Mail not delivered yet, still trying
SMTP MAILER
postmaster at ccf3.nrl.navy.mil
Wed Nov 29 01:55:49 AEST 1989
----Mail status follows----
Have been unable to send your mail to <whitis at rira.nrl.navy.mil>,
will keep trying for a total of three days.
At that time your mail will be returned.
----Transcript of message follows----
Date: 28 Nov 89 03:28:00 EST
From: unix-wizards at BRL.MIL
Subject: UNIX-WIZARDS Digest V9#002
To: "whitis" <whitis at rira.nrl.navy.mil>
Return-Path: <@nrl3.arpa:unix-wizards-request at sem.brl.mil>
Received: from nrl3.arpa by nrl3.arpa with SMTP ; Tue, 28 Nov 89 03:28:04 EST
Received: from SEM.BRL.MIL by nrl3.arpa with SMTP ; Tue, 28 Nov 89 03:08:38 EST
Received: from SEM.BRL.MIL by SEM.BRL.MIL id aa01802; 28 Nov 89 2:55 EST
Received: from sem.brl.mil by SEM.BRL.MIL id aa01759; 28 Nov 89 2:45 EST
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 89 02:45:21 EST
From: The Moderator (Mike Muuss) <Unix-Wizards-Request at BRL.MIL>
To: UNIX-WIZARDS at BRL.MIL
Reply-To: UNIX-WIZARDS at BRL.MIL
Subject: UNIX-WIZARDS Digest V9#002
Message-ID: <8911280245.aa01759 at SEM.BRL.MIL>
UNIX-WIZARDS Digest Tue, 28 Nov 1989 V9#002
Today's Topics:
How to maintain OO project?
Re: Watchdog program
Re: of course!
How do you copy multiple dump tapes to one dump file?
uucico hangup problem
Re: Why isn't argv[argc]==(char *)0 ?
Re: Indirect system call (WARNING)
Re: FCC doing it again...
Re: Question about GETOPT(3)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Terence Kwan <nctkwan at watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Subject: How to maintain OO project?
Date: 27 Nov 89 07:46:38 GMT
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
Hello, I have some problem with 'ar'. I just wonder is there anyway to
change the filename limit to be more than 15 characters. I am doing a
very big project. The project is consisted a driver and about 20 set
of modules. I have about 30 directories. Each directories contain a
set of modules and we are using the same filename name for each
module within different directories. For example, in each directory,
we have a file called "init.c" to initialize the module. The problem
is that we want to create a library file for the project and procedure
a big project.a. However, we cannot use the filename in each module as
the object filename because of the duplication. We are thinking of add
the path name before the object file, for example, "path_init.o".
However, it will excess the limit of 15 characters. We had also
thought about numberize the object file but it is not that easy to
maintain the project. Is there any better way to do it?
Thank you in advance.
Terence Kwan
--
Terence Kwan ----------------- [ Together, we can build a better China. ]
nctkwan at watdragon.waterloo.edu ------------------------------------------
University of Waterloo, Computer Science --------------------------------
Office Automation Lab ---------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
From: "Jonathan I. Kamens" <jik at athena.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Watchdog program
Date: 27 Nov 89 12:38:43 GMT
Sender: News system <news at athena.mit.edu>
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
In article <21529 at adm.BRL.MIL> moore at ncsc.navy.mil (Moore) writes:
>It seems like a program such as this should be very common: does anyone have
>a program (source, too, please!) to monitor terminal inactivity and shut down
>any processes idle for a certain amount of time? It would have to detect
>processes that indicate Idle but really aren't (like a Kermit file transfer).
The comp.sources.unix archives on uunet.uu.net (and, presumably,
whereever else they are archived) contains several such programs. A
quick scan for "idle" in the c.s.u index reveals:
volume 3:
idledaemon Yet another idledaemon
volume 7:
idle.users A simple BSD idle-users daemon
untamo2 Log out idle users
untamo3 Log out idle users (untamo revised)
There may be others I've missed.
You have to be careful when mentioning idle daemons on the net,
because for some reason some people feel very strongly that idle
daemons are a BAD idea, and will explain their opinions at length at
the least provocation. This inevitably leads to a heated debate (read
"flame") which usually repeats to a tee the last debate on the same
subject.
(Only 1/2 :-)
Jonathan Kamens USnail:
MIT Project Athena 11 Ashford Terrace
jik at Athena.MIT.EDU Allston, MA 02134
Office: 617-253-8495 Home: 617-782-0710
-----------------------------
From: Richard Tobin <richard at aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: of course!
Date: 25 Nov 89 16:10:24 GMT
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
In article <11674 at smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn at brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>Many implementations have severe constraints on stack size.
Some at least.
>For example, on Gould PowerNode series running UTX-32 (based on 4.3BSD),
>the stack size is fixed at link time, typically only a few kilobytes.
...
>The three major alternatives are:
(4) Don't buy such machines. We all know that all the world is not a vax,
and that we mustn't dereference null pointers, but some machines just
aren't worth the pain, given that there are plenty of sane systems
available. In my opinion, Goulds are among them.
-- Richard
--
Richard Tobin, JANET: R.Tobin at uk.ac.ed
AI Applications Institute, ARPA: R.Tobin%uk.ac.ed at nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Edinburgh University. UUCP: ...!ukc!ed.ac.uk!R.Tobin
-----------------------------
From: Scott Simpson <simpson at trwind.uucp>
Subject: How do you copy multiple dump tapes to one dump file?
Date: 27 Nov 89 18:48:47 GMT
Keywords: dump format, copying tapes
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
Sun OS 3.4, Sun 3/280, Exabyte is /dev/rsmt0 and /dev/nrsmt0
I am trying to copy a set of dump tapes in dump format from a magtape
drive to an Exabyte. The magtape dump tapes consist of three tapes
consisting of one file system. I want to dump all three tapes to one
file on the Exabyte. I can't use dd because it would cease after the first
tape. Would the following work:
% dd if=/dev/rmt8 of=/dev/nrsmt0 bs=10k
% mt -t /dev/nrsmt0 bsr
% dd if=/dev/rmt8 of=/dev/nrsmt0 bs=10k
% mt -t /dev/nrsmt0 bsr
% dd if=/dev/rmt8 of=/dev/nrsmt0 bs=10k
That is, are the files on the multiple dump tapes simply contiguous and
will backspacing one record back space past the end of tape mark?
Please reply to me directly. I don't normally read this newsgroup.
--
Scott Simpson
TRW Space and Defense Sector
oberon!trwarcadia!simpson (UUCP)
trwarcadia!simpson at oberon.usc.edu (Internet)
-----------------------------
From: Scott Barman <scott at nastar.uucp>
Subject: uucico hangup problem
Date: 27 Nov 89 17:14:28 GMT
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
I know this is a problem someone has seen before but I still need to ask
since it bit us during the long holiday weekend.
Let's start with the essentials -
Hardware: Sun 3/60
Operating System: SunOS 3.5 (no flames on not going to 4.0.*. We have
a good reason and if you want to hear it email me the request)
Modem: Telebit Trailblazer+ not connected to our PBX and connected to
/dev/ttya out of the back of the box.
Local filesystem: /usr/spool is symbolicly linked to a directory on a
disk that is local to the machine but is mounted via NFS on our
internal network.
Problem: When I finally made it in this morning [:-)] I was doing my
usual checking to find that uucico was still running to the site we feed
news to at 2400 baud and has been executing since last Wednesday night!
Mail to root, uucp, and daemon only spoke of files in the spool
directory being cleaned out but not of any problems (messages from
/usr/lib/uucp/uucp.night). There were no auxilary logfile (LOG.*) and
the LOGFILE saved from last Wednesday only showed a REQUEST message
looking to copy a news batch to the remote system. Doing a ps showed
uucico still running and the modem showed itself as being "off hook."
No evidence of problems except there was no activity on the modem (e.g.
Tx and Rx LEDs were not blinking) and a uucico running for about 4-5
days.
HELP! I need to find out how to prevent this from happening again! If
knowing why it happens helps, fine! But we are going to be closed the
last week of the year and I'm lible to take off for parts unknown and
would like to leave this machine unattended for that time. Is there
something I can do?
Please email your response and if there is a significant request for
summaries, I will post one to the net.
All help is appreciated!
--
scott barman
{gatech, emory}!nastar!scott
-----------------------------
From: Guy Harris <guy at auspex.auspex.com>
Subject: Re: Why isn't argv[argc]==(char *)0 ?
Date: 27 Nov 89 23:32:18 GMT
Keywords: X/OS, Olivetti, LSX, coredump
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
>>(I.e., unless you have to deal with an archaic UNIX or a Mutant UNIX
>>From Hell, you can count on argv[argc] == 0.)
>
>In X/OS, a SYSV/BSD hybrid operating system for the Olivetti LSX
>minicomputers, a reference to argv[argc] will make your program dump core.
If you mean "a *de*reference *of* 'argv[argc]' will make your program
dump core", that's true on Suns as well, and some other machines, since
they don't let you dereference null pointers.
If you mean "even trying to copy the (pointer) *value* somewhere else
causes a core dump", then I think the label "Mutant UNIX From Hell" is
well-deserved; I've nothing against, say, array bounds-checking, but
"argv" has "argc+1" elements, not "argc" elements - if Olivetti intends
to get POSIX or ANSI C support on the LSX, they'd better fix this....
-----------------------------
From: Dan Mick <dan at charyb.com>
Subject: Re: Indirect system call (WARNING)
Date: 27 Nov 89 22:38:22 GMT
Keywords: doesn't aways work
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
In article <128380 at sun.Eng.Sun.COM> lm at sun.UUCP (Larry McVoy) writes:
>[From Sun's syscall man page:
>BUGS
> There is no way to simulate system calls such as pipe(2V),
> which return values in register d1 on Sun-3 and Sun-4 sys-
> tems or in register %edx on Sun386i systems.
>]
Pretty neat, since Sun-4 systems have no register named 'd1'...<sigh>...
(They probably mean %o1.)
--
.sig files are idiotic and wasteful.
-----------------------------
From: "Conor P. Cahill" <cpcahil at virtech.uucp>
Subject: Re: FCC doing it again...
Date: 28 Nov 89 01:15:14 GMT
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
In article <21536 at adm.BRL.MIL>, AGRISCS at umcvmb.missouri.edu (Don Ingli) writes:
> Please allow me to express my displeasure with the FCC proposal
> which would authorize a surcharge for the use of modems on the
> telephone network. This regulation is nothing less than an
> attempt to restrict the free exchange of information among the
> growing number of computer users. Calls placed using modems
> require no special telephone company equipment, and users of
> modems pay the phone company for use of the network in the form
> of a monthly bill. In short a modem call is the same as a voice
> call, and should not be subject to any additional charges.
Not that I want to pay a surcharge, but...
A modem phone call is not the same as a voice phone call. Modem calls are
continuously transmitting tones on the line, while a voice call has lots
of periods of silence. This makes modem calls harder to multiplex on the
phone network than voice calls.
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Conor P. Cahill uunet!virtech!cpcahil 703-430-9247 !
| Virtual Technologies Inc., P. O. Box 876, Sterling, VA 22170 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
-----------------------------
From: Dave Fenske <davef at lakesys.lakesys.com>
Subject: Re: FCC doing it again...
Date: 28 Nov 89 00:25:42 GMT
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
It appeared as though someone's 2 cents were being solicited, so why not mine.
The proposed modem charge is not the only item. It seems some of the Bell
operating companies are now attempting to charge business rates for lines
connected to any bulletin boards.
The net effect of such things is to limit the free exchange of information.
Could it be that the FCC is being inspired? I rather believe that these
actions stem from the desire of AT&T and the Bell operating companies to
firmly entrench themselves in the information selling business.
p.s. appologies to those who are going to say "what the #$@& is this doing
-----------------------------
From: Peter da Silva <peter at ficc.uu.net>
Subject: Re: Question about GETOPT(3)
Date: 27 Nov 89 18:03:01 GMT
Followup-To: comp.unix.wizards
To: unix-wizards at sem.brl.mil
[ I suggested &n refer to /dev/fd/n ]
> command1&command2
> is currently valid syntax in the bourne shell.
And it'd remain so. You might have problems if you have a program called
'1', '2', and so on. That's pretty unlikely.
--
`-_-' Peter da Silva <peter at ficc.uu.net> <peter at sugar.lonestar.org>.
'U` -------------- +1 713 274 5180.
"The basic notion underlying USENET is the flame."
-- Chuq Von Rospach, chuq at Apple.COM
-----------------------------
End of UNIX-WIZARDS Digest
**************************
More information about the Comp.unix.wizards
mailing list