Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:48:25PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:38:09PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > > Then they deserve to be hurt. Really. We can't possibly support > > > dribbling idiots, and frankly, I have no

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:34:06PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > You are Michael Schwern, and I claim your m4d h41rkut skillz. Oh, get real. Schwern has *no* relation to haircuts *at all*... dha -- David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ We went on holiday by mis

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 03:44:04PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > Am I allowed to mention -MM-DD, which actually sorts best of all... Do > we really not learn from Y2K? You have a Y10K problem. -- For me, UNIX is a way of being. -Armando P. Stettner

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote: > BTW - I've just had some fun trying to uncompress a .zip file on Linux! tar > gzip and gunzip don't seem to want to know. Guess that makes me a luser! you need the unzip(1) NAMEunzip - list, test and extract compressed files in a ZI

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

- Original Message - From: "Robert Shiels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 6:47 PM Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects > .tar.gz - wtf is that, why isn't there a zip file. > > People keep misunderstanding this point: just because someone is usin

Re: Module of the Year contender...

>At Tue, 20 Mar 2001 17:01:19 +, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot >e: >> On the shoulders of such giants as Date::Christmas, Date::Discordian >> and Date::Tolkien::Shire stands Date::MMDDYY! >> >> http://search.cpan.org/search?dist=Date-MMDDYY >> >> Reason #120398 why I need to ge

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

> On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:48:25PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:38:09PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > > > Then they deserve to be hurt. Really. We can't possibly support > > > > dribbling idiots, and frankly,

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:48:25PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:38:09PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > > Then they deserve to be hurt. Really. We can't possibly support > > > dribbling idiots, and frankly, I have no

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:48:25PM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:38:09PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > Then they deserve to be hurt. Really. We can't possibly support > > dribbling idiots, and frankly, I have no wish to do so. If someone is > > scared by a .tar.g

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:43:08AM -0500, Chris Devers wrote: > ...except that the Windows extension hiding feature only applies to files seen >through the normal filesystem tools (Windows Explorer, various dialog boxes, etc), >and not Internetty stuff. People might still be scared off by seein

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On or about Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 12:24:38PM -0500, Chris Devers typed: >Would a CPAN replacement have to be "drop-in"? I can see the argument behind making >replacements for MSA code be functionally identical in most visible ways, but when >you're dealing with CPAN code, presumably, you're deal

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:33:07PM +, Mark Fowler wrote: > > Oh it's dreadful. We need quality control on CPAN before more of this gets > > through. > > Hmm. Karma would workOr sponsorship. 'Larry Wall uses $modulename, > you should too' You are Michael Schwern, and I claim your m4d h41

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

Hows this for a patch: package Date::MMDDYY; use strict; use vars qw(@ISA @EXPORT); use Carp; use Exporter; @ISA = qw(Exporter); @EXPORT = qw(datecon); sub datecon { croak "Date::MMDDYY has been deprecated in favour of POSIX::strftime"; } 1; Matt At 17:16 20/03/01 +, you wrot

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

At 05:16 PM 20.3.2001 +, Robin wrote: >Any drop-in replacement would inevitably suffer from the >same flaws of conception and interface. Would a CPAN replacement have to be "drop-in"? I can see the argument behind making replacements for MSA code be functionally identical in most visible way

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 03:44:04PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:40:29PM +, Simon Wilcox wrote: > > > At 16:29 20/03/2001 +, Jonathan Peterson wrote: > > > > > a) a two reasons why this module should never ha

Re: Module of the Year contender...

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 12:14:44PM -0500, Dave Cross wrote: > From ny.pm. > The meme is spreading :) > At Tue, 20 Mar 2001 17:01:19 +, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On the shoulders of such giants as Date::Christmas, Date::Discordian > > and Date::Tolkien::Shire stands Date

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:07:28PM +, Leon Brocard wrote: > This isn't such a crazy idea. People keep on complaining about the > quality of modules on CPAN. So pick a random one and make it better > ;-P Well, with a module like Date::MMDDYY the implementation _is_ broken - it uses gmtime() in

Re: Module of the Year contender...

>From ny.pm. The meme is spreading :) Dave At Tue, 20 Mar 2001 17:01:19 +, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On the shoulders of such giants as Date::Christmas, Date::Discordian > and Date::Tolkien::Shire stands Date::MMDDYY! > > http://search.cpan.org/search?dist=Date-MMD

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

At Tue, 20 Mar 2001 17:01:30 +, Robin Houston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:40:18AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote: > > I really think I should drop the author a polite note offering him a > > patch or three. > > A patch? It needs taking outside and shooting! > > package

RE: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

> From: Michael Stevens [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> MMDDYY is about as backwards and illogical as you can possibly get[0]. > > Our cousins across the ocean appear to like it for some reason. I suspect > this was the motivation for the module. Along with a few other quirks, such as: - copper plat

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

At 16:49 20/03/01 +, you wrote: >On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:44:55PM -, Simon Batistoni wrote: >> MMDDYY is about as backwards and illogical as you can possibly get[0]. > >Our cousins across the ocean appear to like it for some reason. I suspect >this was the motivation for the module. The

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

Robin Houston sent the following bits through the ether: > Should we also do a series of drop-in replacements for crappy CPAN > modules? ;-) This isn't such a crazy idea. People keep on complaining about the quality of modules on CPAN. So pick a random one and make it better ;-P Leon -- Leon B

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:40:18AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote: > I really think I should drop the author a polite note offering him a > patch or three. A patch? It needs taking outside and shooting! package Date::MMDDYY; use strict; use vars qw(@ISA @EXPORT_OK); require Exporter; @ISA = qw(Exporte

Re: [ot] NetBSD

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:53:32PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > Summary: > > pwd_mkdb didn't work, so I tried re-installing (it was a fresh install I'd > broken anyway). I then proceded to get very annoyed with the NetBSD > installer, because it doesn't let you go back and correct your stupid

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote: > All this is pre-ir35: > > as a employee of a limited company you would be paid national minimum > > wage (4 quid an hour) .. you pay NIC and tax on that ... (minimal) .. you > > claim expenses off the (ie your own) company for all the driving around > > you do and

Re: [ot] NetBSD

Summary: pwd_mkdb didn't work, so I tried re-installing (it was a fresh install I'd broken anyway). I then proceded to get very annoyed with the NetBSD installer, because it doesn't let you go back and correct your stupid mistakes. And then installed Debian. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECT

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On 20/03/2001 at 16:40 +, Michael Stevens wrote: >On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:40:29PM +, Simon Wilcox wrote: >> At 16:29 20/03/2001 +, Jonathan Peterson wrote: >> > > a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and >> >2. MM DD YY is an evil date format, and should

RE: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

At 04:40 PM 20.3.2001 +, Simon Wilcox wrote: >At 16:29 20/03/2001 +, Jonathan Peterson wrote: >>> a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and >> >>1. It's redundant, other modules do this already. >>2. MM DD YY is an evil date format, and should be abolished >>

RE: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

> > a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and > > 1. It's redundant, other modules do this already. > 2. MM DD YY is an evil date format, and should be abolished in > favour of DD > MM YY which is more sensible. Not to mention the fact that YY in itself is also bad from

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

At Tue, 20 Mar 2001 11:40:35 -0500, Alex Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:40:29PM +, Simon Wilcox wrote: > > > >2. MM DD YY is an evil date format, and should be abolished in favour of DD > > >MM YY which is more sensible. > > > Or even better YY-MM-DD which avoid

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On or about Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:40:18AM -0500, Dave Cross typed: >I really think I should drop the author a polite note offering him a >patch or three. s/entire_file/strftime/ ? Roger

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:40:29PM +, Simon Wilcox wrote: > > At 16:29 20/03/2001 +, Jonathan Peterson wrote: > > > > a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and > > >2. MM DD YY is an evil date format, and should be ab

RE: Matt's Scripts Projects

At 04:07 PM 20.3.2001 +, you wrote: >> Not neccesary from a techical point of view. Neccesary from a >> social point of view (What's this extension! I don't understand! >> What's going on! > >Except that windows machines tend not to even show the extension by >default, and so the file w

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

Taken from the hallowed code itself: our $VERSION = 1.10; I shudder to think about the pre-release versions... Ian _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

At Tue, 20 Mar 2001 11:18:47 -0500 (EST), Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Take a look at this . > > Now give me: > > a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and > b) as many flaws as possible in the implementatio

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:40:29PM +, Simon Wilcox wrote: > >2. MM DD YY is an evil date format, and should be abolished in favour of DD > >MM YY which is more sensible. > Or even better YY-MM-DD which avoids cross-pond confusion. Or even better still, -MM-DD :-) Alex

RE: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

At 16:29 20/03/2001 +, Jonathan Peterson wrote: > > a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and > >1. It's redundant, other modules do this already. >2. MM DD YY is an evil date format, and should be abolished in favour of DD >MM YY which is more sensible. Or even bet

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

All this is pre-ir35: > as a employee of a limited company you would be paid national minimum > wage (4 quid an hour) .. you pay NIC and tax on that ... (minimal) .. you > claim expenses off the (ie your own) company for all the driving around > you do and having to buy things and accomodation whi

RE: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

> Oh it's dreadful. We need quality control on CPAN before more of this gets > through. Hmm. Karma would workOr sponsorship. 'Larry Wall uses $modulename, you should too' Later. Mark. -- print "\n",map{my$a="\n"if(length$_>6);' 'x(36-length($_)/2)."$_\n$a"} ( Name => 'Mark Fowler',

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > > Take a look at this . > > Now give me: > > a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and 1) I'm English. MMDDYY makes not sense. Maybe that's just a gripe about the name. 2)

RE: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

> a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and 1. It's redundant, other modules do this already. 2. MM DD YY is an evil date format, and should be abolished in favour of DD MM YY which is more sensible. > b) as many flaws as possible in the implementation. No use strict

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Robin Szemeti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 3:06 PM > Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects > > > > On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > apart from that the benfits of running a

RE: Matt's Scripts Projects

> Not neccesary from a techical point of view. Neccesary from a social > point of view (What's this extension! I don't understand! > What's going on! Excewpt that windows machines tend not to even show the extension by default, and so the file will just have a little WinZip icon[0], which m

Re: Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:18:47AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote: > > Take a look at this . > > Now give me: > > a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and > b) as many flaws as possible in the implementation. Submit a patch f

Pointless, Badly-Written Module.

Take a look at this . Now give me: a) a two reasons why this module should never have been written, and b) as many flaws as possible in the implementation. Dave... [with his nasty, bitchy head on]

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

> here. Those of you who have yor own company. Did you set yourselves up as > a Limited Company, or as a Sole Trader. If you set yourself up as a limited > company did/do you have liability insurance etc. Ltd, with insurance.

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

Marty Pauley writes: > On Tue Mar 20 11:46:25 2001, Gareth Harper wrote: > > On a completely off topic note I'm appealing to the contractors among you > > here. Those of you who have yor own company. Did you set yourselves up as > > a Limited Company, or as a Sole Trader. If you set yoursel

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

At 15:40 20/03/2001 +, Gareth Harper wrote: >- Original Message - >From: "Robin Szemeti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 3:06 PM >Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects > > > > On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > apart from that the benfits of

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

- Original Message - From: "Robin Szemeti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 3:06 PM Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects > On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote: > apart from that the benfits of running as a Limited Company are large > (ish) assuming you

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote: > On Tue Mar 20 11:46:25 2001, Gareth Harper wrote: > > On a completely off topic note I'm appealing to the contractors among you > > here. Those of you who have yor own company. Did you set yourselves up as > > a Limited Company, or as a Sole Trader. If you set

Fwd: [lmug-talk] Apple comes to town !

For those that might be interested. >To: lmug-talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >From: Michael Corgan >Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 16:38:58 + >Subject: [lmug-talk] Apple comes to town ! > >You might like to get in on the OS X act with LMUG. Apple UK are sending >their man to our April Forum meeting, at the

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue Mar 20 11:46:25 2001, Gareth Harper wrote: > On a completely off topic note I'm appealing to the contractors among you > here. Those of you who have yor own company. Did you set yourselves up as > a Limited Company, or as a Sole Trader. If you set yourself up as a limited > company did/d

Re: [ot] NetBSD

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 01:08:22PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > A quick question for all the BSD people. > > How do I boot NetBSD into single-user mode? In case it matters, this is > on Sparc. > > A pint for whoever helps me reset the root password :-) ok boot -s You may need variations

Re: [ot] NetBSD

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 01:20:19PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > I'm not totally certain things are the same on NetBSD, but you should be > able to get going, by looking at this and the man pages on > www.netbsd.org. You may also want to use the source code: ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBS

Re: [ot] NetBSD

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 01:20:19PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > Resetting the root password is not too difficult, I think (I'm more > used to FreeBSD, this will /probably/ work. Once booted into single > user mode, do: > > # mount -u / > # ed /etc/master.passwd > 1s/:[^:]*/:/ >

[ot] NetBSD

A quick question for all the BSD people. How do I boot NetBSD into single-user mode? In case it matters, this is on Sparc. A pint for whoever helps me reset the root password :-) -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/ This is a signature. There are man

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

- Original Message - From: "Robert Shiels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 12:12 PM Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects > > - Original Message - > > From: "Jonathan Stowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

> - Original Message - > From: "Jonathan Stowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > > * Bundling. Need to build gzipped tarballs of our new versions (I > > guess > > > this should be built on top of the CVS stuff). Matt makes pkzipped > > > versions avaiable

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:51:26AM +, Michael Stevens wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:46:25AM -, Gareth Harper wrote: > > Winzip (what most windows users these days use to unzip) handlers tar.gz by > > default so that may not be neccesary. > > Yes, but I think we should have .zip file

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

On the subject of having zip archives as well as tarballs on the server, Gareth Harper said: > Winzip (what most windows users these days use to unzip) handlers tar.gz by > default so that may not be neccesary. Not neccesary from a techical point of view. Neccesary from a social point of view

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

- Original Message - From: "Jonathan Stowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > * Bundling. Need to build gzipped tarballs of our new versions (I > guess > > this should be built on top of the CVS stuff). Matt makes pkzipped > > versions avaiable as well - so

Re: Matt's Scripts Projects

Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Seems like we've made a reasonable start on this project. We already > have a few scripts written - anyone want to report progress on any of > the others? I have Guestbook, FFA and simple search all ready to for testing elsewhere - I'll package and up