Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #381174 > unrolled thread
| Started by | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-01-29 16:03 +0000 |
| Last post | 2024-02-12 02:18 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 415 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-01-29 16:03 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-01-30 00:57 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-01-29 17:38 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-01-30 09:06 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-01-30 15:23 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-01-31 08:36 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-01-31 19:12 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-01-31 00:44 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-01-30 01:45 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-01-30 04:46 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-01-30 11:52 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-01-30 16:50 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-01-30 17:57 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-01-30 19:22 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-01-31 16:41 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-01-31 19:01 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-01-31 20:25 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-01 09:39 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-01 11:31 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-01 16:11 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-01 17:33 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-01 18:34 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-01 22:23 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-01 20:55 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-01 13:10 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-01 22:38 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-02 00:55 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-01 23:31 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-02 02:08 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-02 09:02 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-02 15:28 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-02 15:49 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-02 16:53 +0200
Stu Feldman (Was: Experimental C Build System) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-02-02 16:29 +0000
Re: Stu Feldman (Was: Experimental C Build System) Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-02 17:29 +0000
Re: Stu Feldman (Was: Experimental C Build System) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-04 05:44 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 13:47 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-02 15:57 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-02 15:18 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 17:44 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-02 18:26 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 05:45 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-03 21:24 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-03 13:19 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-02 21:42 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 22:12 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-03 01:29 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 12:02 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 12:25 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-04 06:47 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 19:52 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 19:58 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 05:52 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-03 14:52 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 14:59 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-04 06:51 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-04 11:08 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 15:44 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 16:03 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 17:02 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-04 13:29 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 12:31 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 22:11 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 16:24 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-04 01:19 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 17:51 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> - 2024-02-04 14:07 +1100
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 20:01 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 04:56 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 21:36 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 21:41 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-04 13:44 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 15:50 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-04 18:27 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 14:52 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Kees Nuyt <k.nuyt@nospam.demon.nl> - 2024-02-05 17:57 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 09:17 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-05 19:11 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 12:29 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-04 06:43 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 14:51 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-03 21:15 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-03 21:39 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-03 14:23 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 13:48 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 14:16 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-03 18:17 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 20:12 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2024-02-04 16:13 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 14:08 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-04 18:22 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-04 13:53 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-04 14:01 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-04 18:36 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-04 22:46 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-04 23:29 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 15:32 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2024-02-05 17:37 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 18:03 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-05 18:42 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 13:25 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-05 21:31 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 13:40 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-05 22:29 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 14:39 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-05 22:47 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-06 00:03 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-05 19:16 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 00:07 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 16:10 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> - 2024-02-05 10:41 -0600
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-05 18:13 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> - 2024-02-06 23:41 -0600
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-07 09:56 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-02-07 11:10 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2024-02-07 11:13 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-07 20:50 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-02-08 11:05 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> - 2024-02-07 23:46 +1100
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-07 15:09 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-07 14:21 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> - 2024-02-07 10:11 -0600
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-07 20:46 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-07 21:53 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-07 14:54 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-02-07 16:15 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-02-07 17:34 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System [Ben] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2024-02-07 22:50 -0600
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-08 09:40 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-02-08 11:55 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-08 12:32 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-08 16:35 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-08 16:31 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-08 21:24 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-02-08 16:50 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2024-02-08 17:04 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-08 17:10 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-08 17:25 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-08 23:30 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-08 17:38 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-08 21:30 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-02-09 00:58 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 01:14 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-09 01:18 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-09 01:27 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-02-09 01:30 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 10:32 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2024-02-09 13:16 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-09 02:07 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 15:49 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-09 17:13 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 18:24 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-09 10:34 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-09 18:42 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 20:41 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-09 21:56 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 22:43 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-09 23:12 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 23:47 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-10 00:28 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-09 15:41 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 23:53 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-10 00:16 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-09 16:33 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-10 02:26 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-10 02:47 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-10 20:17 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-10 21:02 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-10 20:09 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 22:43 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-10 19:51 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-09 18:25 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 20:55 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-09 21:06 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-09 13:15 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-09 22:09 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-10 15:24 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-09 21:04 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-09 09:21 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-08 17:15 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-08 23:29 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-07 15:31 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-07 19:24 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-07 20:44 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-07 15:30 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> - 2024-02-07 10:12 -0600
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-07 08:40 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> - 2024-02-07 12:24 -0600
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-05 01:45 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 20:17 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 20:41 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 20:46 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-02-05 06:48 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 11:20 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 13:33 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-02-05 21:57 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 23:20 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 15:41 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-06 01:48 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-02-06 00:18 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-02-05 06:00 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 22:46 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 15:57 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-05 13:02 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 14:50 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-05 22:51 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 23:18 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-06 00:16 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-06 14:32 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-06 14:40 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-06 16:59 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-06 19:20 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-06 20:32 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-06 20:34 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2024-02-06 20:49 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-06 13:07 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-06 21:39 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2024-02-07 15:02 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-07 20:36 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-07 20:48 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-07 21:15 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-07 23:15 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-07 23:58 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-08 01:33 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-08 01:34 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-02-08 01:50 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-08 02:17 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-07 22:48 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-07 23:44 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-06 21:09 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-06 21:43 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-02-08 17:23 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-07 00:51 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-07 02:18 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-07 04:21 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-02-07 07:17 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-07 12:59 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System "Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> - 2024-02-07 23:53 +1100
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-07 15:45 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System "Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> - 2024-02-08 12:56 +1100
Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-02-08 17:22 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-06 00:07 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-06 10:08 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-09 11:44 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-09 21:03 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-01 22:34 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-01 22:29 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-01 15:28 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-02 01:03 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-01 17:42 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-02 02:43 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-01 19:03 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-02 10:54 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-02 21:16 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-02 16:09 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-03 01:32 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-03 02:36 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-02-03 00:53 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 13:51 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-02-03 17:56 -0500
Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-02-04 07:52 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-02-04 06:18 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2024-02-02 03:22 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 11:13 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> - 2024-02-03 00:25 +1100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 13:29 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-02 10:47 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-02 15:45 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-02 16:26 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-03 14:39 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-03 16:26 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-03 17:11 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-06 13:59 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-06 13:14 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-06 14:32 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-06 14:16 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-06 17:02 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-06 20:31 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 14:14 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-02 16:43 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 15:18 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2024-02-02 20:43 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 20:16 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-02 16:31 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 17:00 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-02 17:31 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-02 10:36 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 19:52 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-02 20:21 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-02 21:09 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-02 13:15 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-03 15:13 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-02 21:23 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 21:51 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-03 01:31 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 12:16 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-03 17:59 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 19:35 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2024-02-03 21:57 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-04 18:48 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-04 20:18 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-04 20:55 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-02-07 02:57 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-07 03:18 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-07 15:27 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-07 15:48 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-07 16:30 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-02-08 00:39 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-07 21:59 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-07 09:42 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-07 10:40 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-07 15:37 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-04 22:51 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-04 23:11 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-05 13:42 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-05 14:59 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-05 15:45 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 11:25 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-05 22:46 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-05 14:43 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-04 22:42 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 14:53 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 14:02 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> - 2024-02-05 10:48 -0600
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 17:29 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> - 2024-02-05 11:36 -0600
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 14:04 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-02 18:54 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 06:04 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-02 22:13 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 06:43 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 00:02 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 08:47 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-03 06:30 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 11:17 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 14:02 -0800
[meta] Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-03 15:04 +0100
Re: [meta] Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-02-03 07:19 -0800
Re: [meta] Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-04 05:29 +0100
Re: [meta] Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 05:37 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-02 16:26 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-01 23:30 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-02 11:05 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-02 21:18 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-04 15:50 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-02 00:26 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 00:35 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-02 11:13 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-02 10:54 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-02 14:15 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-02 01:46 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-01 16:20 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-01 21:34 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-02-01 16:09 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-01 17:32 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-01 19:25 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-01 19:51 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-01 12:12 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-01 12:43 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-02-01 22:36 +0200
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-01 23:09 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-01 23:32 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-01-31 21:17 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-01 09:48 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-01 11:49 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-01 21:39 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-02-01 15:24 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-01 23:38 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-02-01 23:53 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-01 23:14 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-01-30 09:17 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-01-30 12:09 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-01-30 15:25 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-01-30 17:50 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-01-31 03:14 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-01-31 20:38 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 13:46 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 14:06 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-05 14:48 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-05 15:23 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-01-30 16:46 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-01-31 03:13 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> - 2024-01-31 03:23 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-01-31 08:47 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2024-01-31 11:02 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-01-31 15:31 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-01-31 15:13 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-01-31 23:00 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-01 00:29 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-01 03:07 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-01 15:00 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-02-01 23:40 +0000
system(3) (was: Re: Experimental C Build System) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-02-01 08:15 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-01-31 23:02 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-02-01 00:33 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-01 15:11 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-01 14:55 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-02-01 14:42 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-01-31 12:19 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-01 14:29 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-02-01 16:43 +0100
Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-02-03 01:05 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 11:54 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-02-03 07:17 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 15:54 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 16:05 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-03 12:39 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-03 22:19 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 20:56 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-02-04 20:57 -0800
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-01-31 20:36 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System thiago <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-02-07 20:36 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-08 13:50 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System thiago <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2024-02-07 20:42 +0000
Re: Experimental C Build System bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2024-02-12 02:18 +0000
Page 5 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 21 Next page →
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 14:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <upp4d7$3sf80$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381728 |
On 2/3/2024 10:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 15:44:29 +0000, Malcolm McLean wrote: > >> On the other had, if you want a GUI, the Windows system is all set up >> for you and you just have to call the right functions. > > Except the Win32 GUI functions are pretty low-level, so everybody uses > some kind of toolkit. I used some toolkit that had a lot of macros, I cannot remember what one it was right now. Damn! ATL? Was not MFC. > Only it’s not clear which toolkit is Microsoft’s > official recommendation this week--is it MAUI? Dotnet? WinForms? Something > else I haven’t even heard of?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-03 21:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c2yvN.104505$JLvf.69049@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #381654 |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes: periority. > >It's a very silly attitude of course. Ah, self-awareness after all...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-03 21:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <upmbra$39vft$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381654 |
On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 05:52:18 +0000, Malcolm McLean wrote: > .. but if you were given a UNIX system you were a > bit special. And that gave UNIX programmers a sense of superiority. > > It's a very silly attitude of course. Naturally. And a company like Microsoft, that is right now trying to turn Windows into Linux, is simply behaving like a very silly company.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-03 14:23 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <upleoi$34tr4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381640 |
On 02.02.2024 23:12, bart wrote: > On 02/02/2024 21:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:47:25 +0000, bart wrote: >> >>> That's true: only 47 years in computing, and 42 years of evolving, >>> implementing and running my systems language. >> >> On how many different platforms? > > I started in 1976. I started using Windows for my products in 1995 > because all my potential customers could buy an off-the-shelf Windows > PC. And that is actually the problem that folks have tried to make clear to you. Being so long in a bubble, working on an a technically lousy inferior system that decades long did not even manage (maybe not even intend) to catch up with any state-of-the-art techniques; what do you expect? > Linux was nowhere. Unix was only in academia, I think; nowhere > relevant to me anyway. There was a special license for academia that made it possible to spread UNIX quickly through academia. But that is just one aspect why it disseminated so fast. I don't know about you, whether you have an academic technical background, whether you had the chance to try out UNIX or the BSD variant these days. Myself I already knew a couple OSes (for PCs, some not even worth to call them OS, for medium scale systems, and also for mainframes) before I had my first contact with a Unix system. With that systems and OS background it was easy to strive for the better ones; from the ones I met it was Unix. (BTW, I observed a similar enthusiasm with a friend of mine, a long year hardcore MS DOS user, when he got his fingers onto a Unix system.) You might imagine what a joy it thus was when Linux and the GNU tools appeared, a powerful and reliable(!) system and OS base, and even (almost) for free. (For you, I dare to say, it's obviously far too late. That ship has sailed. If you'd have strived for a broader experience in your early days it would certainly be a different situation. And I am not only speaking about systems and OSes, also all project management, tools, methods, and strategy themes. Just continue your way in your scope.) > [...] > > Why do you consider that fair game, but people hate if when anyone > criticises Unix? I cannot speak for "people". Myself I name any issues I see; Unix issues are not exempt from that. - I have even a printed version of "The UNIX - HATERS Handbook" in my bookshelf (though a lot of its content is meanwhile outdated, it doesn't apply any more). - And I can certainly collect a page full of deficiencies I see with Linux. But so what? (For the MS platforms I could probably "fill a book".) Yet, in past decades, I haven't seen any serious competitor to Unix. (Note: When I'm saying that I am not considering e.g. supercomputers doing e.g. massive hydrodynamic computations. But even in this area there's meanwhile also Linux clusters running.) Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-03 13:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <uplg86$3526q$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381671 |
On 03/02/2024 13:23, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 02.02.2024 23:12, bart wrote: >> On 02/02/2024 21:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>> On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:47:25 +0000, bart wrote: >>> >>>> That's true: only 47 years in computing, and 42 years of evolving, >>>> implementing and running my systems language. >>> >>> On how many different platforms? >> >> I started in 1976. I started using Windows for my products in 1995 >> because all my potential customers could buy an off-the-shelf Windows >> PC. > > And that is actually the problem that folks have tried to make clear > to you. Being so long in a bubble, working on an a technically lousy > inferior system that decades long did not even manage (maybe not even > intend) to catch up with any state-of-the-art techniques; what do you > expect? > Windows sucessfully rolled out to a mass market whilst Unix did not. And if your customers are part of the mass market, you have to use it. Whilst there is a point in discussing the technical merits of various systems, only rarely can you choose systems, and often there no option other than to make things work on Windows. And Windows does run a very wide variety of programs successfully. And you are not an inferior order of human being nor are the issues you face unimportant because you are in the position of needing to do that. You are presumably not a university undergraduate and grow up. -- Check out Basic Algorithms and my other books: https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/bgy1mm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-03 14:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <uplhrp$35e9i$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381671 |
On 03/02/2024 13:23, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 02.02.2024 23:12, bart wrote: >> On 02/02/2024 21:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>> On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:47:25 +0000, bart wrote: >>> >>>> That's true: only 47 years in computing, and 42 years of evolving, >>>> implementing and running my systems language. >>> >>> On how many different platforms? >> >> I started in 1976. I started using Windows for my products in 1995 >> because all my potential customers could buy an off-the-shelf Windows >> PC. > > And that is actually the problem that folks have tried to make clear > to you. Being so long in a bubble, Which bubble, the one before 1995, or after? Don't you see that using only Unix-like systems is also a bubble? > I don't know about you, whether you have an academic technical > background, I have a CS bachelor's degree. > whether you had the chance to try out UNIX or the BSD > variant these days. I've tinkered only with various kinds of Linuxes. It was fun if your idea of fun was spending 80% of your time getting things configured to work properly, and doing apt-gets every 5 minutes for yet another essential dependency. But if absolutely necessary I could switch my bubble to Linux, after an initial painful period of converting my tools. Then the bubble would eventually look very similar to the Windows one. As I say below, I don't care about OSes. > Myself I already knew a couple OSes (for PCs, some not even worth > to call them OS, for medium scale systems, and also for mainframes) > before I had my first contact with a Unix system. With that systems > and OS background it was easy to strive for the better ones; from > the ones I met it was Unix. (BTW, I observed a similar enthusiasm > with a friend of mine, a long year hardcore MS DOS user, when he > got his fingers onto a Unix system.) You might imagine what a joy > it thus was when Linux and the GNU tools appeared, a powerful and > reliable(!) system and OS base, and even (almost) for free. > > (For you, I dare to say, it's obviously far too late. That ship has > sailed. If you'd have strived for a broader experience in your early > days it would certainly be a different situation. I'd say using anything but Unix /is/ a broader experience than using only Unix. That latter seems to give people the impression that unless every OS should either be exactly like Unix, then it is worthless. I used whatever OS DECSystem10/20 came with; MultiJob on ICL; RSX11M on PDP11; a CP/M clone (that my company, not me, developed); then the progression from MSDOS. Personally I have no interest in OSes other than they a provide a file system. Anything involving graphical apps in the 80s, I had to program everything down to the last pixel. Using, naturally, my language and my compiler. I also worked for few years in hardware development where the products I made didn't have an OS at all when I was working on them, but I needed the means to put test programs into them. There, you had to be resourceful. How would a Unix-like system (did they even work on 8-bit machines) have benefited me? > I cannot speak for "people". Myself I name any issues I see; Unix > issues are not exempt from that. - I have even a printed version of > "The UNIX - HATERS Handbook" in my bookshelf (though a lot of its > content is meanwhile outdated, it doesn't apply any more). - And I > can certainly collect a page full of deficiencies I see with Linux. > But so what? (For the MS platforms I could probably "fill a book".) > Yet, in past decades, I haven't seen any serious competitor to Unix. > (Note: When I'm saying that I am not considering e.g. supercomputers > doing e.g. massive hydrodynamic computations. But even in this area > there's meanwhile also Linux clusters running.) MSDOS and Windows were intended for direct use by ordinary consumers. Unix was intended for developers. Few ordinary consumers directly use a Unix-like system unless it is made to look like MacOS or Android. Or they run a GUI desktop that makes it look a bit like Windows.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-03 18:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20240203100011.214@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #381677 |
On 2024-02-03, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > On 03/02/2024 13:23, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> On 02.02.2024 23:12, bart wrote: >>> On 02/02/2024 21:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>> On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:47:25 +0000, bart wrote: >>>> >>>>> That's true: only 47 years in computing, and 42 years of evolving, >>>>> implementing and running my systems language. >>>> >>>> On how many different platforms? >>> >>> I started in 1976. I started using Windows for my products in 1995 >>> because all my potential customers could buy an off-the-shelf Windows >>> PC. >> >> And that is actually the problem that folks have tried to make clear >> to you. Being so long in a bubble, > > Which bubble, the one before 1995, or after? > > Don't you see that using only Unix-like systems is also a bubble? Don't you see that living on Earth is literally being in bubble? Your bubble contains only one person. The Unix-like bubble is pertty huge, full of economic opportunities, spanning from embedded to server. A lot of embedded systems are Unix-like (and those that aren't often have Unix-like development environments). Phones, tables, routers, set top boxes, IOT, remote sensing, robotics, yaddda yadda. While you were dismissing Linux in 1995, it was actually going strong, marching forward. Only fools ignored it. A year before that, in 1994, I was doing contract work for Linux already. My client used it for serving up pay-per-click web pages to paying customers. I was working on the log processing and billing side of it, and also created a text-UI (curses) admin tool. > I'd say using anything but Unix /is/ a broader experience than using > only Unix. No, it isn't. That is fallacious. Working with anything else plus Unix is a broader experience than only Unix. Otherwise, we can't say. > That latter seems to give people the impression that unless > every OS should either be exactly like Unix, then it is worthless. Actually there are ways in which that is objectively true. An OS that provides more or less the same semantics as POSIX, but using interfaces that are gratuitously different, and incompatible, is worthless in this day and age. Something that doesn't conform to compatibility standards, and isn't demonstrably better for it, is a dud. There is good different and bad different. More or less same, but incompatible, is bad different. -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-03 20:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <upm6mi$39735$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381691 |
On 03/02/2024 18:17, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2024-02-03, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> Don't you see that using only Unix-like systems is also a bubble? > > Don't you see that living on Earth is literally being in bubble? > > Your bubble contains only one person. > > The Unix-like bubble is pertty huge, full of economic opportunities, > spanning from embedded to server. You're missing my point. Unix imposes a certain mindset, mainly that there is only ONE way to things, and that is the Unix way. That is pretty obvious from the passionate posts people make about it. And it is obvious that they struggle outside it, which is why they hate Windows - it just isn't Unix! > While you were dismissing Linux in 1995, it was actually going strong, > marching forward. Only fools ignored it. > > A year before that, in 1994, I was doing contract work for Linux > already. My client used it for serving up pay-per-click web pages to > paying customers. I was working on the log processing and billing side > of it, and also created a text-UI (curses) admin tool. Meanwhile, a decade before that, the question of OS in my first commercial product was utterly irrelevant. It provided a file system and it was used to launch my app. What was it again? I can barely remember. I JUST DO NOT CARE. Of all those OSes I have used, Windows might rank near the bottom, but not for the reasons you think. That's because it operated in protected mode so that lots of things which had been easy, became hard. And now it is just monstrous. As I'm typing this, there are 240 processes and 2700 threads. In 1984, a machine running my app would have exactly process: itself! (I've just looked up that machine I used c.1985; it was a PCW 8256, an 8-bit machine running CP/M+. Why not Unix? I've no idea. Maybe it was just not practical. Maybe CP/M+ was cheaper. More pressing to me was how to get programs inside it, given its non-standard 3" floppies, and how to display graphics, given that it was a word processor with a text-mode display. How would Unix have helped with that? It wouldn't.) >> I'd say using anything but Unix /is/ a broader experience than using >> only Unix. > > No, it isn't. That is fallacious. Working with anything else plus Unix > is a broader experience than only Unix. Otherwise, we can't say. Well, I've tinkered with Linux on and off since the late 90s. So yes, I have used it. I have ported a few of my tools to it in the past. So I have some experience of it. It's not as though I first used it last week. I just don't care for it. But if I had a gun pointed at my head I could use it. > An OS that provides more or less the same semantics as POSIX, but using > interfaces that are gratuitously different, and incompatible, is > worthless in this day and age. Because .... you say so? I mean, are core OSes really so hard to write that everyone in the world has to use the same one? There seems to plenty of amateur OS development still. > Something that doesn't conform to compatibility standards, and isn't > demonstrably better for it, is a dud. > > There is good different and bad different. More or less same, but > incompatible, is bad different. I build a box where you feed in data in the form of byte-stream, and it gives results in the form of a byte-stream. Or replace one of those by something physical; say the box is a printer or scanner. There is no OS specified, you've no idea whether it uses POSIX, or even if there's a computer inside. But if it performs a useful task, then what is the problem? Same thing if you are working on a self-contained function, library or app. It may have inputs or outputs. Do you need to care what OS is running? No, only on the job it has to do. Really you make too much of it. The main thing I don't like is when I have some software that is hard to build on Windows when there is no reason for it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 16:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnurvdtp.276.jj@iridium.wf32df> |
| In reply to | #381697 |
On 2024-02-03, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
> On 03/02/2024 18:17, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>> On 2024-02-03, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>
>>> Don't you see that using only Unix-like systems is also a bubble?
>>
>> Don't you see that living on Earth is literally being in bubble?
>>
>> Your bubble contains only one person.
>>
>> The Unix-like bubble is pertty huge, full of economic opportunities,
>> spanning from embedded to server.
>
> You're missing my point. Unix imposes a certain mindset, mainly that
> there is only ONE way to things, and that is the Unix way.
^^^
I had to laugh. Others criticise the linux/unix world for having TOO
many ways of doing things, which makes things difficult :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 14:08 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <upp1t5$3rqfm$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381746 |
On 2/4/2024 8:13 AM, Jim Jackson wrote: > On 2024-02-03, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> On 03/02/2024 18:17, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>> On 2024-02-03, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> >>>> Don't you see that using only Unix-like systems is also a bubble? >>> >>> Don't you see that living on Earth is literally being in bubble? >>> >>> Your bubble contains only one person. >>> >>> The Unix-like bubble is pertty huge, full of economic opportunities, >>> spanning from embedded to server. >> >> You're missing my point. Unix imposes a certain mindset, mainly that >> there is only ONE way to things, and that is the Unix way. > ^^^ > > I had to laugh. Others criticise the linux/unix world for having TOO > many ways of doing things, which makes things difficult :-) > :^D
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <433-929-6894@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 18:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20240204095807.244@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #381697 |
On 2024-02-03, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > On 03/02/2024 18:17, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> On 2024-02-03, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > >>> Don't you see that using only Unix-like systems is also a bubble? >> >> Don't you see that living on Earth is literally being in bubble? >> >> Your bubble contains only one person. >> >> The Unix-like bubble is pertty huge, full of economic opportunities, >> spanning from embedded to server. > > You're missing my point. Unix imposes a certain mindset, mainly that > there is only ONE way to things, and that is the Unix way. In the world of Unix-like systems, there are many, many ways of working. There isn't one way. Can you name a software system which doesn't impose a mindset? For instance, doesn't a spreadsheet impose the mindset that data are visually represented by entries in tables, linked by formulas? > That is pretty obvious from the passionate posts people make about it. Mostly, what people are passionate about here is pointing out the mistakes which make others wrong. That's it. In the world of Unix and Linux, there is a lot of criticism from the inside. Improvements are made. The free environments we have now are collectively a huge improvement over the original proprietary Unix, or even BSD. As a GNU/Linux user, when you step inside a proprietary Unix with no free software installed in it, it's like taking a time machine to the dark ages. > And it is obvious that they struggle outside it, which is why they hate > Windows - it just isn't Unix! Many users of GNU/Linux who are critics of Windows have previous experience with Windows. Users with no Windows exposure, whose first system was some kind of Linux >> While you were dismissing Linux in 1995, it was actually going strong, >> marching forward. Only fools ignored it. >> >> A year before that, in 1994, I was doing contract work for Linux >> already. My client used it for serving up pay-per-click web pages to >> paying customers. I was working on the log processing and billing side >> of it, and also created a text-UI (curses) admin tool. > > Meanwhile, a decade before that, the question of OS in my first > commercial product was utterly irrelevant. It provided a file system and > it was used to launch my app. Many applications critically depend on application programming interfaces (APIs) in the operating system. > What was it again? I can barely remember. I JUST DO NOT CARE. If you talk about it, you care. > Of all those OSes I have used, Windows might rank near the bottom, but > not for the reasons you think. That's because it operated in protected > mode so that lots of things which had been easy, became hard. Sure, easy things like trashing another application, or using hardware rudely while something else is accessing it! It's harder to be polite and request things, than to just barge in and take what you need. In a protected system, you have to use an operating system API to do some of those things. Want to put pixels directly into a frame buffer? Because there is a windowing system you have to arrange that with the OS and follow certain rules. You can't keep putting pixels there if your program loses focus and another window is put over your screen area. Tough luck! > How would Unix have helped with that? It wouldn't.) The question how Unix would have helped on an 8 bit CP/M machine forty years go isn't very interesting today. At that time, Unix probably ran best on machines with at least perhaps five to ten times the resources of that, or thereabouts. >> An OS that provides more or less the same semantics as POSIX, but using >> interfaces that are gratuitously different, and incompatible, is >> worthless in this day and age. > > Because .... you say so? The economic marketplace says so, mainly. > I mean, are core OSes really so hard to write that everyone in the world > has to use the same one? There seems to plenty of amateur OS development > still. Yes, developing a production OS is very, very hard. Writing and debugging just one damned driver for an OS (e.g. USB host controller) can be very hard and take a lot of time. >> Something that doesn't conform to compatibility standards, and isn't >> demonstrably better for it, is a dud. >> >> There is good different and bad different. More or less same, but >> incompatible, is bad different. > > I build a box where you feed in data in the form of byte-stream, and it > gives results in the form of a byte-stream. Or replace one of those by > something physical; say the box is a printer or scanner. > > There is no OS specified, you've no idea whether it uses POSIX, or even > if there's a computer inside. If that byte stream is incompatible from the one used by every other such a box in the commercial marketplace, it's a dud. More so if it is undocumented and changes monthly. > But if it performs a useful task, then what is the problem? Vendor lock-in. > Same thing if you are working on a self-contained function, library or > app. It may have inputs or outputs. Do you need to care what OS is > running? No, only on the job it has to do. An app can hide the system from the user, but the app itself certainly cares about what OS it's running on. > Really you make too much of it. The main thing I don't like is when I > have some software that is hard to build on Windows when there is no > reason for it. There is a reason; mainly, some of the program depends on a different OS which is not compatible with Windows. -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 13:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <upo1cv$3lbbl$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381677 |
On 03/02/2024 15:16, bart wrote: > MSDOS and Windows were intended for direct use by ordinary consumers. > Unix was intended for developers. > There is a bit of truth in that - though Unix was also targeted at serious computer users, workstation users (such as for CAD, simulations, and other demanding work), server usage, and other "big" things. DOS and Windows were targeted at simpler consumer usage, office applications and games. As Linux gained traction, it became perfectly good for "ordinary consumers" too. My mother-in-law has used Linux for the last 15 years or so, for email, browsing, writing letters, banking, and suchlike. And she is as far from being a "computer nerd" as you can get! (Given your statement here, why do you find it so hard to accept that people find Linux a much better platform for developers than Windows?) > Few ordinary consumers directly use a Unix-like system unless it is made > to look like MacOS or Android. Or they run a GUI desktop that makes it > look a bit like Windows. > I run a gui that makes my computer look like a computer - instead of Windows which tries to make it look like a giant schizophrenic telephone (after having gone through stages such as XP's Teletubbies interface). Of course, with Linux you have a choice - you can pick a giant telephone gui if you like.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 14:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <upo5b4$3m4fu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381735 |
On 04/02/2024 12:53, David Brown wrote: > On 03/02/2024 15:16, bart wrote: > >> MSDOS and Windows were intended for direct use by ordinary consumers. >> Unix was intended for developers. >> > > There is a bit of truth in that - though Unix was also targeted at > serious computer users, workstation users (such as for CAD, (My company specialised in low-end CAD products, one of them running on an 8-bit computer using CP/M. I think at one CAD/CAM trade show, we had the cheapest product by far.) > (Given your statement here, why do you find it so hard to accept that > people find Linux a much better platform for developers than Windows?) I didn't quite say that. I meant that Unix with its abstruse interface was more suited to technical people such as developers, but also those in academia or industry. Who could also afford such a machine (because somebody else was paying). Some aspects of it, such as case-sensitive commands and file system, would have caused difficulties. Real-life is not usually case-sensitive. Even now, ordinary people's exposure to it seems to be mainly with passwords. (I did a lot of telephone support walking people through dialogs on a terminal. A case-sensitive OS would have made things considerably harder.) But it does seem as though Unix was a breeding ground for multitudinous developer tools. Plus there was little demarcation between user commands, C development tools, C libraries and OS. Somebody who's used to that environment is surely going to have trouble on an OS like MSDOS or Windows where they have to start from nothing. Even if most of the tools are now free.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 18:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <upohvg$3o7ig$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381736 |
On 04/02/2024 15:01, bart wrote: > On 04/02/2024 12:53, David Brown wrote: >> On 03/02/2024 15:16, bart wrote: >> >>> MSDOS and Windows were intended for direct use by ordinary consumers. >>> Unix was intended for developers. >>> >> >> There is a bit of truth in that - though Unix was also targeted at >> serious computer users, workstation users (such as for CAD, > > (My company specialised in low-end CAD products, one of them running on > an 8-bit computer using CP/M. I think at one CAD/CAM trade show, we had > the cheapest product by far.) > OK. There's always been a market for low-end, low-price products on low-price hardware. (That's not a criticism in any way.) At the high-end, it was all Unix at least until Windows NT came out. And since then, it's still primarily *nix for the top end stuff - mostly running on Linux, of course. (Number two choice would be Macs, especially in some areas.) >> (Given your statement here, why do you find it so hard to accept that >> people find Linux a much better platform for developers than Windows?) > > I didn't quite say that. I meant that Unix with its abstruse interface > was more suited to technical people such as developers, but also those > in academia or industry. Who could also afford such a machine (because > somebody else was paying). > That used to be the case, yes. > Some aspects of it, such as case-sensitive commands and file system, > would have caused difficulties. I know that's a hobby-horse of yours, but it is completely irrelevant to most people. People who use gui's don't care about case sensitivity. > Real-life is not usually case-sensitive. > Even now, ordinary people's exposure to it seems to be mainly with > passwords. > I've only ever heard of it being an issue when someone has left their caps lock on by mistake. > (I did a lot of telephone support walking people through dialogs on a > terminal. A case-sensitive OS would have made things considerably harder.) > Ordinary users don't use terminals. > But it does seem as though Unix was a breeding ground for multitudinous > developer tools. Plus there was little demarcation between user > commands, C development tools, C libraries and OS. > > Somebody who's used to that environment is surely going to have trouble > on an OS like MSDOS or Windows where they have to start from nothing. > Even if most of the tools are now free. > I am very used to both environments. I would consider myself as a "power user" of Linux /and/ a "power user" of Windows. (I admit that my advanced usage on Windows is getting a bit out of date. I've tried to avoid anything after Windows 7.) This is why I can give a qualified opinion comparing the OS'es - though it is still obviously an opinion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 22:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <upp43r$3s4nc$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381736 |
On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 14:01:08 +0000, bart wrote: > But it does seem as though Unix was a breeding ground for multitudinous > developer tools. Plus there was little demarcation between user > commands, C development tools, C libraries and OS. > > Somebody who's used to that environment is surely going to have trouble > on an OS like MSDOS or Windows where they have to start from nothing. > Even if most of the tools are now free. Yet it seems like even someone like you, who is supposed to be “used to” Windows rather than *nix, still has the same trouble. So maybe it’s not about being “used to” *nix at all, there really is something inherent in the fundamental design of that environment that makes development work easier.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 23:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <upp6js$3t5rg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381765 |
On 04/02/2024 22:46, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 14:01:08 +0000, bart wrote: > >> But it does seem as though Unix was a breeding ground for multitudinous >> developer tools. Plus there was little demarcation between user >> commands, C development tools, C libraries and OS. >> >> Somebody who's used to that environment is surely going to have trouble >> on an OS like MSDOS or Windows where they have to start from nothing. >> Even if most of the tools are now free. > > Yet it seems like even someone like you, who is supposed to be “used to” > Windows rather than *nix, still has the same trouble. *I* don't have trouble. Only with other people's projects originating from Linux. Apparently, on that OS, nobody knows how to build a program given only the C source files, and a C compiler. Or if they do, they are unwilling to part with that information. It is encrypted into a makefile, or worse.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-04 15:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <upp6pi$3t3ai$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381772 |
On 2/4/2024 3:29 PM, bart wrote: > On 04/02/2024 22:46, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 14:01:08 +0000, bart wrote: >> >>> But it does seem as though Unix was a breeding ground for multitudinous >>> developer tools. Plus there was little demarcation between user >>> commands, C development tools, C libraries and OS. >>> >>> Somebody who's used to that environment is surely going to have trouble >>> on an OS like MSDOS or Windows where they have to start from nothing. >>> Even if most of the tools are now free. >> >> Yet it seems like even someone like you, who is supposed to be “used to” >> Windows rather than *nix, still has the same trouble. > > > *I* don't have trouble. Only with other people's projects originating > from Linux. > > Apparently, on that OS, nobody knows how to build a program given only > the C source files, and a C compiler. > > Or if they do, they are unwilling to part with that information. > It is encrypted into a makefile, or worse. > [...] Okay, you basically forced me to laugh right there! Yes, makefiles that are "auto-generated" can tend to look a bit "cryptic" for sure.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-05 17:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnus275u.2s0.jj@iridium.wf32df> |
| In reply to | #381772 |
On 2024-02-04, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > On 04/02/2024 22:46, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 14:01:08 +0000, bart wrote: >> >>> But it does seem as though Unix was a breeding ground for multitudinous >>> developer tools. Plus there was little demarcation between user >>> commands, C development tools, C libraries and OS. >>> >>> Somebody who's used to that environment is surely going to have trouble >>> on an OS like MSDOS or Windows where they have to start from nothing. >>> Even if most of the tools are now free. >> >> Yet it seems like even someone like you, who is supposed to be ???used to??? >> Windows rather than *nix, still has the same trouble. > > > *I* don't have trouble. Only with other people's projects originating > from Linux. > > Apparently, on that OS, nobody knows how to build a program given only > the C source files, and a C compiler. Programmers and Developers do. > Or if they do, they are unwilling to part with that information. It is > encrypted into a makefile, or worse. Encrypted? I always thought makefiles were plain text? You can read them with less^H^H^H^H "more" - which if memory serves, is also a DOS command? As an aside I skip most of this rubbish and just dip in occasionally. But I think I have some measure of where bart is coming from. Some people come at things not as they are, but as they wish they were given their background. I'll go back to lurking and just dipping into this if I've time to waste.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-05 18:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <upr7t3$d70i$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381835 |
On 05/02/2024 17:37, Jim Jackson wrote: > On 2024-02-04, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >> On 04/02/2024 22:46, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>> On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 14:01:08 +0000, bart wrote: >>> >>>> But it does seem as though Unix was a breeding ground for multitudinous >>>> developer tools. Plus there was little demarcation between user >>>> commands, C development tools, C libraries and OS. >>>> >>>> Somebody who's used to that environment is surely going to have trouble >>>> on an OS like MSDOS or Windows where they have to start from nothing. >>>> Even if most of the tools are now free. >>> >>> Yet it seems like even someone like you, who is supposed to be ???used to??? >>> Windows rather than *nix, still has the same trouble. >> >> >> *I* don't have trouble. Only with other people's projects originating >> from Linux. >> >> Apparently, on that OS, nobody knows how to build a program given only >> the C source files, and a C compiler. > > Programmers and Developers do. > >> Or if they do, they are unwilling to part with that information. It is >> encrypted into a makefile, or worse. > > Encrypted? I always thought makefiles were plain text? You can read them > with less^H^H^H^H "more" - which if memory serves, is also a DOS command? > Here's one on my machine I selected almost at random !ifndef BCROOT BCROOT=$(MAKEDIR)\.. !endif BCC32 = $(BCROOT)\bin\Bcc32.exe IDE_LinkFLAGS32 = -L$(BCROOT)\LIB COMPOPTS= -O2 -tWC -tWM- -Vx -Ve -D_NO_VCL; -I../../../../; -L..\..\build\bcb5 timer.exe : regex_timer.cpp $(BCC32) @&&| $(COMPOPTS) -e$@ regex_timer.cpp | Whilst some of this is pretty clear, it's not all obvious what the second half of the line $(BCC32) @&&| is meant to mean. -- Check out Basic Algorithms and my other books: https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/bgy1mm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-02-05 18:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <upra6k$dkgp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #381838 |
On 05/02/2024 18:03, Malcolm McLean wrote: > On 05/02/2024 17:37, Jim Jackson wrote: >> On 2024-02-04, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: >>> On 04/02/2024 22:46, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>> On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 14:01:08 +0000, bart wrote: >>>> >>>>> But it does seem as though Unix was a breeding ground for >>>>> multitudinous >>>>> developer tools. Plus there was little demarcation between user >>>>> commands, C development tools, C libraries and OS. >>>>> >>>>> Somebody who's used to that environment is surely going to have >>>>> trouble >>>>> on an OS like MSDOS or Windows where they have to start from nothing. >>>>> Even if most of the tools are now free. >>>> >>>> Yet it seems like even someone like you, who is supposed to be >>>> ???used to??? >>>> Windows rather than *nix, still has the same trouble. >>> >>> >>> *I* don't have trouble. Only with other people's projects originating >>> from Linux. >>> >>> Apparently, on that OS, nobody knows how to build a program given only >>> the C source files, and a C compiler. >> >> Programmers and Developers do. >> >>> Or if they do, they are unwilling to part with that information. It is >>> encrypted into a makefile, or worse. >> >> Encrypted? I always thought makefiles were plain text? You can read them >> with less^H^H^H^H "more" - which if memory serves, is also a DOS command? >> > Here's one on my machine I selected almost at random > > !ifndef BCROOT > BCROOT=$(MAKEDIR)\.. > !endif > > BCC32 = $(BCROOT)\bin\Bcc32.exe > > IDE_LinkFLAGS32 = -L$(BCROOT)\LIB > COMPOPTS= -O2 -tWC -tWM- -Vx -Ve -D_NO_VCL; -I../../../../; > -L..\..\build\bcb5 > > > timer.exe : regex_timer.cpp > $(BCC32) @&&| > $(COMPOPTS) -e$@ regex_timer.cpp > | > > > Whilst some of this is pretty clear, it's not all obvious what the > second half of the line > $(BCC32) @&&| > is meant to mean. > > I thought of some project and decided to look at NASM sources, choosing 2.15 from a few years ago as it might be simpler. There was no makefile, only makefile.in of 1000 lines. If I type 'make', it says no targets found. There was also 'configure' of 11,000 lines, so I switched to WSL. Now typing ./configure shows: -bash: ./configure: /bin/sh^M: bad interpreter: No such file or directory So it doesn't work on Linux either. If I look at INSTALL, it actually says use "sh configure". That now says: : not found14: configure: 30: Syntax error: newline unexpected (expecting ")") The entire project is only 106 .c files. If I try compiling a random .c file, it complains of a missing header. This is all quite typical.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web