UNIX-WIZARDS Digest V5#078
Mike Muuss
Unix-Wizards-Request at arpa.brl
Fri Jun 24 17:45:18 AEST 1988
UNIX-WIZARDS Digest Fri, 24 Jun 1988 V5#078
Today's Topics:
touch (Was Re: -since option for ls -lt)
Re: lp/lpr interface
Re: Question about value of a source licence
"dd conv=unblock cbs=80"
Re: Curses & Color
Re: "Open" Software Foundation: GNU
Re: -since option for ls -lt
Re: whence ``glob''
ZIM vs PROGRESS
Re: implementing pseudo-asynchronous io on SYS5
Re: sh(1) command substitution and here documents
Re: touch (Was Re: -since option for ls -lt)
Re: What do panic messages mean?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Geoff Rimmer <maujd at warwick.uucp>
Subject: touch (Was Re: -since option for ls -lt)
Date: 21 Jun 88 13:37:06 GMT
Sender: news at warwick.uucp
To: unix-wizards at brl-sem.arpa
In article <344 at ajpo.sei.cmu.edu> jrkelly at ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (John Kelly) writes:
>
>Has anyone implemented any of the following for Unix:
>
> 1. a directory listing command with a -since option?
> 2. a program to force a specified modification time upon a specified file?
> 3. a program to compare two dates/times and return an appropriate status?
>
>where the dates/times are given in string form, as in the output of "date" and
>"ls"?
Although I haven't done #1, I would have thought it would be a fairly
easy C routine to write. Use readdir(3) to step thru the files, and
stat(2) to find the modify time - then only print the info if the file
is after the time/date specified by -since.
#2 is already implemented on our (system V version) touch(1V) :-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NAME
touch - update times of last access and modification of a
file
SYSTEM V SYNOPSIS
touch [ -c ] [ -a ] [ -m ] [ mmddhhmm[yy] ] filename ...
DESCRIPTION
touch causes the access and modification times of each argu-
ment to be set to the current time. A file is created if it
does not already exist.
OPTIONS
-c Do not create filename if it does not exist.
-a Update only the access time.
-m Update only the modification time.
mmddhhmm[yy]
Update the times to the specified time rather than to
the current time. The first mm is the month, dd is the
day of the month, hh is the hour, and the second mm is
the minute; if yy is specified, it is the last two
digits of the year, otherwise the current year is used.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't know about #3.
Geoff
------------------------------------------------------------
Geoff Rimmer, Computer Science, Warwick University, UK.
maujd at uk.ac.warwick.opal
"Oh, don't be so sentimental mother, things explode every day."
------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
From: Andrew Beattie <andrew at riddle.uucp>
Subject: Re: lp/lpr interface
Date: 20 Jun 88 08:07:57 GMT
To: unix-wizards at brl-sem.arpa
In article <16162 at brl-adm.ARPA> drl%backup at uunet.uu.net (David R. Linn) writes:
>Before I reinvent the wheel, can anyone provide pointers on interfacing
>lpr- and lp-based spooling? I have a network with both SUNOS/BSD machines
>and HP-UX/SYSV machines and would like to be able to print from any machine
>to any printer;
This is the script that I use to set up the printers here.
It goes round all our computers and sets up all the spoolers so that anyone
can print on any printer from anywhere (good eh?)
Some notes:
This copy has had some site specific stuff hacked out of it (our interface
scripts are actualy split into several parts and need special handling) and
so has't been tested in exactly this form.
The directory that the script is run from should contain the printer interface
models. (in our case these are called draft and laser)
In order to cope with different printer speeds, the interfaces should contain
SPEED=set_this_at_installation
stty $SPEED ........etc
I havn't got shar to hand so convert this to a shell script simply by removing
the X at the begining of each line and cutting at the CUT HERE line
To configure for your network, you will need to change the value of ALLMACHINES
to all the sysV machines on your net and the table at the top of the script to
indicate which printers are on which machine.
I have not included the draft and laser interface script, but I have included
the network transfer script. This script must also be in the same directory
and named tcp.
We have only one BSD machine and I interface it by having a script called *lp*
which does:
su guest_account -c "remsh sys_V_server_machine lp $*"
Script starts here:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
X# ALL MACHINES NOT TO INCLUDE BSD MACHINES
XALLMACHINES="amachine bmachine cmachine dmachine emachine fmachine"
Xtmpconf=/tmp/prconf$$
Xcat >$tmpconf <<!
X1printer amachine tty1a laser 4800
X2printer bmachine tty8d laser 9600
X3printer cmachine tty15 draft
X4printer dmachine tty8b draft
X5printer emachine tty8c laser 9600
X6printer fmachine tty43 laser 19200
X7printer gmachine tty9f laser 9600
X!
X
Xfor target in $ALLMACHINES
Xdo
X echo purging spooler on ${target}
X remsh ${target} /usr/lib/lpshut
X remsh ${target} lpstat -o "|" cut "-d\ " -f1 "|" sed 's/\^/cancel\ /' \
X">" /tmp/clearup$$
X for printer in `remsh ${target} lpstat -a |cut "-d " -f1`
X do
X # remsh ${target} /usr/lib/lpadmin -x${printer}
X remsh ${target} rm -rf /usr/spool/lp/interface/${printer} \
X/usr/spool/lp/member/${printer} /usr/spool/lp/request/${printer}
X done
X remsh ${target} cat /dev/null ">" default
X remsh ${target} cat /dev/null ">" pstatus
X remsh ${target} cat /dev/null ">" log
X remsh ${target} cat /dev/null ">" qstatus
X remsh ${target} cat /dev/null ">" seqfile
X remsh ${target} cat /dev/null ">" outputq
X
X for printer in `cut -f1 $tmpconf`
X do
X echo creating the printer ${printer} on ${target}
X set -- `grep "^$printer " $tmpconf`
X remsh $target chmod 600 /dev/$3
X remsh $target chown lp /dev/$3
X model=$4
X if [ $2 != $target ]
X then
X sed "s/^SERVER=.*/SERVER=$2/" <tcp >/tmp/tcp$$
X rcp /tmp/tcp$$ ${target}:/usr/spool/lp/model/temp
X remsh ${target} /usr/lib/lpadmin -p$printer \
X-v/dev/null -mtemp
X else
X rcp $model ${target}:/usr/spool/lp/model/temp
X remsh ${target} /usr/lib/lpadmin -p$printer \
X-v/dev/$3 -mtemp
X fi
X remsh ${target} enable ${printer}
X remsh ${target} /usr/lib/accept ${printer}
X done
X # remsh ${target} /usr/lib/lpsched "<" /dev/null
Xdone
X ----------- CUT HERE ---------------
X# this script is called tcp
XERR="lp remote print spooler failure: contact administrator"
XSERVER=support # Name of target machine
X
XPRINTER=`basename $0`
XBANNER="${3:-$2}"
XCOPIES=$4
Xfor I in $5
Xdo
X OPTIONS="$OPTIONS -o$I"
Xdone
Xshift; shift; shift; shift; shift
Xfor I
Xdo
X if echo $I | grep "/usr/spool/lp" > /dev/null 2>&1
X then
X chmod a+r $I
X while :
X do
X # this should use rcp ... but never mind
X if cat $I | remsh ${SERVER} lp -d$PRINTER \
X"-t$BANNER" "-n$COPIES" "$OPTIONS" -
X then
X exit 0
X else
X sleep 60
X fi
X done
X
X
X
X fi
Xdone
Andrew Beattie
Sphinx, 43-53 Moorbrige Road, Maidenhead, England
mcvax!ukc!reading!riddle!andrew
andrew at sphinx.co.uk
+44 628 75343
#include <disclaimer.h>
-----------------------------
From: Geoff Kratz <kratz at dataspan.uucp>
Subject: Re: Question about value of a source licence
Date: 21 Jun 88 14:09:30 GMT
Keywords: source licence, suns, money
To: unix-wizards at SEM.BRL.MIL
In article <2439 at quacky.mips.COM>, dce at mips.COM (David Elliott) writes:
> You really haven't provided a lot of background.
...
> David Elliott dce at mips.com or {ames,prls,pyramid,decwrl}!mips!dce
Sorry, you're right. Our department (R&D) is primarily concerned with
developing new software systems. We are currently working on a system
to scan a document (maps at the moment) using a high-res scanner (Scitex
laser scanner) and creating a boundary chain from the raster file. We then
extract the medial axis from this file to produce the vector file. This
is processed by people to add contour information (elevation and feature
codes) plus any other useful info (this is the data capture departments area).
The resulting file is converted to any number of formats (IGES, SIF) for
a client. Included in this are a raster editor to clean the raster file
and extract the parts we need, and a vector editor to manipulate the vector
files.
Our main goal for getting the source is to gain some insight into the
system itself (the documentation enhancement you mentioned). For me
specifically, that means actually see what happens in the low-level
windowing (the documentation seems to be sparse or missing in places).
A secondary goal is to make things easier for system admin internally (my
other job around here). Our user-base (half technical, half non-technical)
always wants to know "why it isn't working" when things break, and our manager
is not always happy with vague answers to wierd problems. Pointing to a line
of code (even though he doesn't know what it means) and saying "there!" would
make things simpler for me and show them that I could (maybe) fix it, but
shouldn't because that would mean re-fixing each release until Sun fixed it
themselves (you also mentioned this regarding system hacks). The source isn't
all that crucial for this aspect, but it sure would help.
But, as I said before, our management would like to see some "revenue"
created directly because of the licence (you know, money for money) and
our department's arguments alone aren't sufficient.
--
Geoff Kratz Dataspan Technology Inc. Ph:(403) 237-9313
400-540 5th Av SW
Calgary Alberta Canada T2P 0M2 "Hey, no problem!"
...!{ubc-vision,mnetor}!alberta!calgary!dataspan!kratz
-----------------------------
From: Andrew Klossner <andrew at frip.gwd.tek.com>
Subject: "dd conv=unblock cbs=80"
Date: 22 Jun 88 16:01:50 GMT
Sender: andrew at tekecs.tek.com
To: unix-wizards at brl-sem.arpa
>> Can't you just do: "dd conv=unblock cbs=80 (or whatever)" to
>> convert the file to standard Unix \n-terminated lines? Hasn't this been
>> part of Unix since at least v6?
> Apparently not: neither System III nor System V r3.1 supports it. (I used
> "strings" on both systems, to make sure it wasn't merely undocumented).
Either your "strings" is busted or you have a crippled V3.1. The
vanilla AT&T 3.1 source tape includes a dd.c that implements this
command.
-=- Andrew Klossner (decvax!tektronix!tekecs!andrew) [UUCP]
(andrew%tekecs.tek.com at relay.cs.net) [ARPA]
-----------------------------
From: "Mike H. Moran" <mhm at cbterra.att.com>
Subject: Re: Curses & Color
Date: 23 Jun 88 12:46:08 GMT
To: unix-wizards at SEM.BRL.MIL
Color may be supported, but not correctly in the background. The
release notes for SVR3.1 say the attributes operating on the background
are unreliable. A fact I have found to be quite true on the 6386.
Mike Moran
Contracted to AT&T-BL, Columbus, Oh UUCP: att!cbosgd!mhm
-----------------------------
From: Jim Adcock <jima at hplsla.hp.com>
Subject: Re: "Open" Software Foundation: GNU
Date: 22 Jun 88 18:50:22 GMT
To: unix-wizards at SEM.BRL.MIL
| Is the gcc licence agreement more restrictive than commercial (say AT&T
| for example) compiler licences. On my system all the include files
| have AT&T Copyright notices on them. My (binary only) licence doesn't
| say anything about exemptions for libraries or include files. Arguably
| giving/selling a program compiled on my system is redistributing stuff
| that my licence forbids. It would have major ramifications for the
| whole industry if anyone tried to enforce such an interpretation.
In general, I believe the FSF license is about as restrictive as other
commercial software [note -- I consider FSF software to be commercial
software]
While I am not a lawyer, and the following should not be considered
any kind of legal advice, it seems that the general consensus is that
selling or distributing software in binary form that contains any
binary code that directly or indirectly comes from someone else's
source code IS a violation of that person's/company's copyright
on the original source. The exception would be binaries resulting
from sources that are in the public domain [FSF sources are NOT
public domain]
If using someone's include file does not cause code to be generated
directly related to that include file -- as in the case where an
include file only includes definitions, and no source corresponding
to executable code, then presumably one could use the include file
in the compile process to help generate your binaries.
In general, one is not free to sell or distribute binaries that
include binary code linked in from libraries generated from someone
else's source code, unless one has specifically purchased additional
licenses allowing one to do so from the people who originally
wrote those libraries. Since these additional licenses typically
cost thousands of dollars, presumably you know if you have purchased
such licenses. Otherwise you shouldn't be redistributing binaries
that include code from these libraries. This would be no different than
any other form of unauthorized copying and redistributing software
without the proper license [commonly known as software piracy]
In general, when you purchase a compiler with libraries, you are
only allowed to use software generated using that compiler,
which includes code from those libraries, for your own personal
use on that one particular machine. Any selling or redistribution
of the resulting binaries requires the purchasing of these
additional "commercial use" licenses.
Also, please be aware that even if you don't explicetly call for
linking someone else's libraries in with your code, most compilers
will still include binary code derived from that compiler
manufacturer's source code in your binaries -- so you still have
to get the additional commercial licenses. Examples of this
include the _main() wrapper which is placed around your main()
routine, built-in new or delete or memory management features,
built-in support for floating point routines, etc.
I do not pretend to know what common industry practice is in these
regards. I suspect that many people DO distribute or sell software
that contains binaries from libraries that they do not have these
additional "commercial" licenses for. Whether or not one agrees
that this is the way software copyrights should work [I don't,]
why would one live one's life outside of the legal framework?
Especially, why would one run a company or a consulting business
outside of a legal framework? Is this not plain, simple theft?
I do know that on the commercial projects I have worked on,
my managers have consistently worked VERY carefully and diligently
to make sure we always clear, clean, legal title to ALL, every
last bit of binary code that goes into our software products.
To do so is frankly a royal pain in the b*tt, and keeps us from
using many otherwise good products. But we feel its necessary
that when we are done, that no one could possibly come back and
make some claim that they have some ownership over our efforts.
Do you not wish to have clear ownership over the software products
you develop???
Frankly, I hate and detest these restrictions on the use of compilers
and libraries. Compilers and libraries are SUPPOSE to be used for
generating runnable binary code. To me, for the manufacturers of
these compilers and libraries to then turn around and claim
ownership over part of the compiled code is tantamount to Stanley
Tools claiming they own part of my house because I used a Stanley
hammer to help build my house. But the Law seldom corresponds to MY
concepts of common decency and common sense.
The above represents this authors opinions only, expressed as a USER
of compilers and libraries, and should not be considered a substitute
for legal advice from someone competent in software law. Please
consider the above to only be motivating statements to encourage you
to do what's necessary to stay inside the law, and to seek legal
advice as necessary.
PS: I HATE LAWYERS TOO. [except when they save my *ss]
-----------------------------
From: bob desinger <bd at hpsemc.hp.com>
Subject: Re: -since option for ls -lt
Date: 23 Jun 88 00:22:55 GMT
To: unix-wizards at brl-sem.arpa
Steve Summit (scs at athena.mit.edu) writes:
> 2. There are (probably nonstandard) versions of test that can do
> test file1 -nt file2
> test file1 -ot file2
> ("newer than" and "older than").
The Korn shell has this. `test' is a built-in command to ksh.
-----------------------------
From: Dave Decot <decot at hpisod2.hp.com>
Subject: Re: whence ``glob''
Date: 23 Jun 88 07:44:04 GMT
To: unix-wizards at brl-sem.arpa
Although I've heard the "delete with switches" story, I always was
under the impression that "dsw" really stands for the Russian phrase
meaning "goodbye".
Dave "DUH Swee DUHNya?" Decot
-----------------------------
From: Tom Betz <tbetz at dasys1.uucp>
Subject: ZIM vs PROGRESS
Date: 23 Jun 88 19:24:23 GMT
Keywords: Zim, Progress, 4GL, RDBMS
To: unix-wizards at SEM.BRL.MIL
x
In evaluating 4GL/RDBMS products available for Xenix 386, with an
aim of using one of these to develop an order proccessing/inventory
management/production database system, I've come down to a choice
between Zim and Progress... and right now I'm leaning toward Zim, for
several reasons:
1: Zim has a richer set of built-in mathematical functions, while
retaining all the capabilities of Progress.
2: Zim's set- and entity-based approach (including ROLES, a sort
of aliasing) appeals to my sense of how a business is actually
structured. I do feel a bit of discomfort at letting go of arrays,
since Zim does not employ them, but I also feel that the power offered
by set handling will easily offset this.
3: Zim's self-documentation features far outstrip Progress's.
One example - when one adds or deletes a field from a file, one needs
must recompile any compiled procedures using that file. Zim is kind
enough to tell you which procedures need to be recompiled, so you are
less likely to miss one. This could save a lot of grief in an OLTP
system!
4: Progress automatically compiles every procedure before running
it, while Zim permits considerable debugging in an interpreter, then
lets the user decide when it's time to compile. Zim even permits
compiled procedures to call uncompiled procedures, and vice-versa!
Zim's approach, while offering considerable power to the user, also
leaves itself open to some hazards (if the interpreted procedure
happens to return something the procedure calling it doesn't
anticipate) but I think the power it offers is well worth the
tradeoff.
These are just a few of the points I have observed in a couple
weeks' part-time exploration of these two packages.
I would very much appreciate comments from anyone who has used
either or both of these packages regarding points I may have missed or
should look out for... also from partisans of other 4GL packages that
can offer reasons why I'm missing the boat here.
As usual, if sufficient response is generated, I will summarize to
the Net.
--
Tom Betz
ZCNY {bellcore,cmcl2}!cucard!dasys1!tbetz
Yonkers, NY, USA 10701-2509
"Opinions? What opinions? These are >facts<!!"
-----------------------------
From: "William E. Davidsen Jr" <davidsen at steinmetz.ge.com>
Subject: Re: implementing pseudo-asynchronous io on SYS5
Date: 23 Jun 88 15:06:27 GMT
Keywords: OSI
To: unix-wizards at brl-sem.arpa
One way to do this is to fork processes and communicate via semiphores
when data is available. The actual data may be passed via pipes,
messages, or shared memory, depending on how confortable you are with
these.
--
bill davidsen (wedu at ge-crd.arpa)
{uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
-----------------------------
From: "William E. Davidsen Jr" <davidsen at steinmetz.ge.com>
Subject: Re: sh(1) command substitution and here documents
Date: 23 Jun 88 15:17:32 GMT
To: unix-wizards at brl-sem.arpa
In article <6774 at sigi.Colorado.EDU> wu at spot.Colorado.EDU (WU SHI-KUEI) writes:
| You don't need or want the here document. The following will do just fine:
|
| #!/bin/sh # not needed with REAL UNIX
| var=`bc '
| scale = 2
| 3 / 4
| quit'`
|
| The 'quit' is essential since bc keeps reading the standard input after the command have been read.
I think something got lost in typing this one... the first argument of
bc is a filename, and bc just complains in both BSD and SysV (I tried
several) versions.
I have a solution, crude that it is:
#!/bin/sh
# insert error checking here
temp=/tmp/bctmp$$
echo "scale=2; $1/$2; quit" > $temp
bc $temp
rm -f $temp
That will return the first argument divided by the second. You can
also just have the scale the first arg and the expression the second,
which makes it a lot more general, where the echo statement becomes:
echo "scale=$1; $2; quit" > $temp
This is slow, clunky, and as far as I can tell portable to V7 and later.
--
bill davidsen (wedu at ge-crd.arpa)
{uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
-----------------------------
From: Russell Kent <kent at tifsie.uucp>
Subject: Re: touch (Was Re: -since option for ls -lt)
Date: 24 Jun 88 00:17:31 GMT
Posted: Thu Jun 23 19:17:31 1988
To: unix-wizards at SEM.BRL.MIL
in article <712 at ubu.warwick.UUCP>, maujd at warwick.UUCP (Geoff Rimmer) says:
> In article <344 at ajpo.sei.cmu.edu> jrkelly at ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (John Kelly) writes:
>>
>>Has anyone implemented any of the following for Unix:
>>
>> 1. a directory listing command with a -since option?
>> 2. a program to force a specified modification time upon a specified file?
>> 3. a program to compare two dates/times and return an appropriate status?
>>
>>where the dates/times are given in string form, as in the output of "date" and
>>"ls"?
>
> #2 is already implemented on our (system V version) touch(1V) :-
As Geoff noted, SYSV touch allows you to set the date to a specific time,
whether future or past. BSD touch does not however. But then again, BSD
will "force" a touch (via an -f option) even if the file is not writable
(assuming you own the file or are the superuser). At my last check, SYSV
has no provision to do this (Clarification anyone?).
I got frustrated enough at the "gratuitous differences" between BSD
and SYSV on this point that I wrote my own. It is written entirely
without reference to BSD or SYSV source, but implements both features
from BSD and SYSV. If some kind soul will mail instructions on how
to distrubute via comp.unix.sources, I will share. For those of you
who can't wait, send me mail and I will email directly.
John Kelly: I would have emailed the source directly to you, but my mailer
doesn't know how to get to you. (Dumb ain't it) If you can come up with
a bang-style address, I'll send it to you.
Russell Kent Phone: +1 214 995 3501
Texas Instruments UUCP address:
P.O. Box 655012 MS 3635 ...!convex!smu!tifsie!kent
Dallas, TX 75265 ...!ut-sally!im4u!ti-csl!tifsie!kent
--
Russell Kent Phone: +1 214 995 3501
Texas Instruments UUCP address:
P.O. Box 655012 MS 3635 ...!convex!smu!tifsie!kent
Dallas, TX 75265 ...!ut-sally!im4u!ti-csl!tifsie!kent
-----------------------------
From: "Chris Lewis (It's loose again!" <clewis at spectrix.uucp>
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at BRL.ARPA
Subject: Re: What do panic messages mean?
Date: 23 Jun 88 21:31:59 GMT
To: unix-wizards at SEM.BRL.MIL
In article <170 at pigs.UUCP> haugj at pigs.UUCP (The Beach Bum) writes:
|In article <446 at sysco>, chapman at sco.COM (brian chapman) writes:
|] In article <2375 at rpp386.UUCP> jfh at rpp386.UUCP (The Beach Bum) writes:
|] [ DNA trap in kernel mode
|] [
|] [ now, what i want to know is what is a DNA trap? does this mean the
|] [ machine has been genetically mutated?
|]
|] On the chance that this is a serious question I will attempt
|] to answer it.
|] DNA is Device Not Availible (floating point device, that is)
|] Meaning the kernel is executing *87 instructions. Or trying to.
|] --
|] Brian Chapman uunet!sco!chapman
|
|OK - i thought it was a typo version of DMA trap. now that i know
|its True Meaning(tm), how come i don't see it when i am executing
|80387 instructions? i mean, i use floating point code, but never
|see the message. does this only apply if the kernel thought there
|was an 80387 and then later found out it had disappeared? you've
|made me curious now!
My suspicion is that "DNA trap in kernel mode" would only occur
if the kernel itself tried to issue a FPU (or some other co-processor)
instruction when no FPU (or other co-processor) was present.
Though it is possible that this would occur if the ROM BIOS was
so stupid as to tell the kernel during boot that the FPU was present,
but it wasn't.
Usually, UNIX kernels are designed to not have FPU instructions of their
own. During system boot, the 386 kernel (this applies to most kernels
all the way back to PDP-11 V7 or V6) determines whether the FP hardware
is present. If the FP hardware is not present, then the kernel makes
arrangements so that if a user tries to execute a FPU instruction, the
kernel will catch the exception, emulate the instruction in *software*,
and then continue the user's code. So, the user is never really aware
whether there's a true FPU present except that software emulation is slower.
Therefore, the compiler *always* emits true FPU instructions.
[Just consider all the grief that wouldn't happen if DOS did the emulation
of non-existant instructions in software too!]
However, if the kernel does detect that an FP instruction was issued
from itself, obviously something is wrong (the kernel should never
depend on optional co-processors) and it panics. Sort of like having
a page fault while in kernel mode (unless your kernel can page itself
that is).
ISC 386/ix used to (and I suspect Microport and Bell Tech still do)
crash if the ROM BIOS was so stupid to tell the kernel during boot
that the FPU was present but it really wasn't (which was a bug in
several earlier 386 ROM BIOSes).
Not all systems work this way (eg: Spectrix programs are linked with
different libraries depending on whether a real hardware FPU is present),
but 386 UNIXes do.
--
Chris Lewis, Spectrix Microsystems Inc, Phone: (416)-474-1955
UUCP: {uunet!mnetor, utcsri!utzoo, lsuc, yunexus}!spectrix!clewis
Moderator of the Ferret Mailing List (ferret-list,ferret-request at spectrix)
-----------------------------
End of UNIX-WIZARDS Digest
**************************
More information about the Comp.unix.wizards
mailing list