Re: sorting pathnames by basename

2002-08-21 Thread John Abreau
mike ledoux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I see this sort of claim fairly frequently from the Perl crowd, usually > accompanied by 'everything you need to know is in perldoc'. Yet every > time I need to figure out what one of these obscure no-letter variables > does, perldoc falls down: > >

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread Bayard R. Coolidge
[EMAIL PROTECTED] asked: >>> was Unix ever developed on any of those? (meaning the 12-bit PDP-8/PDP-12 architectures) AFAIK, no. I believe that the original development was on some PDP-11's (11/45's?) that Bell Labs had at the time. Those, of course, are 16-bit machines. But, I don't ever hearin

Re: sorting pathnames by basename

2002-08-21 Thread Erik Price
On Wednesday, August 21, 2002, at 07:52 PM, mike ledoux wrote: > So, if I'm in a rush (usually), and I need to figure out what someone > else's unreadable Perl does, where should I be looking? I'm too lazy to lift my hands off my keyboard or mouse, to the shelf right in front of my face where

Re: sorting pathnames by basename

2002-08-21 Thread bscott
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, at 7:52pm, mike ledoux wrote: > So, if I'm in a rush (usually), and I need to figure out what someone > else's unreadable Perl does, where should I be looking? For variables, try 'man perlvar' (or 'perldoc perlvar', if you prefer). Another very useful reference is 'man pe

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread bscott
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, at 6:44pm, Jon Hall wrote: > To throw a bit (pun un-intentional) more into this discussion, don't > assume that a "byte" was eight bits. The PDP-8, Linc-8 and PDP-12 for > instance, were all twelve bit words, broken down into two six-bit > characters. I'm just curious... w

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread Jon Hall
To throw a bit (pun un-intentional) more into this discussion, don't assume that a "byte" was eight bits. The PDP-8, Linc-8 and PDP-12 for instance, were all twelve bit words, broken down into two six-bit characters. Nevertheless, back in those days saving a few bits for every entry in a symbol

Re: Redhat 7.2 install on Alpha

2002-08-21 Thread Rich Payne
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Derek Doucette wrote: > I'm pretty sure that there are a few Alpha people on this list. I'm > trying to install 7.2 on a digital alphaserver 800 5/500. When trying > to boot I get the following: > > IDE Command not successfully terminated > ST0 = 40 > Missing

Redhat 7.2 install on Alpha

2002-08-21 Thread Derek Doucette
I'm pretty sure that there are a few Alpha people on this list. I'm trying to install 7.2 on a digital alphaserver 800 5/500. When trying to boot I get the following: IDE Command not successfully terminated ST0 = 40 Missing address mark I have searched google a bit and found some

Re: MELBA Tonight

2002-08-21 Thread Matthew J. Brodeur
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Jeffry Smith wrote: > What's the word on a MELBA meeting tonight? I can finally make one, but I > haven't seen an announcement. You must have missed this: On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > When: Wednesday, 2

Re: [gnhlug-announce] MELBA Meeting Wednesday night

2002-08-21 Thread Jefferson Kirkland
The usual place would be Martha's Exchange on Main St. in Nashua. Here is a link to the directions: http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Www/Marthas_directions Dinner is at 6pm. Go in the front door and turn right. Turn left at the wall and go past the micro brewers. The usual table(s) a

Re: [gnhlug-announce] MELBA Meeting Wednesday night

2002-08-21 Thread bscott
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, at 4:24pm, Ganesan M wrote: >> (and to heckle Ben :) > ^^ > Where the heck is this Heckle Ben? Just kidding. Alas, I won't be able to make it tonight, so you will have to find someone else to heckle instead. ;-) -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The op

Re: [gnhlug-announce] MELBA Meeting Wednesday night

2002-08-21 Thread Ganesan M
> > When: Wednesday, 21 August 2002, 19:30ish > Where: Martha's Exchange, Nashua (2nd floor) > Why: Because we haven't gotten together there in a while. > (and to heckle Ben :) ^^ Where the heck is this Heckle Ben? Just kidding. I don't know the usual place. I 'd appreciate if y

MELBA?

2002-08-21 Thread Jeffry Smith
What's the word on a MELBA meeting tonight? I can finally make one, but I haven't seen an announcement. If there isn't one, is anyone planning on going to Martha's anyway for dinner/talk? jeff (who does, in fact, live) ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing li

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread bscott
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, at 2:52pm, Bill Freeman wrote: > The description is close. Radix 50 actually allows you to get three > characters into a 16 bit word (40*40*40 <= 65536), or 6 into a 32 bit > word. Ya know, I thought a gain of only one character (five characters, vs the four 8-bit bytes in

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread Bill Freeman
Mark Komarinski writes: > Good thing more colors other than green and amber were invented too. Newcommer! We only had black print on those cards and listings. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gn

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread Bill Freeman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Way back when 16 kilobytes was a lot of memory, a method for encoding five > characters into a single 32-bit machine word was developed. It was called > "Radix-50", or "RAD50". The 50 is octal, or 40 decimal. The character set > was 26 monocase letters, 10 digi

Re: sorting pathnames by basename

2002-08-21 Thread Bob Bell
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 05:31:14PM -0400, Kevin D. Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You have a list of stuff that you want sorted. The problem is is that > you want your stuff sorted according to a field contained in the input > (the last field). Further complicating matters is the fact that

Re: [Tutor] little something in the way of file parsing

2002-08-21 Thread Erik Price
On Tuesday, August 20, 2002, at 05:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Heh. This is pretty ironic. One of the standard Luddite responses to > Python is that whitespace is syntactically significant. Personally, I > find > it a bit weird, but I'm not used to it, and it certainly isn't a > sho

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread bscott
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, at 10:10am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Okay, I'll buy that, but why create a linker that only supports 5 > character function names? Okay, some Google searches eventually tracked down this explanation: Way back when 16 kilobytes was a lot of memory, a method for encoding

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread Mark Komarinski
Good thing more colors other than green and amber were invented too. -Mark On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 11:00:10AM -0400, Andrew W. Gaunt wrote: > > Back in the early days of computers there weren't > as many characters to go around and folks had to > be very conservative with their use. Since then

Re: sorting pathnames by basename

2002-08-21 Thread Kevin D. Clark
Bob Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Fix your box :-) Point taken, although I try to write portable code, and as such, I will always be a little bit conservative when I am using sed. > > 2: Those options to sort don't work on my Linux box. > > Really? They work on mine. What `sort` d

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread Andrew W. Gaunt
Back in the early days of computers there weren't as many characters to go around and folks had to be very conservative with their use. Since then, more have been pulled out of the ground so we can use them more liberally. -- __ | 0|___||. Andrew Gaunt *nix Sys. Admin., etc. _| _| :

Re: sorting pathnames by basename

2002-08-21 Thread Hewitt Tech
The complexity of a computer language can result in the use of language subsets. Specifically, if the language has too many features, programmers will only learn a subset and since different programmers will learn different subsets, it becomes difficult for language implementors to guarantee that

Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually)

2002-08-21 Thread pll
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 16:52:35 EDT "Steven W. Orr" said: >On Tue, 20 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >=>In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 15:16:58 CDT >=>Thomas Charron said: >=> >=>For example, in shell, the construct: >=> >=> cd /tmp && rm foo > >Whotchoo talkin 'bout W

Re: UNIX Arcana [was Re: Perl (or Unix vs. MS, actually) ]

2002-08-21 Thread pll
In a message dated: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 16:43:36 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > I believe it was Ken Thompson, and I believe the remark was intended to be >humorous. Step back and ask: Why would he spell "create" as "creat" in the >first place? If you are going to type five characters, you might

Re: sorting pathnames by basename

2002-08-21 Thread bscott
On 21 Aug 2002, at 8:52am, Kevin D. Clark wrote: >> ... sort -fdt/k1 ... > > ... Those options to sort don't work on my Linux box ... I assume you mean the -k switch? On my RHL 7.3 box, which has GNU sort from GNU textutils 2.0.21, the "info" manual for "sort" states: > Warning: the `+

Re: sorting pathnames by basename

2002-08-21 Thread Bob Bell
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 08:52:14AM -0400, Kevin D. Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bob Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > sed -e 's;\(\(.*\)/\)*\(.*\);\3/\1\3;' | sort -fdt/k1 | sed -e 's;[^/]*/\(.*\);\1;' > > This doesn't work for me for a number of reasons: > > 1: sed is known to contai

Re: sorting pathnames by basename

2002-08-21 Thread Kevin D. Clark
Bob Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > '/' is an illegal character in a filename, right? > > sed -e 's;\(\(.*\)/\)*\(.*\);\3/\1\3;' | sort -fdt/k1 | sed -e 's;[^/]*/\(.*\);\1;' This doesn't work for me for a number of reasons: 1: sed is known to contain a number of bugs, and you're hitting o