HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Fortran Is Not Dead, Unfortunately
From: alanb@sdl.mdcbbs.com (Alan Braggins)
Date: 17 Nov 92 10:53:47 GMT
 .spc.uchicago.edu><FRIEDMAN.92Oct18171824@nutrimat.gnu.ai.mit.edu><BwCBBn.8Dq@
 mtholyoke.edu> <HARDS4.92Oct19105906@evans.ee.adfa.oz.au><1992Oct19.212947.20744@maths.tcd.ie>
Organization: Shape Data (Division of EDS), Cambridge UK
In-reply-to: tim@maths.tcd.ie's message of Mon, 19 Oct 1992 21:29:47 GMT

>>>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 1992 21:29:47 GMT, tim@maths.tcd.ie (Timothy Murphy) said:

> hards4@evans.ee.adfa.oz.au (Brad Hards) writes:

>>   P.S.: At MHC they're teaching intro-CompSci and data structures in
>>   ANSI C now... but I just recently discovered that at least one
>>   instructor is busily trying to turn C into Pascal, by doing such
>>   horrible things as using "const" to declare constants instead of using
>>   the pre-processor.  Ugh!

> Are you sure this was in imitation of Pascal?
> There are obvious advantages in using const --
> for one thing, the compiler can check the type.

And you can have structure constants, and they show up in the debugger,
and you can pass the integral ones to Fortran by address (see topic title).

But they aren't compile time constants, so can't be used for dimensioning
arrays, or have constant folding done. Enums can, and can also be typechecked.

I'd like to see

extern const int foo = 5;

be legal, meaning "The space for foo is allocated elsewhere, but it is safe
to assume it will be 5". Having a definition which is not initialised to
the same value would be an error.

> Come on, admit it, the instructor was right ...
Depends whether he taught which should be used where and why, or just presented
a rule to be followed blindly...

--
     Alan Braggins, alanb@sdl.mdcbbs.com, abraggins@cix.compulink.co.uk
Shape Data - A division of EDS-Scicon Limited.   Cambridge, UK +44-223-316673
   "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
 "My employer does not necessarily share my views - but I'm working on it."
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: "Haydn Huntley" <huntley@gable.cs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re:  November LPF Programming Freedom issue
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:22:12 -0500

Hello!

I hope you will post this message to the appropriate mailing list
and/or news group.

My name is Haydn Huntley, and I'm a Ph.D student at Indiana University
in Bloomington, and I *used* to be a member of the LPF.  I support the
LPF's position that algorithms should not be patentable, and that is
the reason I became a member.  

The reason I decided not to renew my membership is that I was turned
off by the LPF's anti-Apple attitude.  I can understand boycotting an
organization as a protest against what they are doing, but hasn't the
threatening part of the Apple vs. Microsoft/Hewlett-Packard suit been
resolved already?  Aren't there other companies which are doing things
which are far more pernicious to the field of sofware freedom, in the
form of algorithm patents, than Apple is?  For example, in the
November LPF posting, it mentioned that an IBM executive chaired the
commission on software patents, and recommended that algorithm patents
should be allowed, and enforced *world-wide*.  Isn't that pretty bad?

When the LPF treats all companies reasonably fairly, then I will be
able to support it whole-heartedly.  Originally, I was under the
impression that the LPF was an organization which cared about
principles, but I really don't understand how continuing to sell
'Fanged Apple' buttons is the best way to explain our cause (that is,
that we are anti-algorithm patents, rather than against certain parts
of the software industry).

--Haydn
From: probreak@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (James Michael Chacon)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: A BASH question
Date: 22 Nov 1992 17:39:58 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu (norman miller) writes:

>I'm brand new to bash (and not very knowing about csh
>for that matter).  How does a feller reset the prompt,
>indicate wildcards in the .profile file, etc.?  In
>short, anybody got any documentation?

>E-mail preferred.

>Thanks in advance.

>Norman Miller
>nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu

It has a man page and texinfo files in the src distribution. I would
suggest reading these to answer any questions you have about bash.

James

Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: bash 1.12.1 question
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 03:08:10 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.205052.6857@panther.mot.com> sacks@netmgr.mot.com (Dennis Sacks) writes:

   In bash 1.12.1 (SunOS 4.1.2/sparc) can someone explain this behavior:
   ls -la | head -5 	works, but then gives "Broken Pipe" message after execution

This does not occur in bash 1.07.1 under SunOS 4.1.3.
-- 
Ed McGuire                   1603 LBJ Freeway, Suite 780
Systems Administrator/       Dallas, Texas 75234
 Member of Technical Staff   214/620-2100, FAX 214/484-8110
Intellection, Inc.           <ed@intellection.com>
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: mea@polaris.utu.fi (Matti Aarnio)
Subject: Re: GNU-WINDOWS (for MS-DOS)
Organization: University of Turku, Computing Centre
Distribution: gnu
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 22:57:16 GMT

  I put here a bit of archie search result.. (see below)

marshall@ll.mit.edu (Hunter Marshall) writes:
>In article <9211210515.AA08743@raisin-nut> gnulists@ai.mit.edu (GNU Mailing List Maintenance) writes:
>
>	Neither rms or I have ever heard of GNU-WINDOWS (for MS-DOS).
>
>I am not sure about the status of the above software.
>I vaguely remember this thread surfacing months ago. 
>At that time, one assessment was that this software was bogus; it was 
>a joke. 
>
>Again, my evidence is far from conclusive. 
>
>	hunter


Host nic.funet.fi
    Location: /pub/msdos/SIMTEL20-mirror/win3util
           FILE -rw-r--r--     342000  Jan 31 1992  gnuwin01.zip
    Location: /pub/msdos/windows/util
           FILE -rw-r--r--     342000  Jan 31 1992  gnuwin01.zip
Host puffin.doc.ic.ac.uk
    Location: /ibmpc/windows3/util
           FILE -r--r--r--     342000  Feb  8 1992  gnuwin01.zip
Host src.doc.ic.ac.uk
    Location: /ibmpc/windows3/util
           FILE -r--r--r--     342000  Feb  8 1992  gnuwin01.zip

Well, so one can find it at the Simtel-20 (we all know what that
place is, don't we? - at least those with long experience on this
networking activity should know..) and it has gone thru their
checks, thus propably it isn't entirely a hoax.

    Still I wonder why it has been written by using Borland graphics
interface tools, and not with proper Windows things, as one gets the
feeling it has been meant to be used...  Wierd in deed.

	/Matti Aarnio <mea@utu.fi>  Postmaster
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: jeffo@uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson-Owens)
Subject: Re: GNU stuff is a pain to install, and I can't get any help!
Reply-To: jeffo@uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson-Owens)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 05:00:36 GMT

I agree with Edward J. Hartnett in that some of the GNU stuff I've downloaded  
has been neat to hear about and see other people using, but some of it is  
uninstallable on my platform (NeXTSTEP 3.0).  I had to get a lot of help before  
I could install the latest emacs 18.59, I believe.  I still haven't been able  
to just compile the latest versions of gcc, gdb and oleo.

I too was curious how many other people feel this way, but since the majority  
of GNU software is installed on UNIX machines and UNIX is mainly the OS for  
programmers, not users, most of the people on USENET reading this message will  
probably not identify with Edward J. Hartnett's post.  Therefore, when it comes  
to getting one's hand held for installing 1 or 2 pieces of GNU software, which  
it sounds like all some people need to get them on their way to being able to  
install other software, it would help if there were a way to learn to do it  
without needing to read 10 manuals on every function of C, UNIX and programming  
hints of one sort or another.

When I think about the whole GNU idea, I wonder if it will ever take off in a  
big way.  I fear that it will  become just another user-unfriendly,  
UNIX-lookalike, enormous set of tools where very few actual applications exist,  
just a *lot* of development tools.  I'm grateful for the idea of exchanging  
software ideas and code freely, but the implementation lacks any advantage for  
those who use computers for something other than managing other computers.

In summary, I feel the following about todays computers (applicable to UNIX  
machines and GNU software):  Computers were made to help people complete work  
that they would have to do anyways.  When you have to hire someone to keep  
track of things going on with your computer, or if you construct or use an OS  
that takes years to learn where the knowledge of how to do things rests only  
with a certain few (aka, UNIX gurus), you have a bad computer.  This is in  
direct violation of the purpose for computers because it makes them harder to  
understand and operate.
-- 
-- Jeff (jeffo@uiuc.edu)
-- NeXTmail welcome
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: bogstad@blaze.cs.jhu.edu (Bill Bogstad)
Subject: Re: GNU stuff is a pain to install, and I can't get any help!
Organization: Johns Hopkins Computer Science Department, Baltimore, MD
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 23:43:15 GMT

In article <Bxy5x1.GnK@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jeffo@uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson-Owens) writes:
>I agree with Edward J. Hartnett in that some of the GNU stuff I've downloaded  
>has been neat to hear about and see other people using, but some of it is  
>uninstallable on my platform (NeXTSTEP 3.0).  I had to get a lot of help before  
>I could install the latest emacs 18.59, I believe.  I still haven't been able  
>to just compile the latest versions of gcc, gdb and oleo.

	In many cases, the "latest" version of a GNU package is considered
Alpha or Beta test code.  I believe that GCC 2.* and all versions of oleo are
considered to still be in "testing".  It would probably help if it was more
obvious which versions where considered stable and which ones to avoid.  A
seperate list of machines on which each package/version has been installed
would help alot.  That way you could decide whether it was worth your while
to try to install it on your machine.  If you don't feel like having to do
some debugging of the install, just stay away from versions that aren't
already known to work on your mahcine.

	I will say that I've been installing GNU code for over 5 years now
and I still run into problems.  Take your time.  I've had problems with
installing commercial software for Unix as well.  I guess that's life...

					Bill Bogstad
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: marshall@ll.mit.edu (Hunter Marshall)
Subject: Re: GNU-WINDOWS (for MS-DOS)
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Distribution: gnu
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 22:40:25 -0500

In article <9211210515.AA08743@raisin-nut> gnulists@ai.mit.edu (GNU Mailing List Maintenance) writes:

	Neither rms or I have ever heard of GNU-WINDOWS (for MS-DOS).

I am not sure about the status of the above software.
I vaguely remember this thread surfacing months ago. 
At that time, one assessment was that this software was bogus; it was 
a joke. 

Again, my evidence is far from conclusive. 

	hunter
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: November LPF Programming Freedom issue
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 13:17:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.005217.25341@freenet.carleton.ca>, aa302@Freenet (Russell McOrmond) writes:
>  It sounds like I should start reading comp.org.lpf and find out the
>issues here as this does sound pretty contradictory..

There is no newsgroup named comp.org.lpf, but there's an ongoing vote
on creation of comp.org.lpf.news and comp.org.lpf.talk.  See
news.announce.newgroups for details.

//Jyrki
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu (Edward J. Hartnett)
Subject: GNU stuff is a pain to install, and I can't get any help!
Organization: CIRES, University of Colorado
Date: 18 Nov 92 11:16:09


I really love emacs, and the more I read about GNU stuff the more
excited I get. But I've been trying to install gcc for two weeks now
on a Sun IPC running 4.1.1 (a very common machine) and I can't get it
to work, and no one will answer my questions on gnu.gcc.help. My point
is that the whole GNU project might be well served if they could get
someone to answer these kinds of questions.

I've been a sys admin for a while, and I'm not an idiot, but I have no
expert help here I can draw on. And I can't justify spending this
much time installing a free package (it'd be cheaper to buy one!) I
read all the gnu groups and answer as many questions as I can - I
think other, more experienced users of GNU stuff (not to mention those
who wrote the programs) should do the same. I know that some will say
that I could pay for support, but there's just no way my boss is
going to go for that unless I can show him some reasons why it's worth
it. And I can't do that if I can't get these things installed in the
first place!

So I guess this is just a plea to those GNU gods that they remember
that not everyone is as experienced in system administration as they
are, and that if they want a large crop of users, who will later (when
they're more experienced) go on to contribute code to the GNU project
(as I hope to one day), they have to help more people get the GNU
stuff running on their machines in the first place.

I know I'm going to get flames because I'm complaining about something
that is, after all, free. But it's just a crying shame to have all
these free great packages that, with just a few minutes help from an
expert, could be accessible, and not be able to use them. Am I the
only one who feels this way?

Just so you don't think I'm totally ingrateful, thanks, RMS, for GNU
Emacs, which is the best program I have ever seen or heard of, and
thanks all you other GNU programmers, for working so hard to craft
quality software. I only wish I could use it!

--
Edward Hartnett			ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu

Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu (Edward J. Hartnett)
Subject: Re: sense of scale (was: GNU stuff is a pain to install, and I can't get any help!)
Organization: CIRES, University of Colorado
Date: 22 Nov 92 18:03:12

In article <GUMBY.92Nov21074049@Cygnus.COM> gumby@Cygnus.COM (David V. Henkel-Wallace) writes:

   Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu (norman miller)
Subject: A BASH question
Organization: Trinity College, Hartford, CT.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 22:59:32 GMT

I'm brand new to bash (and not very knowing about csh
for that matter).  How does a feller reset the prompt,
indicate wildcards in the .profile file, etc.?  In
short, anybody got any documentation?

E-mail preferred.

Thanks in advance.

Norman Miller
nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: aoki@physics.ucla.edu (Ken-ichiro Aoki)
Subject: Re: GNU stuff is a pain to install, and I can't get any help!
Summary: mumble, mumble
Keywords: GNU software, installation,
Organization: UCLA Department of Physics
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 18:35:16 GMT

The original article generated some thoughtful posts,
but I would like to chip in with a few points which seems
not mentioned. Also, I am no C wiz, no unix guru nor a full
time sysadmin, so it might come off a bit different.

GNU stuff is a lot of stuff. There is a substantial fraction that
installs trivially. Personally I have installed some
smaller stuff like fileutils, shellutils, tar, compress
which have all compiled+installed trivially on both
NeXTs and sometimes on sparcs. Also, bash has compiled trivially
on both platforms. All these utilities have been
useful to us, they are much better than their unix
counterparts when the unix counterparts exist.
eg. tar which can do remote dumps, VERY fast grep,
cut which does not come with NeXT, bash, my favorite
shell, etc.

On bigger projects like gcc, libgcc, g++, gdb, emacs, bash, etc,
it would be nice if stuff did install trivially
and in some cases they do. But compiling+installing a fully
working compiler from the source by bootstrapping
sounds like a serious biz to me. I wouldn't be surprised
if it did not work perfectly the first time around.
(I have not compiled gcc, since I use NeXTs mostly
and they come with gcc, albeit older version.)

When I have had problems, I have posted bug reports
to the net or have emailed it to the maintainers.
I have either gotten help from the net or picked
up a newer version a few weeks to a couple months) later
to find that the problem has gone.
Also, some archives carry compiled versions in addition
to the source so that you can often avoid the trouble/pleasure
of compiling if you wish (this is true in the NeXT community, must
be true of the muuuch larger sun community too, I should think.)

Also, I think that having the code out in the open
is a *good thing*. As we can see, people report in bugs,
fixes and requests all the time on the net. As a result, 
I think the GNU software evolves more rapidly than
the usual commercial software.

I really appreciate the quality software the GNU project
has given us for free. I believe in the GNU philosophy
and I do not think they will become developers' tools.
Even if they did, people will not be able to charge
that much for installing or putting nice frontends
to GNU soft since they will be undercut (since it is
usually not difficult)

I just reread this; hmm... Am I wearing my rose-tinted glasses
today....

Hoping that GNU project proceeds steadily and with energy,
-- 
                        ___Kenichiro Aoki. (aoki@physics.ucla.edu)
From: dalet@reseau.Berkeley.EDU (Groupe SUPAERO)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Looking for GPTROFF
Date: 16 Nov 92 15:17:49 GMT
Reply-To: dalet@reseau.Berkeley.EDU (Groupe SUPAERO)
Distribution: world


Hi !

This is my first posting to a newsgroup. I hope this message
will land in the right group.

I am looking for the gnu version of ptroff.

Does anyone have heard of it?
Where can i find it?

Thanks in advance.


-- Benoit Dalet  
   dalet@onecert.fr
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: felix@crowfix.com (Felix Finch)
Subject: Re: bash 1.12.1 question
Organization: Scarecrow Repair, Dutch Flat.
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 21:33:28 GMT

>>>>> In article <1992Nov11.205052.6857@panther.mot.com>, sacks@netmgr.mot.com (Dennis Sacks) writes:
> Nntp-Posting-Host: netmgr.panther.mot.com

> In bash 1.12.1 (SunOS 4.1.2/sparc) can someone explain this behavior:	

> ls -a | head -5		works as expected

> ls -l | head -5 	works as expected

> ls -la | head -5 	works, but then gives "Broken Pipe" message after execution

Could it be that the directory has so few entries (<=5) that the head
command never shuts down the -a or -l pipe, but -al produces 7 lines
and the pipes cuts off after 5?
-- 

            ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._.
   Felix Finch, scarecrow repairer / felix@crowfix.com / uunet!crowfix!felix
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
From: eric14@bernina.ethz.ch (Eric Baltischwiler)
Subject: g++, help
Summary: Looking for a good c++ book
Organization: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:38:38 GMT

I'm trying to learn how to use G++.  Can anyone point me at a good
book?

I currently have Stroustrup's book, 1987 edition, but I know the
language has changed over time.

My email address is:		eric14@tik.ethz.ch

Thank you in advance


PS Sorry to put this here, but posting to g++.help got no responce and
   someone in GNU must know how to use this stuff...
From: emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU stuff is a pain to install, and I can't get any help!
Date: 18 Nov 1992 23:09:41 GMT
Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, Michigan
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.msen.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Edward J. Hartnett (ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu) wrote:
: 
: I really love emacs, and the more I read about GNU stuff the more
: excited I get. But I've been trying to install gcc for two weeks now
: on a Sun IPC running 4.1.1 (a very common machine) and I can't get it
: to work, and no one will answer my questions on gnu.gcc.help. My point
: is that the whole GNU project might be well served if they could get
: someone to answer these kinds of questions.

There are a number of public access internet sites running on Sun
hardware which have GNU stuff installed.  An account on one of them,
though it would cost you a few bucks a month, would give you the
opportunity to see a working installion first hand.  (Like maybe
Colorado Supernet?)

For that matter, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that there's a machine
right there on the Colorado campus that has working stuff which you
could peek at if you poked around a bit locally.

If you want someone to hold your and for installation, there are people
who will gladly do that - for a fee.  But a lot of us are real busy.
Ask around a bit local first & I'm sure you'll find something useful.

  Edward Vielmetti, vice president for research, Msen Inc. emv@Msen.com
        Msen Inc., 628 Brooks, Ann Arbor MI  48103 +1 313 998 GLOB
From: gumby@Cygnus.COM (David V. Henkel-Wallace)
Subject: sense of scale (was: GNU stuff is a pain to install, and I can't get any help!)
Organization: Cygnus Support, Palo Alto, California
Date: 21 Nov 92 07:40:49

   Date: 18 Nov 92 11:16:09
   From: ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu (Edward J. Hartnett)

			     But it's just a crying shame to have all
   these free great packages that, with just a few minutes help from an
   expert, could be accessible, and not be able to use them. Am I the
   only one who feels this way?

The software may be free, but there's no free lunch.  Here's an
interesting quote from Cringely's Accidental Empires:

   "Typical WordPerfect customers make two [support] calls, averaging
    five minutes each, which means that when the founders of a
    five-person software start-up dream about selling 100,000 copies
    of their new application they are also dreaming (though usually
    they dont know it) spending at least 8.3 man-years on the
    telephone answering the same questions over and over again."

Now would you rather that the GNU team spend 10 man years (there must
be more than 100,000 emacs users out there) answering questions or
working on the GNU project?  

There ae very kind volenteers who maintain FAQs on various subjects
relevent to the GNU project -- those are time-consuming too!  Perhaps
you might like to become expert on one or another of the GNU tools,
and then becoming the "support desk" for that tool. That's what you're
asking someone to do -- you could help the GNU project by doing it
yourself!

(by the way, I don't cite the case of WordPerfect to justify
proprietary software.  In free software you only have to pay for
support (or distribution) if you use it -- it's unbundled!)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss