cottrell@nbs-vms.ARPA (03/01/85)
/* I have finally been enlightened! Guy Harris is never wrong!!! Never mind that he chastised me for non-portability in C. If I want to run his application on my machine, I will gladly modify my login.c for him. He knows all the answers and how everything should be done. How could I have been so dense all along? Some guys just have it! jim */
guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris) (03/01/85)
> Never mind that he chastised me for non-portability in C. If I want > to run his application on my machine, I will gladly modify my login.c > for him. Oh, shut up. I said the correct answer is for UNIX vendors to change "login" to preserve things like TERM, not for everybody to modify their logins. Our application runs mostly on our machines, and we changed "login" to preserve TERM. Your articles are coming within a hairsbreadth of content-free flames, and seem to serve solely as an irritant; as such, I don't see why I should bother reading them anymore. I suspect a lot of others out there would agree... Guy Harris {seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy
cottrell@nbs-vms.ARPA (03/01/85)
/* > Oh, shut up. I said the correct answer is for UNIX vendors to change > "login" to preserve things like TERM, not for everybody to modify their > logins. Our application runs mostly on our machines, and we changed "login" > to preserve TERM. You didn't make yourself clear. You said `it was a kluge' without stating your environmental particularities. Make youself clear. > Your articles are coming within a hairsbreadth of content-free flames, and > seem to serve solely as an irritant; as such, I don't see why I should > bother reading them anymore. I suspect a lot of others out there would > agree... > > Guy Harris My original reply was full of content. No flaming. You fanned the flames. I suppose you could sell a refrigerator to an eskimo. I have been accused of liking to argue, but you take the cake. Okay, I'll try to be nice if you will. It's not life or death you know. Truce? jim */
billp@ISM780.UUCP (03/03/85)
> Your articles are coming within a hairsbreadth of content-free flames, and > seem to serve solely as an irritant; as such, I don't see why I should > bother reading them anymore. I suspect a lot of others out there would > agree... Yes, especially when you post an article or response without giving name and/or affiliation. If you must post something, please be good enough to give us your name so that we all know just which "tom", "dick" or "jim" you are. Bill Putnam Usenet: decvax!ima!ism780!billp Interactive Systems Corp. or ucbvax!ucla-va!ucla-cs!oac6.putnam Santa Monica, CA (`8 If I wanted your opinion I'd beat it out of you. 8')