, the Delta has a non-2^n number); you can only ask why and hear their
explanation.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Resident Cynic, Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Second Favorite email message: Returned mail: Cannot send message for 3 days
A Ref: Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, vol. 1, G. Polya
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
From: john@aquarius.unm.edu (John Prentice)
Subject: Re: KSR curiosity and MPP hype
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 18:20:09 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Physics & Astro, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Keywords: CACM

In article <1992Aug12.171629.2858@nas.nasa.gov> fineberg@nas.nasa.gov writes:
>What I found amusing in Bell's article was the claims that KSR had proven
>that its architecture was scalable to 1088 nodes.  At a talk I heard they
>had never tried constructing a machine with more than 128 nodes, and have
>little experinece with machines larger than 64 nodes.  Thats a long way
>from 1088.  It reminds me of the claims TMC has made about the CM5's
>scalability to 16K nodes.

In general, the hype in the MPP field is thick enough to cut with a
knife.  Unfortunately, many large organizations are getting swept up by it and
are basing purchasing decisions on it.  The result could well be that time on
supercomputers capable of addressing the needs of the bulk of current users
may be hard to come by in a few years.  Should be good news for the
workstation manufacturers and people who are selling workstation networking
software (along those lines, there was an interesting article in Monday or
Tuesday's Wall Street Journal about people abondoning supercomputers in favor
of networked workstations). 

John





-- 
Dr. John K. Prentice                      
Partner, Quetzal Computational Associates    
3200 Carlisle N.E., Albuquerque, NM   87110-1664; 505-889-4543
john@unmfys.unm.edu -or- jkprent@cs.sandia.gov -or- prentice@rufous.cs.unm.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
From: joel@cs.mcgill.ca (Joel Malard)
Subject: Forced messages on Intel iPSC/860?
Originator: joel@opus.cs.mcgill.ca
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 18:10:50 GMT

The iPSC/860 provides forced types to speed-up communications in highly
synchronous computations. Would anyone know what the improvement is
(in mu. secs) for nearest neighbor connections. The figures i have are
about 70-80mu. secs but i don't recall the source of that information.

Thank you for any pointer.

Joel Malard.

joel@cs.mcgill.ca
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
From: chasman@athena.mit.edu (David Chasman)
Subject: optimized FFT for Crays
Keywords: FFT, CRAY
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 17:04:44 GMT

Can anybody provide pointers to the best 3D codes for:

forward REAL to COMPLEX FFT

and 

inverse COMPLEX to REAL FFT

codes for crays.

Please send e-mail to inolden@athena.mit.edu and chasman@mit.edu
From: john@aquarius.unm.edu (John Prentice)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
Subject: Re: KSR curiosity
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:58:54 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Physics & Astro, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <ELIAS.92Aug20095752@fitz.TC.Cornell.EDU> elias@fitz.TC.Cornell.EDU (Doug Elias) writes:
>The KSR1, delivered to the Cornell Theory Center late in '91 and put
>through Acceptance in May '92, did indeed achieve 513 MFLOPS for a
>1000x1000 Linpack, and was informally reported to have achieved
>~517 MFLOPS on an in-house machine (in Waltham) prior to the actual
>Acceptance Test performed here on ours.
>

Yesterday I heard some very similar performance numbers for a CFD code run on
about the same size KSR system.  

John

-- 
Dr. John K. Prentice                      
Partner, Quetzal Computational Associates    
3200 Carlisle N.E., Albuquerque, NM   87110-1664; 505-889-4543
john@unmfys.unm.edu -or- jkprent@cs.sandia.gov -or- prentice@rufous.cs.unm.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: Re: MPP hype
Keywords: CACM
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 16:40:06 GMT

In article <!14m#9l@lynx.unm.edu> john@aquarius.unm.edu (John Prentice) writes:
>In general, the hype in the MPP field is thick enough to cut with a
>knife.  Unfortunately, many large organizations are getting swept up by it and
>are basing purchasing decisions on it.  The result could well be that time on
>supercomputers capable of addressing the needs of the bulk of current users
>may be hard to come by in a few years.  Should be good news for the
>workstation manufacturers and people who are selling workstation networking
>software (along those lines, there was an interesting article in Monday or
>Tuesday's Wall Street Journal about people abondoning supercomputers in favor
>of networked workstations). 

Two years ago at the yearly Hackers Conference, there was some discussion
brought up about distributed programming after Hillis spoke about
genetic algorithms.  The general consensus appeared to be that programmers
did not care for centrally located resources whose time had to be scheduled or
where resource conflicts might take place.  While this view was a little
naive, I think it shows that people want to control their own resources.
[It's only naive because most of the people expressing the opinion were
not thinking about system balance and were not people aware of the state
of parallelism software.]  I believe it will go on pushed by things like PVM.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Resident Cynic, Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Second Favorite email message: Returned mail: Cannot send message for 3 days
A Ref: Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, vol. 1, G. Polya
From: gxc8951@hertz.njit.edu (chirn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
Subject: Ncube question
Date: 13 Aug 92 13:51:11 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
Originator: gxc8951@hertz.njit.edu

I am asked to write a simulation of ncube on UNIX system. But I can not
find out the information about the VERTEX os.

Could anyone tell me where to find the manual about the VERTEX.
The most important part I am looking for is the queue scheduling.

Is there a news group for ncube?

Please send e-mail to gxc8951@hertz.njit.edu

THANKS
From: ehgasm2@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Simon Marshall)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sequent
Subject: Re: getcwd() on DYNIX V3.1.2 running on a Symmetry
Keywords: Help!  getcwd
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:35:02 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre, Manchester, England, M13 9PL.

In article <payne.714199590@cwis> payne@cwis.unomaha.edu (Matt G. Payne) writes:
>I'm trying to compile GCC 2.2.2 on a Sequent Symmetry  (I'm after the
>C++ function of the compiler) running DYNIX V3.1.2.  During the first
>make, I get an undefined  _getcwd() error.  

Change getcwd() to getwd().  You could do it by a define, if you wanted, though
I was under the impression that getcwd() took 2 args, buf and size?

Simon.
-- 
Simon Marshall, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Hull, Hull HU6 7RX, UK
  "Football isn't about life and death.  It's more important than that." Bill
Email: S.Marshall@Hull.ac.uk    Phone: +44 482 465181    Fax: 466666   Shankley
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sequent