Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.unix.programmer > #16910
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.unix.programmer |
| Subject | Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily |
| Date | 2025-01-08 13:00 +0000 |
| Organization | PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC |
| Message-ID | <vllssh$kjk$1@reader2.panix.com> (permalink) |
| References | <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <vljmc6$29tkd$1@dont-email.me> <vljnns$o9b$1@reader2.panix.com> <vllcgq$2mphu$1@dont-email.me> |
In article <vllcgq$2mphu$1@dont-email.me>, <Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org> wrote: >On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:19:56 -0000 (UTC) >cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wibbled: >>In article <vljmc6$29tkd$1@dont-email.me>, <Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org> wrote: >>>On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:02:51 -0000 (UTC) >>>>In the kernel, it sure is. Unix programmers have been writing >>>>asynchronous programs (using e.g. `fork`) since 1970. >>> >>>Thats not what we're discussion here and you know it. >> >>Actually, it is. > >Ah ok, goalposts moved. Why not some straw men while you're at it? > >>>>https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/bash.git/tree/sig.c?h=devel#n691 >>> >>>Basically sets flags. >> >>Did you actually read and understand any of that code? > >Did you? Yes. I see that the call chains invoked from that handler wind up calling things like `malloc`. I guess you couldn't read the code well enough to see that for yourself. >>>Not a clever way to do it because an xterm and other terminal progs can >>>indirectly cause a whole load of SIGWINCH to be created if someone is >>resizing >>>it and only the final one really needs the ioctl call done. Better to set a >>>flag then manually do a call when appropriate. >> >>Ok. You may even be right! But tell me: where would you check >>those flags? > >Presuably a genius like you would know most terminal programs have a seperate >thread or a multiplex timeout in order to flash the cursor. You work out >the rest. Right, handwave away those very real concerns. We're talking about Unix here, not code running on some microcontroller; code might be sitting in some tight loop doing computation for arbitrarily long. >>Regardless, here you are, again, moving the goalposts in the >>face of evidence that contradicted your earlier position. > >Irony, love it. > >>>There are always exceptions to every rule. You seem to be so desperate to >>>win this argument I can only assume your fragile ego has been burst by >>>someone having the temerity to disagree with you. Tough, suck it up. >> >>Ah, here we go. The classic attempt at an insult. > >If the shoe fits. > >>Look, you made categorical, definitive statements. Those >>statements were factually incorrect. I pointed that out. You > >No, I stated the majority approach to using signals. You disagree which is >fine, but don't pretent your view is THE view, it isn't. Bluntly, I don't see any evidence that you are qualified enough to make any statement regarding the "majority approach" to, well, just about anything related to the domain, let alone the industry writ large. On the other hand, despite you assuring us that we should just take your word for it that you're some kind of expert, I see plenty of evidence in the form of factually incorrect statements to conclude that you don't know what you're about generally. In other words, no, I'm not just taking your word for it, but instead trusting the evidence before me. >>Perhaps I am not the one with the fragile ego that needs to suck >>it up when disagreed with. > >Ego size on usenet is almost always correlated with the verbiage of a reply. I'm not the one who started with dishing out insults at the first person who disagreed with me. Feel free to have the last word, but absent some actually technical point, I'm done with you. - Dan C.
Back to comp.unix.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Sebastian <sebastian@here.com.invalid> - 2024-11-11 07:31 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-11 10:06 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> - 2024-11-11 08:28 -0300
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-11-11 16:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-11 20:55 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 10:14 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-12 09:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 10:31 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-12 09:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 15:05 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-12 15:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> - 2024-11-12 13:47 -0300
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-11 21:24 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-12 10:23 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Wolfgang Agnes <wagnes@jemoni.to> - 2024-11-12 13:50 -0300
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-12 20:29 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) - 2024-11-19 18:43 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-20 04:34 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 08:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-20 11:51 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 11:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-20 16:38 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 16:38 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-20 17:54 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-20 10:03 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 08:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-21 07:56 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-21 14:13 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 16:06 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 08:13 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-11-21 07:58 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-20 17:50 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-21 14:40 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 15:07 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 13:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 15:41 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 15:52 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 17:35 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 17:17 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 17:48 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 18:12 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 18:48 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 19:24 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:46 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 17:26 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 23:06 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 22:49 -0500
[OT] Thunderbird Reply-button (was Re: <subject that has now for long nothing to do with the OP>) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-23 05:26 +0100
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button (was Re: <subject that has now for long nothing to do with the OP>) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-23 00:04 -0500
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-23 06:09 +0100
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-23 09:24 -0500
Re: [OT] Thunderbird Reply-button Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-23 20:14 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-23 13:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-11-22 18:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-11-22 18:22 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 18:30 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 18:59 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:15 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 19:26 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 19:51 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages mas@a4.home - 2024-11-21 15:46 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-11-21 16:08 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 17:31 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2024-11-21 17:53 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 17:19 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 14:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 15:27 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 21:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 22:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 23:10 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 17:16 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-22 22:34 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-22 23:44 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-23 14:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-11-23 10:22 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2024-11-23 16:38 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 13:59 +0000
Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-27 14:35 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-27 14:56 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-27 16:14 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-27 15:07 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-27 23:09 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 23:22 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 00:44 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 23:56 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 00:11 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-27 21:22 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 19:48 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 20:30 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 21:07 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-29 09:50 +0000
Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-29 10:33 +0000
Re: Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-29 10:38 +0000
Re: Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:45 +0100
Re: Why TF? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-29 23:01 +0000
Re: Why TF? (Was: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-30 09:35 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-29 13:07 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-29 14:09 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-12-29 16:41 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> - 2024-12-29 17:56 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-29 18:59 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-29 22:19 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-30 19:31 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2024-12-30 18:10 -0300
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-30 23:11 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-02 03:40 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-02 16:29 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-02 19:36 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-03 02:55 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-03 18:15 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-01-04 10:12 +0000
OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-01-04 08:31 -0300
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-01-04 11:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-04 22:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-01-04 19:17 -0300
Re: OT: Windows Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 00:47 +0000
Re: OT: Windows Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> - 2025-01-09 22:27 -0300
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-01-05 16:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-05 17:14 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-05 21:09 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 08:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 14:08 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 14:21 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 15:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 15:55 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 16:46 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-01-06 12:42 -0500
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 18:16 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2025-01-06 18:24 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 18:52 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 08:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 13:18 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 14:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 14:14 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 15:35 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:53 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 16:10 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 17:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:23 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:23 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 12:19 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 13:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2025-01-07 17:16 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2025-01-06 17:53 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:28 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 20:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2025-01-06 20:38 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-07 00:49 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-07 02:14 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-07 08:59 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-07 14:59 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-08 02:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-08 03:23 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-08 07:52 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 12:21 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-08 14:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 14:41 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 15:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 13:59 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-07 15:54 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:56 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-08 02:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 16:17 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2025-01-07 16:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 08:37 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 15:22 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-06 16:00 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-06 16:39 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 08:34 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 14:13 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 15:11 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 16:02 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-07 16:56 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:19 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:20 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 13:00 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 13:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-08 16:05 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-01-08 09:55 -0800
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-08 18:38 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-15 16:46 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-15 20:20 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-16 09:40 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> - 2025-01-16 15:01 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-08 20:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-15 16:47 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-15 20:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-15 22:55 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-16 09:43 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-16 14:51 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-16 15:47 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-01-16 17:34 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-16 15:56 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-16 16:53 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-07 15:24 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-01-07 17:31 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-07 19:09 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-01-08 08:26 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-09 04:39 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:27 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 20:36 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 20:26 +0000
Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-01-06 15:02 +0000
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 19:27 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 23:03 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 02:07 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 19:40 +0100
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 23:00 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-28 23:32 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-12-28 19:02 -0600
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-28 21:12 -0500
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-12-29 09:54 +0000
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-29 07:39 -0500
A herd of elephants (Was: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2024-12-29 14:32 +0000
Re: A herd of elephants (Was: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 22:03 +0100
Re: A herd of elephants (Was: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able) Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-29 19:49 -0500
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:55 +0100
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 22:07 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2024-12-28 14:26 -0500
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:10 +0100
Re: Open Source does not mean easily re-compile-able Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-27 13:11 -0500
Re: Open Source does mean easily re-compile-able Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-27 23:11 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-12-27 14:56 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2024-12-27 23:22 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-12-27 07:43 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-12-27 17:39 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-27 13:15 -0500
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-12-27 19:14 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-12-28 00:38 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 12:14 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-22 11:56 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 20:33 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-11-21 19:12 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-22 10:09 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-11-22 18:18 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-11-23 11:40 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 12:17 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2024-11-22 18:19 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 20:20 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Ed Morton <mortonspam@gmail.com> - 2024-11-20 05:46 -0600
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-20 12:27 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-20 21:43 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-11-21 08:15 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-21 22:05 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-22 12:47 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-11-22 20:41 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-11-20 16:53 +0100
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Ed Morton <mortonspam@gmail.com> - 2024-11-23 18:17 -0600
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-20 12:21 +0000
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) - 2024-11-21 05:38 -0800
Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2024-11-21 17:01 +0000
csiph-web