gregg@a.cs.okstate.edu (Gregg Wonderly) (10/21/87)
$ check=755981510
$ on error then goto oops
$ on severe_error then goto oops
$ on warning then goto oops
$ if f$search("VI.4") .nes. "" then goto assem
$ write sys$output -
"I can't find VI.4, have you executed the command files to extract"
$ write sys$output "each part of the VI.TPU source?"
$ exit
$ ASSEM:
$ if f$search("SRC.DIR") .nes. "" then goto assem_1
$ write sys$output -
"I can't find the [.SRC] directory, have you extracted the other portions"
$ write sys$output "of the distribution yet?
$ exit
$ ASSEM_1:
$ write sys$output "Assembling complete VI.TPU source file..."
$ write sys$output "$ COPY VI.4 [.SRC]VI.TPU"
$ copy VI.4 [.SRC]VI.TPU
$ write sys$output "$ APPEND VI.5 [.SRC]VI.TPU"
$ append VI.5 [.SRC]VI.TPU
$ write sys$output "$ APPEND VI.6 [.SRC]VI.TPU"
$ append VI.6 [.SRC]VI.TPU
$ write sys$output "$ APPEND VI.7 [.SRC]VI.TPU"
$ append VI.7 [.SRC]VI.TPU
$ write sys$output "$ APPEND VI.8 [.SRC]VI.TPU"
$ append VI.8 [.SRC]VI.TPU
$ write sys$output "$ APPEND VI.9 [.SRC]VI.TPU"
$ append VI.9 [.SRC]VI.TPU
$ write sys$output "$ APPEND VI.10 [.SRC]VI.TPU"
$ append VI.10 [.SRC]VI.TPU
$ write sys$output "$ APPEND VI.11 [.SRC]VI.TPU"
$ append VI.11 [.SRC]VI.TPU
$ write sys$output "$ SET DEFAULT [.SRC]"
$ set default [.SRC]
$ write sys$output "VI source file assembled... Checking"
$ checksum VI.TPU
$ if checksum$checksum .ne. check then goto bad_check
$ write sys$output "Checksum OK..."
$ COMPILE:
$ if f$search ("make.com") .nes. "" then goto domake
$ write sys$output -
"I can't find [.SRC]make.com, perhaps you haven't extracted it yet?"
$ set def [-]
$ exit
$ DOMAKE:
$ write sys$output "$ @MAKE VI"
$ @make VI
$ type sys$input
$ write sys$output -
f$fao("!/*** The VI TPU section file has been succesfully built ***!/")
$ DEF = F$ENVIRONMENT ("DEFAULT")
$ TVI=="EDIT/TPU/SECTION=''DEF'VI.GBL"
$ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "$ SET DEFAULT [-]"
$ SET DEF [-]
$ EXIT
$ bad_check:
$ write sys$output f$fao ("Checksum of file failed, it may be damaged!/")
$ write sys$output check," <> ",checksum$checksum
$ write sys$output -
f$fao ("!/Proceeding with Compile, just in case it is not.!/")
$ goto compile
$ oops:
$ exit '$STATUS'gregg@a.cs.okstate.edu (Gregg Wonderly) (10/21/87)
The previous 14 parts of VI comprise the same version that I posted to
comp.sources.misc on the 11th. However, I repackaged the distribution
using VMS_SHAR to try and cure the mailer trama I had with wrapped lines.
The posting on the 11th was supposed to go to this group as well, but
evidently it did not.
I am creating some lists on my machine to handle any new request, bug reports,
and comments in general, about VI. They are as follows:
info-vi All discussion concerning VI fixes/bugs and general comments.
vi-req Requests to me for software or other things not of general
interest to the info-vi list. I.E. you should send mail to
this list to be placed on the other (whenever possible).
These lists exist, on NEMO.MATH.OKSTATE.EDU, NOT on A.CS.OKSTATE.EDU which
is where these articles originated from.
Note that future updates and distributions of VI will go to these lists,
and not to the NET at large.
-----
Gregg Wonderly
Department of Mathematics
Oklahoma State University
UUCP: {cbosgd, ihnp4, rutgers}!okstate!nemo.math.okstate.edu!gregg
ARPA: gregg@NEMO.MATH.OKSTATE.EDUWOLF@BBNG (Jerry Wolf) (10/26/87)
I would like to protest the distribution to the entire INFO-VAX list of LARGE program sources such as the recent "VI in TPU" that hit our machine this past weekend. Mr. Wonderly's effort appears to be impressive at least in terms of bulk, and may well be useful to scores of INFO-VAXers -- that's not the point at all. I just don't see the point of inflicting a megabyte (more or less -- I didn't count) of traffic through many networks worldwide on all of us who aren't desiring it. I admit I don't know if this had been preceded by a net-wide discussion of whether a general distribution of this was desired by enough people -- I discard many INFO-VAX messages after scanning the subject. So maybe I had a chance to vote against it beforehand. I just don't feel that this is the appropriate vehicle for such distributions. Why not collect responses from interested parties and send JUST to them? Jerry Wolf BBN Laboratories Incorporated
ignatz@chinet.UUCP (Dave Ihnat) (10/27/87)
> I would like to protest the distribution to the entire INFO-VAX > list of LARGE program sources such as the recent "VI in TPU" that > hit our machine this past weekend. Mr. Wonderly's effort appears > to be impressive at least in terms of bulk, and may well be useful > to scores of INFO-VAXers -- that's not the point at all. I just > don't see the point of inflicting a megabyte (more or less -- I > didn't count) of traffic through many networks worldwide on all > of us who aren't desiring it. Mr. Wolf, you're way out of line. There is no vms.sources group--your complaint, if stated as "there should be such a group so that I could ignore it"--would be OK. (Then, of course, you'd gripe when a neat program you needed flew by, and ask people to please send it to you...) This, incidentally, has turned out to be one of the hottest pieces of software, VMS or Unix, that I've received in terms of requests from clients; TPU is a powerful utility, but the only DEC-provided interfaces (EVE and EDT/TPU) only weakly provide access to its capabilities (no *wildcarding*, fer crissakes!) Yes, I'd agree that a vms source group is in order; but for Ghod's sake, don't bite the hand that feeds you--just because *you* don't need *this* piece of software, you want to ban all software submissions? Create a new group, or volunteer an RA81 to use as a remotely accessable archive for the world, but don't try to mess up my access to such benefits as Greg's utility... Grrr, Dave Ihnat Analysts International Corp. ihnp4!homebru!ignatz -- Dave Ihnat ihnp4!homebru!ignatz || ihnp4!chinet!ignatz (w) (312) 882-4673
poole@ut-ngp.UUCP (10/29/87)
Gregg In Article 3154 of comp.os.vms you write >Subject: Re: VI in TPU part 14/14 >I am creating some lists on my machine to handle any new request, bug reports, >and comments in general, about VI. They are as follows: > > info-vi All discussion concerning VI fixes/bugs and general comments. > vi-req Requests to me for software or other things not of general >These lists exist, on NEMO.MATH.OKSTATE.EDU, NOT on A.CS.OKSTATE.EDU which >is where these articles originated from. > >Note that future updates and distributions of VI will go to these lists, >and not to the NET at large. I don't understand what you mean when you say you are creating these lists on your machine. Do you mean that these will be addresses where we can send mail? I don't think so. It seems like you are talking about some kind of mini-newsgroup that you are creating on your machine that we can somehow read from and post to. Exactly what are you talking about. -- Steve Poole ARPA: poole@ngp.utexas.edu UUCP: {ames,angband,exodus,harvard,im4u,mordor,seismo}!ut-sally!ut-ngp!poole
campbell@maynard.BSW.COM (Larry Campbell) (10/30/87)
In article <1787@chinet.UUCP> ignatz@chinet.UUCP (Dave Ihnat) writes:
<> ... There is no vms.sources group...
and
<>Yes, I'd agree that a vms source group is in order...
What about comp.sources.misc? I have seen VMS software posted there --
in fact, wasn't VERB (which I find one of the most useful tidbits from
the net in a long time) posted there?
I agree with the original poster (Wolf) in substance, if not in tone.
comp.os.vms should be for discussions; sources, ESPECIALLY gigantic
ones, should be in a sources group, and I think comp.sources.misc is
quite appropriate for that.
--
Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc.
Internet: campbell@maynard.bsw.com 120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109
uucp: {husc6,mirror,think}!maynard!campbell +1 617 367 6846sommar@enea.UUCP (10/31/87)
Larry Campbell (campbell@maynard.UUCP) suggests that Gregg should
have posted his source to comp.sources.misc.
1) Gregg did post it to comp.sources.misc too as I recall.
2) Does comp.sources.misc go to ARPA, Bitnet and all the other
nets that get Info-VAX? Isn't comp.sources.misc exclusively
Usenet?
So what should be needed would something like Info-VAX-sources
(Called comp.sources.vms probably on Usenet.) But I think that is up
to the ARPA/Bitnet people to decide. I read Info-VAX from Unix and
don't get my mailbox filled by huge sources that I don't want.
Personally, I think Gregg was right in posting his sources. Although
I despise vi myself, I can easily imagine that his job is of interest
for many people that are used to Unix and don't like switching editor
when they are on VMS.
--
Erland Sommarskog
ENEA Data, Stockholm
sommar@enea.UUCP
It could have been worse; it could have been Pepsi.WOLF@BBNG (Jerry Wolf) (11/02/87)
Last week I sent out a message that began: > I would like to protest the distribution to the entire INFO-VAX > list of LARGE program sources such as the recent "VI in TPU" that > hit our machine this past weekend. Let me be more specific (and perhaps take back the word "protest" in favor of "suggesting otherwise"). I don't wish to inhibit sharing software on IFNO_VAX or anywhere else, and my complaint/suggestion has nothing to do with the QUALITY of programs that are submitted group-wide, just the SIZE, as I believe I pointed out. Those giant messages, arriving unbidden, darn near ran me out of disk quota (and would have, had I not happened to log in on the weekend and delete them in time). Who knows what havoc they wreaked to other hapless recipients? My suggestion is merely that authors of LARGE things they wish to share send a message to all to the effect that" "I have a neat program that does X. It is written in Y, and it requires system resources Z. It is about W kilocharacters long. If you're interested in receiving it, reply to me." I WOULD appreciate receiving such messages and replying to receive those programs that look useful to our system or even just interesting to me. That way, everybody gets a chance to see what's being offered for sharing and the data gets transmitted only to those who want/need it. Doesn't seem to me there's a need for a separate sources group. OK, my suggestion does embody a size threshold -- i.e., when is a submission small enough to submit to the entire group? I don't have any strong opinions about this; I'd be happy simply having submitters just ask themselves that question before going ahead and sending the whole shebang. Perhaps if it's too big to send in one message, you should ask first? Cheers, Jerry Wolf BBN Laboratories Incorporated
dtraver@macomw.ARPA (George Andrew Traver) (11/13/87)
I would realy like a copy of VI in TPU, but I missed it ther first time round. Could someone email me a copy? Or give me the mail address of the person who originaly posted it? addres:= "dtraver@macomw.arpa" Thanks in advance.