I5110401%DBSTU1.BITNET@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu (09/11/89)
Bruce Evans <evans@DITSYDA.OZ> writes: >These modifications are already in my 286 PM kernel, and so should be in >1.4b-PC. The old proc_addr() macro is better for constant proc numbers, so I >renamed it cproc_addr() and kept it for those. > >I think my kernel gets used, but the code is not widely read. (?) Bruce, you are somewhat wrong. The truth is, i can't use nearly nothing coming along this newsgroup. This is a BITNET host, meaning it's using EBCDIC code for transmission (Extraneous Bits Cause Destruction In Communications...). Moreover, someone munges TABs an produces 4 spaces instead of it, and, more worse, someone is removing trailing blanks from the postings, making nearly every context diff unusable. I am used to get the important things from a nearby fileserver, and your modified kernel is on the bottom of my importance list (remember, i'm using minix on an ST). Just a suggestion : Would you (and i mean *everyone*) please send more soft- ware in uuencode format ? That would be very good for those hanging on this [comments censored] bitnet | >Bruce Evans evans@ditsyda.oz.au -- ========================================================================= " This space intentionally left blank " Kai-Uwe Bloem, I5110401@DBSTU1.BitNet, ...!unido!dbstu1.bitnet!i5110401, I5110401%DBSTU1.BITNET@CORNELLC.CCS.CORNELL.EDU (or other known gateways) student of cs at Technische Universitaet Braunschweig / w-germany
ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) (09/12/89)
In article <23662@louie.udel.EDU> I5110401%DBSTU1.BITNET@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu writes: >Just a suggestion : Would you (and i mean *everyone*) please send more soft- >ware in uuencode format ? That would be very good for those hanging on this >[comments censored] bitnet | Although in theory it should be possible to uudecode things every time, I have had problems. It is also extra work for nonbitnet sites, and consumes extra network bandwidth. Another possibility: is there anyone who could function as a gateway, i.e. someone who is on USENET and bitnet, and who could take could postings, uuencode them, and then get them onto bitnet or even send them to a bitnet mailing list of interested people. I hate to restrict everybody to upper case letters only because there is somebody, somewhere, who still has an IBM 026 card punch around. Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)
ncoverby@ndsuvax.UUCP (Glen Overby) (09/13/89)
In article <23662@louie.udel.EDU> I5110401%DBSTU1.BITNET@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu whines: >Just a suggestion : Would you (and i mean *everyone*) please send more soft- >ware in uuencode format ? That would be very good for those hanging on this >[comments censored] bitnet | Don't ask the rest of the world to stiffle themselves just for your Bitnet (IBM) problems. If your network is broke, FIX IT! Better yet, get on a Usenet (Eunet) node. Or become one! I have my Minix PC on (thanks to Peter Housel and his port of UUPC). I do not think the rest of us should pay for the added overhead and inconvenience of uuencoded *source* files for one odball network's problems. Several years ago I started an archive on the Bitnet node NDSUVM1, in hopes of getting the Bitnet people to shut up about trashed files. I have quite a bit of stuff there, and it seems to be quite usable from Bitnet (I dont have space for *everything*, and I do maintenance in bursts). >Moreover, someone munges TABs an produces 4 spaces instead of it, and, more >worse, someone is removing trailing blanks from the postings, making nearly >every context diff unusable. "Someone" is IBM's "FAL" TCP/IP product. There are other solutions to the trashed patces problem: for starters, use patch with the "-l" option ("loose" comparisons, meaning ignore tabs converted into spaces). I did the upgrade from 1.1 to 1.2 this way with Bitnet-ised diffs. > " This space intentionally left blank " Blank truncated by IBM protocol because it was at the end of a line :-) -- Glen Overby <ncoverby@plains.nodak.edu> uunet!ndsuvax!ncoverby (UUCP) ncoverby@ndsuvax (Bitnet)