Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #13769 > unrolled thread
| Started by | not.socialnetwork@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-02-28 12:13 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-04-14 06:46 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 219 — 49 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Keeping 'order' without RTC. not.socialnetwork@gmail.com - 2015-02-28 12:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2015-02-28 06:52 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-02-28 13:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2015-02-28 07:59 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-28 18:28 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-02-28 19:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-28 19:22 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-02-28 15:48 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-02-28 21:14 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-02-28 22:40 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-02-28 18:01 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-01 01:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-01 07:21 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. cl@isbd.net - 2015-03-01 09:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-01 10:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 11:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-01 17:18 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 18:33 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-02 09:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-02 09:19 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-03-02 17:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-02 09:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-02 16:27 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jim Diamond <Jim.Diamond@deletethis.AcadiaU.ca> - 2015-03-05 08:36 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. cl@isbd.net - 2015-03-01 11:25 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-01 11:40 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-01 16:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-03-01 17:11 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 18:47 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-01 19:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2015-03-03 22:27 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-04 00:50 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 01:51 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2015-03-04 17:05 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 17:59 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-05 11:46 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-06 00:00 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-06 06:55 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2015-03-04 07:31 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-04 10:00 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2015-03-04 11:01 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-04 22:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2015-03-04 22:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-05 01:07 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-05 10:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-05 10:51 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-05 11:53 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-05 15:35 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-05 17:24 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-05 11:49 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-05 23:56 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 16:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-04 22:34 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-04 08:23 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-03-04 11:19 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-03-04 17:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 16:10 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2015-03-04 10:43 +0200
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-04 09:28 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 16:11 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-04 08:22 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-28 13:34 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-02-28 09:14 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2015-02-28 08:52 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-28 15:22 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-02-28 15:46 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-28 21:10 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-02-28 19:48 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-03-01 09:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-03-01 07:52 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-01 16:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Mike Fleming <{mike}@tauzero.co.uk> - 2015-03-01 20:28 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. not.socialnetwork@gmail.com - 2015-03-01 11:00 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-01 11:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-03 07:37 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-03 17:21 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 11:43 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. RRansil <ransil@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 10:44 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-03-01 19:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 20:46 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. RRansil <ransil@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 13:12 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. RRansil <ransil@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 13:07 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-01 21:56 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. RRansil <ransil@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 14:49 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-28 18:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-02-28 19:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-03-01 14:22 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-01 21:54 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-02 16:12 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2015-03-02 19:57 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "David B" <askforemail@gmail.com> - 2015-03-03 10:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-03 19:38 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-04 10:43 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2015-03-04 11:23 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-04 11:30 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 16:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-04 16:31 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "David B" <askforemail@gmail.com> - 2015-03-04 16:38 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-03-04 17:39 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "David B" <askforemail@gmail.com> - 2015-03-04 16:53 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-04 17:03 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2015-03-04 08:52 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-03-05 20:23 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-04 17:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-03-05 20:16 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-03-05 22:38 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-06 17:46 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2015-03-06 18:45 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2015-03-06 14:56 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-06 06:30 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-03-06 08:24 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-06 17:46 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2015-03-06 10:02 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-06 09:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-07 00:34 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-06 06:21 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-06 11:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2015-03-06 14:56 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-07 12:14 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-08 02:38 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2015-03-07 21:15 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-03-07 21:44 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-08 16:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-08 09:42 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-03 23:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-05 08:52 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-05 09:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-03-05 09:47 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-06 01:31 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-11 04:53 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-11 05:24 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2015-03-11 07:58 -0700
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-03-11 19:01 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2015-03-11 13:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-12 17:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-12 13:50 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2015-04-13 13:14 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-13 15:10 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2015-04-14 00:30 +1000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-13 17:47 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2015-04-15 22:37 +0200
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-04-17 02:32 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-25 23:09 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2015-04-27 13:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-13 16:22 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-04-13 21:14 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-04-13 21:55 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-14 09:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-14 10:12 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-04-14 10:29 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-14 12:05 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2015-04-14 22:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-16 14:11 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-16 20:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-04-14 05:25 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-16 14:13 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2015-04-16 20:18 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-04 03:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-04 04:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Ryan <noreply@remailer.cpunk.us> - 2015-05-04 07:54 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-04 18:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2015-05-04 19:40 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Kees Theunissen <theuniss@rijnh.nl> - 2015-05-04 22:31 +0200
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-04 22:35 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-04 19:13 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-05 02:56 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Baeuerle <michael.baeuerle@stz-e.de> - 2015-05-05 08:04 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-05 09:22 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-05 08:26 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-05 18:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-05-11 23:16 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-11 17:52 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-12 07:09 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 06:47 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-12 08:27 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 15:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 17:08 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 17:21 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-12 12:41 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 19:03 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 18:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 19:59 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 20:05 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 22:58 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-13 01:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-13 08:14 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-13 09:24 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-12 11:50 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-12 18:52 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-12 17:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 18:36 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 20:00 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 20:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-12 06:14 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-12 06:09 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 06:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-12 17:45 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-12 21:06 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-04-14 23:18 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-04-14 20:58 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-04-15 06:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Andrew Smallshaw <andrews@sdf.lonestar.org> - 2015-04-16 02:58 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-16 05:21 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-04-16 11:42 +0200
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-04-16 12:10 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-16 13:42 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-04-16 15:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-04-16 23:09 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-16 14:17 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-04 09:56 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. ruben safir <ruben@mrbrklyn.com> - 2015-04-16 06:13 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-16 12:40 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-04-16 16:32 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-04-17 01:54 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-17 06:34 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dr J R Stockton <reply1500@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-04-18 23:13 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-04-13 20:39 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-04-14 06:46 +0000
Page 7 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 11 Next page →
| From | Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-08 02:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nKvGoE.L7u@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #13973 |
Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> writes:
>
> FWIW, this was the same single-density, single-sided diskette standard that
> Woz used with Group Coded Recording to get (eventually) 143K bytes on a
> side (by using a clever state machine to do clock recovery)--at the same
> bit density.
>
I don't think so. Mine was a standard FM (later superseded by the
double-density MFM 512 bytes per sector) format: 35 tracks,
10 sectors, 256 bytes per sector, hard-sectored. (North Star
MDS using fairly simple hardware)
Woz's system was completely different, being software-intensive
utilising the CPU instead of simple hardware,if I remember correctly.
Jack
--
"I'm a home-loving girl. And that's where I wish I was."
"At home ..."
"Loving."
- Laugh-In, 1968
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-07 21:15 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <1839896073447475809.420670mjmahon-aol.com@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #13978 |
Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> wrote: > Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> writes: >> >> FWIW, this was the same single-density, single-sided diskette standard that >> Woz used with Group Coded Recording to get (eventually) 143K bytes on a >> side (by using a clever state machine to do clock recovery)--at the same >> bit density. >> > I don't think so. Mine was a standard FM (later superseded by the > double-density MFM 512 bytes per sector) format: 35 tracks, > 10 sectors, 256 bytes per sector, hard-sectored. (North Star > MDS using fairly simple hardware) > > Woz's system was completely different, being software-intensive > utilising the CPU instead of simple hardware,if I remember correctly. > > Jack Check the facts. Woz used a standard SA 390 drive, minus the standard analog card, which did additional signal conditioning and controlled seeks. The bit rate (disk transitions, not unrestricted data, was 250kHz, that is, single density. He did GCR coding/decoding in software, as well as seeking/head positioning. Since (by the time of Apple DOS 3.3, each of 35 tracks held 16 256-byte sectors, for a single-sided capacity of 143,360 bytes. Because his software seek routines used acceleration/deceleration tables, the Disk ][ could seek faster than the Shugart constant-step-rate technique. And because his GCR put six data bits into each 8-bit group on the disk, while single-density FM disks wrote only 4 bits per 8 bits on the media, he obtained a 50% boost in data density at the same bit density. And yes, his Disk ][ Controller was a design of great cleverness and beauty, based on a self-synchronizing ROM state machine running at 2MHz, in which one of the ROM address pins was the head signal! If you've never seen the design, I recommend it to all digital designers. Beauty = Function / Complexity. ;-) http://www.scribd.com/doc/201423/Understanding-the-Apple-II-by-Jim-Sather-1983Quality-Software See chapter 9 for a good time. ;-) -michael - NadaNet 3.1 and AppleCrate II: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-07 21:44 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <87oao4b1ad.fsf@thumper.dhh.gt.org> |
| In reply to | #13979 |
Michael J. Mahon writes: > And yes, his Disk ][ Controller was a design of great cleverness and > beauty, based on a self-synchronizing ROM state machine running at 2MHz, in > which one of the ROM address pins was the head signal! > If you've never seen the design, I recommend it to all digital > designers. Beauty = Function / Complexity. ;-) I once had a contract to design a non-infringing implementation. Took me about half again as many parts. I don't know if it would have stood up in court because the client ran out of money. -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-08 16:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mdht8f01el3@news4.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #13979 |
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.misc.] On 2015-03-08, Michael J Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote: > Beauty = Function / Complexity. ;-) I like that. It says it all. It also explains why our current society, so obsessed with complexity, is becoming ugly. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rob <nomail@example.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-08 09:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmfo6bm.d9p.nomail@xs8.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #13978 |
Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> wrote: > Woz's system was completely different, being software-intensive > utilising the CPU instead of simple hardware,if I remember correctly. In fact in those days the CPU usually was fully committed when using the floppy anyway. When using an LSI controller that did all the work, there still had to be a CPU loop that polled some "data ready" bit, read a byte from the controller, stored it in memory, incremented a pointer, decremented a counter, and looped for all bytes in the sector. This required clever code and used almost all of a Z-80 at about 2 MHz. It was not possible to do this in an interrupt handler because the interrupt overhead would be too much for a single byte. DMA was the only other option but it was used only by a few systems. Of course the controller could do a seek while the CPU would do something else, but as the system was usually single-tasking in those days there was little advantage in doing that, or at least the OS did not make an attempt to take advantage of it. (i.e. it would send a seek command to the controller and then busy-wait until it completed)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-03 23:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <0dgcfapnrqi2fs7msjdhvf0kg92dec2jbb@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #13847 |
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 19:57:15 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote: >Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> wrote: >> On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:54:39 +0000 (UTC), William Unruh >> >> >PCs have had RTC for a long long time now. >> >> Only from August 1984 > >That was a long long time ago. Not to me it wasn't. :-( -- J B Good
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Unknown <dog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-05 08:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2015.03.05.09.02.56@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #13843 |
On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:12:47 +0000, Johny B Good wrote: > On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:54:39 +0000 (UTC), William Unruh > <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote: > >>On 2015-03-01, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, not.socialnetwork@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>>> When you transfer a dir of script/s & data-files to rPi from your >>>> PC, via USBstik, there's a problem, since the rPi has no >>>> RealTimeClock. --- snip-- >>>> So the important abilty to 'evaluate' files by their recentcy >>> is lost. > It's a universal truth that you'll want to get the >>> most-recent >>>> cup-of-coffee and not the 17th most-recent that you put-down. That's >>>> why stacks are used. >>>> >>>> What algorithm do you use to solve this problem? >>>> >>>> ==TIA. >>>> >>>> >>>> > IMO, the best "Algorithm" is to use an add on RTC module and add the > appropriate time setting requests to the startup script if reasonably > accurate time is required on a R-Pi that stands in total isolation from > the internet or any other time setting source such as MSF Rugby or a GPS > receiver. > "Algorithm" means: understand that 'order'/sequence> does not need RTC. > Relying on the latest date of a regularly updated file is a piss poor > workaround at best, only being slightly better than nothing at all. If > the system date/time has any importance at all (at least to the extent > of asking this question), you really aught to fit an RTC module if no > alternative source of accurate time setting is available. I want to speak to the injunyear, not the sales-clerk.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-05 09:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <md96n8$nbb$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #13918 |
On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 08:52:02 +0000, Unknown wrote: > On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:12:47 +0000, Johny B Good wrote: > >> On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:54:39 +0000 (UTC), William Unruh >> <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote: >> >>>On 2015-03-01, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >>>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, not.socialnetwork@gmail.com wrote: >>>> >>>>> When you transfer a dir of script/s & data-files to rPi from your >>>>> PC, via USBstik, there's a problem, since the rPi has no >>>>> RealTimeClock. > --- snip-- >>>>> So the important abilty to 'evaluate' files by their recentcy >>>> is lost. > It's a universal truth that you'll want to get the >>>> most-recent >>>>> cup-of-coffee and not the 17th most-recent that you put-down. That's >>>>> why stacks are used. >>>>> >>>>> What algorithm do you use to solve this problem? >>>>> >>>>> ==TIA. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> IMO, the best "Algorithm" is to use an add on RTC module and add the >> appropriate time setting requests to the startup script if reasonably >> accurate time is required on a R-Pi that stands in total isolation from >> the internet or any other time setting source such as MSF Rugby or a >> GPS receiver. >> > "Algorithm" means: understand that 'order'/sequence> does not need RTC. > >> Relying on the latest date of a regularly updated file is a piss poor >> workaround at best, only being slightly better than nothing at all. If >> the system date/time has any importance at all (at least to the extent >> of asking this question), you really aught to fit an RTC module if no >> alternative source of accurate time setting is available. > > I want to speak to the injunyear, not the sales-clerk. Engineers only speak to organ grinders not monkeys YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE WHAT YOU WANT WITH WHAT YOU HAVE. Either follow the advise you are given (spent tuppence ha'penny on an RTC module) or take your business elsewhere. -- Cheer Up! Things are getting worse at a slower rate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-05 09:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <md98ns$91t$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #13919 |
In comp.os.linux.misc alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote: > On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 08:52:02 +0000, Unknown wrote: > > On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:12:47 +0000, Johny B Good wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:54:39 +0000 (UTC), William Unruh > >> <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote: > >> > >>>On 2015-03-01, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: > >>>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, not.socialnetwork@gmail.com wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> When you transfer a dir of script/s & data-files to rPi from your > >>>>> PC, via USBstik, there's a problem, since the rPi has no > >>>>> RealTimeClock. > > --- snip-- > >>>>> So the important abilty to 'evaluate' files by their recentcy > >>>> is lost. > It's a universal truth that you'll want to get the > >>>> most-recent > >>>>> cup-of-coffee and not the 17th most-recent that you put-down. That's > >>>>> why stacks are used. > >>>>> > >>>>> What algorithm do you use to solve this problem? > >>>>> > >>>>> ==TIA. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> IMO, the best "Algorithm" is to use an add on RTC module and add the > >> appropriate time setting requests to the startup script if reasonably > >> accurate time is required on a R-Pi that stands in total isolation from > >> the internet or any other time setting source such as MSF Rugby or a > >> GPS receiver. > >> > > "Algorithm" means: understand that 'order'/sequence> does not need RTC. > > > >> Relying on the latest date of a regularly updated file is a piss poor > >> workaround at best, only being slightly better than nothing at all. If > >> the system date/time has any importance at all (at least to the extent > >> of asking this question), you really aught to fit an RTC module if no > >> alternative source of accurate time setting is available. > > > > I want to speak to the injunyear, not the sales-clerk. > Engineers only speak to organ grinders not monkeys > YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE WHAT YOU WANT WITH WHAT YOU HAVE. > Either follow the advise you are given (spent tuppence ha'penny on an RTC > module) or take your business elsewhere. Do Not Feed The Trolls. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Z2Va6S-wRls/TYcQZmuPSYI/AAAAAAAAAKI/N9rkyluOyPw/s1600/Trolls-3.gif
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 01:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ip0ifa53ceoo0cldf5b6ksf7iddcgcpmp5@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #13920 |
On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 09:47:40 +0000 (UTC), Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote: > >Do Not Feed The Trolls. ... Is the right answer! :-) >http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Z2Va6S-wRls/TYcQZmuPSYI/AAAAAAAAAKI/N9rkyluOyPw/s1600/Trolls-3.gif -- J B Good
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Unknown <dog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-11 04:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2015.03.11.05.04.49@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #13919 |
On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 09:13:12 +0000, alister wrote: > On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 08:52:02 +0000, Unknown wrote: > >> On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:12:47 +0000, Johny B Good wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:54:39 +0000 (UTC), William Unruh >>> <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote: >>> >>>>On 2015-03-01, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, not.socialnetwork@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> When you transfer a dir of script/s & data-files to rPi from your >>>>>> PC, via USBstik, there's a problem, since the rPi has no >>>>>> RealTimeClock. >> --- snip-- >>>>>> So the important abilty to 'evaluate' files by their recentcy >>>>> is lost. > It's a universal truth that you'll want to get the >>>>> most-recent >>>>>> cup-of-coffee and not the 17th most-recent that you put-down. >>>>>> That's why stacks are used. >>>>>> >>>>>> What algorithm do you use to solve this problem? >>>>>> >>>>>> ==TIA. >>>>>> >>> IMO, the best "Algorithm" is to use an add on RTC module and add the >>> appropriate time setting requests to the startup script if reasonably >>> accurate time is required on a R-Pi that stands in total isolation >>> from the internet or any other time setting source such as MSF Rugby >>> or a GPS receiver. >>> >> "Algorithm" means: understand that 'order'/sequence> does not need RTC. >> >>> Relying on the latest date of a regularly updated file is a piss poor >>> workaround at best, only being slightly better than nothing at all. If >>> the system date/time has any importance at all (at least to the extent >>> of asking this question), you really aught to fit an RTC module if no >>> alternative source of accurate time setting is available. >> >> I want to speak to the injunyear, not the sales-clerk. > > Engineers only speak to organ grinders not monkeys > > YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE WHAT YOU WANT WITH WHAT YOU HAVE. Either follow the > advise you are given (spent tuppence ha'penny on an RTC module) or take > your business elsewhere. Interestingly, 2 of the major 20th century technologies were 'developed' by US <hobbyists> collaborating: aviation & computing. USEnet originated as a collaborating device. But, apparently most USEnet users are now a generation younger than me and also stressed by the arrival of Toffler's 3-rd-wave economy. Considering that many retirees are genetically programmed to play golf, imagine their reaction if you advised them to buy-a-ding-dong to get the ball in the hole. So, back to the algorithm: the mathematical concept 'order' [as emphasised in the "Subject:"] is key. When Newton was called away from his desk of paper-work, he needed the papers to be 'stacked' in the same ORDER when he returned. Even if the cleaning-lady, had 'been there' during his absence, and <accessed the files>, provided the 'order' was maintained, the real-time attributes were not needed. So how can you achieve that by *thinking*, instead of buying a ding-dong that will put-the-ball-in-the-hole-for you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-11 05:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mdoji5$681$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14007 |
On 2015-03-11, Unknown <dog@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 09:13:12 +0000, alister wrote: > >> On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 08:52:02 +0000, Unknown wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:12:47 +0000, Johny B Good wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:54:39 +0000 (UTC), William Unruh >>>> <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On 2015-03-01, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, not.socialnetwork@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> When you transfer a dir of script/s & data-files to rPi from your >>>>>>> PC, via USBstik, there's a problem, since the rPi has no >>>>>>> RealTimeClock. >>> --- snip-- >>>>>>> So the important abilty to 'evaluate' files by their recentcy >>>>>> is lost. > It's a universal truth that you'll want to get the >>>>>> most-recent >>>>>>> cup-of-coffee and not the 17th most-recent that you put-down. >>>>>>> That's why stacks are used. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What algorithm do you use to solve this problem? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ==TIA. >>>>>>> >>>> IMO, the best "Algorithm" is to use an add on RTC module and add the >>>> appropriate time setting requests to the startup script if reasonably >>>> accurate time is required on a R-Pi that stands in total isolation >>>> from the internet or any other time setting source such as MSF Rugby >>>> or a GPS receiver. >>>> >>> "Algorithm" means: understand that 'order'/sequence> does not need RTC. >>> >>>> Relying on the latest date of a regularly updated file is a piss poor >>>> workaround at best, only being slightly better than nothing at all. If >>>> the system date/time has any importance at all (at least to the extent >>>> of asking this question), you really aught to fit an RTC module if no >>>> alternative source of accurate time setting is available. >>> >>> I want to speak to the injunyear, not the sales-clerk. >> >> Engineers only speak to organ grinders not monkeys >> >> YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE WHAT YOU WANT WITH WHAT YOU HAVE. Either follow the >> advise you are given (spent tuppence ha'penny on an RTC module) or take >> your business elsewhere. > > Interestingly, 2 of the major 20th century technologies were 'developed' > by US <hobbyists> collaborating: aviation & computing. > USEnet originated as a collaborating device. > But, apparently most USEnet users are now a generation younger than me > and also stressed by the arrival of Toffler's 3-rd-wave economy. > > Considering that many retirees are genetically programmed to play golf, > imagine their reaction if you advised them to buy-a-ding-dong to get the > ball in the hole. > > So, back to the algorithm: > the mathematical concept 'order' [as emphasised in the "Subject:"] is > key. When Newton was called away from his desk of paper-work, he needed > the papers to be 'stacked' in the same ORDER when he returned. > Even if the cleaning-lady, had 'been there' during his absence, and > <accessed the files>, provided the 'order' was maintained, the real-time > attributes were not needed. > > So how can you achieve that by *thinking*, instead of buying a ding-dong > that will put-the-ball-in-the-hole-for you. Numerous suggestions have been made. He has not responded. If you are the OP, take one of the suggestions and impliment it. And not all required a "dingdong" (and an $8 dingdong is cheaper than the time he has already wasted) >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-11 07:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <vo16tbxgqk.ln2@goaway.wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> |
| In reply to | #14008 |
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.misc.] On 2015-03-11, William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote: > On 2015-03-11, Unknown <dog@gmail.com> wrote: > > Numerous suggestions have been made. He has not responded. If you are > the OP, take one of the suggestions and impliment it. That is one of the "Chris Glur" troll morphs, so he is the OP. This is one of his trolling tactics: ignoring all advice and re-posting another poorly reworded phrasing of his original poorly worded question, with the implication that somehow none of the answers provided were "good enough" for him, because he's somehow smarter than everyone else yet completely unable to solve his own problem. > And not all required a "dingdong" (and an $8 dingdong is cheaper than > the time he has already wasted) He only really cares about wasting our time, not his. --keith -- kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us (try just my userid to email me) AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt see X- headers for PGP signature information
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-11 19:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <zi0Mw.1249050$I4.88965@fx34.am4> |
| In reply to | #14008 |
On 11/03/2015 05:24, William Unruh wrote: > On 2015-03-11, Unknown <dog@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 09:13:12 +0000, alister wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 08:52:02 +0000, Unknown wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:12:47 +0000, Johny B Good wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:54:39 +0000 (UTC), William Unruh >>>>> <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 2015-03-01, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, not.socialnetwork@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When you transfer a dir of script/s & data-files to rPi from your >>>>>>>> PC, via USBstik, there's a problem, since the rPi has no >>>>>>>> RealTimeClock. >>>> --- snip-- >>>>>>>> So the important abilty to 'evaluate' files by their recentcy >>>>>>> is lost. > It's a universal truth that you'll want to get the >>>>>>> most-recent >>>>>>>> cup-of-coffee and not the 17th most-recent that you put-down. >>>>>>>> That's why stacks are used. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What algorithm do you use to solve this problem? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ==TIA. >>>>>>>> >>>>> IMO, the best "Algorithm" is to use an add on RTC module and add the >>>>> appropriate time setting requests to the startup script if reasonably >>>>> accurate time is required on a R-Pi that stands in total isolation >>>>> from the internet or any other time setting source such as MSF Rugby >>>>> or a GPS receiver. >>>>> >>>> "Algorithm" means: understand that 'order'/sequence> does not need RTC. >>>> >>>>> Relying on the latest date of a regularly updated file is a piss poor >>>>> workaround at best, only being slightly better than nothing at all. If >>>>> the system date/time has any importance at all (at least to the extent >>>>> of asking this question), you really aught to fit an RTC module if no >>>>> alternative source of accurate time setting is available. >>>> >>>> I want to speak to the injunyear, not the sales-clerk. >>> >>> Engineers only speak to organ grinders not monkeys >>> >>> YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE WHAT YOU WANT WITH WHAT YOU HAVE. Either follow the >>> advise you are given (spent tuppence ha'penny on an RTC module) or take >>> your business elsewhere. >> >> Interestingly, 2 of the major 20th century technologies were 'developed' >> by US <hobbyists> collaborating: aviation & computing. >> USEnet originated as a collaborating device. >> But, apparently most USEnet users are now a generation younger than me >> and also stressed by the arrival of Toffler's 3-rd-wave economy. >> >> Considering that many retirees are genetically programmed to play golf, >> imagine their reaction if you advised them to buy-a-ding-dong to get the >> ball in the hole. >> >> So, back to the algorithm: >> the mathematical concept 'order' [as emphasised in the "Subject:"] is >> key. When Newton was called away from his desk of paper-work, he needed >> the papers to be 'stacked' in the same ORDER when he returned. >> Even if the cleaning-lady, had 'been there' during his absence, and >> <accessed the files>, provided the 'order' was maintained, the real-time >> attributes were not needed. >> >> So how can you achieve that by *thinking*, instead of buying a ding-dong >> that will put-the-ball-in-the-hole-for you. > > Numerous suggestions have been made. He has not responded. If you are > the OP, take one of the suggestions and impliment it. > And not all required a "dingdong" (and an $8 dingdong is cheaper than > the time he has already wasted) > >> Which bit of DON'T FEED THE TROLL do you not understand?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-11 13:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mdpfe6$r9h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14007 |
On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 04:53:11 +0000, Unknown wrote: > So, back to the algorithm: > the mathematical concept 'order' [as emphasised in the "Subject:"] is > key. When Newton was called away from his desk of paper-work, he needed > the papers to be 'stacked' in the same ORDER when he returned. > Even if the cleaning-lady, had 'been there' during his absence, and > <accessed the files>, provided the 'order' was maintained, the > real-time attributes were not needed. One option, forget the idea of timestamps entirely. Name the files with sequential numbers. Be sure to zero pad so ls works as expected. You could even do the Basic programming trick of skipping numbers (e.g. by 10s) so you could insert items higher in the queue without renumbering. 000000010-playme.mp3 000000020-thesis.mp3 000000030-soothing.mp3 000000040-jamz.mp3 uh-oh, breaking news, add 000000000-sungoingnova.mp3
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Unknown <dog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-12 17:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2015.04.12.17.18.50@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #14010 |
On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:20:06 +0000, Joe Beanfish wrote: > On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 04:53:11 +0000, Unknown wrote: >> So, back to the algorithm: >> the mathematical concept 'order' [as emphasised in the "Subject:"] is >> key. When Newton was called away from his desk of paper-work, he >> needed the papers to be 'stacked' in the same ORDER when he returned. >> Even if the cleaning-lady, had 'been there' during his absence, and >> <accessed the files>, provided the 'order' was maintained, the >> real-time attributes were not needed. > > One option, forget the idea of timestamps entirely. Name the files with > sequential numbers. Be sure to zero pad so ls works as expected. You > could even do the Basic programming trick of skipping numbers (e.g. by > 10s) so you could insert items higher in the queue without renumbering. > > 000000010-playme.mp3 > 000000020-thesis.mp3 > 000000030-soothing.mp3 > 000000040-jamz.mp3 > > uh-oh, breaking news, add > 000000000-sungoingnova.mp3 That's the kind if original good idea which we need !! With the 'thread overflow' I nearly missed this 1 month old post. I'll try to implement your idea, when I've cleared the chaos. Thanks.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-12 13:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504121346440.10384@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #14509 |
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, Unknown wrote: > On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:20:06 +0000, Joe Beanfish wrote: > >> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 04:53:11 +0000, Unknown wrote: >>> So, back to the algorithm: >>> the mathematical concept 'order' [as emphasised in the "Subject:"] is >>> key. When Newton was called away from his desk of paper-work, he >>> needed the papers to be 'stacked' in the same ORDER when he returned. >>> Even if the cleaning-lady, had 'been there' during his absence, and >>> <accessed the files>, provided the 'order' was maintained, the >>> real-time attributes were not needed. >> >> One option, forget the idea of timestamps entirely. Name the files with >> sequential numbers. Be sure to zero pad so ls works as expected. You >> could even do the Basic programming trick of skipping numbers (e.g. by >> 10s) so you could insert items higher in the queue without renumbering. >> >> 000000010-playme.mp3 >> 000000020-thesis.mp3 >> 000000030-soothing.mp3 >> 000000040-jamz.mp3 >> >> uh-oh, breaking news, add >> 000000000-sungoingnova.mp3 > > That's the kind if original good idea which we need !! > With the 'thread overflow' I nearly missed this 1 month old post. > I'll try to implement your idea, when I've cleared the chaos. > And the Raspberry Pi can't run without a Real Time Clock. You wasted all this time because you pretended to no know that. Linux needs to be interrupted to actually work, so keeping time is intrinsic to the operating system. Like I said way back when, all you have to do is set the time and date when you start the Pi up, something that used to be quite common. A hardware clock is only used to set the time when the computer starts, saving you a few keystrokes, the Pi or any Linux computer doesn't get time from the hardware clock other times (unless someone is configuring it differently, and a common thing then is to access a cesium standard on the internet, which would be another way do to this if the Pi is networked). You waste everyone's time, and now thing some roundabout method is "good", when it is all about you being too lazy to set the time when you turn on the computer. Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-13 13:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mggfft$ftu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14510 |
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 13:50:16 -0400, Michael Black wrote: > On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, Unknown wrote: > >> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:20:06 +0000, Joe Beanfish wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 04:53:11 +0000, Unknown wrote: >>>> So, back to the algorithm: >>>> the mathematical concept 'order' [as emphasised in the "Subject:"] >>>> is key. When Newton was called away from his desk of paper-work, he >>>> needed the papers to be 'stacked' in the same ORDER when he >>>> returned. >>>> Even if the cleaning-lady, had 'been there' during his absence, and >>>> <accessed the files>, provided the 'order' was maintained, the >>>> real-time attributes were not needed. >>> >>> One option, forget the idea of timestamps entirely. Name the files >>> with sequential numbers. Be sure to zero pad so ls works as expected. >>> You could even do the Basic programming trick of skipping numbers >>> (e.g. by 10s) so you could insert items higher in the queue without >>> renumbering. >>> >>> 000000010-playme.mp3 000000020-thesis.mp3 000000030-soothing.mp3 >>> 000000040-jamz.mp3 >>> >>> uh-oh, breaking news, add 000000000-sungoingnova.mp3 >> >> That's the kind if original good idea which we need !! >> With the 'thread overflow' I nearly missed this 1 month old post. >> I'll try to implement your idea, when I've cleared the chaos. >> > And the Raspberry Pi can't run without a Real Time Clock. > > You wasted all this time because you pretended to no know that. > > Linux needs to be interrupted to actually work, so keeping time is > intrinsic to the operating system. > > Like I said way back when, all you have to do is set the time and date > when you start the Pi up, something that used to be quite common. A > hardware clock is only used to set the time when the computer starts, > saving you a few keystrokes, the Pi or any Linux computer doesn't get > time from the hardware clock other times (unless someone is configuring > it differently, and a common thing then is to access a cesium standard > on the internet, which would be another way do to this if the Pi is > networked). > > You waste everyone's time, and now thing some roundabout method is > "good", > when it is all about you being too lazy to set the time when you turn on > the computer. > > Michael If you had paid any attention to the complete problem you'd know there's no way to enter the time on power up. Think of this as a home-brew ipod nano with no buttons save power on/off. Please, just butt out of you have nothing to offer. You're worse than the so-called troll. Same for the rest of ya, there's more blather by you folk whining or being super-superior about the "troll" than actual technical discussion about anything. Just shut up already. You think you're so superior when you're just feeding the fire to get your own names up in lights.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-13 15:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mgginq$9pp$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #14519 |
On 13/04/15 14:14, Joe Beanfish wrote: > > Please, just butt out of you have nothing to offer. You're worse than > the so-called troll. Same for the rest of ya, there's more blather by > you folk whining or being super-superior about the "troll" than actual > technical discussion about anything. Just shut up already. You think > you're so superior when you're just feeding the fire to get your own > names up in lights. > If you want time and date to be meaningful - which may or may not be the case you have to ensure that they are accurate. There are three ways to do that - - a battery backed clock that keeps time when the 'puter is off. - use of some internet accessible clock that you trust to set time on boot and keep time after boot - manually or magically setting the clock to the correct time on boot. If none of those suit your bigotry, then go away. Posing problems that have no acceptable solutions is even easier than dreaming up solutions that are totally impractical. See the Belling Of The Cat. -- Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. – Erwin Knoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-14 00:30 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <j6knia997ndg4n6ufjecncb3g27cqhdb17@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #14520 |
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >On 13/04/15 14:14, Joe Beanfish wrote: > >> >> Please, just butt out of you have nothing to offer. You're worse than >> the so-called troll. Same for the rest of ya, there's more blather by >> you folk whining or being super-superior about the "troll" than actual >> technical discussion about anything. Just shut up already. You think >> you're so superior when you're just feeding the fire to get your own >> names up in lights. >> > >If you want time and date to be meaningful - which may or may not be the >case you have to ensure that they are accurate. The OP said, specifically, that he only wanted to keep "order". For that purpose the time and date don't have to be meaningful. > >There are three ways to do that - > >- a battery backed clock that keeps time when the 'puter is off. >- use of some internet accessible clock that you trust to set time on >boot and keep time after boot >- manually or magically setting the clock to the correct time on boot. > >If none of those suit your bigotry, then go away. >Posing problems that have no acceptable solutions is even easier than >dreaming up solutions that are totally impractical. Keeping order does have another practical solution. It is only necessary to set the date and time to a value greater than the latest date and time that was last used. > >See the Belling Of The Cat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web