Linux-Misc Digest #338, Volume #19 Sat, 6 Mar 99 20:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: compiling QT for KDE?? (Gary Momarison)
Re: whoops. fdisk and partition numbering woes. (Tim Moore)
Re: MCSE preparation exams (Raymond Doetjes)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Jason Clifford)
Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion (steve mcadams)
Re: Linux Wannabe: which distribution? (David Kirkpatrick)
ATI Rage PRO LT Video Card... ("B. Jay")
Re: Downloading at half the speed under Linux vs NT (mist)
xmgr: how to compute a frequency histogram (Andreas Eisenkolb)
Re: Directory colours in RedHat 5.2 (ozric)
Re: Linux Wannabe: which distribution? (MiragePhotos)
Problem with starting X11-Server+KDE ("Torsten Schmidt.")
Re: best offline newsreader? (Christopher B. Browne)
Re: Linux Wannabe: which distribution? (Rob Clark)
Cant get dynamic IP-Adress at PPP-Dialin ("Torsten Schmidt.")
glibc2.1.x + gnu.org 'political issues'?? (jik-)
Re: Public license question (John Hasler)
Re: C (or Perl?) code to import Excel? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Public license question (Isaac)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gary Momarison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: compiling QT for KDE??
Date: 06 Mar 1999 00:08:45 -0800
chips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> *created .profile in my home directory and set all the evironment
> variables per the instructions at ftp://ftp.troll.no/qt/INSTALL
NOTICE: Please request help on comp.os.linux.help or one of the other
linux newsgroups, leaving this one for miscellaneous discussions.
I, for one, am only answering couple of help requests at most per day
on this newsgroup, just for the opportunity to post this notice.
It appears that you didn't "source" the .profile file after changing
it's environmental variables. That would be "source ~/.profile"
or maybe ". ~/.profile" depending on your shell. Doing this changes
the environmental variables of the current shell. Just changing
.profile doesn't do anything until some program (like a shell)
reads it.
The way some people have there .profile written
(like PATH=xxx:yyy:$PATH), sourcing it multiple times might have
nasty consequences so be aware of that. And some people don't use
.profile; just .bashrc or some others.
--
Look for Linux info at http://www.dejanews.com/home_ps.shtml and in
Gary's Encyclopedia at http://www.aa.net/~swear/pedia/index.html
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 22:30:49 -0800
From: Tim Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: whoops. fdisk and partition numbering woes.
/dev/hda5 > 5 NT
/dev/hda6 > 6 Linux swap
/dev/hda7 > 7 Linux
...
/dev/hda5 > 5 Linux swap
/dev/hda6 > 6 Linux
/dev/hda7 > 7 (was) NT
o LILO: linux single root=/dev/hd6 initrd=
o In /etc/fstab and /etc/lilo.conf change all /dev/hda6 references to
/dev/hda5. Similarly 7 -> 6 and 5 -> 7.
o Rerun /sbin/lilo.
o Reboot from disk.
Once you get used to it, you'll be splitting and shuffling partitions
without even having to think about it.
--
[Replies: make the double y a single]
"Everything is permitted. Nothing is forbidden."
WS Burroughs.
------------------------------
From: Raymond Doetjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: MCSE preparation exams
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 10:39:33 +0100
I agree Tim.
MCSE is just a commercial stunt to make money. They do learn alot but it
is just stupid learning work. They don't learn howto troubleshoot a
problem nor do the really know the background of processes.
They know where to click but that is that. The don't know why things
work the way they do so they probably never go out and ask the right
questions. I think that is the most important thing in the I.T. This way
you can always ask for the help from a person whoms field it is. Most of
the MCSE people I know feel like they are god, but in fact they don't
know ass much as the say they do. ANd instead of asking a question they
just go out and fiddle on their own since they are to pride to ask since
they are MCSE certified. Then again I may have given them the answer
straight away.
Raymond
------------------------------
From: Jason Clifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 00:04:43 +0000
On Fri, 5 Mar 1999, Donn Miller wrote:
> But can you get cable modem access in the UK? If so, how much is it per month?
> Mine (Pittsburgh area, USA) is $39.95 per mo.
No we cannot. The Cable Co.s have annouced the service for release in
*some* areas this summer but they have not released any pricing
information yet.
Also note that historically UK telecoms prices have been far higher than
those in the US.
Jason Clifford
Definite Linux Systems
http://definite.ukpost.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 05:55:16 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gotta chime in on this one...
[Posted & mailed, snipped, quoted is ">"]
Francois-Rene Rideau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I certainly would want to live without it!
>Why can't I? Because I have to run intrinsically unreliable software.
Right.
>Why is software so unreliable? Because people use shoddy low-level languages.
I disagree. You can't get any better in terms of reliability and
performance than hand-crafted assembler. That's about as low as you
can get on the level chain. Point is, there aren't many people around
who can still -write- hand-crafted assembler. Probably a good thing
because most programmers don't think that tightly. But back to point,
it is with the higher-level languages that errors are introduced.
I'm probably being unclear here. Let me try to simplify the way I see
if it that's possible, since I'm very simpleminded:
1. Best possible opsys language is hand-crafted assembler; this
assumes you have a highly disciplined artist writing the code.
2. As language moves up the abstraction chain, three things happen:
a) More people are capable of programming it.
b) It's harder to tell what the compiler is doing, and compilers
being the traditionally poorly-documented creatures they are, and
compiler-producers generally relying on higher-level languages
whenever possible so they minimize their cost-to-market, the higher
you go the more bloat you get and the less reliability you get.
It boils down to P (precision of programmer) * E (error inherent in
language, those little gaps between intention and actuality). The P
value maxes out; there's a state of programming excellence you can
reach but cannot be passed. With the P value maxed out, your E value
is what counts. And it goes to hell as the concepts get bigger (and
cloudier).
As you probably see I totally disagree with your statement ;-]
>Why don't users care? Because they're trained to not see the sources anyway,
>and can't make the difference.
Depends on who your user is. The user of a kernel ought, by rights,
to be the driver or support-library or server developer. Different by
an order of magnitude than an end-user-app writer who has to be
concerned with usability and appearance, and to whom performance is
seldom an issue since most time is spent waiting for end-user input.
>Why don't corporate programmers don't use higher-level languages?
>Because high-level languages depend on elaborate runtimes and libraries,
>and corporate hoarders can only use whatever lies within
>their license barriers, which gets worse when they need interoperability.
Nonsense. Corporate programmers do use higher-level languages. In
fact they user whatever they are told to use, whether they like it or
not.
>Happily, there is free software.
>With free software, users care, and so do programmers.
Well duh, since the programmers are the users, right?
>With free software, programmers do not hesitate to develop elaborate
>high-level languages: Elisp, Perl, Scheme, ML, Haskell, Mercury.
And this is a good thing? Language proliferation is a side-effect of
specialization and evolution, nothing more; once the science of
computing has evolved sufficiently, we'll probably have a relative
handful of highly evolved and very different languages, each with its
own problem-domain of which it is unquestioned master.
>Of *course* when you have to face stupid code written by stupid people
>in stupid languages, you have to use stupid low-level barriers.
You use stupid low-level barriers in the highest layer that loses
trust in the layer above it. If you have a bunch of bozos writing
drivers, you enforce your assumptions at the kernel level. If only
the godlike write your drivers and servers and support libraries, then
you can afford to put your idiot-checking at the library level. We
all know that idiot-checking is absolutely required at the end-user
level.
>By following your argument to its extreme point
>(which is the one and only test for an argument),
It's only one of the tests for an argument; actually there are any
number depending on how you look at it. Testing one extreme is
inadequate. Would you test only the high bound value on an index you
are receiveing and simply access the array with it, or would you also
make sure it's not -1 for example? Matter of trust.
>> Also, a modularised design with simple links that can be made
>> network-transparent (message passing), will scale better towards large
>> scaling distributed environments, without much re-design.
>Mind you, concurrent programming languages like JOCAML not only
>are fully network transparent, they also make re-implementation
>(not just re-design) useless, and their compiler also optimize
>the local case, so you don't pay the price of a low-level "modular" design.
Modularized designs with simple interfaces are by nature more
generalized than they need to be for any given application of their
function. As such, they are less efficient than monolithic designs;
they know less about how they will be used and therefore must check
more.
The problem is that developing a truely monolithic chunk of code
larger than a breadbasket is a matter of stripping down generalized
algorithms, classes, whatever, into their essential parts as required
in the specific use they are put to. It's gruntwork. Nobody likes to
do that. We'd prefer to develop the logic once (or maybe, "one last
time") and then encapsulate it and forget it, no matter what language
we write in. Basic conflict resulting in big, smart, mostly unused
modules, resulting in large codesize, increased load-time, yada yada
bad stuff.
>Certainly every single program written in LISP, ML, Perl, Modula-3, Haskell,
>Mercury, Prolog, or otherwise high-level language, is formally proven
>to never ever do an unauthorized memory access,
>[least you explicitly do unsafe operations].
>This is already much more than stupid low-level memory protection
>will *ever* bring to you.
Only within those codepaths that have been tested. It is eaiser than
one might think to create a new combination of factors that drives
code through a completely un-exercised codepath.
>> Apart from that, there will
>> never be clean and uniform inter-module interfaces unless 'forced' upon
>> designers by the barriers (i.e. protocols) you mention.
>Why wouldn't there be? Do you think programmers are stupid?
I know it for a fact. Not only that, we're stubborn and pigheaded and
arrogant and damn sure we know better than the next guy. Generally
:-)
>If they are possible (in whatever language, including C),
>programmers will use them whereever useful.
>If they are not possible, mandating them everywhere by force,
>regardless of their utility, won't make them happen.
Ever hear of "Murphy's Law"? If somebody CAN do something stupid,
they WILL do it. The trick is not to check them again and again at
every level; once they reach a trusted level stop checking.
>That's the typical fascist pig approach!
Apparently only "fascist pig" programmers are worth a damn then. Hey,
so be it, fascist pig or not, I will continue validating input
whenever I think it's coming from a bozo, because I have learned that
not doing this is a Bad Thing because it causes you Pain.
>Instead, I propose that you open your mind to the concept of a compiler,
>whereby the computer does the work of mapping higher-level programs
>into lower-level instructions, in ways that preserve system invariants.
>And in case you haven't heard about it despite the hype,
>let me introduce you to the concept of compilers that work even for
>stupid low-level code for pseudo-"portable" second-zone language bytecodes
>(meant to lengthen the evil reign of binary compatibility
>with proprietary code): even braindead languages can be reasonably efficiently
>implemented in a way that is intrinsically secure,
>without the need for stupid low-level barriers.
Instead, I propose that you consider for a moment that irremovable gap
between intention and action that is the root of all programming
error. Have you never typed a statement that was not in fact saying
what you intended to say?
>I think you should get both your brain hemispheres up and running for once.
>Well, at least either. See? ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM is sooooo easy!
Been a while since you've talked to your corpus collosum, has it?
Drop in and say "hi!" some time, I'm sure it misses you.
>So what? The topic was: "microkernels", I explained why they were evil.
No kernel is evil. Only the Vile Bill is truely evil, and he is being
emasculated as we speak, so you really don't need to worry about evil.
There are much better things to rail about.
>The C language doesn't allow to specify high-level interfaces
>with rich semantics.
Did somebody see a skunk? Something about this stinks. Hello. You
can do pretty much whatever you want in C if you know how to write it.
Geez, assembler gives you even more flexibility and power.
Well, I'm even boring myself. I think you might be trolling to draw
attention to some new higher-than-high-level language you have
invented. Or not.
____________________________________________________________________________
"Always enforce your assumptions." -steve, http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: David Kirkpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux Wannabe: which distribution?
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 09:27:14 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill,
Go with RH -the 3CD set with the floppy & book included - 28
bucks. The book is worth that. Its install is reliable and has
an upgrade option to update the load if you missed something or
want more later after you get more info on things. Plus since
there are more & more people using it the questions you have will
probably have been answered before so you can search for answers.
http://searchlinux.com
deja news
Davidk
Bill wrote:
>
> I'm really eager to get started installing and using Linux, about installing
> and using which I know just about nothing. My friend gave me a CD he had
> put together with Debian on it, and even installed Debian on my SCSI hard
> drive, but he forgot to include my Initio SCSI controller in the kernel so I
> can't boot. He downloaded a new item (module? patch? kernel version?) which
> definitely supports this SCSI controller but mistakenly figured to mount it
> later instead of including it at the boot so it can be used then. I doubt I
> have said this exactly right so I hope you can understand what I'm trying to
> convey. Another problem is that Lilo isn't configured and placed.
>
> And when I try to figure out how to do these things, I discover many of the
> readme and installation information files are apparently corrupted (they
> won't display in Windows Notepad or Word Pad), perhaps by the CDR process,
> although other CD's he's made work fine. So I guess I'm on my own and will
> have to erase what my friend has done and start over.
>
> I spent a couple of hours reading Linux books in Barnes & Noble today. I'm
> sold on trying Linux, but can't seem to figure out whether to go for
> Slackware or Red Hat, both of which had several good books with CDROM's
> included. Or Debian, which my friend has chosen and recommended but Debian
> wasn't specifically dealt with in any of the books I could find.
>
> Or should I just start out with the Moron's Guide or the Idiot's Guide to
> Linux?
>
> I really would appreciate anyone's recommendation or helpful information.
> Thanks very much. Since my mail server is not reliable, I'd appreciate an
> email copy of your reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "B. Jay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ATI Rage PRO LT Video Card...
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 09:28:56 -0500
==============F43A5BE93C165C8D48936EBE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Has anyone tried to get their XFree86 working with their ATI Rage PRO LT
card??
I'm almost there...but having difficulty getting above 640x480. My
video monitor goes into standby when higher resolutions are picked...
Try the following page which you may find useful if you're also having
difficulty. You'll have to edit the XF86Config file manually by
following directions...
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/rchau/top.html#xfree
Good luck! And let me know how to get some decent screen resolutions...
BJ
==============F43A5BE93C165C8D48936EBE
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
Has anyone tried to get their XFree86 working with their ATI Rage PRO LT
card??
<P>I'm almost there...but having difficulty getting above 640x480.
My video monitor goes into standby when higher resolutions are picked...
<P>Try the following page which you may find useful if you're also having
difficulty. You'll have to edit the XF86Config file manually by following
directions...
<P><FONT COLOR="#FF0000"><FONT SIZE=+1><A
HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/ca/rchau/top.html#xfree">http://www.angelfire.com/ca/rchau/top.html#xfree</A></FONT></FONT><FONT
COLOR="#000000"></FONT>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000">Good luck! And let me know how to get some
decent screen resolutions...</FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#000000">BJ</FONT></HTML>
==============F43A5BE93C165C8D48936EBE==
------------------------------
From: mist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Downloading at half the speed under Linux vs NT
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 14:27:03 +0000
Reply-To: mist <new$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Collin Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribed to us that -
>I read some place that packets on the internet are 572. I have the
>exact model modem and I have my MTU and MRU set at 552. I read that
>value some place too. Mines work fine.
>
MTU is not a constant thing. Some routers may have greater MTUs across
their networks than others. 576 Octets (I think) is the minimum
required standard that all routers should be able to pass in one frame.
I think that as for setting your own MTU at your end, it probably
depends on what sort of data you're sending/receiving. Setting a high
MTU and sending lots of small bits of info would be pretty wasteful, but
it might be good for downloading files, so long as all the networks in-
between yourself and the source support that MTU size, otherwise your
messages will be fragmented anyway...
--
Mist.
------------------------------
From: Andreas Eisenkolb <amadeus@nospam!.med.uni-muenchen.de>
Crossposted-To: comp.misc
Subject: xmgr: how to compute a frequency histogram
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 15:52:51 +0100
Hi Xmgr-users,
I wonder how to plot a frequncy histogram using xmgr.
>From data that is given in form of one single column
I want to produce a frequency distribution as shown below
(don't read this with a proportional font):
DATA HISTOGRAM
1 ^ _
2 | _| |_
3 | _ _| | | |_ _
3 | | | | | | | | |
4 -------------------->
4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4
5
5
6
7
cheers, Andreas
To remail substitute "nospam!" by "imp"
------------------------------
From: ozric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Directory colours in RedHat 5.2
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 14:52:35 GMT
Thanks, I always wondered about that I started out on slack 3.1 ;)
William Wueppelmann wrote:
>
> In our last episode (Fri, 5 Mar 1999 10:32:50 +0200),
> the artist formerly known as Devan Willemburg said:
> >On Thu, 4 Mar 1999, kernel wrote:
> >
> >)regoltd wrote:
> >)>
> >)> I have recently installed RedHat 5.2 and am new to Linux. I have previously
> >)> tried Slackware and liked the way the directories and other files were in
> >)> colours and the normal text type files were white. I prefer the RedHat to
> >)> the Slackware because it is easier for me to use until I get use to Linux.
> >)> Can I do this with RedHat 5.2 and how do I do this.
> >)> M. Rego
> >
> >Try adding the alias: alias ls="ls -l"
> >to your .bashrc file... then type "source .bashrc"... that should have you
> >seeing groovey psychodelicness all over your screen (:
>
> That's just going to give the long-form listing. e.g.:
>
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 william william 32 Feb 24 16:58 /home/william/.vimrc
>
> Try
>
> alias ls="ls --color -F"
>
> which provides colours plus the file type symbols (e.g. executables are
> displayed with a '*", symlinks with a "@" and so forth).
>
> --
> William
> It is pitch black. You are likely to be spammed by a grue.
------------------------------
From: MiragePhotos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux Wannabe: which distribution?
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 23:02:22 +0800
I'd suggest you try Mandrake 5.3 (http://www.linuxmandrake.com). It'll
cost around $2.00 from Cheapbytes (http://www.cheapbytes.com). It's
based on Redhat 5.2 but has the latest version of KDE and other assorted
goodies. I bought the Official Redhat 5.2 specifically for the manual
and have found it so poorly written as to be virtually useless (I do
technical writing on the side).
Try to get "Using Linux" (4th Ed) from QUE. I think it's one of the
better written books on the market. It doesn't assume the user knows to
much and explains things a little more clearly, IMHO.
Good luck!
Corey
Mirage Photos
Taipei, Taiwan
--
BeOS R4, Mandrake 5.3, OS/2 Warp 4 & Solaris 7
Fine Art Nudes Kyoto
http://member.nifty.ne.jp/photo/gallery/C_SHADOW/index.html
------------------------------
From: "Torsten Schmidt." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Problem with starting X11-Server+KDE
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 15:35:35 +0100
If I boot my machine (P60,64MB,PCI VGA with 4MB&S3Virge,AHA2940UW)
cold and directly into Linux and X11 with KDE the startx hangs the
machine up.
But if I boot the machine first into Win95 and ends this "os" to ms-dos
and start
the linux now with loadlin-, the startx works fine and the x11server
works.
Thanks for your help...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher B. Browne)
Subject: Re: best offline newsreader?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 14:35:44 GMT
On Sat, 6 Mar 1999 00:45:00 -0800, Richard Latimer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>That's my point. Unix users apparently are quite happy with
>the console and plain text. The rest of the world has moved
>on to other things.
My car still has wheels on it. Someone invented that back in the
early mists of time, and the world has not "moved on to other things."
Occasionally people come up with peculiar aircraft designs involving
lifting surfaces that look rather differemt from wings, but as for the
company I work for, our fleet has not "moved on to other things."
The world has not, generally speaking, "moved on to other things."
--
Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
-- Henry Spencer <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - "What have you contributed to free software today?..."
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux Wannabe: which distribution?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Clark)
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 15:28:20 GMT
In article <7bqpqv$9uk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm really eager to get started installing and using Linux, about installing
>and using which I know just about nothing. My friend gave me a CD he had
>put together with Debian on it, and even installed Debian on my SCSI hard
>drive, but he forgot to include my Initio SCSI controller in the kernel so I
Using the same distribution as your friend can be extremely beneficial
when you need help. Debian and Red Hat will both do the job, but your
friend might throw up his hands if you have problems with a Red Hat
configuration tool.
As far as books, you are better off avoiding "Dummies" and "Idiots" books
because they are oversimplistic, and Linux isn't simple. "Running Linux"
is often cited as a good book; also try http://www.linux.org for book
recommendations.
Have fun!
Rob Clark, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html
------------------------------
From: "Torsten Schmidt." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Cant get dynamic IP-Adress at PPP-Dialin
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 15:37:00 +0100
I can�t get dynamic IP-adress on ppp-dialin ?
------------------------------
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: glibc2.1.x + gnu.org 'political issues'??
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 07:16:27 -0800
What are these political issues that keep gnu.org from distributing
glibc2 updates? There is a text file at thier ftp site that says
QUOTE
glibc-2.1 has been (temporarily) removed, until some
political issues are worked out.
ENDQUOTE
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 14:13:56 GMT
Geoffrey writes:
> However, if you write a document called "Analysis of the use of the word
> "snow" in the novel _Snow Crash_", which refers to each page on which the
> word is used, you can distribute it without violating copyright---not
> just because it's probably fair use, but because it doesn't actually
> contain a significant part of the novel.
Excellent example. The analysis could avoid including any portion of
_Snow Crash_ by using page and line number references, and could explicitly
say "In order to use this book you must have a copy of _Snow Crash_" and
still not infringe the copyright. The fact that the analysis can only be
used with _Snow Crash_ is irrelelvant.
You could even publish a set of marginal notes with instructions to paste
them into a copy of _Snow Crash_. The result of the pasting would be a
derivative of both _Snow Crash_ and your notes, but the notes as
distributed would not be a derivative of _Snow Crash_.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.apps.spreadsheets,microsoft.public.excel.programming
Subject: Re: C (or Perl?) code to import Excel?
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 1999 16:38:52 GMT
Try again: is there either Perl or C standalone code to pull the alphanumeric
data from several worksheets in an excel spreadsheet? The code must run on a
platform on which excel does not run.
/ivo welch
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bud Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > Is there portable C code that imports the text (numbers) in Excel
> > spreadsheets?
> >
> > Nothing fancy; I do not care about formatting or other issues. I just want
> > tab-delimited text fields, preferably from multiple worksheets in the same
> > spreadsheet.
>
> Sounds like a job for perl.
>
> --
> Bud Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.sirinet.net/~budr/twocups.gif
>
> Linux twocups 2.0.36 #2 Tue Feb 23 18:47:52 CST 1999 i586 unknown
> 5:51am up 10:25, 2 users, load average: 0.18, 0.15, 0.19
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Isaac)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: 6 Mar 1999 16:46:37 GMT
On Sat, 06 Mar 1999 00:54:03 GMT, Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>NF Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Let's take a slightly more tenuous link between the GPL work and another
>>program. What if I wrote a proprietory program which acts as a wrapper
>>to gcc, allowing you to specify source files and compilation options
>>using a gui. My program uses the options supplied and then exec's gcc.
>>To me this seems little different from the dynamic linking case. It
>>further fulfils the condition that my program would be useless without
>>gcc; yet I very much doubt anyone could claim that it was a "derived
>>work" of gcc.
>
>Based on what RMS has said about plug-ins, I think he *would*.
>
I think you're wrong.
Isn't this pretty much a description of how the RCS gui that someone
distributes commerically works. I'm pretty sure the company distributing
that got RMS's blessing.
Isaac
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Misc Digest
******************************
