Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #68776 > unrolled thread
| Started by | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-06-14 01:15 -0400 |
| Last post | 2025-06-19 06:36 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 230 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-14 01:15 -0400
Re: VMS Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-06-14 10:05 -0700
Re: VMS Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2025-06-14 20:30 +0200
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-14 23:27 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-15 00:57 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-14 23:32 -0400
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-15 08:26 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-15 21:12 -0400
Re: VMS Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-06-16 18:15 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-17 23:20 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-18 04:14 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-18 02:34 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-15 18:49 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-15 22:45 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-16 04:35 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-16 01:35 -0400
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-14 23:03 -0400
Re: VMS candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-06-18 05:30 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-18 02:09 -0400
Re: VMS candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-06-18 19:00 +0000
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-18 20:23 +0000
Re: VMS Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-06-18 20:30 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-18 23:09 +0000
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-19 08:40 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-20 00:43 -0400
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-20 09:00 +0100
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-20 10:19 +0100
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-20 15:15 +0100
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-20 13:36 +0000
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-20 16:15 +0100
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-20 23:07 +0000
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-21 01:07 +0100
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-21 03:09 +0000
Re: VMS Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-06-21 03:43 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-21 01:36 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-21 05:53 +0000
Re: VMS candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-06-22 13:50 +0000
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-22 15:27 +0100
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-22 15:56 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-23 00:18 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-22 19:23 +0000
Re: VMS candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-06-23 18:10 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-23 19:27 +0000
Re: VMS Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-06-24 03:34 +0000
Re: VMS Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-06-24 04:52 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-24 05:14 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-24 01:36 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-24 06:49 +0000
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-24 10:31 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-25 01:36 -0400
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-25 07:31 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-25 03:08 -0400
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-24 08:56 +0100
Re: VMS Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-06-25 03:01 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-25 01:59 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-25 06:52 +0000
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-20 14:31 +0000
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-06-25 09:32 -0700
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-06-25 09:44 -0700
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-25 19:01 -0400
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-20 14:37 +0000
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-21 08:42 +0100
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-21 09:12 -0700
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-07-21 18:44 +0100
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-21 20:47 +0100
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-21 13:31 -0700
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-07-23 07:22 +0100
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-23 08:04 -0700
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-23 08:44 -0700
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-23 20:04 +0100
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-23 22:47 +0000
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-24 09:56 +0100
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-07-23 21:53 +0100
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-23 14:28 -0700
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-07-24 00:29 +0100
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-24 08:05 -0700
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-24 21:51 +0100
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-24 15:06 -0700
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-07-25 07:06 +0100
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-25 10:39 -0700
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-07-26 17:54 +0100
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-26 18:02 +0100
Re: VMS Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-07-27 04:04 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-27 01:50 -0400
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-27 12:07 +0100
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-07-27 10:23 +0100
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-27 10:55 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-27 21:23 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-28 04:45 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-28 02:14 -0400
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-28 13:48 +0100
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-28 20:38 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-28 20:32 +0000
Re: VMS Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-07-28 14:17 -0700
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-29 05:08 +0000
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-28 13:44 +0100
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-28 13:39 +0100
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 01:03 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-29 05:29 +0000
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-29 11:42 +0100
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-29 19:16 +0000
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-07-29 12:10 +0100
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-29 13:08 +0100
Re: VMS Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-07-29 09:51 -0700
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-29 18:53 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-29 04:51 -0400
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-29 13:32 +0000
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-28 09:22 -0700
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-27 12:11 +0100
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-27 22:02 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-28 04:58 +0000
Re: VMS Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-01 19:13 +0000
Re: VMS Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2025-08-01 20:38 +0000
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-02 00:01 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-08-02 02:24 -0400
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-08-02 11:34 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-08-02 21:02 -0400
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-03 02:08 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-08-03 01:00 -0400
Re: VMS Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-09 10:26 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-09 20:00 +0000
Re: VMS Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-09 10:19 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-27 21:31 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-28 05:03 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-28 02:19 -0400
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-27 21:09 -0400
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-28 10:17 -0700
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-28 20:46 +0000
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-28 14:34 -0700
Re: VMS Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-07-28 16:34 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-28 20:48 +0000
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 01:00 +0000
Re: VMS Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-07-29 10:07 +0100
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 23:05 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-30 02:43 -0400
Re: VMS Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2025-08-02 18:11 +0200
Re: VMS Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-07-24 14:42 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-24 18:05 +0000
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-24 11:14 -0700
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-24 23:10 +0000
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-24 21:16 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-24 23:21 +0000
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-21 14:05 -0700
Re: VMS Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-07-21 21:14 +0000
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-21 22:19 +0100
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-22 02:10 +0000
Re: VMS candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-06-27 06:00 +0000
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-27 08:37 +0100
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-27 08:45 +0100
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-27 08:14 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-27 13:27 -0400
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-27 19:13 +0100
Re: VMS Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-06-28 09:16 -0400
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-27 13:24 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-27 17:40 +0000
Re: VMS Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2025-06-27 18:20 +0000
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-27 23:03 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-28 01:13 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-28 06:10 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-27 18:16 -0400
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-28 08:52 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-28 23:16 -0400
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-29 08:18 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-29 19:09 -0400
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-30 08:36 +0100
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-30 08:51 +0100
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-30 08:59 +0100
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-30 08:33 +0000
Re: VMS John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-06-30 09:08 -0700
Re: VMS jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> - 2025-06-30 22:18 -0400
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-30 09:00 +0100
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-30 09:24 +0100
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-30 08:34 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-30 23:30 -0400
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-30 23:26 -0400
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-01 10:49 +0100
Re: VMS Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2025-07-01 12:44 +0000
Re: VMS Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-07-02 01:13 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-01 21:46 -0400
Re: VMS Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2025-07-02 16:03 +0000
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-30 07:54 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-30 18:10 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-30 23:12 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-01 04:02 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-01 12:42 -0400
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-30 08:56 +0100
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-20 14:42 +0000
Re: VMS Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2025-07-20 14:54 +0000
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-20 16:51 +0100
Re: VMS Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2025-07-20 16:15 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-25 00:31 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-25 05:53 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-25 05:05 -0400
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-25 10:59 +0100
Re: VMS candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-07-25 16:20 +0000
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-25 08:43 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-25 04:39 -0400
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-20 21:18 +0100
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-27 19:40 +0000
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-20 21:19 +0100
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-20 23:17 +0000
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-21 08:42 +0100
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-21 07:02 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-21 03:23 -0400
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-21 01:27 -0400
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-21 01:10 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-21 05:59 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-21 02:10 -0400
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-20 10:12 +0100
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-20 13:39 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-21 01:23 -0400
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-21 06:57 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-21 03:07 -0400
Re: VMS Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-21 08:45 +0100
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-22 02:32 -0400
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-20 13:30 +0000
Re: VMS The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-06-20 16:14 +0100
Re: VMS Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-20 08:57 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-21 01:17 -0400
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-14 22:57 -0400
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-15 14:24 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-15 22:26 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-16 04:30 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-16 01:31 -0400
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-18 17:40 +0000
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-18 23:06 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-18 19:43 -0400
Re: VMS Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-06-19 01:08 +0000
Re: VMS c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-19 00:46 -0400
Re: VMS rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-06-19 06:36 +0000
Page 7 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 12 Next page →
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-09 20:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mfpnn2FeecnU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #70664 |
On 09 Aug 2025 10:26:10 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote: > Fixing a bug is not always more important to the client than developing > a new functionality. It depends on the impact of the bug and the impact > of the functionality. I've fixed bugs that some users thought were neat functionality. 'You can please some of the people all of the time etc.'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-09 10:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <6897209d$0$10602$426a74cc@news.free.fr> |
| In reply to | #70251 |
Le 02-08-2025, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> a écrit : > On 8/1/25 3:13 PM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote: >> Le 27-07-2025, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> a écrit : >>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2025 12:11:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> >>>> The company had a NO BUGS ALLOWED policy. 'Zero Tolerance'. >>> >>> One easy way to achieve that is not to have a bug-reporting mechanism. >> >> Another way is to have a program which does nothing. Without >> functionalities come zero bugs. When you want something which does a lot >> of things and you don't want to wait long years for it, you have to >> compromise. > > Yea ... but only to a POINT. It's better to > put another week or month into "hardening" than > to suffer the results of too many 'compromises'. That's what I'm saying. You delay your product for one month to fix something, and then something new need to be fixed. And ten years later, you are still fixing things with no product. -- Si vous avez du temps à perdre : https://scarpet42.gitlab.io
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-27 21:31 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <J72dnRwNL7PdThv1nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #69963 |
On 7/27/25 7:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 27/07/2025 10:23, Pancho wrote: >> On 7/26/25 18:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 26/07/2025 17:54, Pancho wrote: >>>> On 7/25/25 18:39, John Ames wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Funny you should cite bridge-building. As a friend once observed: >>>>> >>>>> "The Romans made their architects stand under the arches they designed >>>>> while the keystone was put in place and the supports removed. >>>>> >>>>> The Romans built bridges that stayed the #&@! up." >>>>> >>>> >>>> AIUI, The reason Roman bridges stayed put, is that they massively >>>> over specced. I don't think they really understood enough to make >>>> appropriate structures for the required load. >>> >>> The same is true of much Victorian engineering. >>> >>> Lacking the detailed mathematical analyses it was easier to just make >>> it bloody big, and thank god they did. London's main sewer is still >>> able to cope with the load. >>> >>> On the other hand, many structures have failed. We only see the ones >>> that didn't fall down. >>> >> >> A bit like the old software accounting systems. I don't know why they >> are reliable, but I doubt it is just down to good design. > > An Ex GF of mine trained on IBM kit and COBOL in an IBM software house > back in the day. (1982) > > The company had a NO BUGS ALLOWED policy. 'Zero Tolerance'. > > Back then there was a rigorous process of business analysis, code and > data specification, coding and stress testing. > > And it was expensive. Damned expensicve. But it damn well worked. Yep, that's how they used to do it - and produced GOOD software. However as the PC-Gen rose, more and more little hacks got into things and kind of smothered the output of the old narrow-tie Dilberts. Some of the stuff like VisiCalc and WordStar ... the programmers were still good and went off in directions (and price-group) the big old corps wouldn't. Leave it to Big Blue and CDC and such and 'word-processing' workstations would cost $50k each and only work with their mini/mainframes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-28 05:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <meoellFqusoU6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #69981 |
On Sun, 27 Jul 2025 21:31:57 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Leave it to Big Blue and CDC and such and 'word-processing' > workstations would cost $50k each and only work with their > mini/mainframes. Y2K was the watershed for our clients. IBM only patched the latest OS and it wouldn't run on older systems. The sites looked at the cost of replacing their whole RS/6000 hardware and Windows started looking pretty damn good. Despite the importance of the 911 system not many government agencies throw wads of cash at the PSAPs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-28 02:19 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <W2Kdnd_Uba3Xixr1nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #69992 |
On 7/28/25 1:03 AM, rbowman wrote: > On Sun, 27 Jul 2025 21:31:57 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> Leave it to Big Blue and CDC and such and 'word-processing' >> workstations would cost $50k each and only work with their >> mini/mainframes. > > Y2K was the watershed for our clients. IBM only patched the latest OS and > it wouldn't run on older systems. The sites looked at the cost of > replacing their whole RS/6000 hardware and Windows started looking pretty > damn good. > > Despite the importance of the 911 system not many government agencies > throw wads of cash at the PSAPs. Money and Politics - what's new ??? Nothing really wrong with Big Blue and friends - they make Good Stuff. But, surprise, it's Good Stuff that profits THEM.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-27 21:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <O9KdnQIMEdZIUBv1nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #69959 |
On 7/27/25 5:23 AM, Pancho wrote: > On 7/26/25 18:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 26/07/2025 17:54, Pancho wrote: >>> On 7/25/25 18:39, John Ames wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Funny you should cite bridge-building. As a friend once observed: >>>> >>>> "The Romans made their architects stand under the arches they designed >>>> while the keystone was put in place and the supports removed. >>>> >>>> The Romans built bridges that stayed the #&@! up." >>>> >>> >>> AIUI, The reason Roman bridges stayed put, is that they massively >>> over specced. I don't think they really understood enough to make >>> appropriate structures for the required load. >> >> The same is true of much Victorian engineering. >> >> Lacking the detailed mathematical analyses it was easier to just make >> it bloody big, and thank god they did. London's main sewer is still >> able to cope with the load. >> >> On the other hand, many structures have failed. We only see the ones >> that didn't fall down. >> > > A bit like the old software accounting systems. I don't know why they > are reliable, but I doubt it is just down to good design. "Old" generally also means "simple" - and simple is a lot easier to debug/maintain. Throw in 900% more GUI/connectedness stuff and I don't think even the AIs can get it all straight.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-28 10:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20250728101739.00004731@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #69942 |
On Sat, 26 Jul 2025 17:54:15 +0100 Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> wrote: > > Funny you should cite bridge-building. As a friend once observed: > > > > "The Romans made their architects stand under the arches they > > designed while the keystone was put in place and the supports > > removed. > > > > The Romans built bridges that stayed the #&@! up." > > AIUI, The reason Roman bridges stayed put, is that they massively > over specced. I don't think they really understood enough to make > appropriate structures for the required load. That may well be so - but I'd be willing to bet that they *didn't* make a habit of *not checking where they'd put the end of the bridge* and trusting that it'd work itself out as long as they built extra.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-28 20:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <meq5ttF55jpU6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #70024 |
On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 10:17:39 -0700, John Ames wrote: > On Sat, 26 Jul 2025 17:54:15 +0100 Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> > wrote: > >> > Funny you should cite bridge-building. As a friend once observed: >> > >> > "The Romans made their architects stand under the arches they >> > designed while the keystone was put in place and the supports >> > removed. >> > >> > The Romans built bridges that stayed the #&@! up." >> >> AIUI, The reason Roman bridges stayed put, is that they massively over >> specced. I don't think they really understood enough to make >> appropriate structures for the required load. > > That may well be so - but I'd be willing to bet that they *didn't* make > a habit of *not checking where they'd put the end of the bridge* and > trusting that it'd work itself out as long as they built extra. I'm not sure how to parse the double negatives but it reminded me of a local project to build a railroad overpass over a new road. Short story -- the crew building the rail bed missed the bridge. It was only by a few feet but I'm sure it was quite a cat fight while they figured out who screwed up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-28 14:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20250728143450.00006a7e@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #70030 |
On 28 Jul 2025 20:46:53 GMT rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > > That may well be so - but I'd be willing to bet that they *didn't* > > make a habit of *not checking where they'd put the end of the > > bridge* and trusting that it'd work itself out as long as they > > built extra. > > I'm not sure how to parse the double negatives but it reminded me of > a local project to build a railroad overpass over a new road. Short > story -- the crew building the rail bed missed the bridge. It was > only by a few feet but I'm sure it was quite a cat fight while they > figured out who screwed up. A more-than-usually-literal segmentation fault...!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-28 16:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qENhQ.165271$QtA1.59260@fx16.iad> |
| In reply to | #69906 |
On 2025-07-25, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 07:06:27 +0100
> Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Fortunately I don't develop SSL, chip microcode or aircraft
>> controllers. People accept my code falls over occasionally.
>
> To be perfectly frank, it's *very* fortunate that you don't develop
> aircraft controllers.
Pancho seems to have adopted Microsoft's quality criteria:
"Sort of works, most of the time."
Microsoft's crime against humanity is getting people to
lower their standards enough to accept bad software.
>> This is the way structural engineering works. Bridge building etc.
>
> Funny you should cite bridge-building. As a friend once observed:
>
> "The Romans made their architects stand under the arches they designed
> while the keystone was put in place and the supports removed.
>
> The Romans built bridges that stayed the #&@! up."
It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more
dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those
decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for
being wrong. -- Thomas Sowell
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-28 20:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <meq60sF55jpU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #70023 |
On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:34:30 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2025-07-25, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 07:06:27 +0100 Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Fortunately I don't develop SSL, chip microcode or aircraft >>> controllers. People accept my code falls over occasionally. >> >> To be perfectly frank, it's *very* fortunate that you don't develop >> aircraft controllers. > > Pancho seems to have adopted Microsoft's quality criteria: > "Sort of works, most of the time." > > Microsoft's crime against humanity is getting people to lower their > standards enough to accept bad software. > >>> This is the way structural engineering works. Bridge building etc. >> >> Funny you should cite bridge-building. As a friend once observed: >> >> "The Romans made their architects stand under the arches they designed >> while the keystone was put in place and the supports removed. >> >> The Romans built bridges that stayed the #&@! up." > > It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way > of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of > people who pay no price for being wrong. -- Thomas Sowell That sums up the American Way nicely...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-29 01:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10696fj$2d4ra$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70023 |
On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:34:30 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way > of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of > people who pay no price for being wrong. -- Thomas Sowell I’m not sure how else you would do it, though. If a politician in charge of health denies life-saving vaccines to the populace, and a few thousand people die, should he be put on trial for their murder? If a judge sentences a person to death who later turns out to be innocent, should the judge be charged with murder as well?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-29 10:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <106a302$2hjlf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70023 |
On 7/28/25 17:34, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2025-07-25, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 07:06:27 +0100 >> Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Fortunately I don't develop SSL, chip microcode or aircraft >>> controllers. People accept my code falls over occasionally. >> >> To be perfectly frank, it's *very* fortunate that you don't develop >> aircraft controllers. > > Pancho seems to have adopted Microsoft's quality criteria: > "Sort of works, most of the time." > Pancho has adopted Microsoft's criteria of giving customers what they want. To continue the bridge analogy. When the US army was trying to cross the Rhine in March 1945, they didn't commission some solid Roman style bridges, capable of lasting 1000 years. No, they used pontoon bridges. > Microsoft's crime against humanity is getting people to > lower their standards enough to accept bad software. > Professionally, I started on VMS, I can assure you the most recent software I developed on Windows was hugely better, more reliable than the stuff I wrote for VMS. The VMS software development process seems almost inconceivable to me now. No unit tests, no systematic logging, no QA, no source code control, no Google, crappy languages, slow builds, vt00 terminals, crappy editor (sorry Steve). It took ages to develop stuff.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-29 23:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <106bk2s$2t9mq$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70064 |
On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 10:07:13 +0100, Pancho wrote: > The VMS software development process seems almost inconceivable to me > now. No unit tests, no systematic logging, no QA, no source code > control, no Google, crappy languages, slow builds, vt00 terminals, > crappy editor (sorry Steve). It took ages to develop stuff. It had source-code control, but it was of the clunky, bureaucratic kind that dated from the era where it was assumed that letting two different people check out the same source file for modification would bring about the End Times or something. Their answer to Unix makefiles was similarly clunky. I never used either. (Also, remember in those days companies charged extra for development tools like these.) The symbolic debugger was pretty good. It benefited a lot from the commonality of different language runtimes on the VAX, down to even how exceptions were handled. As for editors -- I hated EDT (having become accustomed to a TECO-based editor before that), but TPU was quite tolerable. DEC were basically trying to invent their own version of Emacs, poorly, and introducing yet another proprietary language of their own for the purpose.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-30 02:43 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <98KcnQwA6e3QIhT1nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #70124 |
On 7/29/25 7:05 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 10:07:13 +0100, Pancho wrote: > >> The VMS software development process seems almost inconceivable to me >> now. No unit tests, no systematic logging, no QA, no source code >> control, no Google, crappy languages, slow builds, vt00 terminals, >> crappy editor (sorry Steve). It took ages to develop stuff. > > It had source-code control, but it was of the clunky, bureaucratic kind > that dated from the era where it was assumed that letting two different > people check out the same source file for modification would bring about > the End Times or something. Yea, that kinda sums it up ! :-) And, then, it was kind of TRUE. > Their answer to Unix makefiles was similarly clunky. I never used either. > > (Also, remember in those days companies charged extra for development > tools like these.) > > The symbolic debugger was pretty good. It benefited a lot from the > commonality of different language runtimes on the VAX, down to even how > exceptions were handled. > > As for editors -- I hated EDT (having become accustomed to a TECO-based > editor before that), but TPU was quite tolerable. DEC were basically > trying to invent their own version of Emacs, poorly, and introducing yet > another proprietary language of their own for the purpose. VMS was very good - for its time and, maybe, even for now. I'd like to see a new Linus adapt it for the modern world. We need OPTIONS folks. Linux/BSD are good, but I'd pref to see at least one other open-source way to go that's good enough for Real Stuff. STILL think M$ is plotting legal ways to claim ownership of Linux. It has LOTS of lawyers. M$ apps also seems to be inflitrating slowly but surely, becoming 'invaluable'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-02 18:11 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <87y0s1hffd.fsf@eder.anydns.info> |
| In reply to | #70064 |
On Di 29 Jul 2025 at 10:07, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> wrote: > On 7/28/25 17:34, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> On 2025-07-25, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 07:06:27 +0100 >>> Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Fortunately I don't develop SSL, chip microcode or aircraft >>>> controllers. People accept my code falls over occasionally. >>> >>> To be perfectly frank, it's *very* fortunate that you don't develop >>> aircraft controllers. >> Pancho seems to have adopted Microsoft's quality criteria: >> "Sort of works, most of the time." >> > > Pancho has adopted Microsoft's criteria of giving customers what they want. > > To continue the bridge analogy. When the US army was trying to cross the > Rhine in March 1945, they didn't commission some solid Roman style bridges, > capable of lasting 1000 years. No, they used pontoon bridges. > >> Microsoft's crime against humanity is getting people to >> lower their standards enough to accept bad software. >> > > Professionally, I started on VMS, I can assure you the most recent software > I developed on Windows was hugely better, more reliable than the stuff I > wrote for VMS. Well, that doesn't tell us much since that is a relative measure. > The VMS software development process seems almost inconceivable to me now. > No unit tests, no systematic logging, no QA, no source code control, no > Google, crappy languages, slow builds, vt00 terminals, crappy editor (sorry > Steve). It took ages to develop stuff. That hasn't much to do with VMS since all that could as well be done under VMS. 'Andreas -- ceterum censeo redmondinem esse delendam
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-24 14:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <QDrgQ.147637$VlKa.106571@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #69860 |
On 2025-07-23, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jul 2025 21:53:47 +0100 > Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> wrote: > >> If n is small, it probably isn't worth the time thinking about it, so >> you just allocate n^2 elements. There is nothing superstitious or >> dangerous about this. It just recognises that the extra coding time >> is not worth the memory cost. > > That's fair enough - but it's also not what was being discussed. This > branch of the discussion started off, specifically, with the suggestion > that allocating extra was a helpful ward against running off the end of > a buffer/array and stomping on the next allocation, which it really, > really isn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_programming -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-24 18:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mefavuFbbn6U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #69864 |
On Thu, 24 Jul 2025 14:42:56 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2025-07-23, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 23 Jul 2025 21:53:47 +0100 Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> If n is small, it probably isn't worth the time thinking about it, so >>> you just allocate n^2 elements. There is nothing superstitious or >>> dangerous about this. It just recognises that the extra coding time is >>> not worth the memory cost. >> >> That's fair enough - but it's also not what was being discussed. This >> branch of the discussion started off, specifically, with the suggestion >> that allocating extra was a helpful ward against running off the end of >> a buffer/array and stomping on the next allocation, which it really, >> really isn't. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_programming The intersection of cargo cult and vibe programming should be able to generate a mass of unmaintainable crap that makes the sins of my generation look benign. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondo_Cane That's a very strange '60s movie with footage of the mock runways and control tower the cultist built. During the war planes with good stuff landed at the nearby airport and the natives figured if they built one planes with good stuff would come. The theme from the movie made the charts too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBj9KMQ2BNs If you can find it it's a fun excursion into the weird.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-24 11:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20250724111451.00004223@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #69866 |
On 24 Jul 2025 18:05:51 GMT rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > The intersection of cargo cult and vibe programming should be able to > generate a mass of unmaintainable crap that makes the sins of my > generation look benign. It's already happening. I wish the author here had left the original article up, but the comments on HN alone should give you some idea what kind of absolute fiascoes we're gonna see in the future: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44512368
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-24 23:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mefsr2Fbbn6U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #69867 |
On Thu, 24 Jul 2025 11:14:51 -0700, John Ames wrote: > On 24 Jul 2025 18:05:51 GMT rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > >> The intersection of cargo cult and vibe programming should be able to >> generate a mass of unmaintainable crap that makes the sins of my >> generation look benign. > > It's already happening. I wish the author here had left the original > article up, but the comments on HN alone should give you some idea what > kind of absolute fiascoes we're gonna see in the future: > > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44512368 https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2025/07/ai-coding- assistants-chase-phantoms-destroy-real-user-data/ According to that not only does the AI screw up royally but it lies about what it's doing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web