ees@antique.UUCP (Gene Sampieri) (04/08/88)
Is there a group for source and binaries for the Apple IIe/c? I can't seem to find one in our list. Thanks Gene Sampieri AT&T Bell Labs vax135!ees
abc@BRL.ARPA (Brint Cooper) (04/11/88)
Gene Sampieri asks: > Is there a group for source and binaries for the Apple IIe/c? I can't > seem to find one in our list. Not for source, and that's the irony. All that hex code that is posted to apple2-L and would be posted to a comp.apple.binaries newsgroup first exists source code somewhere. There aren't very many wizards programming in hex! Yet, people are chafing at the bit to get hex code which they cannot read and whose functionality they can only guess at. I don't understand why folks aren't clamoring for a comp.apple.sources group where original source (including assembler source) code would be posted. _Brint
nakada@husc7.HARVARD.EDU (Paul Nakada) (04/12/88)
In article <8804101825.aa02650@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA> abc@BRL.ARPA (Brint Cooper) writes: : :Gene Sampieri asks: : :> Is there a group for source and binaries for the Apple IIe/c? I can't :> seem to find one in our list. : :Not for source, and that's the irony. All that hex code that is posted :to apple2-L and would be posted to a comp.apple.binaries newsgroup first :exists source code somewhere. There aren't very many wizards :programming in hex! Yet, people are chafing at the bit to get hex code :which they cannot read and whose functionality they can only guess at. :I don't understand why folks aren't clamoring for a comp.apple.sources :group where original source (including assembler source) code would be :posted. : :_Brint -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==--=-= there is no rule stating that only executeable files may be posted to comp.binaries.apple2 All we ask is that files posted to it be in some kind of executioner file... This executioner file may be a singl;e file, a bunch of files archived using the binary II format, or a compressed version of either. The archive format is ideal for bundling source and executeable together in one file... let's just hope the approve the newsgroup... -paul __ | Paul Nakada '89 #8-) | North House | ihnp4!think\ nakada@husc4.HARVARD.EDU Harvard College | seismo>!harvard!husc4!nakada.UUCP Cambridge, MA 02138 | rutgers/ nakada@husc4.BITNET 617/498-6263 || 7110 | __|
mbm75@leah.Albany.Edu (Michael B Meyer) (04/12/88)
Here's my "][" cents worth. Count me in for support of a comp.apple.sources.
kamath@reed.UUCP (Sean Kamath) (04/13/88)
In article <8804101825.aa02650@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA> abc@BRL.ARPA (Brint Cooper) writes: > >Gene Sampieri asks: > >> Is there a group for source and binaries for the Apple IIe/c? I can't >> seem to find one in our list. > >Not for source, and that's the irony. All that hex code that is posted >to apple2-L and would be posted to a comp.apple.binaries newsgroup first >exists source code somewhere. There aren't very many wizards >programming in hex! Yet, people are chafing at the bit to get hex code >which they cannot read and whose functionality they can only guess at. >I don't understand why folks aren't clamoring for a comp.apple.sources >group where original source (including assembler source) code would be >posted. > >_Brint Oh, people, stop! Come on. Look how hard it was to get comp.apple.binaries! You really think people are gonna want to hassle with yet another group? no. Look, in the unix world, only sources are distributed (for the most part), as the definition of unix calls for portability of source, not binary code. In the micro world, it's a little smaller. When you buy a program, does it come with source? In the unix world, you almost always have the option (sometimes at a cost of several thousand dollars) to get the source, and sometimes you *only* get the source. I for one really like the PD and shareware route, as you can *sometimes* get the sources. On the otherhand, keep this in mind. On the net, you can always try to contact the author to try and get the source. I will be more than glad to give people the source for *my* stuff. I will also post it. Don't think that the name means it will contain *nothing* but binaries. After all, merlin Pro (dos 3.3) keeps it's files in binary form. I could always claim it was binary, not source code. But what's the point! How many times do we hear about Amigas or Macs in comp.sys.apple? Spare me!. It does *not* mean binaries only. Sorry about being so livid, but it's a real sore point. It's (comp.apple.binaries) just a place to distribute programs, in whatever form we wish. I could send it in digitized cassette form, but what good would it do? (Based on the old cassette copying routines.) Sean Kamath Sorry if there are a lot of typos in this. I know that in my post about a sys file I made a few mistakes, and yes, the 200 was supposed to be a 2000. However, I'm not using DCOM, but rather ProTERM, which has a really horrid vt100 emulation (the normal problem of motion outside a scrolling region, but it get's confused in vi as well!). All because I wanted to download files, and I get distracted. Poor Robin. Gotta go. -- UUCP: {decvax allegra ucbcad ucbvax hplabs ihnp4}!tektronix!reed!kamath CSNET: reed!kamath@Tektronix.CSNET || BITNET: reed!kamath@PSUVAX1.BITNET ARPA: reed!kamath@psuvax1.arpa US Snail: 3934 SE Boise, Portland, OR 97202 (I hate 4 line .sigs!)
blume@netmbx.UUCP (Heiko Blume) (04/15/88)
perhaps comp.programs.apple might have been better but i am happy that
i just got the .binaries. newsgroup.
anyway why not post sources there ? just because its name ???
--
Heiko Blume # DOMAIN: blume@netmbx.UUCP { BITNET: ( mixed }
Seekorso 29 # BANG : ..!{backbone}!netmbx!blume
D-1000 Berlin 22, West-Germany # Phone : (+49 30) 365 55 71 or ... 365 75 01
Telex : 183008 intro d # Fax : (+49 30) 882 50 65