olof@sems.UUCP (Olof Backing) (10/04/87)
I'm looking for people using OS9/68K for exchanging software and other
nice things. Please e-mail to me so we can start to talk.
thanks, Olof
--
ADDRESS: Havrevagen 14, S-175 43 Jarfalla, Sweden
PHONE : (46) 758 33941, 35516 home
UUCP : ...{uunet,mcvax,ukc,unido}!enea!sems!olof piner@pur-phy (Richard Piner) (10/09/87)
In article <163@sems.UUCP> olof@sems.UUCP (Olof Backing) writes: >I'm looking for people using OS9/68K for exchanging software and other >nice things. Please e-mail to me so we can start to talk. Me too. Actually, I'm looking for a port of cshell or vi. Professional OS9/68K comes with a copy of micro-emacs which is ok, but not great. The standard shell is fast but dumb. It does not pass arguments to scripts. It does not have variables. Needless to say, it does not have history or aliases. It does support execution paths and enviornment tables. So, I'm looking for a better shell and an editor like vi. Anyone know of such software? Richard Piner piner@newton.physics.purdue.edu
jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (10/12/87)
First, regarding text editors, we have version 3.8i MicroEMACS which
has some more features than the version that comes with Professional
OS-9. However, I still use 'umacs' myself. Frankly, I can't use
all the features. I use too many text editors to get to learn any
of them thoroughly.
Aside from those we also have GNU EMACS which is yet another
version of MicroEMACS, but more compatible with GNU EMACS (I should
have said *Micro*GNU EMACS). If you don't like EMACS' this won't help.
From Microware there is also Scred which is apparently sort of
'vi'-like. I've only used 'vi' a couple of times and so I can only
say that the general user interface is like 'vi'. I hear that 'vi'
is much more powerful, but I've not experienced it fully.
Commercially I also have Dynastar. Dynastar is a word processor
package by Frank Hogg. This is sort of Wordstar-like. It comes with
a compatible text formatter which I haven't tried yet. Frank Hogg
has an ad in October's Byte Magazine. Check it for the phone number
and address.
There's also Stylograph. I have Stylograph on a 6809 Color Computer
II but not on the 68000, so if you're interested in trying it, all
I can say is it's available. For the most part, I *like* Stylograph.
The only problem is that the version I have for the 6809 has bugs
which don't make it totally unusable, but can be annoying. I currently
use it for all my letters and articles. I have used it for programming
and found it quite acceptable.
In Europe there's at least one more Wordstar clone around. Why
Wordstar I'll never understand. You know, of all the word processors
I've tried, the best design I've tried was VIP Writer on the old
Color Computer. It wasn't a "fully featured" word processor, but
it came very close and what was there was *right*. They'd obviously
looked at the others and learned from the scr*w*ps that the others
made. If I had the time to write a word processor from scratch
I'd write a new version of that program. Anyway, VIP seems to
have given up on word processors. They're making their money on
spread sheets and databases. Not much you can do about that.
As for porting OS-9, well, you have to get in touch with Microware.
The difficulty of porting is probably less than other Unix-like OS's
since it's been done more often than most other Unix-like OS's.
However, it's expensive.
Generally, do you guys know about 'comp.os.os9'? The moderator
has copies of MicroEMACS 3.8i executables. With luck we'll have
the sources as well.
Cheers! -- Jim O.
--
Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880
ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura
Byte Information eXchange: jimomurajr@amanue.UUCP (Jim Rosenberg) (10/14/87)
In article <841@pur-phy> piner@newton.physics.purdue.edu.UUCP (Richard Piner) writes: >In article <163@sems.UUCP> olof@sems.UUCP (Olof Backing) writes: >Actually, I'm looking for a port of cshell or vi. Professional >OS9/68K comes with a copy of micro-emacs which is ok, but not great. >The standard shell is fast but dumb. It does not pass arguments to >scripts. I'm as frustrated with the OS-9 shell as you are, but there does appear to be a way to pass *an* argument to a script. Multiple arguments is another story -- I still don't know how to do that. There is a command called cfp which will replace the character '*' with each of a series of arguments, and execute the resulting script. E.g. if the script is called foo and looks like cat newheader >-new/* grep -v "#" * >+new/* then cfp foo *.c would be roughly equivalent to UNIX for i do cat newheader >new/$i grep -v "#" $i >>new/$i done -- you can read it in the manual. Not very good compared to a real shell, but it gets around a tight spot until someone writes one. There's a public domain shell in Marc Rochkind's Advanced UNIX programming book that beats the socks off of what OS-9 has. Anyone volunteer to port it? :-) -- Jim Rosenberg CIS: 71515,124 decvax!idis! \ WELL: jer allegra! ---- pitt!amanue!jr BIX: jrosenberg seismo!cmcl2!cadre! /
rms@frog.UUCP (Bob Santy) (10/16/87)
I am also a user of OS9/68K (Atari 1040 ST). I agree about uEMacs and the shell limitations. I have the professional version (very expensive for home use but necessary to do any serious development). The personal version is more reasonably priced, but VERY limited (Basic is the only programming language). Bob Santy 5 Johnson Avenue West Medford, MA 02155 (617)-488-3515