Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #68560 > unrolled thread
| Started by | nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-01-19 16:50 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-01-23 14:16 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 220 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Gassee joins the fray nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2015-01-19 16:50 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-20 00:01 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-19 22:18 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-20 15:43 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-20 11:16 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-20 16:28 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@me.com> - 2015-01-20 12:39 -0600
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-21 06:18 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2015-01-20 14:05 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-21 06:19 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-20 19:53 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 02:40 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lao-Ming Liu <laomingliu@gmail.com> - 2015-01-20 20:18 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 04:42 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-20 22:31 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-21 21:46 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lao-Ming Liu <laomingliu@gmail.com> - 2015-01-20 22:01 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-20 23:12 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-21 09:56 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-21 09:22 -0600
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 15:49 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-21 10:59 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 16:29 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-21 16:52 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 17:06 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 13:40 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-21 19:02 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 14:09 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 19:23 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 19:19 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-21 19:46 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 19:50 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-21 20:43 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 20:55 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-21 14:00 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 21:09 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 16:14 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 21:19 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-21 23:53 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-22 00:06 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-21 13:55 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-21 23:55 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-21 17:41 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 16:13 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-21 16:10 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 21:12 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-21 23:57 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-01-22 15:16 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 11:59 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-23 01:04 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 03:04 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-01-22 11:59 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-21 23:17 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2015-01-22 20:42 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-22 22:14 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 03:52 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-22 22:14 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 14:21 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2015-01-21 23:12 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-24 18:42 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-24 18:40 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-25 02:53 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-21 21:36 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-22 16:55 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-22 12:14 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-22 17:24 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-22 13:25 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-22 22:05 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-22 22:06 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 14:16 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 13:44 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-24 18:47 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-25 02:57 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-24 21:09 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-25 09:30 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-25 16:19 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-25 09:22 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 11:09 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-26 14:53 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 12:14 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-22 22:03 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 00:00 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-23 09:52 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 15:13 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-23 15:40 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 11:28 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 13:44 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 11:44 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 14:32 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 14:44 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 14:48 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 14:50 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 23:15 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 18:22 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-24 10:56 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-24 11:05 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-24 16:22 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-24 21:51 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-25 12:20 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-25 02:38 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-24 15:32 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 23:14 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 18:22 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 10:29 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-24 15:35 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-24 12:38 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 10:33 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 14:30 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 14:42 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 14:54 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 15:00 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 08:50 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-24 17:07 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 16:35 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-25 00:03 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-25 09:19 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 23:13 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 11:01 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2015-01-26 21:34 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 23:07 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 18:22 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 14:12 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-23 09:49 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 15:08 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-23 10:49 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 16:18 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-23 11:30 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 16:55 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-23 12:03 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 17:07 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 13:44 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 11:41 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 14:39 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 14:45 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-24 16:19 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-24 21:38 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-24 18:45 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-25 03:04 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 11:17 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 13:44 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 18:46 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-01-24 10:46 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-24 10:54 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-24 13:55 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-24 10:42 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-24 16:14 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-25 03:54 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-23 17:34 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 17:49 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-23 18:05 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 18:37 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 11:41 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 18:43 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 14:13 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 12:23 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 19:28 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 10:58 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 10:58 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-26 14:46 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-23 20:46 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-24 10:17 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 14:05 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 19:08 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 11:20 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 14:40 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 18:23 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 18:21 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 20:50 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-24 10:15 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-23 23:19 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-24 13:16 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 08:48 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-24 09:20 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-01-23 15:38 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 14:36 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 14:45 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 23:17 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-24 17:14 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-24 22:37 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-25 12:24 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 10:40 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-26 13:39 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 18:22 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 18:22 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 18:21 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 22:05 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 20:46 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 19:55 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 21:05 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 20:57 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 21:01 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-24 00:12 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-24 18:31 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-23 23:17 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 08:52 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-24 18:40 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-25 03:03 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-25 09:27 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-26 01:50 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-25 22:25 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-25 14:56 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-25 20:19 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2015-01-26 21:55 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 20:07 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 23:57 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 10:45 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2015-01-26 21:52 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 10:37 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2015-01-26 21:49 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 11:26 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-24 10:20 +1300
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-23 14:43 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-23 14:48 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-26 10:56 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 13:44 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2015-01-22 20:37 -0500
Re: Gassee joins the fray nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2015-01-22 20:55 -0700
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 03:59 +0000
Re: Gassee joins the fray Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-22 22:09 -0800
Re: Gassee joins the fray Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-23 14:16 +0000
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 15:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ma1a1v$nv7$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #68885 |
On 2015-01-24 21:22:12 +0000, JF Mezei said: > BTW, not sure if it still does, but it wasn't so long ago that Apple > marketed OS-X as the Unix with the largest installed base in the world. Yes... ..."marketed"... ...as in played up because its potential customers might PERCEIVE that to be an asset. > Seems to me like having Unix under OS-X was seen as an important asset > for Apple to attract business and scientific users. It also worked hard > to add multiprocessing capabilities and ability to use graphics cards > for intence scientific computing. (Believe it came with Snow Leopard). > > It wasn't just to play games. > > > I don't think I have heard that since "Back to Mac" started.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 23:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cig2udFtvaiU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #68803 |
On 2015-01-23, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: > > That's up to the user, and not Apple. At least, in the Unix > philosophy, it should be. In the Steve era at least these kinds of > processes had man pages informing you that the process was not meant to > be interacted with by the user. Bullshit. The xattr tool sis just one of many examples showing how wrong you are. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 18:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <230120151822516611%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #68803 |
In article <m9ui5b$7br$1@dont-email.me>, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>> Why should there be man pages for processes that have no method of > >>> interaction? > >> > >> Because you need to know about the options and arguments to manage the > >> daemon's start/stop/management > > > > Why would you need that if the daemon should never be stopped, or > > started or managed? > > That's up to the user, and not Apple. that's why there's a system pref to turn it on or off. > At least, in the Unix > philosophy, it should be. os x may be based on unix but it's not unix to the end user. end users don't care, nor do they need to. > In the Steve era at least these kinds of > processes had man pages informing you that the process was not meant to > be interacted with by the user. no they didn't.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-26 10:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmcc5q0.v83.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #68803 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> was all, like: > On 2015-01-23 19:44:19 +0000, Alan Baker said: >> On 2015-01-23 14:52:28 +0000, JF Mezei said: >> >>> On 15-01-23 03:00, Alan Baker wrote: >>> >>>> Why should there be man pages for processes that have no method of interaction? >>> >>> Because you need to know about the options and arguments to manage the >>> daemon's start/stop/management >> >> Why would you need that if the daemon should never be stopped, or >> started or managed? > That's up to the user, and not Apple. Nope. > At least, in the Unix philosophy, it should be. Nope. You are conflating UNIX with Linux. Not the same thing. > In the Steve era at least these kinds of processes had man pages Bullshit. -- http://2blog.kreme.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 15:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54c401fa$0$44478$c3e8da3$66d3cc2f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #68788 |
On 15-01-23 14:44, Alan Baker wrote: > Why would you need that if the daemon should never be stopped, or > started or managed? I'll give you an example. I initially had problems with Postfix on the Xserve where the RBL lookups would sometimes work, sometimes fail. No logic to it, but it resulted in a lot more spam than the more primitive mail server on VMS that I had before. Turns out that attempts to resolve via IPv6 would return "not found" which the mail server took as "not on the RBL list, ok to process that email". Looking at the man pages for either the resolver or BIND server, I was able to find the switch to disable IPv6 lookups and this fixed the problem. It required editing the startup .plist to make it permanent. Yet, this is a deamon nobody starts/stops, and having documentation on it was extremely handy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 12:38 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ma0vsg$d4e$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #68877 |
On 2015-01-24 20:35:05 +0000, JF Mezei said: > On 15-01-23 14:44, Alan Baker wrote: > >> Why would you need that if the daemon should never be stopped, or >> started or managed? > > I'll give you an example. > > I initially had problems with Postfix on the Xserve where the RBL > lookups would sometimes work, sometimes fail. No logic to it, but it > resulted in a lot more spam than the more primitive mail server on VMS > that I had before. > > Turns out that attempts to resolve via IPv6 would return "not found" > which the mail server took as "not on the RBL list, ok to process that > email". > > Looking at the man pages for either the resolver or BIND server, I was > able to find the switch to disable IPv6 lookups and this fixed the > problem. It required editing the startup .plist to make it permanent. > > Yet, this is a deamon nobody starts/stops, and having documentation on > it was extremely handy. "stopped, started or MANAGED". If there is a daemon that has no management options, then there would be nothing for the man page to say.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-26 10:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmcc614.v83.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #68877 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> was all, like: > On 15-01-23 14:44, Alan Baker wrote: >> Why would you need that if the daemon should never be stopped, or >> started or managed? > I'll give you an example. > I initially had problems with Postfix on the Xserve where the RBL > lookups would sometimes work, sometimes fail. No logic to it, but it > resulted in a lot more spam than the more primitive mail server on VMS > that I had before. > Turns out that attempts to resolve via IPv6 would return "not found" > which the mail server took as "not on the RBL list, ok to process that > email". > Looking at the man pages for either the resolver or BIND server, I was > able to find the switch to disable IPv6 lookups and this fixed the > problem. It required editing the startup .plist to make it permanent. > Yet, this is a deamon nobody starts/stops, and having documentation on > it was extremely handy. So your example of how bad it is to not have man pages is about a well-known process with literally gigabytes of online documentation and man pages in OS X? Really? That's all you've got? -- http://2blog.kreme.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 14:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <m9ui15$6r5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68739 |
On 2015-01-23 08:00:32 +0000, Alan Baker said: > On 2015-01-23 06:03:29 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: > >> On 2015-01-22 17:14:19 +0000, Warren Oates said: >> >>> In article <m9q27p$t0q$1@dont-email.me>, >>> Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> the whole system, write man pages for all the new Unix programs that >>>> are suddenly running, >>> >>> Which ones? >> >> Many of them. >> >> Just going off the running processes on my machine right now, I will >> start at the top and list just the processes starting with A: >> >> accountd - no man page >> AddressBookSourceSync - no man page >> AirPlayUIAgent - no man page >> airportd - has man page, no real info though >> amfid - has man page, no real info though >> appleeventsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant >> config files >> AppleIDAuthAgent - no man page >> AppleMobileDeviceHelper - no man page >> apsd - has man page, no real info though >> askpermissiond - no man page >> ath - no man page >> authd - no man page >> autofsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant config files >> awdd - no man page >> >> I assure you this is representative of the whole system. The majority >> of daemons are undocumented, and the ones that are are usually older >> (Steve era). >> >> This is just another illustration of Apple's slide into shitware. I >> expect undocumented processes from Microsoft, but not Apple. > > Sorry, but man pages are essentially documentation about how to > interact with a process; what command options it supports, etc. > > Why should there be man pages for processes that have no method of interaction? So I know what they're doing, obviously. Perhaps, since I don't even have iCloud activated, I would like to learn how to disable the iCloud daemon that's constantly running? Maybe the people who have discovered runaway processes (agan, many complaints here on the Apple Support forums) could check what they are and what they're doing? Maybe you're not a tinkerer, and maybe you don't use the BSD layer on OS X that often. That's fine. But for people who do use the BSD layer this documentation is expected as a regular part of the system. As I said before I expect this kind of crap from Microsoft, but not Apple. In the Steve days you had man pages for everything that at least told you that you're not supposed to run the program. Many included references too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 14:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <m9uipf$u23$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #68802 |
On 2015-01-23 22:30:29 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: > On 2015-01-23 08:00:32 +0000, Alan Baker said: > >> On 2015-01-23 06:03:29 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: >> >>> On 2015-01-22 17:14:19 +0000, Warren Oates said: >>> >>>> In article <m9q27p$t0q$1@dont-email.me>, >>>> Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> the whole system, write man pages for all the new Unix programs that >>>>> are suddenly running, >>>> >>>> Which ones? >>> >>> Many of them. >>> >>> Just going off the running processes on my machine right now, I will >>> start at the top and list just the processes starting with A: >>> >>> accountd - no man page >>> AddressBookSourceSync - no man page >>> AirPlayUIAgent - no man page >>> airportd - has man page, no real info though >>> amfid - has man page, no real info though >>> appleeventsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant >>> config files >>> AppleIDAuthAgent - no man page >>> AppleMobileDeviceHelper - no man page >>> apsd - has man page, no real info though >>> askpermissiond - no man page >>> ath - no man page >>> authd - no man page >>> autofsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant config files >>> awdd - no man page >>> >>> I assure you this is representative of the whole system. The majority >>> of daemons are undocumented, and the ones that are are usually older >>> (Steve era). >>> >>> This is just another illustration of Apple's slide into shitware. I >>> expect undocumented processes from Microsoft, but not Apple. >> >> Sorry, but man pages are essentially documentation about how to >> interact with a process; what command options it supports, etc. >> >> Why should there be man pages for processes that have no method of interaction? > > So I know what they're doing, obviously. Why does that matter? Is there a man page for the kernel in Linux? > Perhaps, since I don't even have iCloud activated, I would like to > learn how to disable the iCloud daemon that's constantly running? And you can't figure it out without a man page? > Maybe the people who have discovered runaway processes (agan, many > complaints here on the Apple Support forums) could check what they are > and what they're doing? Examples? > > Maybe you're not a tinkerer, and maybe you don't use the BSD layer on > OS X that often. That's fine. But for people who do use the BSD layer > this documentation is expected as a regular part of the system. Here's a novel thought for you: do you think Apple is building systems for tinkerers? > > As I said before I expect this kind of crap from Microsoft, but not > Apple. In the Steve days you had man pages for everything that at > least told you that you're not supposed to run the program. Many > included references too. No. In the "Steve days" you had man pages for processes that came to the Mac with man pages and for some others. They were largely irrelevant to the vast majority of Mac users.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 14:54 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <m9ujdd$bg8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68807 |
On 2015-01-23 22:42:56 +0000, Alan Baker said: > On 2015-01-23 22:30:29 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: > >> On 2015-01-23 08:00:32 +0000, Alan Baker said: >> >>> On 2015-01-23 06:03:29 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: >>> >>>> On 2015-01-22 17:14:19 +0000, Warren Oates said: >>>> >>>>> In article <m9q27p$t0q$1@dont-email.me>, >>>>> Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> the whole system, write man pages for all the new Unix programs that >>>>>> are suddenly running, >>>>> >>>>> Which ones? >>>> >>>> Many of them. >>>> >>>> Just going off the running processes on my machine right now, I will >>>> start at the top and list just the processes starting with A: >>>> >>>> accountd - no man page >>>> AddressBookSourceSync - no man page >>>> AirPlayUIAgent - no man page >>>> airportd - has man page, no real info though >>>> amfid - has man page, no real info though >>>> appleeventsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant >>>> config files >>>> AppleIDAuthAgent - no man page >>>> AppleMobileDeviceHelper - no man page >>>> apsd - has man page, no real info though >>>> askpermissiond - no man page >>>> ath - no man page >>>> authd - no man page >>>> autofsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant config files >>>> awdd - no man page >>>> >>>> I assure you this is representative of the whole system. The majority >>>> of daemons are undocumented, and the ones that are are usually older >>>> (Steve era). >>>> >>>> This is just another illustration of Apple's slide into shitware. I >>>> expect undocumented processes from Microsoft, but not Apple. >>> >>> Sorry, but man pages are essentially documentation about how to >>> interact with a process; what command options it supports, etc. >>> >>> Why should there be man pages for processes that have no method of interaction? >> >> So I know what they're doing, obviously. > > Why does that matter? Is there a man page for the kernel in Linux? > >> Perhaps, since I don't even have iCloud activated, I would like to >> learn how to disable the iCloud daemon that's constantly running? > > And you can't figure it out without a man page? > >> Maybe the people who have discovered runaway processes (agan, many >> complaints here on the Apple Support forums) could check what they are >> and what they're doing? > > Examples? > >> >> Maybe you're not a tinkerer, and maybe you don't use the BSD layer on >> OS X that often. That's fine. But for people who do use the BSD layer >> this documentation is expected as a regular part of the system. > > Here's a novel thought for you: do you think Apple is building systems > for tinkerers? > >> >> As I said before I expect this kind of crap from Microsoft, but not >> Apple. In the Steve days you had man pages for everything that at >> least told you that you're not supposed to run the program. Many >> included references too. > > No. In the "Steve days" you had man pages for processes that came to > the Mac with man pages and for some others. > > They were largely irrelevant to the vast majority of Mac users. Bla bla bla. I'm sure you are really keen on making me run around and pluck out references "proving" everything I said, so you can throw up a bunch of one-liners at me again. It has to be a major source of entertainment for you. Forget it man. All the problems I list with OS X are obvious, well known, and easily discovered by you. Figure it out for yourself if you're so interested. The fact of the matter is, the Unix neckbeard guy was the first to buy into OS X, and he is going to be the first to leave. You can handwave and deny that Unix is important to OS X (to which I would have to say, that you're nuts if you actually believe it) but it's the truth, and if Apple keeps letting it go to shit it's going to massively hurt them in the long term. I have yet to actually see you contribute usefully to any thread that you've posted in. You instead seem to please yourself with Jesuitical or Talmudic or Juristic attempts to deconstruct, nitpick, or otherwise cross-examine people who seem to want to actually have a conversation, without actually contrinuting anything yourself. You demand references and proof and whatnot from people, but you haven't proffered anything more than a surly opinion of your own. With that, I must say: ker-PLONK *flusshhhhhhh*
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 15:00 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <m9ujqi$vhe$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #68815 |
On 2015-01-23 22:54:04 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: > On 2015-01-23 22:42:56 +0000, Alan Baker said: > >> On 2015-01-23 22:30:29 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: >> >>> On 2015-01-23 08:00:32 +0000, Alan Baker said: >>> >>>> On 2015-01-23 06:03:29 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: >>>> >>>>> On 2015-01-22 17:14:19 +0000, Warren Oates said: >>>>> >>>>>> In article <m9q27p$t0q$1@dont-email.me>, >>>>>> Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> the whole system, write man pages for all the new Unix programs that >>>>>>> are suddenly running, >>>>>> >>>>>> Which ones? >>>>> >>>>> Many of them. >>>>> >>>>> Just going off the running processes on my machine right now, I will >>>>> start at the top and list just the processes starting with A: >>>>> >>>>> accountd - no man page >>>>> AddressBookSourceSync - no man page >>>>> AirPlayUIAgent - no man page >>>>> airportd - has man page, no real info though >>>>> amfid - has man page, no real info though >>>>> appleeventsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant >>>>> config files >>>>> AppleIDAuthAgent - no man page >>>>> AppleMobileDeviceHelper - no man page >>>>> apsd - has man page, no real info though >>>>> askpermissiond - no man page >>>>> ath - no man page >>>>> authd - no man page >>>>> autofsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant config files >>>>> awdd - no man page >>>>> >>>>> I assure you this is representative of the whole system. The majority >>>>> of daemons are undocumented, and the ones that are are usually older >>>>> (Steve era). >>>>> >>>>> This is just another illustration of Apple's slide into shitware. I >>>>> expect undocumented processes from Microsoft, but not Apple. >>>> >>>> Sorry, but man pages are essentially documentation about how to >>>> interact with a process; what command options it supports, etc. >>>> >>>> Why should there be man pages for processes that have no method of interaction? >>> >>> So I know what they're doing, obviously. >> >> Why does that matter? Is there a man page for the kernel in Linux? So, you have no answer? >> >>> Perhaps, since I don't even have iCloud activated, I would like to >>> learn how to disable the iCloud daemon that's constantly running? >> >> And you can't figure it out without a man page? >> >>> Maybe the people who have discovered runaway processes (agan, many >>> complaints here on the Apple Support forums) could check what they are >>> and what they're doing? >> >> Examples? >> >>> >>> Maybe you're not a tinkerer, and maybe you don't use the BSD layer on >>> OS X that often. That's fine. But for people who do use the BSD layer >>> this documentation is expected as a regular part of the system. >> >> Here's a novel thought for you: do you think Apple is building systems >> for tinkerers? Well? >> >>> >>> As I said before I expect this kind of crap from Microsoft, but not >>> Apple. In the Steve days you had man pages for everything that at >>> least told you that you're not supposed to run the program. Many >>> included references too. >> >> No. In the "Steve days" you had man pages for processes that came to >> the Mac with man pages and for some others. >> >> They were largely irrelevant to the vast majority of Mac users. > > Bla bla bla. I'm sure you are really keen on making me run around and > pluck out references "proving" everything I said, so you can throw up a > bunch of one-liners at me again. It has to be a major source of > entertainment for you. > > Forget it man. All the problems I list with OS X are obvious, well > known, and easily discovered by you. Figure it out for yourself if > you're so interested. Sorry, but lack of man pages for processes you aren't supposed to interact with directly is just not a real problem. > > The fact of the matter is, the Unix neckbeard guy was the first to buy > into OS X, No. He wasn't. > and he is going to be the first to leave. All dozen of them? > You can handwave and deny that Unix is important to OS X (to which I > would have to say, that you're nuts if you actually believe it) but > it's the truth, and if Apple keeps letting it go to shit it's going to > massively hurt them in the long term. Unix is utterly irrelevant to OS X's success. If Apple removed it entirely tomorrow but kept all the standard functionality found within the OS X GUI only a relative handful of OS X users would even know it had happened > > I have yet to actually see you contribute usefully to any thread that > you've posted in. You instead seem to please yourself with Jesuitical > or Talmudic or Juristic attempts to deconstruct, nitpick, or otherwise > cross-examine people who seem to want to actually have a conversation, > without actually contrinuting anything yourself. You demand references > and proof and whatnot from people, but you haven't proffered anything > more than a surly opinion of your own. > > With that, I must say: > > ker-PLONK *flusshhhhhhh* Awwww....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 08:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54c3a323$0$19905$c3e8da3$33881b6a@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #68816 |
In article <m9ujqi$vhe$1@news.datemas.de>, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > On 2015-01-23 22:54:04 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: > > > On 2015-01-23 22:42:56 +0000, Alan Baker said: > > > >> On 2015-01-23 22:30:29 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: > >> > >>> On 2015-01-23 08:00:32 +0000, Alan Baker said: > >>> > >>>> On 2015-01-23 06:03:29 +0000, Oregonian Haruspex said: > >>>> > >>>>> On 2015-01-22 17:14:19 +0000, Warren Oates said: > >>>>> > >>>>>> In article <m9q27p$t0q$1@dont-email.me>, > >>>>>> Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> the whole system, write man pages for all the new Unix programs that > >>>>>>> are suddenly running, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Which ones? > >>>>> > >>>>> Many of them. > >>>>> > >>>>> Just going off the running processes on my machine right now, I will > >>>>> start at the top and list just the processes starting with A: > >>>>> > >>>>> accountd - no man page > >>>>> AddressBookSourceSync - no man page > >>>>> AirPlayUIAgent - no man page > >>>>> airportd - has man page, no real info though > >>>>> amfid - has man page, no real info though > >>>>> appleeventsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant > >>>>> config files > >>>>> AppleIDAuthAgent - no man page > >>>>> AppleMobileDeviceHelper - no man page > >>>>> apsd - has man page, no real info though > >>>>> askpermissiond - no man page > >>>>> ath - no man page > >>>>> authd - no man page > >>>>> autofsd - has man page, surprisingly lists options and relevant config > >>>>> files > >>>>> awdd - no man page > >>>>> > >>>>> I assure you this is representative of the whole system. The majority > >>>>> of daemons are undocumented, and the ones that are are usually older > >>>>> (Steve era). > >>>>> > >>>>> This is just another illustration of Apple's slide into shitware. I > >>>>> expect undocumented processes from Microsoft, but not Apple. > >>>> > >>>> Sorry, but man pages are essentially documentation about how to > >>>> interact with a process; what command options it supports, etc. > >>>> > >>>> Why should there be man pages for processes that have no method of > >>>> interaction? > >>> > >>> So I know what they're doing, obviously. > >> > >> Why does that matter? Is there a man page for the kernel in Linux? > > So, you have no answer? > > >> > >>> Perhaps, since I don't even have iCloud activated, I would like to > >>> learn how to disable the iCloud daemon that's constantly running? > >> > >> And you can't figure it out without a man page? > >> > >>> Maybe the people who have discovered runaway processes (agan, many > >>> complaints here on the Apple Support forums) could check what they are > >>> and what they're doing? > >> > >> Examples? > >> > >>> > >>> Maybe you're not a tinkerer, and maybe you don't use the BSD layer on > >>> OS X that often. That's fine. But for people who do use the BSD layer > >>> this documentation is expected as a regular part of the system. > >> > >> Here's a novel thought for you: do you think Apple is building systems > >> for tinkerers? > > Well? > > >> > >>> > >>> As I said before I expect this kind of crap from Microsoft, but not > >>> Apple. In the Steve days you had man pages for everything that at > >>> least told you that you're not supposed to run the program. Many > >>> included references too. > >> > >> No. In the "Steve days" you had man pages for processes that came to > >> the Mac with man pages and for some others. > >> > >> They were largely irrelevant to the vast majority of Mac users. > > > > Bla bla bla. I'm sure you are really keen on making me run around and > > pluck out references "proving" everything I said, so you can throw up a > > bunch of one-liners at me again. It has to be a major source of > > entertainment for you. > > > > Forget it man. All the problems I list with OS X are obvious, well > > known, and easily discovered by you. Figure it out for yourself if > > you're so interested. > > Sorry, but lack of man pages for processes you aren't supposed to > interact with directly is just not a real problem. > > > > > The fact of the matter is, the Unix neckbeard guy was the first to buy > > into OS X, > > No. He wasn't. > > > and he is going to be the first to leave. > > All dozen of them? > > > You can handwave and deny that Unix is important to OS X (to which I > > would have to say, that you're nuts if you actually believe it) but > > it's the truth, and if Apple keeps letting it go to shit it's going to > > massively hurt them in the long term. > > Unix is utterly irrelevant to OS X's success. If Apple removed it > entirely tomorrow but kept all the standard functionality found within > the OS X GUI only a relative handful of OS X users would even know it > had happened > > > > > I have yet to actually see you contribute usefully to any thread that > > you've posted in. You instead seem to please yourself with Jesuitical > > or Talmudic or Juristic attempts to deconstruct, nitpick, or otherwise > > cross-examine people who seem to want to actually have a conversation, > > without actually contrinuting anything yourself. You demand references > > and proof and whatnot from people, but you haven't proffered anything > > more than a surly opinion of your own. > > > > With that, I must say: > > > > ker-PLONK *flusshhhhhhh* > > Awwww.... oh no mister bill ... -- Where's the Vangelis music? Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her. They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene. -- notes for Blade Runner
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 17:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cii1pqFengaU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #68858 |
On 2015-01-24, Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
[144 lines snipped]
> oh no mister bill ...
Get your fucking delete key fixed.
--
Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 24th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3181
I don't have an attitude problem. If you have a problem with my attitude,
that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 16:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54c41013$0$46987$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #68870 |
In article <cii1pqFengaU2@mid.individual.net>, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: > On 2015-01-24, Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote: > > [144 lines snipped] > > > oh no mister bill ... > > Get your fucking delete key fixed. Go fuck your selfie. Who da fuck are you? -- Where's the Vangelis music? Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her. They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene. -- notes for Blade Runner
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-25 00:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ma1bsu$pj9$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68888 |
On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 16:35:15 -0500, Warren Oates wrote: > In article <cii1pqFengaU2@mid.individual.net>, > Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: > >> On 2015-01-24, Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> [144 lines snipped] >> >> > oh no mister bill ... >> >> Get your fucking delete key fixed. > > Go fuck your selfie. Who da fuck are you? cuhulin, when did Blueberry doggy get you a Mac? ...www.eatinpopcorninthegreatlandmassatwalmart! WHOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWEEEEEEEEEEE!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-25 09:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54c4fb54$0$11284$b1db1813$e2fc9064@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #68909 |
In article <ma1bsu$pj9$2@dont-email.me>, sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> wrote: > On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 16:35:15 -0500, Warren Oates wrote: > > > In article <cii1pqFengaU2@mid.individual.net>, > > Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: > > > >> On 2015-01-24, Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> [144 lines snipped] > >> > >> > oh no mister bill ... > >> > >> Get your fucking delete key fixed. > > > > Go fuck your selfie. Who da fuck are you? > > cuhulin, when did Blueberry doggy get you a Mac? > ...www.eatinpopcorninthegreatlandmassatwalmart! > WHOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWEEEEEEEEEEE! Astonishing. -- Where's the Vangelis music? Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her. They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene. -- notes for Blade Runner
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 23:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cig2s4FtvaiU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #68815 |
On 2015-01-23, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Bla bla bla. I'm sure you are really keen on making me run around and > pluck out references "proving" everything I said, so you can throw up > a bunch of one-liners at me again. It has to be a major source of > entertainment for you. Oh yes, it's hugely entertaining for foolish people to spout off pure bullshit and have to correct their idiotic lies. > Forget it man. You can't back up what you say, so fuck it! Got it. > All the problems I list with OS X are obvious, well known, and easily > discovered by you. Figure it out for yourself if you're so > interested. Sounds more like you are the one who can't figure shit out. More fool you. For the rest of us, missing man pages are no obstacle what-so-ever. > The fact of the matter is, the Unix neckbeard guy was the first to buy > into OS X, and he is going to be the first to leave. You're clueless if that's what you think. You're also completely out of touch with "the Unix neckbeard guy", which is readily apparent to anyone with a clue. > You can handwave and deny that Unix is important to OS X (to which I > would have to say, that you're nuts if you actually believe it) but > it's the truth, and if Apple keeps letting it go to shit it's going to > massively hurt them in the long term. Yes, Apple is doomed. DOOMED! Heard it all before from your ilk. You'd get along well with JF Mezie. In the mean time, I'm not holding my breath. > I have yet to actually see you contribute usefully to any thread that > you've posted in. You wouldn't know. You don't pay enough attention. [Pure bullshit deleted] -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-26 11:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmcc7m2.v83.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #68815 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> was all, like: > The fact of the matter is, the Unix neckbeard guy was the first to buy > into OS X, That is a damn lie. > -- http://2blog.kreme.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-26 21:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dfmanno-A54BA6.21343126012015@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #68815 |
In article <m9ujdd$bg8$1@dont-email.me>, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: > All the problems I list with OS X are obvious, well > known, and easily discovered by you. Figure it out for yourself if > you're so interested. Translation: "I got nothing, man, so I'll just pretend what I'm saying is true." -- D.F. Manno | dfmanno@mail.com GOP delenda est!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 23:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cig2guFtvaiU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #68802 |
On 2015-01-23, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Maybe you're not a tinkerer, and maybe you don't use the BSD layer on > OS X that often. That's fine. But for people who do use the BSD layer > this documentation is expected as a regular part of the system. As someone who makes significant use of the Unix layer, I can say you're just plain wrong. I don't have to interact with the listed tools and daemons, and do not need them documented in man pages. > As I said before I expect this kind of crap from Microsoft, but not > Apple. In the Steve days you had man pages for everything that at > least told you that you're not supposed to run the program. Bullshit. The xattr tool came along long before Steve passed away and didn't have a man page until fairly recently, after his death. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web