bees@infoswx.UUCP (11/07/85)
Isn't it time to create a net.sources.amiga and also decide on a standard for posting binary, ala BINHEX or what ever is best? I vote yea... please vote, too. This and all responses should be cross posted here and to net.news.group. If response is great enough, the group will be created. Ray Davis Teknekron Infoswitch, Richardson, TX infoswx!bees, (214)644-0570
edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (11/10/85)
In article <8700002@infoswx>, bees@infoswx.UUCP writes: > > Isn't it time to create a net.sources.amiga and also decide on > a standard for posting binary, ala BINHEX or what ever is best? > Gawd NO! We have enough trouble with net.sources.mac! -- Edward C. Bennett UUCP: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward /* A charter member of the Scooter bunch */ "Goodnight M.A."
dave@uwvax.UUCP (Dave Cohrs) (11/11/85)
> Isn't it time to create a net.sources.amiga and also decide on > a standard for posting binary, ala BINHEX or what ever is best? The vote here on binaries is: No Binaries, thank you. Source groups are for source. Please keep your binaries in mailing lists (or better yet, on floppies). -- Dave Cohrs (608) 262-1204 ...!{harvard,ihnp4,seismo,topaz}!uwvax!dave dave@romano.wisc.edu
campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) (11/12/85)
> Isn't it time to create a net.sources.amiga and also decide on > a standard for posting binary, ala BINHEX or what ever is best? If people are going to post binaries, I'm dead set against the group. As Paul van der Graaf (sdcsvax!sdcc7!ln63fkn) has pointed out quite succinctly, binaries suck (I summarize). It may be too late for the Mac, but let's nip this binary stuff in the bud for new machines. -- Larry Campbell decvax!genrad The Boston Software Works, Inc. \ 120 Fulton St. seismo!harvard!wjh12!maynard!campbell Boston MA 02109 / / ihnp4 cbosgd ARPA: maynard.UUCP:campbell@harvard.ARPA
sewilco@mecc.UUCP (Scot E. Wilcoxon) (11/13/85)
Suggestion: net.sources.mac be reserved for ASCII sources. Binaries may
be posted if an ASCII source is also posted.
--------
My two cents' worth: net.sources.mac should only have ASCII sources.
Others' worth: Mac users without appropriate compilers can't compile them.
Nobody has mentioned that BINHEX postings don't need "expensive" (for
individual micro owners) compilers.
However, if the .mac sources were in ASCII then they'd be nearly as useful
as .sources postings are. Even if a program won't run on your particular
machine, the interesting algorithms would be available for conversion.
I've been keeping quiet on this, but now Amiga threatens to begin binaries.
We have to act now or we'll have also have Altair binaries.
*Mac, Amiga, Altair are/were trademarks of Apple, Commodore, MITS.
--
Scot E. Wilcoxon Minn. Ed. Comp. Corp. circadia!mecc!sewilco
45 03 N / 93 15 W (612)481-3507 {ihnp4,mgnetp}!dicomed!mecc!sewilcoradzy@calma.UUCP (Tim Radzykewycz) (11/14/85)
> Isn't it time to create a net.sources.amiga and also decide on > a standard for posting binary, ala BINHEX or what ever is best? No. Do not create another group which will be carrying binaries. net.sources.mac is probably going to go away at this site because of that, and other BIN-HEX'd groups should not be created. If very many amiga *sources* get posted to net.sources, then we can create net.sources.amiga, however, as soon as people start sending HEX'd programs over it, it too will probably have to go away. -- Tim (radzy) Radzykewycz, The Incredible Radical Cabbage calma!radzy@ucbvax.ARPA {ucbvax,sun,csd-gould}!calma!radzy
frodo@wcom.UUCP (James Scardelis) (11/17/85)
> > Isn't it time to create a net.sources.amiga and also decide on > a standard for posting binary, ala BINHEX or what ever is best? > > I vote yea... please vote, too. This and all responses should > be cross posted here and to net.news.group. If response is > great enough, the group will be created. > NO NO NO NO! Not another group devoted to the posting of binaries! A definitive NO vote for net.sources.amiga! Let's see some posting of real SOURCES first! -- Jim Scardelis, SA {vax135,ihnp4}!wcom!frodo #include <favorite disclaimer>
tdn@spice.cs.cmu.edu (Thomas Newton) (11/20/85)
> My two cents' worth: net.sources.mac should only have ASCII sources > Others' worth: Mac users without appropriate compilers can't compile them > > Nobody has mentioned that BINHEX postings don't need "expensive" (for > individual micro owners) compilers. The reason that it is useful to post binaries for the Mac (preferably, in addition to sources) is that there are many development environments, but there's no official dev. system for anything but 68000 assembly code. It is not reasonable to expect Mac owners to have *all* of the packages that are on the market -- this would run into thousands of dollars per Mac! > . . . > I've been keeping quiet on this, but now Amiga threatens to begin binaries. > We have to act now or we'll have also have Altair binaries. Fortunately, the Amiga does have a standard development environment, at least for C programming. It probably would not be unreasonable to expect people to buy the standard C compiler, much as net.sources readers are expected to have access to "cc". Thus, C programs could be posted source-only with no loss of utility. (This doesn't address the issue of what to do with shareware, which isn't generally made available in source form, but that's a different topic.) -- Thomas.Newton Thomas.Newton@spice.cs.cmu.edu