Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #75764 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-10-07 16:07 +0300 |
| Last post | 2025-10-12 12:10 +0100 |
| Articles | 19 on this page of 339 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2025-10-07 16:07 +0300
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-07 14:39 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-07 22:52 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-08 01:35 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-08 10:53 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-08 21:06 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-09 21:25 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-09 21:45 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-09 21:41 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-10 09:21 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-10 13:21 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-10 21:15 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-10 21:53 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 02:46 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 02:38 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-09 02:09 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-10-09 18:52 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-09 21:33 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-11 15:10 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-11 17:48 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-11 19:01 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-11 19:08 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-11 19:32 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 22:29 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-12 11:07 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-13 09:06 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-10-18 16:24 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-18 21:02 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-19 01:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-19 13:39 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-20 02:10 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-20 05:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-20 02:33 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-20 02:31 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-20 19:21 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-19 12:17 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-19 02:22 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-19 04:28 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-19 11:19 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-20 09:20 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-25 12:49 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-25 16:45 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-25 22:16 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 01:51 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-26 04:40 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 08:42 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 09:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 10:06 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 19:25 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-26 19:48 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 21:29 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-27 00:44 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-26 00:57 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 07:14 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 11:05 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 02:00 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-26 11:02 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-25 22:03 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-25 21:19 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 01:50 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-26 04:40 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-26 14:52 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 19:06 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-26 20:29 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-26 21:22 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-26 22:17 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-27 10:09 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-27 21:23 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-28 00:47 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-28 00:27 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-28 07:45 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-28 23:05 +0000
Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-28 13:46 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-28 18:47 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-28 20:21 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-28 23:46 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-29 01:41 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-29 11:07 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-29 18:47 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-29 22:15 +0000
Re: Accents. Allodoxaphobia <trepidation@example.net> - 2025-10-30 17:29 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-30 17:31 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-30 19:31 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-30 20:14 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-30 20:11 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-30 20:10 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-30 21:35 +0100
Re: Accents. candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-10-30 21:40 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-30 15:18 -0700
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:17 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-30 21:46 -0700
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:25 +0000
LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:38 +0100
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-01 20:50 -0400
Re: LED lights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 11:14 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 15:41 +0100
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:57 +0000
Re: LED lights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-03 00:12 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 02:38 +0100
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 00:19 -0500
Re: LED lights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-03 07:03 +0000
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 14:20 -0500
Re: LED lights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 20:02 +0000
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-04 04:42 +0000
Re: LED lights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 02:31 -0500
Re: LED lights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 10:16 +0000
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 01:51 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 15:48 +0100
Re: LED lights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:42 +0000
Re: LED lights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 21:33 +0100
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-30 22:21 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 04:59 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-31 14:41 +0100
Re: Accents. John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 08:56 -0700
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:53 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-31 19:02 -0700
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 02:52 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-01 05:32 +0000
Re: Accents. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-19 19:19 +0000
TV tropes (was: Re: Accents.) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-20 11:01 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-20 13:10 +0100
Re: TV tropes Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-20 17:57 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-20 21:28 +0100
Re: TV tropes Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 02:10 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 13:14 +0100
Re: TV tropes Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 02:09 +0000
Re: TV tropes rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-21 07:41 +0000
Re: TV tropes Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-11-21 09:00 +0000
Re: TV tropes The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 09:13 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 13:17 +0100
Re: TV tropes rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-21 19:28 +0000
Re: TV tropes "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 20:43 +0100
Re: TV tropes The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 23:00 +0000
Re: TV tropes rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-22 04:06 +0000
Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:24 +0100
Re: Not Blade Runner Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 19:57 +0000
Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:22 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 01:22 +0000
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 15:50 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:20 +0000
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-02 21:34 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 02:47 +0000
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 13:05 +0100
Re: Blade runner rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 20:04 +0000
Re: Blade runner c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 15:40 -0500
Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 22:30 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-03 17:48 -0500
Re: Flashlights Ian <gay@sfuu.ca> - 2025-11-03 20:26 -0800
Re: Flashlights Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-11-04 04:55 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 02:35 -0500
Re: Flashlights Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-11-05 03:44 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 01:05 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-05 13:20 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:08 -0500
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-05 16:33 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-05 20:37 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:26 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-06 11:56 +0100
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-06 18:42 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 17:30 -0500
Re: Flashlights candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-11-07 16:20 +0000
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-07 18:11 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-07 18:50 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-07 22:42 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-07 21:08 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-08 13:31 +0100
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-08 16:05 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-08 20:06 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-09 00:04 -0500
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-09 20:08 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-10 00:41 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-10 12:07 +0000
Re: Flashlights John-Paul Stewart <jpstewart@personalprojects.net> - 2025-11-09 19:05 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-10 00:58 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:12 -0500
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-06 05:09 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 01:31 -0500
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-06 18:39 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-04 07:51 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 02:19 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-04 09:55 +0000
Re: Flashlights Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 18:16 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-21 20:39 +0100
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-21 22:54 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-21 23:52 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-21 23:32 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-22 06:49 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-22 03:14 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-22 11:32 +0000
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-04 11:28 +0100
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-04 11:15 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 13:27 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-04 19:37 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 21:12 -0500
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 13:22 -0500
Re: Flashlights Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-04 20:52 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-04 21:23 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-05 13:23 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:10 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-06 12:05 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 17:21 -0500
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-05 07:21 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 03:54 -0500
Re: Flashlights Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-21 18:20 +0000
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-04 09:52 +0000
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-05 07:21 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 03:17 -0500
Re: Flashlights The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-05 11:54 +0000
Re: Flashlights rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-05 16:41 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:16 -0500
Re: Flashlights Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-05 22:22 +0000
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 22:41 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-06 12:10 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-06 17:24 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-07 02:44 +0100
Re: Flashlights c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-05 21:53 -0500
Re: Flashlights "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-04 11:12 +0100
Re: Blade runner "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 23:14 +0100
Re: Accents. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-11-19 19:01 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:19 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-01 05:33 +0000
Blade runner. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:29 +0100
Re: Blade runner. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 19:56 +0000
Re: Blade runner. c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-01 21:38 -0400
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:31 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:48 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-31 22:45 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:22 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-30 21:33 +0100
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-30 22:20 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-30 23:36 +0100
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 04:51 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-31 14:48 +0100
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 15:03 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 20:15 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-01 11:15 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:39 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-31 23:26 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:44 +0100
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:05 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:54 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 11:15 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 19:02 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:10 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:49 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 11:13 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 18:48 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 10:12 +0000
Re: Accents. Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-03 20:04 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-04 04:28 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 13:11 +0100
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 12:26 +0000
Re: Accents. John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 09:17 -0800
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 14:42 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 20:01 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-01 11:15 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:33 +0000
Re: Accents. Don_from_AZ <djatechNOSPAM@comcast.net.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:43 -0700
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-11-02 19:30 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 02:21 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:47 +0000
Re: Accents. Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2025-10-30 22:48 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:58 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 08:25 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:09 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 03:29 +0000
Re: Accents. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-30 21:50 -0700
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 08:28 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:29 +0000
Re: Accents. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-31 08:27 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-31 19:41 +0000
Re: Accents. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-31 22:45 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-01 05:36 +0000
Re: Accents. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-01 20:11 +0100
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-02 00:59 +0000
Re: Accents. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-28 18:54 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-28 09:34 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-26 13:53 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-10-26 15:40 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-26 19:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-11-02 14:03 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-26 22:20 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-27 08:29 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-11-02 14:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-02 14:15 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-03 02:37 +0100
OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-02 18:49 -0800
Re: OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-03 06:54 +0000
Re: OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-11-03 08:19 -0800
Re: OT -xRe: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 10:18 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-27 09:34 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-27 21:26 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-19 03:36 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-11 19:31 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-12 01:33 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-11 22:52 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-11 22:48 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-12 02:43 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-12 12:12 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-11 22:02 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-12 06:39 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-12 02:59 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-12 19:20 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-10-13 16:50 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-13 18:38 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 01:38 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 01:45 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-12 12:17 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-13 03:28 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-13 03:41 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-13 10:20 +0100
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-13 11:55 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-13 21:56 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-14 00:35 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 01:21 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-14 06:56 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-14 17:20 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-14 20:01 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-10-15 05:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-15 03:33 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-15 21:18 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-16 02:24 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-15 06:31 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-15 09:00 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-15 21:24 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-15 15:11 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-16 02:27 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-10-16 07:22 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-17 22:24 -0400
Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-18 20:08 +0200
Re: Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-19 04:15 -0400
Re: Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-19 13:46 +0200
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-16 04:36 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-16 10:29 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-10-16 01:49 -0400
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-16 15:43 -0700
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-10-14 21:30 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-14 22:11 +0000
Re: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-12 12:10 +0100
Page 17 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 15 16 [17]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-15 21:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mlahcsFb1aaU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #76179 |
On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 03:33:43 -0400, c186282 wrote: > On 10/15/25 01:36, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> On 2025-10-15, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: >> >>> On 10/14/25 02:56, rbowman wrote: >>> >>>> The path from DDE to OLE to COM is another one of those evolutions >>>> that could have used some natural selection. >>> >>> COMs are a bit weird for my tastes. Lots of languages have their >>> own takes on them however. >>> >>> Hmm ... how to best code something like that in K&R 'C' ? >> >> I looked into it briefly. It became eye-glazingly complex very >> quickly. I punted and re-designed everything using sockets. Much >> simpler - and more portable. > > Much agreed. COMs were kind of a "first try", but better approaches > soon arrived. CORBA was no ball of joy either. However it sort of faded away while COM lived on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-16 02:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <sE2dnQbUGeAnEm31nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #76206 |
On 10/15/25 17:18, rbowman wrote: > On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 03:33:43 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> On 10/15/25 01:36, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>> On 2025-10-15, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 10/14/25 02:56, rbowman wrote: >>>> >>>>> The path from DDE to OLE to COM is another one of those evolutions >>>>> that could have used some natural selection. >>>> >>>> COMs are a bit weird for my tastes. Lots of languages have their >>>> own takes on them however. >>>> >>>> Hmm ... how to best code something like that in K&R 'C' ? >>> >>> I looked into it briefly. It became eye-glazingly complex very >>> quickly. I punted and re-designed everything using sockets. Much >>> simpler - and more portable. >> >> Much agreed. COMs were kind of a "first try", but better approaches >> soon arrived. > > CORBA was no ball of joy either. However it sort of faded away while COM > lived on. SO many methods/'solutions' in the bad old days. Eventually kinda sorted itself out however.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-15 06:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ml8tedF2l5bU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #76151 |
On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 20:01:12 -0400, c186282 wrote: > COMs are a bit weird for my tastes. Lots of languages have their own > takes on them however. > > Hmm ... how to best code something like that in K&R 'C' ? COM is sort of Microsoft's take on Sun's ONC RPC, which uses XDR for serialization. That's all C. You start with a .x definition file which defines the data to be passed with C structs. rpcgen used that to create a header and .c file to link into the program. It's all C data types. Since COM grew from BASIC you wind up with tagged variants and other good stuff. XDR has its drawbacks too. For one it uses network byte order. That gets a little intense with a LAN with only little-endian machines since you have a lot of htonl() and ntohl() calles. Secondly it's a C struct. There may only be data in one field but the entire struct is sent, say 324 bytes of empty space and 9 bytes of data. There have been attempts to improve RPC with XML-RPC, JSON-RPC, and gRPC. With JSON and XML you don't have to send empty fields but you have the overhead of the tags. gRPC is Google's invention. It uses protocol buffers and a interface descriptor language in a .proto file and a tool to create actual code. It smells like XDR to me except you can designate fields as optional.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-15 09:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20251015090025.0000151f@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #76151 |
On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 20:01:12 -0400 c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > Did lots of BASIC programs, but was kind of out of that before it > ever became "visual". Turbo Pascal ... and BASIC went into the bottom > drawer. > > However IF you keep it strict and straight you can do very complex > stuff with BASIC and it works as well as lots of other languages. VB's biggest strength was that it combined a well-known, accessible language with an extremely straightforward UI builder, and did it some- thing close to "the right way round," presenting methods as browseable and editable components of the UI objects they applied to rather than making you dig through an object definition in a source file in search of the appropriate callback function.* Especially back in the Bad Old Days of Win16 programming, it was far and away the simplest way to go from zero to functioning GUI application... * (Of course it was defined the usual way in the raw source text, but the IDE handled things so that you didn't need to bother thinking about it...mostly.) ...but, unfortunately, the language spec was a little bit of a mess from the get-go, and only got worse the more stuff they bolted onto it, plus the runtime was more than a bit buggy :/ Shame, as I still haven't seen anything in the modern day that offers a comparably simple way to build GUI programs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-15 21:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mlaho4Fb1aaU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #76200 |
On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 09:00:25 -0700, John Ames wrote: > VB's biggest strength was that it combined a well-known, accessible > language with an extremely straightforward UI builder, and did it some- > thing close to "the right way round," presenting methods as browseable > and editable components of the UI objects they applied to rather than > making you dig through an object definition in a source file in search > of the appropriate callback function.* Especially back in the Bad Old > Days of Win16 programming, it was far and away the simplest way to go > from zero to functioning GUI application.. WinForms grew out of VB and has survived despite Microsoft's repeated attempts to kill it. QtDesigner isn't too bad for a drag and drop visual editor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-15 15:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20251015151104.0000397c@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #76207 |
On 15 Oct 2025 21:24:20 GMT rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > QtDesigner isn't too bad for a drag and drop visual editor. Oh, there are reasonable *layout* tools for the major frameworks - but what set VB apart back in the day was that it abandoned the whole idea of a form's layout and code being separate entities, at least in the way it normally presents that to the programmer. Open up a *.frm file in a text editor and you'll see a bunch of object declarations for the form and its elements, followed by their methods - but open it in the IDE and it's just a collection of objects, with all the glue handled by VB itself; the programmer doesn't have to slog through all the definition boilerplate to get to an object's on-click method when they can just double-click on the object itself in the form designer, nor do they have to trawl through the editor looking for the line with one particular property of an object when they can select the object itself and edit it in the properties list. Of course, that has its downsides (it never did properly support non- GUI applications,) but compared to the "edit layout in the form designer -> specify behavior in separate source file(s) -> compile, link, test -> repeat" process of most GUI development environments, it's incredibly straightforward. Just, y'know, a shame about its very real *other* issues... :/ (I'd forgotten about GAMBAS when I was writing the preceding message - on cursory inspection, that appears to be the *only* modern development environment I've found that actually took that lesson from VB's success and is attempting to imitate it, aside from a couple projects that aim to be direct clones. The form designer could use some polish and I have no idea how easy it is or isn't to redistribute software built with it, but it's nice to see someone recognizing a good idea when they see it, at least.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-16 02:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <sE2dnQHUGeDKDW31nZ2dnZfqnPoAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #76207 |
On 10/15/25 17:24, rbowman wrote: > On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 09:00:25 -0700, John Ames wrote: > >> VB's biggest strength was that it combined a well-known, accessible >> language with an extremely straightforward UI builder, and did it some- >> thing close to "the right way round," presenting methods as browseable >> and editable components of the UI objects they applied to rather than >> making you dig through an object definition in a source file in search >> of the appropriate callback function.* Especially back in the Bad Old >> Days of Win16 programming, it was far and away the simplest way to go >> from zero to functioning GUI application.. > > WinForms grew out of VB and has survived despite Microsoft's repeated > attempts to kill it. > > QtDesigner isn't too bad for a drag and drop visual editor. I'll assert that Lazarus/FP is by far the best drag-n-drop solution. Super-quick to design GUIs and then add your own IQ to them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-16 07:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mlbkqgFgmi0U7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #76229 |
On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 02:27:34 -0400, c186282 wrote: > I'll assert that Lazarus/FP is by far the best drag-n-drop solution. > Super-quick to design GUIs and then add your own IQ to them. I'll assert I played with Pascal when TurboPascal came out for CP/M. Not bad for $49.99 but that was a few days ago.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-17 22:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <2smdnYErA9D6Z2_1nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #76244 |
On 10/16/25 03:22, rbowman wrote: > On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 02:27:34 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> I'll assert that Lazarus/FP is by far the best drag-n-drop solution. >> Super-quick to design GUIs and then add your own IQ to them. > > I'll assert I played with Pascal when TurboPascal came out for CP/M. Not > bad for $49.99 but that was a few days ago. Still use Pascal for all kinds of things. Something about the look & feel appeals to me. Started with the ancient M$/IBM multipass compiler (still have one in a VM somewhere). However for right-now basic GUIs (albeit with a 90s look) Lazarus is your best bet once you learn how to place and access your own functions in the auto-generated code. Need something by 5pm then you go Lazarus.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-18 20:08 +0200 |
| Subject | Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] |
| Message-ID | <rl1dslx3pk.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #76291 |
On 2025-10-18 04:24, c186282 wrote: > On 10/16/25 03:22, rbowman wrote: >> On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 02:27:34 -0400, c186282 wrote: >> >>> I'll assert that Lazarus/FP is by far the best drag-n-drop solution. >>> Super-quick to design GUIs and then add your own IQ to them. >> >> I'll assert I played with Pascal when TurboPascal came out for CP/M. Not >> bad for $49.99 but that was a few days ago. > > Still use Pascal for all kinds of things. Something > about the look & feel appeals to me. Started with > the ancient M$/IBM multipass compiler (still have > one in a VM somewhere). > > However for right-now basic GUIs (albeit with a > 90s look) Lazarus is your best bet once you learn > how to place and access your own functions in > the auto-generated code. Need something by 5pm > then you go Lazarus. > I also like Lazarus. Although the amount of libraries to do the same thing is confusing, re which is the proper one. I forget how many types of strings: the classic 255 string, the 0 terminated string, Windows style, and then utf strings. Maybe more I forget. And there is a Linux version. Back to topic ;-) -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-19 04:15 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] |
| Message-ID | <kY-cnTr8wb6xA2n1nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #76320 |
On 10/18/25 14:08, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-10-18 04:24, c186282 wrote: >> On 10/16/25 03:22, rbowman wrote: >>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 02:27:34 -0400, c186282 wrote: >>> >>>> I'll assert that Lazarus/FP is by far the best drag-n-drop >>>> solution. >>>> Super-quick to design GUIs and then add your own IQ to them. >>> >>> I'll assert I played with Pascal when TurboPascal came out for CP/M. Not >>> bad for $49.99 but that was a few days ago. >> >> Still use Pascal for all kinds of things. Something >> about the look & feel appeals to me. Started with >> the ancient M$/IBM multipass compiler (still have >> one in a VM somewhere). >> >> However for right-now basic GUIs (albeit with a >> 90s look) Lazarus is your best bet once you learn >> how to place and access your own functions in >> the auto-generated code. Need something by 5pm >> then you go Lazarus. >> > > I also like Lazarus. > > Although the amount of libraries to do the same thing is confusing, re > which is the proper one. I forget how many types of strings: the classic > 255 string, the 0 terminated string, Windows style, and then utf > strings. Maybe more I forget. > > > And there is a Linux version. Back to topic ;-) The main gotcha between Linux and Win tends to be the FONTS :-) I wrote a few programs that could run Lin or Win using Lazarus. Delphi is, alas, only Win (and expensive as all hell these days). Pascal/object-Pascal is almost infinitely capable, pretty well documented and compiler fast. My last five years before retirement I tended to write apps first in Python, then, a week or two later, in FPC or Lazarus tighter-better. Pascal is a Very Good Language for applications. It tends to get forgotten amongst the latest/ greatest "new solutions" - but DON'T forget it. It's still Right There, Up To The Job, and more readable than 'C' or 'Rust'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-19 13:46 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Lazarus [Was: Fancy-smanchy installers that don't work?] |
| Message-ID | <fmveslxer6.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #76351 |
On 2025-10-19 10:15, c186282 wrote: > On 10/18/25 14:08, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2025-10-18 04:24, c186282 wrote: >>> On 10/16/25 03:22, rbowman wrote: >>>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 02:27:34 -0400, c186282 wrote: ... >> I also like Lazarus. >> >> Although the amount of libraries to do the same thing is confusing, re >> which is the proper one. I forget how many types of strings: the >> classic 255 string, the 0 terminated string, Windows style, and then >> utf strings. Maybe more I forget. >> >> >> And there is a Linux version. Back to topic ;-) > > The main gotcha between Linux and Win tends to > be the FONTS :-) Oh. I have not played with them. > I wrote a few programs that could run Lin or Win > using Lazarus. Delphi is, alas, only Win (and > expensive as all hell these days). over $1500, says google. WOW. > Pascal/object-Pascal is almost infinitely > capable, pretty well documented and compiler > fast. > > My last five years before retirement I tended > to write apps first in Python, then, a week or > two later, in FPC or Lazarus tighter-better. > > Pascal is a Very Good Language for applications. > It tends to get forgotten amongst the latest/ > greatest "new solutions" - but DON'T forget it. > It's still Right There, Up To The Job, and > more readable than 'C' or 'Rust'. I thought rust, being newer, would be nicer. Easier to write. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-16 04:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10cpsno$5cmo$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #76200 |
On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 09:00:25 -0700, John Ames wrote: > VB's biggest strength was that it combined a well-known, accessible > language with an extremely straightforward UI builder, and did it some- > thing close to "the right way round," presenting methods as browseable > and editable components of the UI objects they applied to rather than > making you dig through an object definition in a source file in search > of the appropriate callback function. HyperCard was doing that about four years earlier. And don’t forget great-granddaddy Smalltalk, which goes right back to the 1970s, and was more advanced than either of them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-16 10:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20251016102945.00002753@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #76217 |
On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 04:36:09 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > HyperCard was doing that about four years earlier. > > And don’t forget great-granddaddy Smalltalk, which goes right back to > the 1970s, and was more advanced than either of them. Very true, although HyperCard stopped just shy of allowing full first- class application development IIRC (not by enough to keep people from shipping stuff built with it, though.) But it definitely filled the same niche in the Mac world, allowing novice developers with an idea to go from zero to working model in a quick, straightforward manner. Smalltalk was so far ahead of its time it wasn't even funny; sadly, the difficulty of separating *applications* out from the system as a whole made it difficult if not impossible to *ship* software 'til years down the line, by which point its early lead had been mostly lost. A damn shame - even now its fundamental design is beautiful.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-16 01:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <sE2dnQXUGeDuGm31nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #76200 |
On 10/15/25 12:00, John Ames wrote: > On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 20:01:12 -0400 > c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > >> Did lots of BASIC programs, but was kind of out of that before it >> ever became "visual". Turbo Pascal ... and BASIC went into the bottom >> drawer. >> >> However IF you keep it strict and straight you can do very complex >> stuff with BASIC and it works as well as lots of other languages. > > VB's biggest strength was that it combined a well-known, accessible > language with an extremely straightforward UI builder, and did it some- > thing close to "the right way round," presenting methods as browseable > and editable components of the UI objects they applied to rather than > making you dig through an object definition in a source file in search > of the appropriate callback function.* Especially back in the Bad Old > Days of Win16 programming, it was far and away the simplest way to go > from zero to functioning GUI application... Just never used VB ... more straight MS/IBM BASIC and the BASCOM compiler (once the bosses were convinced to pay for it). Recently found a printout of a 1000 line BASIC program meant to collect data from a digitizer tablet, scale and rotate and such, and derive various stats from the polygons. Mostly used for aerial photos. Re-did in in Turbo Pascal not long after ... better and more capable ... but the BASIC version was still totally functional. > * (Of course it was defined the usual way in the raw source text, but > the IDE handled things so that you didn't need to bother thinking > about it...mostly.) > > ...but, unfortunately, the language spec was a little bit of a mess > from the get-go, and only got worse the more stuff they bolted onto it, > plus the runtime was more than a bit buggy :/ Shame, as I still haven't > seen anything in the modern day that offers a comparably simple way to > build GUI programs. Well, today, try Lazarus/FP. If I need something with a versatile GUI like right now - that's the way to go. Yea, pretty "object", but it works and you can hook in custom functions really easy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-16 15:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20251016154310.00000753@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #76224 |
On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 01:49:38 -0400 c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > Well, today, try Lazarus/FP. If I need something with a versatile GUI > like right now - that's the way to go. Yea, pretty "object", but it > works and you can hook in custom functions really easy. That's definitely one of the cleaner designs out there, and shows an admirable eye towards portability. Now if only it wasn't Pascal :/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-14 21:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn10etfl5.1jd92.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid> |
| In reply to | #76092 |
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote at 00:35 this Tuesday (GMT): > On Mon, 13 Oct 2025 21:56:33 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Mon, 13 Oct 2025 10:20:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> Ive seen accounting programs written in BASIC too. >> >> PHP is like the new BASIC -- people use it because they don’t know any >> better. > > The acronyms themselves tell the story. 'Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic > Instruction Code' and 'Personal Home Page'. Technically, the acronym for PHP now stands for "PHP hates programmers". -- user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-14 22:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10cmhqm$38m90$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #76133 |
On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 21:30:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote: > Technically, the acronym for PHP now stands for "PHP hates programmers". I can relate to that. ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-10-12 12:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <10cg2ar$1dscj$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #75946 |
On 11/10/2025 16:10, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote: > Le 10-10-2025, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> a écrit : >> >> Yea, great, half a zillion lines of HTML, PHP and >> fuckin' JAVASCRIPT ........ > > You remind me of a good example of a difficult thing to translate. In > French, I'm calling javascript: cacascript. Because in French caca means > shit. So any French speaker reading/hearing cacascript can understand > it's shit designing javascript. I have no idea how it could be > translated in English because shitscript could be understood as any > scripting language. > JavaShit™, Stéphane, is what I call it. -- There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent renewable energy.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 17 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 15 16 [17]
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web