Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.os.linux > #63928 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2020-03-25 03:14 -0700 |
| Last post | 2020-03-27 01:15 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 289 — 42 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-03-25 03:14 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-25 13:13 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-25 20:57 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-25 16:25 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-26 00:36 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-26 08:18 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 09:57 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 12:23 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 04:35 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 13:18 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-26 21:44 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 01:42 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 19:28 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-26 19:55 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 22:21 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-26 22:49 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:46 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 13:01 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 16:15 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 17:48 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:47 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2020-03-27 21:00 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 22:18 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 16:16 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 12:22 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-03-26 07:33 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2020-03-26 10:56 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 13:17 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-26 21:32 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 21:52 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 16:05 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-26 23:45 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 19:29 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-27 08:06 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:48 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 03:04 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 22:25 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 05:47 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "lucent tpm" <telco@example.com> - 2020-03-27 16:53 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 18:05 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 17:19 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-27 08:03 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:50 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-03-27 06:59 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-27 12:52 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 21:54 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-29 22:46 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 01:34 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-29 19:14 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-30 04:17 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2020-04-03 21:26 +1100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-03 20:04 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2020-04-04 21:43 +1100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-04-04 05:53 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-04 11:48 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2020-04-05 21:09 +1000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-05 11:10 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 06:50 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-30 06:59 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Info <info@perfumeshotsale.com> - 2020-03-30 08:06 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-03-30 12:00 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-29 22:37 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-30 02:11 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-29 19:15 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-30 04:05 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 04:29 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 06:30 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-30 01:52 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Alogsa <alogsa.logistica@alogsalogistica.com> - 2020-03-30 08:05 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-03-30 11:31 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-30 13:01 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-30 11:05 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-03-30 09:26 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-30 17:51 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-30 12:03 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-31 00:06 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-03-31 08:55 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-31 03:18 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-31 04:16 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-31 04:11 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-31 04:45 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-31 08:03 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-31 15:26 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-31 18:55 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 05:59 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 06:30 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-30 07:28 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Contact <contact@larryshopping.com> - 2020-04-01 01:21 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 03:46 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 04:16 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 14:01 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 14:16 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-29 22:36 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 01:44 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-29 19:17 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 04:19 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-29 20:41 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 09:16 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure John-Paul Stewart <jpstewart@sympatico.ca> - 2020-03-30 11:47 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 13:12 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 19:59 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 20:53 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 21:57 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-30 19:19 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 13:13 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-31 05:04 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-31 11:21 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-31 17:25 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 20:01 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 20:53 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 21:59 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-03-31 13:35 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-31 12:02 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-31 11:25 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-03-31 17:13 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-31 12:09 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-03-31 18:51 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-31 13:44 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2020-03-31 14:26 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-04-01 13:14 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-01 13:37 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-12 10:35 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-13 02:22 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-12 22:50 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-13 09:41 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-04-13 07:51 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-13 11:45 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2020-04-13 14:11 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure mGhost <mGhost@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-13 15:50 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-13 18:21 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure mGhost <mGhost@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-13 17:44 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-13 20:40 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2020-04-13 22:56 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-15 12:06 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-15 11:36 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Chris Elvidge <chris@mshome.net> - 2020-04-16 11:22 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-16 11:20 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2020-04-16 09:08 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-16 14:50 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2020-04-16 13:49 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-16 13:16 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-16 20:56 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-04-17 01:43 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-04-16 15:27 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-18 14:56 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure felix@palmen-it.de (Felix Palmen) - 2020-04-16 17:44 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-16 16:26 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2020-04-16 12:37 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-04-13 14:29 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-04-14 08:18 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 12:50 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-04-15 09:59 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-13 09:39 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-13 19:44 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-14 00:16 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 03:39 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-13 21:59 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-14 11:24 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 12:35 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-13 22:04 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 12:47 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-14 14:15 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 15:05 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-15 11:43 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-16 13:31 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-14 13:09 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-04-14 12:20 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-14 05:47 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 12:48 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-14 21:10 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-14 23:54 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-15 01:06 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-15 13:39 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-04-14 08:40 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2020-04-14 17:57 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-15 01:11 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2020-04-15 11:30 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-15 11:55 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-16 00:38 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-01 09:37 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-01 08:55 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-01 11:13 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-01 20:40 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-31 21:38 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-01 13:39 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-04-01 13:51 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-01 20:42 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-02 07:42 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-02 09:19 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-02 13:24 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-02 12:10 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-02 21:56 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-04-03 08:42 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-04 01:27 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2020-04-28 20:32 +1000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-28 12:13 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-04-28 08:39 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-28 17:48 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2020-04-28 20:58 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2020-04-29 21:17 +1000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-29 13:22 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2020-04-30 22:01 +1000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-03 08:05 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-03 09:13 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-03 08:15 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-04-04 01:16 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2020-04-03 05:24 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-03 09:20 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-01 21:34 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-01 17:50 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-04-02 03:15 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2020-04-02 13:42 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Chris F.A. Johnson" <cfajohnson@cfaj.ca> - 2020-04-01 17:32 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-04-01 17:49 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-02 07:44 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2020-04-02 07:12 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-04-03 08:02 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-04-12 10:39 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 07:16 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-30 09:13 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 09:19 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-30 09:29 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2020-03-30 12:20 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-03-30 12:35 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 13:14 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-30 18:52 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-03-30 07:01 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-30 09:58 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-30 09:21 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 19:01 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 09:52 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 13:46 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2020-03-26 07:51 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-03-26 10:34 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 17:36 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 21:49 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-03-27 14:30 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 21:31 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 15:44 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 23:19 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 16:56 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-28 05:10 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 22:46 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-28 20:22 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2020-03-28 13:28 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-28 22:14 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-03-28 17:39 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-29 06:40 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2020-03-29 09:22 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-30 14:47 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-28 16:15 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-29 00:11 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2020-03-28 12:32 -0500
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2020-03-27 20:21 -0700
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2020-03-28 10:18 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-28 10:52 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 12:59 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 21:31 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2020-03-27 15:48 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-03-27 22:03 -0400
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 00:23 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 19:29 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-27 14:07 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2020-03-27 15:42 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-03-27 14:54 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 17:35 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 18:20 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-30 08:41 +0200
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Contact <contact@rockygoods.com> - 2020-03-30 11:47 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-26 13:54 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-26 15:44 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 12:19 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 13:46 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 12:55 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-03-26 15:46 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2020-03-26 15:50 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2020-03-26 16:05 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 00:02 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 01:29 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 17:57 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-03-26 21:56 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2020-03-26 21:13 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-27 00:13 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 16:08 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 23:20 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> - 2020-03-26 19:31 -0600
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org - 2020-03-27 01:04 +0000
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2020-03-26 23:47 +0100
Re: Unix at 50 How the OS that powered smartphones started from failure "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2020-03-27 01:15 +0100
Page 11 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 9 10 [11] 12 13 … 15 Next page →
| From | DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-29 13:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <r8bv2s$hq2$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #64891 |
Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote in news:r8bnoe$j30$1@dont-email.me: > Ned Latham wrote on 28/04/2020 11:39 PM: >> Daniel60 wrote: >>> DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote: >>> >>> <Snip> >>> >>>> Are their high power CBs all over the place? Yep. >>> >>> Are there?? Really?? Given the ubiquitousness of mobile 'phones, >>> I thought CB's had gone the way of the Dinosaur. >>> >>> But, I suppose, mobile 'phone are 'one-on-one' whereas CB's >>> were/are 'broadcast', so different markets, maybe! >> >> Truck and train drivers, grey nomads, hunters, all sorts of >> people who live or work on the move use them. For many, it's an >> important safety factor: > > Yeap! I can thank a truckie and his CB (many years ago) for my > still being alive (today)! > Lemmie guess... yer car crashed through a bridge apron and was teetering on the edge of a 200 ft drop. :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-30 22:01 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <r8eem7$jfe$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #64892 |
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote on 29/04/2020 11:22 PM: > Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote in > news:r8bnoe$j30$1@dont-email.me: > >> Ned Latham wrote on 28/04/2020 11:39 PM: >>> Daniel60 wrote: >>>> DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote: >>>> >>>> <Snip> >>>> >>>>> Are their high power CBs all over the place? Yep. >>>> >>>> Are there?? Really?? Given the ubiquitousness of mobile 'phones, >>>> I thought CB's had gone the way of the Dinosaur. >>>> >>>> But, I suppose, mobile 'phone are 'one-on-one' whereas CB's >>>> were/are 'broadcast', so different markets, maybe! >>> >>> Truck and train drivers, grey nomads, hunters, all sorts of >>> people who live or work on the move use them. For many, it's an >>> important safety factor: >> >> Yeap! I can thank a truckie and his CB (many years ago) for my >> still being alive (today)! > > Lemmie guess... yer car crashed through a bridge apron and was > teetering on the edge of a 200 ft drop. :-) > No!! Nothing that dramatic!! Didn't you read my 'life story' post 'here-abouts' about three-four weeks ago?? -- Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-03 08:05 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r66n89$2k2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #64204 |
On 02/04/2020 19:10, anonlinuxuser wrote: > on older UNIX systems it was either sh or c-shell. C is a compiler to > compile or change into assembly language mnemonics from a source file or > more. But bears no relation to C-shell whatsoever. "The main design objectives for the C shell were that it should look *more like* the C programming language and that it should be better for interactive use." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_shell Anyone who thinks that C shell is a C interpreter has never written a C program -- The New Left are the people they warned you about.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-03 09:13 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <r67jqn$kia$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #64219 |
On 4/3/20 1:05 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 02/04/2020 19:10, anonlinuxuser wrote: >> on older UNIX systems it was either sh or c-shell. C is a compiler to >> compile or change into assembly language mnemonics from a source file >> or more. > > But bears no relation to C-shell whatsoever. > I think I made myself clear that there is a definite distinction. > "The main design objectives for the C shell were that it should look > *more like* the C programming language and that it should be better for > interactive use." > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_shell > > Anyone who thinks that C shell is a C interpreter has never written a C > program > Agreed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-03 08:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87pncp59b6.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #64200 |
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org writes: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> On 01/04/2020 21:42, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote: >>> It really is odd, because UNIX can run C script right from the >>> command line. >> Oh? please give an example? >> As to wht 'C script' is? > > I have a friend who was a novell guy for years and an IT admin at an > insurance broker. Those were his words. Makes sense to me. But then > I do not profess to know what comprises 'sense'. He was probably talking about C Shell, which isn’t the same thing at all. All it shares is a letter in the name and some superficial syntactic traits. -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-04 01:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <r68n5t$188u$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #64220 |
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:87pncp59b6.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk: > DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org writes: >> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> On 01/04/2020 21:42, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org >>> wrote: >>>> It really is odd, because UNIX can run C script right from the >>>> command line. >>> Oh? please give an example? >>> As to wht 'C script' is? >> >> I have a friend who was a novell guy for years and an IT admin >> at an >> insurance broker. Those were his words. Makes sense to me. But >> then I do not profess to know what comprises 'sense'. > > He was probably talking about C Shell, which isn’t the same > thing at all. All it shares is a letter in the name and some > superficial syntactic traits. > In retrospect I am certain you are correct. He may even have said "C script" and I in *my* IT infancy deleted that term from my recollection. He was usually referring to things he would do on the Novell server he operated for years. It was a 40 node network for insurance folks. All 386s and 486s, and they spent a REAL pretty penny on Thomes Conrad Network Systems network adapter cards, and hubs. They all ran DesqViewX, believe it or not, and IF he had gotten TCP/IP istead of the proprietary TCNS protocols, the clients could be accessed through DesqViewX and made to run a process remotely, which was the first, earliest use of distributed processing on PCs back then. Pretty cool stuff for 1992.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-03 05:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q875p6.8CA@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #64186 |
> anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote in > The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a > C compiler. That was so you could alter and recompile the unix kernel to reflect how your Unix machine was configured. (Just like we used to configure and compile our own Linux kernels back in the early 2000s or thereabouts.) When Solaris II was released, there was no longer a need to recompile the kernel (for the same reason that we no longer compile our Linux kernels today either - loadable modules) and there was no longer a built-in C compiler supplied. So that was when I downloaded and began using 'gcc' because Sun's own C Compiler cost fifteen arms and a dozen legs. -- "It's rather cold." she said bitchily.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-03 09:20 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <r67k7i$p0m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #64217 |
On 4/2/20 11:24 PM, Jack Strangio wrote: >> anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote in >> The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a >> C compiler. > > That was so you could alter and recompile the unix kernel to reflect how > your Unix machine was configured. (Just like we used to configure and > compile our own Linux kernels back in the early 2000s or thereabouts.) > > When Solaris II was released, there was no longer a need to recompile > the kernel (for the same reason that we no longer compile our Linux > kernels today either - loadable modules) and there was no longer a > built-in C compiler supplied. > > So that was when I downloaded and began using 'gcc' because Sun's > own C Compiler cost fifteen arms and a dozen legs. > I've heard about Sun's high prices when gcc was free for the download. I've used gcc on old C programs, and found it really didn't like those old source files complaining about old style declarations. So, I downloaded the free Solaris x86 and well as Solaris compiler set, which is now free, and the C compiler is a bit different than gcc. I had to use -Xt when compiling the old source files, and it worked great. The -Xt is supposed to help with K&R C constructs. But the OpenGroup standards still requires that the C compiler be present. At least at last reading about two years ago.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-01 21:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <JN7hG.76256$691.27444@fx09.am4> |
| In reply to | #64182 |
On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote: > On 3/31/20 2:38 PM, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >> Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> writes: >> >>> On 3/30/20 12:19 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> There is of course freeBSD... >>> >>> Of course. But I was sticking with the OSs that I was aware of having >>> the legal ability to use the Unix™ name in all of it's glory. >>> >>> I'm not aware of any current *BSD that can do that. Maybe macOS can, >>> but I'm not aware of it. >> >> https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3555.htm >> >> Then again, in the same version, its rename() wasn’t atomic[1], so i >> guess the certification process can’t have been particularly rigorous. > > That it seems to me as well. > >> >> [1] http://www.weirdnet.nl/apple/rename.html >> > > The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C > compiler. Apple doesn't provide one with the initial system, but can be > downloaded for free. I suppose that it can be said it is UNIX > certified... what ever that means. That means that you pay to open group... we all know that BSD's are real Unix, but not certified... -- press any key to continue or any other to quit... U ničemu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec Svi smo svedoci - oko 3 godine intenzivne propagande je dovoljno da jedan narod poludi -- Zli Zec Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-01 17:50 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <r639bb$rpq$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #64187 |
On 4/1/20 3:34 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: > On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote: >> On 3/31/20 2:38 PM, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>> Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> writes: >>> >>>> On 3/30/20 12:19 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>> There is of course freeBSD... >>>> >>>> Of course. But I was sticking with the OSs that I was aware of having >>>> the legal ability to use the Unix™ name in all of it's glory. >>>> >>>> I'm not aware of any current *BSD that can do that. Maybe macOS can, >>>> but I'm not aware of it. >>> >>> https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3555.htm >>> >>> Then again, in the same version, its rename() wasn’t atomic[1], so i >>> guess the certification process can’t have been particularly rigorous. >> >> That it seems to me as well. >> >>> >>> [1] http://www.weirdnet.nl/apple/rename.html >>> >> >> The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C >> compiler. Apple doesn't provide one with the initial system, but can be >> downloaded for free. I suppose that it can be said it is UNIX >> certified... what ever that means. > > That means that you pay to open group... we all know that BSD's are real > Unix, but not certified... > > It's hard to say for sure these days. Linux is as good as you are going to get anyway.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-02 03:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <3NchG.73793$E%1.70216@fx31.am4> |
| In reply to | #64190 |
On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote: > On 4/1/20 3:34 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: >> On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote: >>> On 3/31/20 2:38 PM, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>>> Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> writes: >>>> >>>>> On 3/30/20 12:19 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>> There is of course freeBSD... >>>>> >>>>> Of course. But I was sticking with the OSs that I was aware of having >>>>> the legal ability to use the Unix™ name in all of it's glory. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not aware of any current *BSD that can do that. Maybe macOS can, >>>>> but I'm not aware of it. >>>> >>>> https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3555.htm >>>> >>>> Then again, in the same version, its rename() wasn’t atomic[1], so i >>>> guess the certification process can’t have been particularly rigorous. >>> >>> That it seems to me as well. >>> >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.weirdnet.nl/apple/rename.html >>>> >>> >>> The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C >>> compiler. Apple doesn't provide one with the initial system, but can be >>> downloaded for free. I suppose that it can be said it is UNIX >>> certified... what ever that means. >> >> That means that you pay to open group... we all know that BSD's are real >> Unix, but not certified... >> >> > It's hard to say for sure these days. > Linux is as good as you are going to get anyway. Yep, and two distributions are certified as Unix ;) > -- press any key to continue or any other to quit... U ničemu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec Svi smo svedoci - oko 3 godine intenzivne propagande je dovoljno da jedan narod poludi -- Zli Zec Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-02 13:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <363hlg-ua.ln1@ID-313840.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #64187 |
Melzzzzz wrote: > On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote: >> >> The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C >> compiler. Apple doesn't provide one with the initial system, but can be >> downloaded for free. I suppose that it can be said it is UNIX >> certified... what ever that means. > > That means that you pay to open group. It means that macOS passed over 40,000 tests in The Open Group test suites, plus one of the industry standard C99 compiler test suites (Perennial or Plum Hall). It doesn't matter if some required parts (such as the C compiler) aren't included by default, as long as there is a way to set up a conforming system. -- Geoff Clare <netnews@gclare.org.uk>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris F.A. Johnson" <cfajohnson@cfaj.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-01 17:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <irdflg-mhb.ln1@news.cfaj.ca> |
| In reply to | #64182 |
On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser wrote: ... >> > > The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C > compiler. The first UNIX I used (in 1990) was AT&T SYSV5R3.2 on a 20MHz 80386. It didn't have a C compiler, so I learned shell scripting.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-01 17:49 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <r6399t$rpq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #64188 |
On 4/1/20 3:32 PM, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote: > On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser wrote: > ... >>> >> >> The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C >> compiler. > > The first UNIX I used (in 1990) was AT&T SYSV5R3.2 on a 20MHz 80386. > > It didn't have a C compiler, so I learned shell scripting. > I would guess that in 1990 it wasn't a requirement back then. The latest openGroup did state it though. Seems like the new standard isn't adhered to any way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-02 07:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r641l2$dal$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #64188 |
On 01/04/2020 22:32, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote: > On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser wrote: > ... >>> >> >> The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C >> compiler. > > The first UNIX I used (in 1990) was AT&T SYSV5R3.2 on a 20MHz 80386. > I go back a bit fiurher. PDP11 in 198sometung > It didn't have a C compiler, so I learned shell scripting. > I first really worked on Unix on a PDP11..mid/late 80s. -- In todays liberal progressive conflict-free education system, everyone gets full Marx.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-02 07:12 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <r64har01aq5@news2.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #64194 |
On 4/2/20 2:44 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 01/04/2020 22:32, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote: >> On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser wrote: >> ... >>>> >>> >>> The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C >>> compiler. >> >> The first UNIX I used (in 1990) was AT&T SYSV5R3.2 on a 20MHz 80386. >> I go back a bit fiurher. PDP11 in 198sometung >> It didn't have a C compiler, so I learned shell scripting. >> > I first really worked on Unix on a PDP11..mid/late 80s. > > I first ran UNIX on a PDP11/45 with a Floating-point processor and a memory management unit in the late 1970s. It certainly did have a C compiler. We diddled the kernel a little so we could use disk files greater than 65535 bytes. In those days, the kernel was written in assember (6 files, IIRC). To build a kernel, one got in the right directory and typed as a?.s and the resulting a.out was the new kernel. -- .~. Jean-David Beyer /V\ PGP-Key:166D840A 0C610C8B /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey ^^-^^ 07:05:01 up 20 days, 10:34, 2 users, load average: 5.32, 4.97, 4.69
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-03 08:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r66n1s$ff$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #64196 |
On 02/04/2020 12:12, Jean-David Beyer wrote: > On 4/2/20 2:44 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 01/04/2020 22:32, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote: >>> On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser wrote: >>> ... >>>>> >>>> >>>> The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C >>>> compiler. >>> >>> The first UNIX I used (in 1990) was AT&T SYSV5R3.2 on a 20MHz 80386. >>> I go back a bit fiurher. PDP11 in 198sometung >>> It didn't have a C compiler, so I learned shell scripting. >>> >> I first really worked on Unix on a PDP11..mid/late 80s. >> >> > I first ran UNIX on a PDP11/45 with a Floating-point processor and a > memory management unit in the late 1970s. It certainly did have a C > compiler. Ours had *two*. One was for the 6809 target we were writing code for :=) And it was possibly the worst C compiler I have ever been exposed to. Worse than even the BDS CP/M z80/808o compiler that I learnt on.. We diddled the kernel a little so we could use disk files > greater than 65535 bytes. In those days, the kernel was written in > assember (6 files, IIRC). To build a kernel, one got in the right > directory and typed > > as a?.s > > and the resulting a.out was the new kernel. > -- The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about. Anon.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 10:39 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <dKFkG.256595$2l2.214255@fx32.iad> |
| In reply to | #64188 |
"Chris F.A. Johnson" <cfajohnson@cfaj.ca> writes: > On 2020-04-01, anonlinuxuser wrote: > ... >>> >> >> The odd part is that the requirements to be a UNIX is to require a C >> compiler. > > The first UNIX I used (in 1990) was AT&T SYSV5R3.2 on a 20MHz 80386. > > It didn't have a C compiler, so I learned shell scripting. That seems to have worked out well for you. :-) (I have 2 of your books, so it's worked out well for me too.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-30 07:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <700b5713da8ebb8a27f4cd68f6c0f9c1@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #64086 |
In article <r5rham$2of$3@dont-email.me> anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote: > > On 3/29/20 4:36 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: > > On 2020-03-26, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > >> On 26/03/2020 20.17, anonlinuxuser wrote: > >>> On 3/26/20 2:18 AM, Melzzzzz wrote: > >>>> On 2020-03-25, anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote: > >>>>> On 3/25/20 1:57 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >>>>>> On 25/03/2020 11.14, Johann Beretta wrote: > >>>>>>> On 9/15/19 3:20 PM, AnonLinuxUser wrote: > >>>>>>> <snip> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> After looking around, I found what Linux was originally intended to > >>>>>>>> do... > >>>>>>>> Learn UNIX for free on a PC. Then the suggestion was to maybe be > >>>>>>>> qualified for a UNIX job. Tho not all of linux is identically the > >>>>>>>> same. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Your comparison itself is false (although not deliberately of course). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It is true that I installed Linux initially to learn Unix, as I could > >>>>>> not pay a Unix system. Unix (and Linux) was used by my employer > >>>>>> company. > >>>>>> Perhaps on summer 1998. Seeing that a serious company was using > >>>>>> Linux on > >>>>>> important tasks told me that Linux was a serious thing, not a hobby. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> According to history, UNIX back in 1992 or so, cost about $1500 for a > >>>>> PC. > >>>> > >>>> That was SCO Unix. I had it. > >>>> > >>> > >>> I was a little lad then. Later I saw some history that Sun Microsystems > >>> started around that time of charging around $1200 for a PC and then > >>> lowered their price to $800,... and then it was offered free. > >>> > >>> Maybe back in 1995 old Ballmer was right calling win95 as a UNIX killer. > >>> The only survivor now is Linux and Apple. > >> > >> No, he wasn't. What killed UNIX was Linux, not Windows. > > > > Unix isn't dead at all... problem is that proprietary system have fewer > > resources... and all simply put effort in Linux and use it... > > > >> > >> I saw PCs deployed in production running Linux doing the same thing as > >> UNIX machines priced a hundred times more. No one thought of using > >> Windows machines instead. > >> > >> > > > > > The only UNIX that I know of today is Apple and Oracle... and oracles > stuff isn't cheap. > Don't know of any other UNIX vendors. IBM AIX IBM also now owns Red Hat Linux Enterprise HPE HP-UX, trying to prop it up by offloading to Linux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-30 09:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <4bce9d605f38399d20d3a9cba84086f3@remailer.privacy.at> |
| In reply to | #64096 |
In article <700b5713da8ebb8a27f4cd68f6c0f9c1@dizum.com> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote: > > In article <r5rham$2of$3@dont-email.me> > anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote: > > > > On 3/29/20 4:36 PM, Melzzzzz wrote: > > > On 2020-03-26, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > > >> On 26/03/2020 20.17, anonlinuxuser wrote: > > >>> On 3/26/20 2:18 AM, Melzzzzz wrote: > > >>>> On 2020-03-25, anonlinuxuser <linuxuser@noone.net> wrote: > > >>>>> On 3/25/20 1:57 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: > > >>>>>> On 25/03/2020 11.14, Johann Beretta wrote: > > >>>>>>> On 9/15/19 3:20 PM, AnonLinuxUser wrote: > > >>>>>>> <snip> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> After looking around, I found what Linux was originally intended to > > >>>>>>>> do... > > >>>>>>>> Learn UNIX for free on a PC.Ā Then the suggestion was to maybe be > > >>>>>>>> qualified for a UNIX job.Ā Tho not all of linux is identically the > > >>>>>>>> same. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Your comparison itself is false (although not deliberately of course). > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> It is true that I installed Linux initially to learn Unix, as I could > > >>>>>> not pay a Unix system. Unix (and Linux) was used by my employer > > >>>>>> company. > > >>>>>> Perhaps on summer 1998. Seeing that a serious company was using > > >>>>>> Linux on > > >>>>>> important tasks told me that Linux was a serious thing, not a hobby. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> According to history, UNIX back in 1992 or so, cost about $1500 for a > > >>>>> PC. > > >>>> > > >>>> That was SCO Unix. I had it. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> I was a little lad then.Ā Later I saw some history that Sun Microsystems > > >>> started around that time of charging around $1200 for a PC and then > > >>> lowered their price to $800,... and then it was offered free. > > >>> > > >>> Maybe back in 1995 old Ballmer was right calling win95 as a UNIX killer. > > >>> The only survivor now is Linux and Apple. > > >> > > >> No, he wasn't. What killed UNIX was Linux, not Windows. > > > > > > Unix isn't dead at all... problem is that proprietary system have fewer > > > resources... and all simply put effort in Linux and use it... > > > > > >> > > >> I saw PCs deployed in production running Linux doing the same thing as > > >> UNIX machines priced a hundred times more. No one thought of using > > >> Windows machines instead. > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > The only UNIX that I know of today is Apple and Oracle... and oracles > > stuff isn't cheap. > > Don't know of any other UNIX vendors. > > IBM AIX > IBM also now owns Red Hat Linux Enterprise > > HPE HP-UX, trying to prop it up by offloading to Linux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 11 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 9 10 [11] 12 13 … 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux
csiph-web