REQUEST FOR URGENT BUSINESS ASSISTANCE
--
Your contact was availed to me by the chamber of
commerce. It was given to me because of my diplomatic
status as I did not disclose the actual reasons for
which I sought your contact. But I was
assured That you are rep
If you "only have access to a Win95 machine", why aren't you just
getting the Win32 version of Java from Sun? Win95 and Linux are so
completely *not* similar in any way...
Volker Augustin wrote:
>
> Ok, there has been a long discussion about using bzip2 or not. Apart from personal
>problems us
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Tucker Balch wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to have java-linux even if I have to
> download and install bzip2 to use it. Still I think it's better
> to stick with more commonly available installation tools (and libraries
> and kernels for that matter).
>
> Is java-li
On Wed, 31 Mar 1999, Volker Augustin wrote:
> Ok, there has been a long discussion about using bzip2 or not. Apart from
> personal problems using bzip2 (I have only access to a Win95 machine and
You oughta upgrade it. We do have a win95 machine here: it's the least
used.
> bzip2 --help does dis
On Thu, Apr 01, 1999 at 12:19:44PM +0200, Robb Shecter wrote:
>
> Peter Kovacs wrote:
>
> > jdk1.2pre-v1.tar.bz2 24457274
> > jdk1.2pre-v1.tar.gz26062044
> >
> > Means a 6.1% better compression rate. Is it really that much improvement? If it
>was at least 1
Peter Kovacs wrote:
> jdk1.2pre-v1.tar.bz2 24457274
> jdk1.2pre-v1.tar.gz26062044
>
> Means a 6.1% better compression rate. Is it really that much improvement? If it was
>at least 15%...
>
Well, that looks like 1.6 MB per download. So, multiplied by the 5
jdk1.2pre-v1.tar.bz2 24457274
jdk1.2pre-v1.tar.gz26062044
Means a 6.1% better compression rate. Is it really that much improvement? If it was at
least 15%...
Peter
John Goerzen wrote:
> "David Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > It was a bit rude as w
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Tucker Balch wrote:
> Nobody has bzip2, whatever that is. You're making your product less portable.
> If you do insist on keeping bzip2, you'll need to change your installation
> instructions because they reference gzip'd files.
Excuse me, but all people *I* know (personall
Ok, there has been a long discussion about using bzip2 or not. Apart from personal
problems using
bzip2 (I have only access to a Win95 machine and bzip2 --help does display help, but
since it's
going to stderr you cannot read all of it and since I could not find documentation I
have no clue
My RedHat 5.2 CD included bzip2...
Tucker Balch wrote:
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to have java-linux even if I have to
> download and install bzip2 to use it. Still I think it's better
> to stick with more commonly available installation tools (and libraries
> and kernels for that matter
Umm... bzip2 is open source and freely available to anyone (I compiled
the binaries I use myself).
David Wall wrote:
>
> It was a bit rude as written, and that's part of the problem with email in
> general. Sometimes terse statements sound worse than the intended message
> was to be delivered.
Tucker Balch wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to have java-linux even if I have to
> download and install bzip2 to use it. Still I think it's better
> to stick with more commonly available installation tools (and libraries
> and kernels for that matter).
>
> Is java-linux for kernel develop
Nelson Minar writes:
> >Nobody has bzip2, whatever that is. You're making your product less portable.
Perhaps, the author intended to say "nobody with no clue has bzip2 or knows
what it is". Indeed this is a valid point, albeit delivered in a slightly
suboptimal way. If you are releasing pre-
> "TB" == Tucker Balch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TB> Is java-linux for kernel developers (100s of people) or the
TB> linux masses (millions)? I suppose Debian includes it, but
TB> RedHat 5.2 does not include bzip2, nor bzip2 capable tar.
Sorry to contradict you but bzip2 is an
OK. I surrender. --Tucker
Martin Little wrote:
>
> Tucker Balch wrote:
>
> > Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to have java-linux even if I have to
> > download and install bzip2 to use it. Still I think it's better
> > to stick with more commonly available installation tools (and libraries
> >
"David Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It was a bit rude as written, and that's part of the problem with email in
> general. Sometimes terse statements sound worse than the intended message
> was to be delivered.
You said "nobody uses bzip2", which is CLEARLY incorrect.
> While I am really
Tucker Balch wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to have java-linux even if I have to
> download and install bzip2 to use it. Still I think it's better
> to stick with more commonly available installation tools (and libraries
> and kernels for that matter).
>
> Is java-linux for kernel devel
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to have java-linux even if I have to
download and install bzip2 to use it. Still I think it's better
to stick with more commonly available installation tools (and libraries
and kernels for that matter).
Is java-linux for kernel developers (100s of people) or the linu
Cool I am a nobody now I thought that distributeing it using bzip2
was an excellent idea in that in promotes using bandwidth friendly
software and gets people using it.
Cheers
James.
Pooh Bear -- "I am just a bear of little brain"
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Tucker Balch wrote:
> Nobody has bz
It was a bit rude as written, and that's part of the problem with email in
general. Sometimes terse statements sound worse than the intended message
was to be delivered.
While I am really happy with the work that this free software team has been
doing, and I appreciate and make good use of their
Tucker Balch wrote:
>
> Nobody has bzip2, whatever that is. You're making your product less portable.
> If you do insist on keeping bzip2, you'll need to change your installation
> instructions because they reference gzip'd files.
Nobody has gzip, whatever that is. You're making your product l
m: Tucker Balch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 1999 10:02 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: go back to gzip!
>
>
> Nobody has bzip2, whatever that is. You're making your
> product less portable.
> If you do insist on keeping bzip2
>Nobody has bzip2, whatever that is. You're making your product less portable.
It always amazes me when people using free software are rude to the
folks who are doing the work. Your message was impolite, and you were
too lazy to go find bzip2, thereby wasting everyone else's time.
You can get b
Nobody has bzip2, whatever that is. You're making your product less portable.
If you do insist on keeping bzip2, you'll need to change your installation
instructions because they reference gzip'd files.
--Tucker
--
Tucker Balch
Computer Science Department
Carnegie Mellon University
http://www.
lied! Does
anyone have any idea why this could be happening, and how I can get back
on the list?
TIA,
-Armen
--
Armen Yampolsky
Axiom Software Labs
New York
Well, at long last my website, domain and personal email addresses are
back online. To be specific:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=> That's me
http://tumu.home.mindspring.com
=> The main URL until I make enough $$ for full domain aliasing
http://tumu.home.mindspring.com/ajug/index.html
=>
If it seems like I haven't been paying attention to java-linux as of
late, I haven't. I've been in the middle of moving all my stuff
and driving down to texas from virginia. Anyway, I'm back again,
please bring anything critical to my attention as I don't really have
27 matches
Mail list logo
