Re. An update for ETHNO?

[A***@gmail.com]

Please forward this to <ETHNO mail-list> since my email registered
to do so fails. And I fail to be <registered by ETHO-forum>.

Peter Easthope wrote:-

I have a small collection of bug fixes for the old ETHNO Alpha
update of 2003-05-01.
Would the administrators of the wiki entertain posting of such
files? Would the files receive any interest?

]yes of course
... and what happened about the archives that P.Muller mentioned?

I normally have multiple instances of: ETH Oberon (2.4.3) for Linux x86
[LEO] running; because I want to have multiple files and multiple parts of
the same files, accessible at the same time; like we used to handle complex
sets of papers on a writing table.

PLUS, I need access to any of my old ETHNO partition/files at the same time.
LNO, running in FrameBuffer-mode [X-mode was problematic] does this,
by <switching to VT-mode>.

Once it's setup to pass any files around between:
LNO: AOS, FAT,
*nix: LEO, *nix, FAT,
it's useful and managable; provided you remember if you're in
LEO *or* LNO; since the look-&-feel is the same, for both.

With ETHNO's flat-file-system, it was reasonable to have 10
partitions, for the different 'topics'. And 3 sets, to cycle the
backups. So you could have 30...50 partitions on your disk.

A spreadsheet is usefull to manage the repeating data
pattern, for fixing the broken-chain of extended-partitions.

Linux USEnet readers will think you are a lunatic, to
have so many partitions.

Bernhard Treutwein wrote:-
] It would be necessary currently to have a FAT filesystem for
] uploading/updating
] the SVN repository via Windows or Linux (e.g : TinyCore) ...

Why FAT? What http can't handle <unix> ?
---------

Speaking of FAT, recently I tried copying my approximately
1600 working files from AosFS to FatFS. An error occurred after
about 130 files. Copying into the root directory of the FatFS and into
a directory in the root both failed. So this is not merely the limitation
of the FAT root directory. Any ideas? It shouldn't interfere with the
aformentioned project but is another bug to solve.

Linux shouldn't expect to 'see' any difference between accessing
FAT or eg. ext2.
Is it the same file that fails?
Normally good diagnostic messages are available.
If you use CF: consider, many are made for 'pictures', where a few
wrong-bits don't matter? Or do they also have hardware error
checking?

Thanks,

== Chris Glur.

PS. for the those who query why I claim that M$-win "is no
good for me", how would it do this:--
get the various "http" contents mention in these 2 emails,
to a single file [just the text, without the butterflies-crap];
all appended to a single file [for later convenient reading];
and with each 'page separated by "<><><><><><>"
and 'headed by its URL, for future reference, and
to prevent repeat-fetching.
`cat <the 2 emails> | strings | fold | grep http >> L`
does:
write the 2 emails
but because its AOS, extaract the ACII (stings) only,
and AOS has no *nix:EOLines, so fold the lines, (80 char),
and only show the lines containing "http",
and append it all to a file called "L" for inet-fetching.
Since we're not certain that a "L" file doesn't already
exist, we'll append instead of overwrite.
And we must in any case check/clean-up "L" before
using it, as <the list of URLs-pages> to fetch, by:-
`g1277 L D`
which means:-
append to D, the list of URL-pages in L (as described
above) - wrapping line length limit =77.

How would WINDOWS do this?

[Manuel Collado]

[snipped]
PS. for the those who query why I claim that M$-win "is no
good for me", how would it do this:--
get the various "http" contents mention in these 2 emails,
to a single file [just the text, without the butterflies-crap];
all appended to a single file [for later convenient reading];
and with each 'page separated by "<><><><><><>"
and 'headed by its URL, for future reference, and
to prevent repeat-fetching.
`cat <the 2 emails> | strings | fold | grep http >> L`
write the 2 emails
but because its AOS, extaract the ACII (stings) only,
and AOS has no *nix:EOLines, so fold the lines, (80 char),
and only show the lines containing "http",
and append it all to a file called "L" for inet-fetching.
Since we're not certain that a "L" file doesn't already
exist, we'll append instead of overwrite.
And we must in any case check/clean-up "L" before
using it, as <the list of URLs-pages> to fetch, by:-
`g1277 L D`
which means:-
append to D, the list of URL-pages in L (as described
above) - wrapping line length limit =77.
How would WINDOWS do this?

Just use Cygwin, or GnuWin32, or DJGPP or other good Windows port of GNU
utilities, for instance. I use them every day.

Of course, a (good) tool is only good for somebody if he/she know how to
use it. IMHO, your choice of Unix as well as my choice of Windows are
both perfectly valid and appropriate.

Well, you challenged me :-)

[n***@gmail.com]

Post by Manuel Collado

[snipped]
PS. for the those who query why I claim that M$-win "is no
good for me", how would it do this:--

-- snip task description---

Post by Manuel Collado

`g1277 L D`
which means:-
append to D, the list of URL-pages in L (as described
above) - wrapping line length limit =77.
How would WINDOWS do this?

Just use Cygwin, or GnuWin32, or DJGPP or other good Windows port of GNU
utilities, for instance. I use them every day.
Of course, a (good) tool is only good for somebody if he/she know how to
use it. IMHO, your choice of Unix as well as my choice of Windows are
both perfectly valid and appropriate.
Well, you challenged me :-)

IF you're familiar with A and B,
and you're using A
THEN you've CHOSEN A.

IF you're familiar with B,
and you're using A
THEN you've NOT CHOSEN A.

Do you know anyone who is familiar with *nix
and choses to rather use 'Windows' ?

[Manuel Collado]

Post by n***@gmail.com
IF you're familiar with A and B,
and you're using A
THEN you've CHOSEN A.
IF you're familiar with B,
and you're using A
THEN you've NOT CHOSEN A.
Do you know anyone who is familiar with *nix
and choses to rather use 'Windows' ?

It is unclear for me if your question refers to the first or the second
scenario.

My simple answer is: I don't know anyone that is familiar with both Unix
and Windows, except myself, and only at an intermediate level ;-)

[Chris Burrows]

Post by n***@gmail.com
Do you know anyone who is familiar with *nix
and choses to rather use 'Windows' ?

I do - me. I last used *nix about 2000 after 15 years of use. I had a copy of Windows 1.0 but only started using it seriously since Windows 3.1. Currently Windows 7 is my main development platform,

--
Chris Burrows
CFB Software
http://www.astrobe.com