shulman@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Jeff Shulman) (06/22/86)
Delphi Mac Digest Sunday, 22 June 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 25
Today's Topics:
That "End User License Agreement"
RE: That "End User License Agreement" (Re: Msg 9178)
Megamax SFGetFile bug?
5 volt adaptor
RE: 5 volt adaptor (Re: Msg 9185)
RE: 5 volt adaptor (Re: Msg 9185)
Smalltalk/Mac+ keyboard
The New System and Copy II
RE: The New System and Copy II (Re: Msg 9206)
List Manager
RE: List Manager (Re: Msg 9212)
RE: List Manager (Re: Msg 9287)
Mass Tech out of business?
HyperNet, HyperDrive 2000
MPW programing system
Re:Red Ryder & MacPut
Re: User-supported BBS packages for the Mac.
Hard Disk 20 Price Cut
Apple Survey
Re: Finder Switching
re: previous Usenet/info-mac inquiry
128K ROMs/ HFS prob
teclick?
I found it
RE: Usenet Mac Digest V2 #48 (Re: Msg 9369)
MacLightning
RE: MacLightning (Re: Msg 9391)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: MACLAIRD (9178)
Subject: That "End User License Agreement"
Date: 16-JUN 17:48 Business Mac
In response to the "End User License Agreement", which certainly appears to be
ill-considered, overly restrictive, and probably specious on its terms:
Here in Forum, we have seen many statements of how copyright rights
apply to computer software. Generally, the copyright owners seem to
claim as many rights as they could possibly possess. I also recall a
Boston College student almost hysterically insisting that all the user
of the software product could do is to make _one_ backup copy.
"Period."
In my opinion, in this democracy, if the law disagrees with the
perception of citizens of how it should be, we should work to change
the law. And if we are confronted with strict, arbitrary terms with a
"take it or leave it" tang about them, I would like everyone's opinion
as to whether the law should allow us to ignore those terms which
simply appear outrageous.
But none of these statements refer to the law. What does the federal Copyright
Act of 1976 say? The pertinent sections are 102, 106, 107, and 117. Section
102 defines the general subject matter of copyright; section 106 gives to the
copyright owner exclusive legal rights; section 107 limits the exclusive rights
to allow fair use for educational purposes; and section 117 gives a special
exemption to owners of copies of computer programs.
Section 102 defines "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium
of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived,
reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a
machine or device" as copyrightable items. It does not include computer
software products, but does not exclude them, and court decisions find computer
programs implicitly included.
Now, sections 106 and 107 are very important parts of this statute.
As I mentioned, computer software or programs are not explicitly
mentioned but are included by judicial construction. Section 106 says
what we all know: an owner of a copyright has exclusive rights to
authorize distribution. Section 107, which modifies section 106, is
most interesting:
"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, the fair use of a copyrighted
work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any
other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment,
news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use),
scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining
whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors
to be considered shall include-
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such
use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational pur-
poses;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the the portion used in relation
to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of
the copyrighted work."
Thus, for educational purposes, or as long as you are merely
conducting research, there is a special exemption for copyright. The
qualification is only that the use be "fair". Rather than issuing
dogmatic statements about the legalities of software copyright, I
think we would be better off discussing what is fair use of such
programs.
Section 117 says "Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an
infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize
the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1) that such new copy or adaptation is created as an essential
step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a
machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only
and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued
possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.
"Any exact copies prepared in accordance with the provisions of this
section may be leased, sold, or otherwise transferred, along with the
copy from which such copies were prepared, only as part of the lease,
sale, or other transfer of all rights in the program. Adaptations so
prepared may be transferred only with the authorization of the
copyright owner."
You can wind your way through the language, but I interpret it to mean that, at
least, you can copy your programs to use them.
Now, I may have omitted some things in this very brief discussion, but
my point is that there is no cut-and-dried answer as to the legal
rights of a software user. Instead, there is much room for discussion
and thought. My reason for bringing this up is, I thought that "End
User License Agreement" stunk! I'm not sure if I am a resident of one
of those states the agreement referred to (which do not allow the
parties to agree to some things) but I'd sure like to find out. (I
think only Louisiana allows the whole-hog adhesion contract, and their
juries didn't allow the software companies to enforce it).
On a final note, sometimes the lawyers writing the "agreement" don't
know a hill of beans about the subject. Also, I'm on vacation next
week, so you'll have to decide what's fair about a contract you have to swallow
even though it is no good for you. The whole tone of that "agreement" smells
like CI$. It's like: I'm big, you're small, and here's something to rub your
face in.
Laird
------------------------------
From: PEABO (9179)
Subject: RE: That "End User License Agreement" (Re: Msg 9178)
Date: 16-JUN 18:02 Business Mac
Laird,
I should show you a copy of the Software Electronic Distribution License (what
I had to sign in order to upload the files from Apple), but it would spoil your
vacation! Enjoy yourself while away ...
peter
------------------------------
From: JEFFS (191)
Subject: Megamax SFGetFile bug?
Date: 16-JUN 22:49 Programming Techniques
Ever since I switched to System 3.2 the strangest thing started
happening to my SFGetFile calls: they won't "automatically" recognize
disk insertions! The disk insertions are only recognized AFTER you
click on some active part of the dialog box. Even more strange is
that it only doesn't work on my Megamax applications, everyone else
seems fine. It only started not working with System 3.2. I've looked
at the Megamax code and it looks OK. What could be going on? Below
is the simple code that illustrates the bug. If anyone wants to see
the binary, I'll mail it to you on request.
Puzzled...
#include <qdvars.h>
#include <pack.h>
#include <stdio.h>
SFReply theSFReply;
main()
{
Point pt;
Rect r;
printf("\n");
InitCursor();
/* Center the dialog box */
r = screenBits.bounds;
pt.a.v = (r.a.bottom - 152)/2;
pt.a.h = (r.a.right - 364)/2;
SFGetFile(&pt, NULL, NULL, 1, "TEXT", NULL, &theSFReply);
}
P.S. I've also tried passing a null string (instead of NULL) and calling
SetEventMask(everyEvent), both to no avail. According to the CheckSum
DA, my 190,512 byte System file (the original) has a checksum of 0FAE. Perhaps
it is bad? (but other programs work fine.)
------------------------------
From: MACINTOUCH (9185)
Subject: 5 volt adaptor
Date: 16-JUN 19:44 Mousing Around
I understand that Thunderware is now shipping an adaptor for
Thunderscan and for any other device that needs 5v. or 12v. power and
8-pin to 9-pin conversion. It seems to be inexpensively priced and
reportedly works with the Fractal sound digitizer, MIDI devices, and
more.
Ric
------------------------------
From: MOUSEKETEER (9187)
Subject: RE: 5 volt adaptor (Re: Msg 9185)
Date: 16-JUN 19:55 Mousing Around
I am supposed to receive one of the Thunderscan power units this week, and will
report on how it works. From what the folks at Thunderware told me, however,
the device is strictly for supplying power. You must provide the mini-8 to
DB-9 adapter (i.e. Macintosh Plus Adapter). The also sell the adapter (same
part number as the Apple unit) for $20 or so.
Alf
------------------------------
From: OPPENHEIM (9197)
Subject: RE: 5 volt adaptor (Re: Msg 9185)
Date: 16-JUN 21:50 Mousing Around
The Thunderscan adaptor works with both Thunderscan and MacNifty. I've used it.
------------------------------
From: OPPENHEIM (9203)
Subject: Smalltalk/Mac+ keyboard
Date: 16-JUN 22:34 Programming
A patch for using Smalltalk with the UK keyboard was posted here from usenet in
March: the following modification will allow the blue button to work correctly
with the Mac+ keyboard:
Search the kernel file (named 'Smalltalk') for the hex string
0C28 0034
and change 34 to $42 (cursor right), or $4c (enter -- awkward).
I have been exploring the code at this point in the kernel and it may be
possible to patch it for something less clumsy, e.g. option and command, which
seems the most obvious way to overcome the 3-button problem (short of a new
mouse!)
The following table corrects the illustration on p.59 of 'Programming with the
Toolbox':
Old New (keypad and cursor keys)
+ <cursor l>
* <cursor r>
<frac> <cursor up>
, <cursor down>
shift-+ +
shift-* *
------------------------------
From: ERNABEE (9206)
Subject: The New System and Copy II
Date: 16-JUN 23:40 Bugs & Features
I found a bug! I found a bug!
Copy II Mac never really worked well with the new Finders, that is,
from 5.0 up. When you initiate a copy (Sector or Bit, doesn't
matter), when it finishes Formatting the Duplicate Disk, Copy II says
"ERROR FORMATTING DUPLICATE DISK" or something like that, and you have
to start again. 5.1 was better, but not always. (By the way, the
formatting problem pops up randomly. If you try a copy one time, and
you get the error, if you try again, you may be able to do the copy.
But maybe not.)
Any Suggestions as to how to fix this? Ernabee
------------------------------
From: MACINTOUCH (9210)
Subject: RE: The New System and Copy II (Re: Msg 9206)
Date: 17-JUN 00:35 Bugs & Features
I didn't have this problem, but I did find that if I tried to do two
things in a row with Copy II 5.1, it got into trouble -- ended up
quitting and re-launching every time I had to handle a second disk.
Ric
------------------------------
From: RJWM (9212)
Subject: List Manager
Date: 17-JUN 01:15 Programming
The List Manager in Pack 0 of the new System is a neat 5K of code. Aids in
reducing wheel reinvention especially for small lists. Question? Do anyone know
the specification of the default LDEF (text only)? I am having trouble getting
the cells to hold anything. Second question: Is the source for the Munger
example program posted anywhere? Suggestions would be appreciated. -Richard
------------------------------
From: ASMCOR (9287)
Subject: RE: List Manager (Re: Msg 9212)
Date: 18-JUN 23:53 Programming
Richard,
To use the default LDEF all you have to do is pass NULL for the procid.
Jan
------------------------------
From: RJWM (9362)
Subject: RE: List Manager (Re: Msg 9287)
Date: 20-JUN 00:28 Programming
Thanks that what I was doing. The problem turned out to be the double
indirection of the Manx data pointers down in the LGetCell procedure,
i.e. instead of a dataPtr as Consulair has it, Manx needs a Ptr to
dataPtr. With that in place everything works fine. -Richard
------------------------------
From: MACINTOUCH (9229)
Subject: Mass Tech out of business?
Date: 17-JUN 13:26 Hardware & Peripherals
Just heard that Mass Tech (the memory upgrade company) is out of business...
Anyone know any more?
Ric
------------------------------
From: MACINTOUCH (9231)
Subject: HyperNet, HyperDrive 2000
Date: 17-JUN 18:02 Business Mac
Just talked with some folks at GCC. HyperDrive 2000 and HyperNet have
both been delayed, but are due out "this summer." Rumors about
layoffs at GCC are claimed to be completely specious. They also say
they are committed to the Mac and aren't turning completely blue
(although some IBM veterans have recently been hired there).
Ric Ford, "MacInTouch"
------------------------------
From: NOFAL (199)
Subject: MPW programing system
Date: 17-JUN 21:46 SIG Business
I would apreciate any info about the MPW(especially the date of release,if
possible).I have Mac C 4.0 and I am planning to get TML Pascal but if apple
releases the MPW before October I would like to buy it instead.
------------------------------
From: BMUG (9312)
Subject: Re:Red Ryder & MacPut
Date: 19-JUN 04:40 Network Digests
To:Kathleen Huddleston <gregory@ICSE.UCI.EDU>
Re:Red Ryder & MacPut
MacPut is essentially a 3-part XMODEM that is peculiar to MacTerminal (and
a couple of other programs that made themselves compatible. To do file tran-
sfers with Red Ryder, do the following:
* If your system supports 8-bit transparency and XMODEM, use that, and
send/receive files in MacBinary format. This will acheive the
same effect as MacTerminal, in terms of transferring the entire file
in a Mac-ish way, including the icon, etc.
* If you can't do that, try using the KERMIT protocol.
* Failing that, you can run files through BINHEX 4.0 and produce .HQX files
that you can send/receive in ASCII.
* If you can't do any of the above, you don't REALLY want to use Red Ryder.
Instead, use MicroPhone, SmartCom II, or MacTerminal.
-- Raines Cohen
SYSOP, BMUG BBS
Delphi:BMUG
CIS: 70007,2271
GEnie: BMUG
The WELL: BMUG
MCI MAIL: BMUG
BMUG BBS: (415) 849-BMUG
------------------------------
From: BMUG (9313)
Subject: Re: User-supported BBS packages for the Mac.
Date: 19-JUN 04:44 Network Digests
To: GKN3M2%IRISHMVS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Re: User-supported BBS packages for the Mac.
Evan -
BMUG uses RED RYDER HOST, a program available from FreeSoft, Inc. in
St. Louis. It comes with Red Ryder registration. It works VERY WELL,
and is EXTREMELY user-configurable. Graphics support is coming out
shortly. All in all, I wouldn't use anything else.
Red Ryder Host registration is just $40 or so.
-- Raines Cohen
SYSOP, BMUG BBS
Delphi:BMUG
CIS: 70007,2271
GEnie: BMUG
The WELL: BMUG
MCI MAIL: BMUG
BMUG BBS: (415) 849-BMUG
------------------------------
From: MACINTOUCH (9325)
Subject: Hard Disk 20 Price Cut
Date: 19-JUN 15:31 Mousing Around
As RAYSANDERS said ... Apple has cut the price on the Hard Disk 20 to $1195.
Things are looking up :-)
Ric
------------------------------
From: HALL (9328)
Subject: Apple Survey
Date: 19-JUN 19:18 MUGS Online
Did anybody else get an "Apple User Group Member Opinion Survey" in the mail
today? I was supposedly picked at random. The survey has some interesting
questions, but doesn't really have any place for me to stick it to them about
the power supply problems. Maybe I'll bring up that problem in the essay
question where they ask "In your wildest dreams, what would you like your
personal computer to do? Anything goes! Be creative!" Stay out of the repair
shop. Or at least, not stay in the shop for several weeks at a time.
Brian
------------------------------
From: MACINTOUCH (9369)
Subject: Re: Finder Switching
Date: 20-JUN 15:15 Network Digests
to: jimb@amdcad.UUCP (Jim Budler) Subject: Re: Finder Switching
We experienced the Finder switching problem on the MaxPlus RAM disk
with the DataFrame hard disk. I'm guessing that Tony Nelson has code
to avoid the problem in RAMstart, but why should the Finder switch at
all? It may have made sense when everyone used floppies, but now it
seems as though it should at least be a _configurable_ option (with
ResEdit or whatever).
Ric Ford
------------------------------
From: MACINTOUCH (9370)
Subject: re: previous Usenet/info-mac inquiry
Date: 20-JUN 15:22 Hardware & Peripherals
I have found someone who seems able to do good repair work on the
Macintosh at prices lower than dealers charge. He gets $15/estimate
and $25/hr. and he tries to fix problems at the component level where
possible, instead of just swapping boards (unless swapping boards
would be cheaper). I'd check this guy out if your power supply dies.
Ken's Computer Service 446 Berlin St. Clinton, MA 01510 617-368-8611
Ric Ford
------------------------------
From: RAMARREN (9367)
Subject: 128K ROMs/ HFS prob
Date: 20-JUN 02:37 Programming
Item One:
I have a 512K mac, with new ROMS and 800K drives. MS Logo (excellent before)
comes up with a continual complaint now that it 'cant get enough memory'. I've
tried a number of work arounds: initializing 800KMFS volumes under system 2.0,
running original 400K mfs under all possible systems and finders etc, to no
avail. Anyone out there know how to make this run?
Item two:
I have a workaround solution to the Microsoft FORTRAN disaster that happened
when I upgraded to the new ROMS and HFS. If anyone is interested, I will post
it. Also it works nicely on a Mac Plus. When is Microsoft/Absoft going to get
their act together and distribute the upgrade I have heard rumored?
Item three:
Is anyone out there doing any work with the SmallTalk-80 prerelease that apple
distributed? I am a real beginner at ST but would like to know if anyone has
used it, has any available hints etc... (also, doesn't work under HFS, no
surprise, but can be kluged through same trick as getting MS FORTRAN to run.).
Item four:
MacPaint (oh gods, this is critical) seems to have difficulty writing to the
scrap under HFS. Also occasionally MacDraw. Anyone else with this difficulty?
is there a fix?
Anyone with some comments to make on these items please send a message.
Incidentally, Human Touch Computer Products gave a demo of the 3-to-1 Touch
board at our JPL Mac Users group a month or so back that was extraordinarily
impressive. Anyone using that yet? Feedback?
again, thanks. GDG
------------------------------
From: ASMCOR (9373)
Subject: teclick?
Date: 20-JUN 18:43 Programming
Mike -
Sent this to Jon, but I wanted to pass it on to you too, just in case you have
any great ideas about possible incompatibility areas between Megamax and
Lightspeed -->
I've run into a perplexing problem, perhaps you may have some suggestions
on where I might look for the solution. I have ported an application over to
Lightspeed from Megamax. It is a specialized text editor for the visually
impaired. It uses the standard TextEdit routines.The problem is, when compiled
under Lightspeed, the program crashes when you click in the text window ONLY
ON A MAC WITH THE OLD ROMS. It does not do this when compiled under Megamax.
The call that's causing the crash is TEClick, not exactly an unusual call, and
I have implemented it in a very simple manner. Here is the section of code
which causes the crash:
handle_edit(theW)
WDescPtr theW;
{
if(myevent.modifiers & 512)
TEClick(myevent.where,1,theW->hTE);
else
TEClick(myevent.where,0,theW->hTE);
}
The parameters on entry seem to be correct, because the program does not crash
until you release the mouse and TEClick returns. Then it crashes with an
address error.
Again, let me emphasize that the program runs fine on the Mac+ or 512E.
I even tried TMON's trap discipline and heap scramble, and I can't get it to
crash with the new ROMs. At this point I'm stumped. My only idea is that
somewhere prior to this routine the stack is getting messed up,and when TEClick
tries to return it finds a bad address on the stack. Of course, I COULD go back
to Megamax and forget it,but I've made quite a few changes to the program since
I moved it to Lightspeed, and I'd have to try to remember them all and port
them back. And I'd have to give up the great Lightspeed system, which is hard
to do once you get used to it!
Any ideas? Even just general ones might be helpful.
Thanks again - Jan.
Thanks Mike --
------------------------------
From: ASMCOR (9383)
Subject: I found it
Date: 21-JUN 00:47 Programming
Mike -
I found it. It's weird. I have a simple clickloop routine, and a pointer to it
is stored in the TERecord's cliKloop field. Naturally it gets called whenever
TEClick is invoked. The problem is that I had declared the routine as pascal,
since it gets called back from the ROM. This works fine with the 128K ROMs, but
it crashes with 64K ROMs. Changing it to a normal C function causes it to work
with both systems. Why should this be? Technically, it SHOULD be a pascal
function, right?
Jan
p.s. This happens even if the clickloop routine is nothing but a stub,
i.e. two braces with nothing in between. If it's pascal, it crashes,
if it's not, it works.
------------------------------
From: DDUNHAM (9386)
Subject: RE: Usenet Mac Digest V2 #48 (Re: Msg 9369)
Date: 21-JUN 04:59 Network Digests
(Haven't I said this before?) The Finder won't switch from
non-ejectable disks. The first DataFrame I saw _was_ ejectable (it
reinserted itself if you tried, but that's not the issue). If, in an
Open dialog, the Eject button is available when the DataFrame is
showing, you have their crummy software. I think there's a new
version, but it was sloppiness like that that steered me to the
LoDOWN.
------------------------------
From: RMORRIS (9391)
Subject: MacLightning
Date: 21-JUN 08:05 Bugs & Features
I bought MacLightning a few weeks back and discovered to my shock and
dismay that their spelling dictionary comes already equipped with pre-
installed mis-spellings. (We won't talk about any I might add,
myself.) Of course, one can add the correct spelling to the
dictionary, but it appears there is no way to REMOVE the wrong
spelling. I wrote Target Software asking how to do the surgical
removal of the bad words, but they did not respond. I also tossed this
question out on CompuServe a few weeks back with no luck. Any ideas?
------------------------------
From: ASMCOR (9414)
Subject: RE: MacLightning (Re: Msg 9391)
Date: 22-JUN 00:46 Bugs & Features
Sadly, no. It is a glaring flaw in an otherwise very good program.
Jan
------------------------------
End of Delphi Mac Digest
************************ephraim@wang.UUCP (pri=8 Ephraim Vishniac x76659 ms1459) (06/23/86)
> Delphi Mac Digest Sunday, 22 June 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 25 > > Today's Topics: > Mass Tech out of business? > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > From: MACINTOUCH (9229) > Subject: Mass Tech out of business? > Date: 17-JUN 13:26 Hardware & Peripherals > > Just heard that Mass Tech (the memory upgrade company) is out of business... > Anyone know any more? > > Ric It's true. The memory upgrade business was slowing down, and the hard disk business was too competitive. MassTech's internal hard disk was too late to gain much recognition, and its external hard disk would have been too late, period. If only Apple had provided new ROMs when they promised them, MassTech might be alive today.
dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (06/23/86)
> > From: ASMCOR (9373) > Subject: teclick? > Date: 20-JUN 18:43 Programming > > Mike - > Sent this to Jon, but I wanted to pass it on to you too, just in case you have > any great ideas about possible incompatibility areas between Megamax and > Lightspeed --> > I've run into a perplexing problem, perhaps you may have some suggestions > on where I might look for the solution. I have ported an application over to > Lightspeed from Megamax. It is a specialized text editor for the visually > impaired. It uses the standard TextEdit routines.The problem is, when compiled > under Lightspeed, the program crashes when you click in the text window ONLY > ON A MAC WITH THE OLD ROMS. It does not do this when compiled under Megamax. > The call that's causing the crash is TEClick, not exactly an unusual call, and > I have implemented it in a very simple manner. Here is the section of code > which causes the crash: > > handle_edit(theW) > WDescPtr theW; > { > if(myevent.modifiers & 512) > TEClick(myevent.where,1,theW->hTE); > else > TEClick(myevent.where,0,theW->hTE); > } > > The parameters on entry seem to be correct, because the program does not crash > until you release the mouse and TEClick returns. Then it crashes with an > address error. > Again, let me emphasize that the program runs fine on the Mac+ or 512E. > I even tried TMON's trap discipline and heap scramble, and I can't get it to > crash with the new ROMs. At this point I'm stumped. My only idea is that > somewhere prior to this routine the stack is getting messed up,and when TEClick > tries to return it finds a bad address on the stack. Of course, I COULD go back > to Megamax and forget it,but I've made quite a few changes to the program since > I moved it to Lightspeed, and I'd have to try to remember them all and port > them back. And I'd have to give up the great Lightspeed system, which is hard > to do once you get used to it! > Any ideas? Even just general ones might be helpful. > Thanks again - Jan. > > Thanks Mike -- > > ------------------------------ > > From: ASMCOR (9383) > Subject: I found it > Date: 21-JUN 00:47 Programming > > Mike - > I found it. It's weird. I have a simple clickloop routine, and a pointer to it > is stored in the TERecord's cliKloop field. Naturally it gets called whenever > TEClick is invoked. The problem is that I had declared the routine as pascal, > since it gets called back from the ROM. This works fine with the 128K ROMs, but > it crashes with 64K ROMs. Changing it to a normal C function causes it to work > with both systems. Why should this be? Technically, it SHOULD be a pascal > function, right? > > Jan > > p.s. This happens even if the clickloop routine is nothing but a stub, > i.e. two braces with nothing in between. If it's pascal, it crashes, > if it's not, it works. Declaring a routine as "pascal" may not be enough. I had similar problems using a filter function to track clicks in a scroll bar. My problem was that I was declaring my function as pascal filterproc () rather than pascal void filterproc () which did the trick. -- Paul DuBois UUCP: {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois | ARPA: dubois@easter --+-- | "Well, we can't give an award to a _dead_ pig," said | the loud speaker. "It's never been done."