On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:41:03PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 08:59:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:43:52PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
nokia 9210
Which is still, AFAIK, unobtainium.
I know someone who knows someone who
* Neil Ford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:41:03PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 08:59:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:43:52PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
nokia 9210
Which is still, AFAIK,
At 21:08 15/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
They already offer it.
You can bar up to ten numbers (IIRC). I don't know how it deals
with withheld numbers. Never checked.
I'm sure I remember reading somewhere that you always send your CID when
you make a phone call. If you choose to withhold the ID, it
David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 08:59:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:43:52PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
nokia 9210
Which is still, AFAIK, unobtainium.
I know someone who knows someone who has a test model - I'll
Some interesting stuff:
http://www.perl.com/pub/2001/05/08/exegesis2.html
I like the fact that hash's and arrays are going to use their own symbols
for stuff like slices, should make explaining things a lot easier in the
future!
Dean
--
But then the serpent of OO entered the garden,
Jonathan Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm sure I remember reading somewhere that you always send your CID when
you make a phone call. If you choose to withhold the ID, it still gets
sent, it just gets sent with a 'do not disclose' flag set, which all (BT
approved) phones and
On Wednesday, May 16, 2001, at 10:47 AM, Dean wrote:
Some interesting stuff:
http://www.perl.com/pub/2001/05/08/exegesis2.html
Exegesis unimatrix-1:
print Hello, World!\n
RFC28 hard at work here!
Marcel
--
$x**$n + $y**$n = $z**$n is insoluble if $n 2;
I have discovered a truly
From: Barbie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 9:29 AM
Dave,
Loved the footnote on page 78.
Thanks very much. It's one of my favourite jokes. It was trialed at a
london.pm technical meeting some months ago :)
Dave...
--
The information contained in this communication is
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:59:07AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
I do keep intending to do something cute with my ISDN adapter and log the
stuff coming out of the D channel and see whats in there ... but time has
prevented it etc.
I'd be interested to hear how you get on... I was under the
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:59:07AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
I do keep intending to do something cute with my ISDN adapter and log the
stuff coming out of the D channel and see whats in there ... but time has
prevented it etc.
I'd be
I think some of the people who use this list have used Transtec's Sparc
clone machines. My question is:
1. Are they any good
2. Are they _really_ identical to Sparcs at the OS level, or do you need
funky drivers and non-standard BIOS / PROM settings in Solaris to work it?
I just love that
Seen in news:de.alt.sysadmin.recovery :
http://www.frankwestphal.de/XPueberdieSchultergeschaut.html
The poster thought it was satire; I'm not so sure. Anyway, if you understand
German (or trust Babelfish), have a look at it.
Enjoy!
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All
* Steve Mynott ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 08:59:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:43:52PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
nokia 9210
Which is still, AFAIK, unobtainium.
I know
Robert Thompson wrote:
print Content-Type: application/octet-stream\n;
print Content-Transfer-Encoding: x-gzip\n\n;
At a guess: Content-Encoding: gzip instead.
I've had a look at the relevant rfc's.
Which ones? RFC 2616 (HTTP/1.1) mentions gzip not x-gzip under 3.5
Content Codings and 3.6
From: Philip Newton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
At a guess: Content-Encoding: gzip instead.
Thanks, I'll give that a try.
I've had a look at the relevant rfc's.
Which ones? RFC 2616 (HTTP/1.1) mentions gzip not x-gzip
under 3.5
Content Codings and 3.6 Transfer Codings.
I was
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:05:25AM +0100, Cross David - dcross wrote:
Loved the footnote on page 78.
Thanks very much. It's one of my favourite jokes. It was trialed at a
london.pm technical meeting some months ago :)
What's the footnote on page 78, Dave?
.robin.
--
A man, a plan, a
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:19:36PM +0100, Robin Houston wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:05:25AM +0100, Cross David - dcross wrote:
Loved the footnote on page 78.
Thanks very much. It's one of my favourite jokes. It was trialed at a
london.pm technical meeting some months ago :)
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:19:36PM +0100, Robin Houston wrote:
Thanks very much. It's one of my favourite jokes. It was trialed at a
london.pm technical meeting some months ago :)
What's the footnote on page 78, Dave?
And is this a subscribers copy or one found in the wild?
Dean
From: Philip Newton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
At a guess: Content-Encoding: gzip instead.
Yep that worked,
thanks
Rob
-
I must memorise rfc's
I must memorise rfc's
I must memorise rfc's
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:22:52PM +0100, Dean wrote:
And is this a subscribers copy or one found in the wild?
My copy turned up this morning, so presumably a subscribers copy.
--
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/
Rip, Mix, Burn, unless you're using
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:19:36PM +0100, Robin Houston wrote:
What's the footnote on page 78, Dave?
IAND, but... I like the fact that the new name includes the word Symbol,
since it means that we can also call it
The::Module::Formerly::Known::as::Sub::Approx.
--
It's God. No, not Richard
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:59:07AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
I do keep intending to do something cute with my ISDN adapter and log the
stuff coming out of the D channel and see whats in there ... but time has
prevented it etc.
I'd be
From: Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:19:36PM +0100, Robin Houston wrote:
Thanks very much. It's one of my favourite jokes. It was trialed at a
london.pm technical meeting some months ago :)
What's the footnote on page 78, Dave?
And is this a subscribers copy or
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:37:25PM +0200, Philip Newton wrote:
Well it isn't English, but it's *almost* comprehensible...
Sounds a bit like dadadodo, only it makes more sense :)
Which does? :)
--
Irrigation of the land with seawater desalinated by fusion power is ancient.
It's called
Matthew Byng-Maddick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:59:07AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
I do keep intending to do something cute with my ISDN adapter and log the
stuff coming out of the D channel and see whats in there
From: Robin Houston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Do you think it's possible to take XP too far?
*Too* extreme?
Sure it is.
Having two people look at/develop a piece of code is better than one.
Therefore having three people must be even better.
But why stop there - why not four, five,
Steve Mynott wrote:
I have heard of people using the D channel signalling to communicate
for free.
I've also heard of phone companies cursing such users and trying to ban
programs that support that.
At least in Germany, there was a program (or several?) that took advantage
of the fact that
From: Matthew Byng-Maddick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Barbie wrote:
sysadmin, being the shortsighted Solaris guru that he claims he is, has
deemed outgoing and ingoing ports that aren't for HTTP, FTP be blocked
:(
dare I enquire how you sent this mail, then?
:)
Oh yeah and
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:08:40PM +0100, Robert Thompson wrote:
Having two people look at/develop a piece of code is better than one.
Therefore having three people must be even better.
But why stop there - why not four, five, six . . .
Better yet - design/develop by committee!
You've hit
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:27:19PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:08:40PM +0100, Robert Thompson wrote:
Having two people look at/develop a piece of code is better than one.
Therefore having three people must be even better.
But why stop there - why not four, five,
On Wed, 16 May 2001, James Powell wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:27:19PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
You've hit the fundamental problem with XP. Getting anything done requires
two programmers to agree on something; this, as everyone knows, is impossible.
No it isn't!
You're right;
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Steve Mynott wrote:
Jonathan Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think some of the people who use this list have used Transtec's Sparc
clone machines. My question is:
sure I can't tempt you with a tadpole?
http://www.tadpole.com/cycle/index.htm
the laptop is
* at 16/05 15:22 +0100 Simon Cozens said:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:41:58PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
You've hit the fundamental problem with XP. Getting anything done
requires two programmers to agree on something; this, as everyone
knows, is impossible.
No it isn't!
That's
Simon Cozens wrote:
That's not argument, it's just contradiction!
I'm sorry; I'm not allowed to argue with you unless you've paid.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 04:31:18PM +0200, Philip Newton wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote:
That's not argument, it's just contradiction!
I'm sorry; I'm not allowed to argue with you unless you've paid.
Ah, you going into consulting as well, eh?
--
The elder gods went to Suggoth and all I
At 03:22 PM 2001.05.16 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
That's not argument, it's just contradiction!
Ahh, you must be looking for a different forum then.
Try Castro's site. ;)
--
Chris Devers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[snip]
Leon
--
Leon Brocard.http://www.astray.com/
Iterative Software...http://www.iterative-software.com/
... 640K ought to be enough for anybody
...is that dollars or pounds...
/Robert
does anyone happen to know if you can discover the asset number of a Dell
poweredge swerver remotely? apparenlty its 'in the bios' .. how useful.
[ I need to order a part .. Dell needs an asset tag number .. the swerver
is in mailbox .. I'm 200 miles away .. ]
--
Robin Szemeti
Redpoint
At 16:39 16/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
does anyone happen to know if you can discover the asset number of a Dell
poweredge swerver remotely? apparenlty its 'in the bios' .. how useful.
It should also be on a silvery sticker on the back of the machine somewhere
with the barcodes. You could try
Robert Shiels wrote:
Leon
... 640K ought to be enough for anybody
...is that dollars or pounds...
Turkish lire?
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
http://page.auctions.yahoo.com/uk/auction/51586918
--
Robin Szemeti
Redpoint Consulting Limited
Real Solutions For A Virtual World
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 05:08:17PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
http://page.auctions.yahoo.com/uk/auction/51586918
The economy took another downturn today as the few remaining London
based dot-coms utilized the last of their ever diminishing budgets in
an attempt to procure an item that would
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Robin Szemeti wrote:
http://page.auctions.yahoo.com/uk/auction/51586918
Tempting very tempting.
I bet the price goes up quite quickly now
Andy
From: Chris Devers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 3:52 PM
At 03:22 PM 2001.05.16 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
That's not argument, it's just contradiction!
Ahh, you must be looking for a different forum then.
Try Castro's site. ;)
Sorry, this is 'senseless abuse'.
--
At 12:31 16/05/01 -0400, you wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Robin Szemeti wrote:
http://page.auctions.yahoo.com/uk/auction/51586918
The seller seems to do quite a trade in signed photos. The last SMG one:
Sultry Buffy Vampire Slayer SARAH MICHELLE GELLAR Signed 8x10 Photo With
COA
went
Coo, coo, see the fabled perl6, remark how it looks just like perl5,
wonder if anything's different and if there's a point to all this ;-)
- Forwarded message from Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Damian Conway's Exegesis 2
To:
Exegesis unimatrix-1:
print Hello, World!\n
RFC28 hard at work here!
Great minds thinking in parallel there, Marcel.
My first draft of Ex2 started like this:
Here's the very first Perl 6 program ever written:
#! /usr/local/bin/perl6 --warnings
*grump*
There is a python plugin to Gnome Dia allowing you to write scripts for
dia. I don't know if it is like GIMPS scripting or more of a macro type
thing but its a little disapointing there isn't a perl one.
Dia 0.88 has an experiemental pyhton plugin capability. I would be
interested in
Leon Brocard writes:
Coo, coo, see the fabled perl6, remark how it looks just like perl5,
wonder if anything's different and if there's a point to all this ;-)
Jihad on Leon, anyone? :-)
perl6 is supposed to look a lot like perl5. If it didn't, we'd call
it Python or something like that.
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Aaron Trevena wrote:
Anyone know much about how the GIMP script -fu stuff
works on the inside,
http://people.delphi.com/gjc/siod.html
AIUI all that the gimp crew have done is to write an extension to SIOD
in C to give access to the Gimp API. No doubt you could do the
* Leon Brocard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Coo, coo, see the fabled perl6, remark how it looks just like perl5,
wonder if anything's different and if there's a point to all this ;-)
Blasphemy ahead ..
I don't think Perl 6 can be a tremendous leap forward, not because
of RFC's along the
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:06:22PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
And just to complete my final blasphemy, Visual Basic, may have
a shit language behind it, it may have performance problems,
it may be very limited and may force you to implement the guts
as of any serious program you write as
52 matches
Mail list logo
