[9042] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 2660 Volume: 8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Thu May 21 11:07:49 1998
Date: Thu, 21 May 98 08:00:31 -0700
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Thu, 21 May 1998 Volume: 8 Number: 2660
Today's topics:
Re: Arrays <gmorgan@photographics.co.uk>
Best module for PerlIS to access ODBC? <bjs@iti-oh.com>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community. <JYoungman@vggas.com>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community <JYoungman@vggas.com>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community <JYoungman@vggas.com>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Chris Nandor)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (John Porter)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Chris Nandor)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Chris Nandor)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (I R A Aggie)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Matthew R. Williams)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (William C. Cheng)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Matthew R. Williams)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Matthew R. Williams)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Matthew R. Williams)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Paul D. Smith)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Chris Adams)
Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil chris+usenet@netmonger.net
Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Help needed - Will pay. <cynthee@earthlink.net>
Re: Help on stripping a string <sfairey@adc.metrica.co.uk>
Re: Information about fetchrow... (Charlie Stross)
O'Reilly has helped promote the acceptance of Perl <Scott.L.Erickson@HealthPartners.com>
Re: Problem de-referencing a reference to a typeglob st <bobklin@idt.net>
Re: Problem de-referencing a reference to a typeglob st <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Re: Software vendor liability [Was: Does Perl have a ID (John Porter)
Re: suid problem <jhoglund@mirage.skypoint.net>
Utilitarian and artistic nature of documentation <Scott.L.Erickson@HealthPartners.com>
Re: What is wrong with this FileHandle code? <jim.michael@gecm.com>
Re: What specific functions should be in a Perl IDE? [W (Charlie Stross)
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 8 Mar 97) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:28:37 +0100
From: "Glenn Morgan" <gmorgan@photographics.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Arrays
Message-Id: <6k1865$qr9$1@news.u-net.com>
Antti-Jussi Korjonen wrote in message <6k0om1$rpp$2@baker.cc.tut.fi>...
>I've got an array full of expressions, one row for example:
>PORTS=16 ACTIVE PORTS=0 SWITCH 2=28 SWITCH 3=24
>Now, I want extract the values of PORTS and SWITCH 2.
>It would be nice to have a function, which does this for me.
>So I have an array, @array which contains a whole lot of rows like above.
>Now I pass @array and say PORTS or PORTS= to the function and it should
>return 16. What would be the easiest way to do this?
>
>--
>
> __/ __/ __/ __/ Antti-Jussi Korjonen
> __/ __/ __/ __/ __/__/ Vaajakatu 5 D 85
> __/ __/ __/ __/ __/__/ 33720 TAMPERE, FINLAND
> __/ __/ __/__/__/ __/ __/ tel. +358-(0)40-577 83 23
> Antti-Jussi.Korjonen@sonera.fi
> --------->> http://www.students.tut.fi/~k150556 <<---------
>
The way I would do this is as follows
Fill your array with anonymous hashs for each row (having created the
appropriate hash first). A row entry would look like
{'PORTS' => 16, 'ACTIVE PORTS' => 0, 'SWITCH 2' => 28 'SWITCH 3' => 24};
To retrieve 'PORTS' from the first entry in the array you could then simply
say
$array[0]->{'PORTS'} which will return the value 16
Or
doing it the way you suggest
sub get _value
{
my ($array_entry, $key) = @_;
$array_entry =~ /$key\s*=\s*(\d+)/; # could add i switch if your
not sure of the key case
$value = $1;
return $value;
}
call it like this
&get_value ($array[0]);
I'd use a method based on the first example
Hope this helps
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 09:52:51 -0400
From: "Brian J. Sayatovic" <bjs@iti-oh.com>
Subject: Best module for PerlIS to access ODBC?
Message-Id: <6k1bji$33t$1@malgudi.oar.net>
I've seen a couple of dsifferent modules for Perl to access databases
through ODBC. I'd like to knwo from those of you who've tried them which is
the best? Is there a clear winner? Do they have any problems with PerlIS
versus the latest native perl for NT?
Brian.
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 13:36:44 +0100
From: James Youngman <JYoungman@vggas.com>
To: Zenin <zenin@bawdycaste.org>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community.
Message-Id: <u1af8b3in7.fsf@noisy.vggas.com>
>>>>> "z" == Zenin <zenin@bawdycaste.org> writes:
z> Depends on what you meen by "free". If I have a GPLed program on my
z> computer and decide to change a piece of it *for my own personal
z> use* and don't publish this change to the entire world, I'm in
z> direct violation of the GPL.
No you are not. Please read the GPL before (or better yet, instead
of) misrepresenting it.
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 12:59:06 GMT
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k18eq$5nf$8@csnews.cs.colorado.edu>
[courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
In comp.lang.perl.misc,
fantome/@/usa/./net (le Fanttme) writes:
:It should be made clear that there could be a cumulative cost for
:copying the FAQ unbundled with other documents unbundled. I don't read
:Mr. Christiansen's restriction as limiting the price of the whole
:CD-ROM, but I do see it as limiting the value which would be placed on
:the perlfaq itself.
Yes, that's right. I can see that I should work on the copyrights on
the FAQ to make sure it's clear what I do and don't want. What I do
want is that it be made useful to all except those who want to sell
little printed copies of it for $400. I want its code to be freeware
that anyone can use is they see fit (as I write in perltoot), not
shackleware or crippleware or virusware with immoral strings attached.
I'm not on a religous mission of forced evangelism, which is why the
GPV must not be used on my documentation. I just want to help people
get good, useful answers to their Perl questions for free. This is not
the FSF's mission, but it is mine.
--tom
--
"If you substitute other kinds of intellectual property into the GNU
manifesto, it quickly becomes absurd." --Cal Keegan
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 13:35:26 +0100
From: James Youngman <JYoungman@vggas.com>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <u1btsr3ipd.fsf@noisy.vggas.com>
>>>>> "tc" == Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> writes:
tc> [courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
tc> In comp.lang.perl.misc,
tc> trd@cs.mu.oz.au (Tyson Richard DOWD) writes:
tc> :However, you convince everyone that there is true freedom when
tc> people cannot :change what you have written.
tc> True freedom doesn't not involve coming to my home and trashing
tc> it just because you feel like it.
Allegories like this are rarely illuminating in these sorts of
discussions.
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 13:34:03 +0100
From: James Youngman <JYoungman@vggas.com>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <u1d8d73iro.fsf@noisy.vggas.com>
>>>>> "jy" == James Youngman <JYoungman@vggas.com> writes:
jy> 1. The GNUs Buletin suggested the creation of Free-in-the-FSF-sense
jy> documentation for Perl. This does not already exist.
Oops, no, sorry. That would be the task list, not the buletin.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:17:33 GMT
From: pudge@pobox.com (Chris Nandor)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <pudge-2105980911520001@dynamic95.ply.adelphia.net>
In article <6k0kkj$dn2$3@csnews.cs.colorado.edu>, tchrist@mox.perl.com
(Tom Christiansen) wrote:
# [courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
#
# In gnu.misc.discuss,
# Barry Margolin <barmar@bbnplanet.com> writes:
# :I disagree. Program documentation is utilitarian, it's not artistic or
# :rhetorical prose
#
# I see that you haven't read my writings lately.
Tom, more importantly, you can see that he does not write much Perl.
After the old "make easy things easier and hard things possible" thing,
possibly the number one reason why Perl is as popular as it is is the fact
that utility and art have common ground in it. That permeates the source,
the docs, the programs, everything.
Only someone without imagination cannot see the art in perl, its source,
and its docs.
--
Chris Nandor mailto:pudge@pobox.com http://pudge.net/
MacPerl: Power and Ease (ISBN 1881957322), http://www.ptf.com/macperl/
%PGPKey = ('B76E72AD', [1024, '0824090B CE73CA10 1FF77F13 8180B6B6'])
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:24:57 GMT
From: jdporter@min.net (John Porter)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <MPG.fcdf6a5ce0f34199896e4@news.min.net>
On Thu, 21 May 1998 01:24:08 GMT,
in article <YmL81.48$152.468270@cam-news-reader1.bbnplanet.com>,
barmar@bbnplanet.com (Barry Margolin) wrote:
> But what if someone makes a modification to perl, and then wants to make a
> corresponding modification to the documentation? Your prohibition against
> modifying the documentation requires them to distribute *incorrect*
> documentation.
No, it doesn't.
If someone wishes not to distribute documentation which is incorrect,
but over which they do not possess the power to amend, then they
should simply to stop disributing it.
John Porter
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:30:02 GMT
From: pudge@pobox.com (Chris Nandor)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <pudge-2105980924210001@dynamic95.ply.adelphia.net>
In article <6k0no5$103$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>, trd@cs.mu.oz.au (Tyson
Richard DOWD) wrote:
# You can't modify it. By the FSF's terminology (which is the only
# terminology relevant to them), it's not free. Some people agree with
# them. Some don't.
# In common parlance, calling perlfaq "free" is OK, but in the free
# software community, where people allow modification and redistribution
# of their work, it's misleading.
I officially redefine "free" as meaning "provided with ketchup". Any
other usage with me is misleading.
Is that burger free?
--
Chris Nandor mailto:pudge@pobox.com http://pudge.net/
MacPerl: Power and Ease (ISBN 1881957322), http://www.ptf.com/macperl/
%PGPKey = ('B76E72AD', [1024, '0824090B CE73CA10 1FF77F13 8180B6B6'])
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:27:38 GMT
From: pudge@pobox.com (Chris Nandor)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <pudge-2105980921570001@dynamic95.ply.adelphia.net>
In article <_bS81.68$152.620589@cam-news-reader1.bbnplanet.com>, Barry
Margolin <barmar@bbnplanet.com> wrote:
# The GPL doesn't force you to share with your friends, it allows it.
What an odd thing to say. Since when does something like sharing your own
work with your friends need to be allowed? Does it allow me to cross the
street without my mommy, too?
--
Chris Nandor mailto:pudge@pobox.com http://pudge.net/
MacPerl: Power and Ease (ISBN 1881957322), http://www.ptf.com/macperl/
%PGPKey = ('B76E72AD', [1024, '0824090B CE73CA10 1FF77F13 8180B6B6'])
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 09:42:25 -0500
From: fl_aggie@thepentagon.com (I R A Aggie)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <fl_aggie-2105980942260001@aggie.coaps.fsu.edu>
In article <864syk5psm.fsf@coulee.tdb.com>, Russell Senior
<seniorr@teleport.com> wrote:
+ You haven't addressed Barry Margolin's observation that if one
+ modifies the code but can't modify the documentation, then the
+ documentation is no longer accurate.
There's this concept called 'addendum'...
James
--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
The Bill of Rights is paid in Responsibilities - Jean McGuire
To cure your perl CGI problems, please look at:
<url:http://www.perl.com/CPAN-local/doc/FAQs/cgi/idiots-guide.html>
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 08:49:51 -0500
From: mrw@uiuc.edu (Matthew R. Williams)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <m2lnrvybr4.fsf@bigglesworth.isdn.uiuc.edu>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> writes:
> If someone modifies the code to make it behave differently than the
> standard release, it is no longer Perl and they may not distribute it
> under the same name. If they modify the code and Perl still works the
> same way, then there is no need to change documentation.
MMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmm.
XEmacs.
Xperl?
Perl-RMS...break all the object stuff because RMS doesn't like data
abstraction[1]?
[1] I heard that from the XEmacs folks. Am I wrong?
--
"Mmmmm...wars not make one great."
-Yoda
"The Empire Strikes Back"
---------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew R. Williams mrw@uiuc.edu
Geek of All Trades http://bigglesworth.isdn.uiuc.edu/~mrw/
---------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 09:46:18 -0400
From: william@cs.umd.edu (William C. Cheng)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k1b7a$l3c@bourbon.cs.umd.edu>
In article <6k0b8b$s3a$1@schenectady.netmonger.net>,
<chris+usenet@netmonger.net> wrote:
>RMS believes that his style of free software and his licensing system
>are the best way to do good for the computing community. Is he not
>allowed to have this opinion? He is mad at O'Reilly because they sell
>a lot of books about GNU software but they don't donate anything to
>the FSF. His response is to ask people to write free books which the
>FSF can sell to raise money (and you can also photocopy or download
>them). Is any of this truly evil? You may disagree (I sometimes do),
>but I think it is self-evident that what RMS is doing is logical and
>consistent with respect to his philosophy of free software.
Isn't what O'Reilly is doing in line with the spirit of GPL? May be the
irony is just too much!
--
Bill Cheng // bill.cheng@acm.org <URL:http://bourbon.cs.umd.edu:8001/william/>
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 08:57:01 -0500
From: mrw@uiuc.edu (Matthew R. Williams)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <m2k97fybf6.fsf@bigglesworth.isdn.uiuc.edu>
cadams@ro.com (Chris Adams) writes:
> You mentioned the Camel book - that is a book from the evil O'Reilly
> company (according to RMS). They are evil because they copyright their
> books and don't give the rights to the FSF.
Evil? Glack. Er. Uhm. O'Reilly? Evil?
*cough* *spit* *hack*
You're kidding, aren't you?
RMS has crossed the line. I'm not sure what the line is, or even
what the two sides of the line should be labeled, but he's way
the hell over it.
I mean, one of the fundamental tenets of the FSF is that money can
be made off of books and support. That is precisely what O'Reilly
is doing.
Taking the intellectual freedom argument and extending it to books
is just plain stupid, because without copyrights, publishing and
writing are no longer viable professions.
I mean, not everyone gets MacArthur grants, eh?
RMS has done wonderful things, but when you start calling O'Reilly
evil for doing what you suggest, then you've become psychotic, and
need to take a breather. Try writing some shareware, big guy.
--
Five seconds later, I'm getting the upside of 15Kv across the
nipples. (These ambulance guys sure know how to party).
-Simon Travaglia
(The Bastard Operator from Hell)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew R. Williams mrw@uiuc.edu
Geek of All Trades http://bigglesworth.isdn.uiuc.edu/~mrw/
---------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 08:58:49 -0500
From: mrw@uiuc.edu (Matthew R. Williams)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <m2iumzybc6.fsf@bigglesworth.isdn.uiuc.edu>
chris+usenet@netmonger.net writes:
> I think he has a perfectly reasonable point. It is a statement of
> fact that the Linux kernel was combined with many programs written as
> part of the GNU project to create a free operating system.
My house is not a "Sears Craftsman/Sakolosky Apartment".
One of the cool parts about FSF stuff is that you can use it to make
proprietary stuff, and the GPL doesn't propagate with the stuff.
--
<mrw> let's say you're working at microsoft.
<mrw> you want a whiteboard in your office.
<mrw> you send e-mail to a certain address, hang a piece of paper on the wall
where you want the whiteboard.
<mrw> within 24 hours, you have a whiteboard hanging where you indicated.
<Arun> wow
<mrw> no wonder they're kicking everyone's ass
<Arun> they plot they're world domination strategies on whiteboards?
<Arun> I bet they're the printing kind.
-Arun Bhalla and myself
---------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew R. Williams mrw@uiuc.edu
Geek of All Trades http://bigglesworth.isdn.uiuc.edu/~mrw/
---------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 13:50:07 GMT
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k1bef$bp7$2@csnews.cs.colorado.edu>
[courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
In comp.lang.perl.misc,
pudge@pobox.com (Chris Nandor) writes:
:I officially redefine "free" as meaning "provided with ketchup". Any
:other usage with me is misleading.
You infidel! What are you thinking! Everyone knows that "free"
means "provided with mustard". I can't believe your insensitivity.
This is a terrible threat to the Free 3735928559 Movement everywhere.
--tom, thinking of Gulliver
--
"If you substitute other kinds of intellectual property into the GNU
manifesto, it quickly becomes absurd." --Cal Keegan
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 09:04:00 -0500
From: mrw@uiuc.edu (Matthew R. Williams)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <m2hg2jyb3j.fsf@bigglesworth.isdn.uiuc.edu>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> writes:
> [courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
>
> In comp.lang.perl.misc,
> pudge@pobox.com (Chris Nandor) writes:
> :I officially redefine "free" as meaning "provided with ketchup". Any
> :other usage with me is misleading.
>
> You infidel! What are you thinking! Everyone knows that "free"
> means "provided with mustard". I can't believe your insensitivity.
> This is a terrible threat to the Free 3735928559 Movement everywhere.
As odd as this may seem on this thread, allow me to propose a compromise:
"free" now means "provided with ketchup and/or mustard"...
--
"They'll kill me if I tell you."
"I'll kill you if you don't."
-Glorie Hendry and Roger Moore
"Live and Let Die"
---------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew R. Williams mrw@uiuc.edu
Geek of All Trades http://bigglesworth.isdn.uiuc.edu/~mrw/
---------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 10:43:06 -0400
From: psmith@baynetworks.com (Paul D. Smith)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <p5vhqzbs79.fsf@baynetworks.com>
%% Barry Margolin <barmar@bbnplanet.com> writes:
bm> Tom apparently sees two problems with putting his documentation under the
bm> GPL:
bm> 1) It would allow people to modify the documentation; and
bm> 2) it would force people who incorporate examples from the
bm> documentation into their programs to put them under the GPL.
bm> Problem 2 is actually easily solved. Since Tom is the author of
bm> the documentation, he can use a license that refers to the GPL,
bm> and then allows additional rights, such as incorporating the
bm> examples into programs without having to distribute their source.
Actually, I don't even think problem 2 is a real problem that needs to
be solved.
All copyrighted work allows for parts of it to be copied under "fair
use". I would say that any code example less than a page or so long is
_automatically_ copyable under copyright law. Of course, IANAL.
There are plenty of sample makefile constructions in the GNU make
manual, for example, but I've never heard it suggested by _anyone_,
including RMS, that placing those examples into your makefiles, even
verbatim, somehow causes your makefiles to be GPL'd.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <psmith@baynetworks.com> Network Management Development
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are my opinions--Bay Networks takes no responsibility for them.
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 14:49:00 GMT
From: cadams@ro.com (Chris Adams)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k1ess$gef$1@news.ro.com>
According to <chris+usenet@netmonger.net>:
>For some reason, people like to claim that Richard is some hideous
>monster out to steal everyone's hard-written software away from them.
>I think he has a perfectly reasonable point. It is a statement of
>fact that the Linux kernel was combined with many programs written as
>part of the GNU project to create a free operating system. Indeed,
>the vast majority of "the Linux operating system" existed long before
>the Linux kernel. I can understand why RMS would be unhappy to see
>that his dream of a free operating system finally came true and the
>GNU project was getting almost no credit for their part of it.
When Linus started Linux, he was told it was unneccesary for several
reasons. Tannenbaum flamed him for the architecture, and GNU people
told him that it was pointless, because the Hurd was going to be the
GNU operating system.
Well, he kept working on it anyway (obviously). Eventually, the GNU
people came back, and wanted to take credit for a lot of the system.
Where's the Hurd? The dream of a free operating system finally came
true in the form of Linux, despite some GNU people telling us it was
useless.
If Richard Stallman had wanted to enforce credit, he should have put it
in the license (like in the BSD license). He did not, and so he has no
right to demand credit.
>RMS believes that his style of free software and his licensing system
>are the best way to do good for the computing community. Is he not
>allowed to have this opinion? He is mad at O'Reilly because they sell
>a lot of books about GNU software but they don't donate anything to
>the FSF. His response is to ask people to write free books which the
>FSF can sell to raise money (and you can also photocopy or download
>them). Is any of this truly evil? You may disagree (I sometimes do),
>but I think it is self-evident that what RMS is doing is logical and
>consistent with respect to his philosophy of free software.
Again, he wrote the license (which by the way has the same "no modify"
clause that Tom's prose has). If he didn't want people to profit from
his work, he should have written a different license. O'Reilly is one
example of how a company can succeed working with GPL software.
--
Chris Adams - cadams@ro.com
System Administrator - Renaissance Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 14:10:46 GMT
From: chris+usenet@netmonger.net
Subject: Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil
Message-Id: <6k1cl6$d6g$1@schenectady.netmonger.net>
In article <6k0kig$dn2$2@csnews.cs.colorado.edu>,
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> wrote:
> In comp.lang.perl.misc,
> Barry Margolin <barmar@bbnplanet.com> writes:
> :Why do you consider the documentation to be sacrosanct in this way?
> :Doesn't the same thing happen if someone uses the Perl source code or Perl
> :modules as a source of examples?
>
> If so, then this is wrong. Perl will have no part of making people's
> choices for them. The documentation and modules are *meant* to be copied.
> Something that's meant to be copied should not carry with it an infection
> that strips the author of his artistic rights of authorship. We must
> not make others' decisions for them in this. They are welcome to do so
> if they *wish*, but a promise extracted under duress caries no moral value.
>
> Choice is key.
You have the _choice_ to write your own damn software instead of using
bits of GPL'd code. Don't you understand that the FSF's purpose for
existence is to promote free software (yes, with _their_ definition of
"free" - why would they use someone else's?). To you this "loss of
artistic rights" is a moral outrage worthy of going apeshit in public.
To them, the most important thing is for software to be free. The
whole POINT of the GPL is to let people write free software and know
that it can never be taken and used in a non-free product. It's been
around for _how_ long? You've been on the net for _how_ long? And
you never realized what the GPL said until now?
You seem to spaz out a lot lately. It might be a good idea to take
a break - have some tea, look out the window, listen to some music
for a few hours before posting.
--
Christopher Masto <chris+usenet@netmonger.net>
Director of Operations, NetMonger Communications, Inc.
"Behold the Power of Cheese"
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 14:38:12 GMT
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Subject: Re: GPL documentation == unspeakable evil
Message-Id: <6k1e8k$h1t$1@csnews.cs.colorado.edu>
[courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
In comp.lang.perl.misc, chris+usenet@netmonger.net writes:
:Don't you understand that the FSF's purpose for
:existence is to promote free software
Don't be silly. The purpose is to get people to write encumbered
software. Software that's free of strings attached is anti-FSF.
RMS shoves his dogma down the throats of those whose idea of freedom
doesn't include viruses. That goes over like a lead balloon.
Listen closely: the free software is much bigger, and much more important,
than the FSF. They don't want to hear this, but it's true. The world
does not revolve around Richard, who strangely wants us all to send
him money.
The revelation for me I hadn't realized that I had accidentally released a
virus to the world by letting my writings be poisoned by the FSF licence.
I am now fixing this immoral disgrace. Crippleware is not what we want,
especially when it is crippled in a way unobvious to the casual user.
I terribly sorry to have released a virus unknowingly. Never again.
The GPL has no place in documentation.
--tom
--
"If you substitute other kinds of intellectual property into the GNU
manifesto, it quickly becomes absurd." --Cal Keegan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 09:34:34 -0500
From: "c." <cynthee@earthlink.net>
Subject: Help needed - Will pay.
Message-Id: <35643B7A.1A2B@earthlink.net>
Hi all...
I'm not entirely sure that I'm looking in the right place, (don't you
hate posts that start out that way?), but I'm hoping that someone here
can help me.
I am a web developer who recently aquired a contract to build a site for
a large, nation-wide organization. This is a very old, very secretive
society, (along the same lines of Eco's Masons) and they have requested
that a large section of their site be password protected. Typically, I
would configure .htaccess and .htpasswd to set this up on the server,
but they have requested that there be no username field, simply a
password.
The same password will be going out to all of the members of this
organization, and it is not likely that the password would ever change.
(If it did, it would be at least a year down the road - The organization
is mostly older people, and the administration for the society wants to
keep it as simple as possible to avoid confusion. Not my idea). I was
informed by my host that I will need a cgi or Java script to accomplish
this, and was wondering if anybody here can help me out. I'm not
begging for a free script, I'm more than willing to pay for something
suitable.
I will need to ensure that there will be only one password prompt, but
it will allow access to an entire directory of pages. Also, I need to
make sure that there would be no way of 'bypassing' the password prompt
into the directory (that the validation will take place at any point of
entry). In the same vein, I need to know that the same password
protection will stymie the search engines attempting to index this
directory. (Although we are not actively going to promote the
site, I don't want them picking it up on their own, and being able to
access and index the secure area).
I realize that this route may not be the most secure way of going about
this, but there's little I can do about it. I explained this to the
organization's administration, and they're fine with it. I also realize
that people may try to get in there, anyway - but, really, they'll be
disappointed, as there's not much there of interest to anybody (except
the organization's members).
Any thoughts or suggestions or volunteers or contractors or ~anything~,
please contact me ASAP, as they're chomping at the bit to get a news
release out to their members regarding the password information, and I'm
still not entirely sure if this is even possible.
TIA
Cynthia Green
http://www.moonstoneproductions.com
clg@moonstoneproductions.com
--
"...children are innocent and love justice,
while most of us are wicked and naturally prefer mercy"
G.K. Chesterton
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:29:32 +0100
From: "Simon Fairey" <sfairey@adc.metrica.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Help on stripping a string
Message-Id: <895757378.21947.0.nnrp-04.c246a788@news.demon.co.uk>
Or yet another way to do it ( again assuming perfect matching quotes)
#!/bin/perl
@strings = (
'Perl Language',
'Perl+Language',
'"Perl Language"',
'"Perl Language" Misc',
'"Perl Language" Misc+"Regular Expression"',
'"Perl Language"+Misc'
);
my @results;
foreach $string ( @strings ) {
@results = ();
print "Splitting - $string\n";
# Extract all strings enclosed in quotes.
while( $string =~ /"([^"]+)"/g ) {
push @results, $1;
# Remove what we just matched from the string
$string =~ s///;
}
# Remove leading and trailing spaces and plus signs
$string =~ s/^(\s|\+)*//;
$string =~ s/(\s|\+)*$//;
push @results, split( /\s|\+/, $string );
print "\t", join( ":", @results ), "\n";
}
Haven't checked it thoroughly but it seems ok.
Simon
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:47:34 GMT
From: charlie@antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Subject: Re: Information about fetchrow...
Message-Id: <slrn6m8fh7.87u.charlie@cs.ed.datacash.com>
On Wed, 20 May 1998 21:26:12 +1000, Andrew Gruskin
<agruskin@melbpc.org.au> wrote:
>Cristina Durana wrote:
>
>> Hi all!!!!!!
>> I need, with urgency, infromation about the instruction "fetchrow"...
>> Anybody could help me, please...
>> Thanks in advance
>> Cristina
>
>Usual deal, Cristina. What information do you need? The documentation
>for Win32::ODBC, assuming this is the FetchRow you want will explain how
>to use all the methods and successfully attach to an ODBC database. Have
>a look at http://www.roth.net/odbc if you don't have the documentation.
Alternatively, you may need to look in the manpage for DBI, or for
whichever DBD driver you're using with your database (or whichever
specialised database interface you're using, e.g. the Msql.pm module
for mSQL).
-- Charlie
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:18:18 -0500
From: Scott Erickson <Scott.L.Erickson@HealthPartners.com>
Subject: O'Reilly has helped promote the acceptance of Perl
Message-Id: <3564299A.D5C4EEE4@HealthPartners.com>
Tom Christiansen wrote:
...
> O'Reilly has done more for free software than
> FSF has even begun to acknowledge. (I sense a pattern here.) If those
> books didn't exist, the programs would be deemed less "real" by users,
> and thus less used.
I agree that O'Reilly has done much to promote the acceptance of Perl as
"real" software. I know of at least two situations where presenting a
Perl book published by O'Reilly has changed the opinion of a key person
such that they approved the use of Perl. Prior to that point, they had
been opposed to the use of Perl because, it was free and because it was
"not supported" (evidently, they do not understand usenet and FAQ's and
documentation).
Scott.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 09:19:38 -0400
From: Bob Kline <bobklin@idt.net>
To: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Subject: Re: Problem de-referencing a reference to a typeglob stored in a hash
Message-Id: <356429EA.693860E2@idt.net>
Thanks, Tom, I see what's happening now. One of the corners of
the language that's not always intuitive. Do the Perl gods
ever regret this tricky overloading of <>?
Bob
Tom Christiansen wrote:
> In comp.lang.perl.misc, bobklin@idt.net writes:
> :I went back and read the FMTEYEWTK (several times) and I can
> :see that it explains what will work and what won't, but I haven't
> :yet found where it explains *why* the expression $x{FH} doesn't
> :produce something the <> operator understands. Why doesn't
> :the hash notation produce the value for the key "FH"?
>
> Because that's a glob.
>
> $x{FH} = "/bin/??";
> @files = <$x{FH}>;
> print "@files\n";
>
> /bin/cp /bin/dd /bin/df /bin/ed /bin/ex /bin/ln /bin/ls /bin/mt
> /bin/mv /bin/ps /bin/rm /bin/sh /bin/su /bin/vi
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 13:35:15 GMT
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Subject: Re: Problem de-referencing a reference to a typeglob stored in a hash
Message-Id: <6k1aij$bp7$1@csnews.cs.colorado.edu>
[courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
:Thanks, Tom, I see what's happening now. One of the corners of
:the language that's not always intuitive. Do the Perl gods
:ever regret this tricky overloading of <>?
Oh, yes. Almost as much as indirect object slot parsing.
--tom
--
"If you substitute other kinds of intellectual property into the GNU
manifesto, it quickly becomes absurd." --Cal Keegan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 12:57:54 GMT
From: jdporter@min.net (John Porter)
Subject: Re: Software vendor liability [Was: Does Perl have a IDE?]
Message-Id: <MPG.fcdf04ebd5f2209896e3@news.min.net>
On 20 May 1998 21:19:19 GMT,
in article <6jvhcn$ol0$2@csnews.cs.colorado.edu>,
tchrist@mox.perl.com (Tom Christiansen) wrote:
> [courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
>
> In comp.lang.perl.misc,
> smcdow@arlut.utexas.edu (Stuart McDow) writes:
> :They'd rather "innovate"
> :than make their current product more reliable.
>
> You have a funny way of spelling copy.
If only they would copy! instead of "innovate".
To be sure, the guys at M$ have noticed that being able to
interoperate with standards, such as IP, is a Good Thing.
And that preemptive multitasking is a Good Thing. But
they've got this strange notion they they can, in the space
of a few months/years, by force of will, create something
like Unix, only better. I believe that's the source of
the landslide of crap from Redmond: the sheer cockiness of
their software guys. It's in the culture. And of course,
it all started with that one spore of hacker cockiness,
Mr. Bill himself.
John Porter
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1998 13:02:55 GMT
From: Jamie Hoglund <jhoglund@mirage.skypoint.net>
Subject: Re: suid problem
Message-Id: <6k18lv$ese$4@shadow.skypoint.net>
Jochen Wiedmann <joe@ispsoft.de> wrote:
: Hello,
: a not so much Perl related problem, but it appears in a Perl script,
: so I'll put it into this group. :-)
: I have a suid script that ought to administrate a set of text files.
: Any text file has a number of users associated with it that are
: allowed to modify the text file. The idea is that users may do a
: suidscript <filename>
: where suidscript checks whether the user is permitted to modify
: <filename> and if so, an editor is invoked.
: Problem is, that all these editors typically have escape sequences
: that allow to pass arbitrary commands to a shell: An obvious
: security hole.
: Any ideas how to fix this?
If I understand your requirements correctly, it would seem that unix
groups would be the thing to use.
On my system "Joe" has access to the floppy disk, as does "root", so
I just made /dev/fd0 owned by root, with a group of "disk", and gave it
permissions of 660.
'Joe' is a member of group "disk" and can write to it.
No set-ID script required! :-)
(of course, this is assuming you have access to the groups file, etc..)
Jamie
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
jamie@lecart.com
http://www.lecart.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:06:24 -0500
From: Scott Erickson <Scott.L.Erickson@HealthPartners.com>
Subject: Utilitarian and artistic nature of documentation
Message-Id: <356426D0.C96E6A6@HealthPartners.com>
Barry Margolin wrote:
> I disagree. Program documentation is utilitarian, it's not artistic or
> rhetorical prose
...
> Its utility is based
> primarily on its accuracy in describing the program.
...
I agree that program documentation has a utilitarian nature, however, I
strongly disagree with any explicit or implied claim that program
documentation does not have an artistic component. I have read enough
program documentation to come to the realization that a lot of art goes
into writing good program documentation. I particularly like the writing
style and wit presented in most of the standard Perl documentation. And
while I enjoy the wit and style, I do not believe that it an obstacle to
my understanding of the program in question.
If program documentation were purely utilitarian in nature, I doubt I
would have a preference for writing style, as long as it was accurate
and correct. However, for me, that is not the case. I do have
preferences regarding writing style, particularly, I dislike writing
styles that may be completely accurate and correct, yet are so dry and
dull that I am unable to use the documentation effectively because I
tend to fall asleep while reading them!
Scott Erickson
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 09:08:16 -0400
From: Jim Michael <jim.michael@gecm.com>
Subject: Re: What is wrong with this FileHandle code?
Message-Id: <35642740.3F49@gecm.com>
Tom Christiansen wrote:
> In comp.lang.perl.misc,
> jim.michael@gecm.com writes:
> :Is it not possible to create an array of file handles?
>
> Sure it's possible to make it. But it's just not useable in that fashion.
> See my recent posting on indirect filehandle.
Thanks Tom. This works:
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
sub ropen {
my $path = shift;
local *FH;
open(FH, $path) || die $!;
return *FH;
}
for ($i=0; $i<@ARGV; $i++) {
$fh[$i] = ropen("$ARGV[$i]");
}
open (OUT,">out.txt");
until (eof $fh[0]) { # Are all files are the same length?
for ($i=0; $i<@ARGV; $i++) {
$myline = readline($fh[$i]);
chomp $myline;
print OUT "$myline";
}
print OUT "\n";
}
__END__
Cheers,
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:27:44 GMT
From: charlie@antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Subject: Re: What specific functions should be in a Perl IDE? [Was: Re: Does Perl have a IDE?I don't like command line.
Message-Id: <slrn6m8ec0.87u.charlie@cs.ed.datacash.com>
On 19 May 1998 18:53:35 GMT, lvirden@cas.org
<lvirden@cas.org> wrote:
>My thought as I plow thru all of the comments is whether one person's
>reference to IDE is the same as the next.
>
>So, for those of you who are asking for a Perl IDE, as I mention in
>the subject:
>
>What specific functions are you seeking in a Perl IDE?
I'll give you some things I've wished for in the past:
* A class browser that understands inheritance, the perl way.
* A decent interface to RCS/CVS.
* A decent, configurable, macro-driven text editor with syntax colourisation,
tags, per-function folding, and the usual bells and whistles.
* Extra tools like a source-level debugger, profiler, source code reformatter,
and so on.
Most of these tools are already available as standalone gadgets, and of
the rest there are environments that come very close to providing
everything I need. For example, Visual Slickedit 3 comes _very_ close to
what I need (my only reason for not going for it is that its class
browser doesn't grok Perl properly). The debugger built into perl is
powerful, and could probably have a nice graphical front end bolted on
top of it with a bit of work. And so on.
I'd be _very_ happy if Cygnus would release a version of Source Navigator
that understood Perl. (There _is_ a third-party perl parser for SN, but
the cost is ridiculous -- including a Source Navigator license, it works
out at about $6000 per bum-on-seat.)
My current environment seems to be vi (for editing files on remote
systems), and kfte -- a KDE port of the fte editor -- for editing on
a local workstation running X. (I simply don't like Xemacs that much.
Must be the lisp.)
-- Charlie
"UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this IMPORTANT Information
is ENCOURAGED"
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 97 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 8 Mar 97)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
the single line:
subscribe perl-users
or:
unsubscribe perl-users
to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.misc (and this Digest), send your
article to perl-users@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
The Meta-FAQ, an article containing information about the FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users meta-faq". The real FAQ, as it
appeared last in the newsgroup, can be retrieved with the request "send
perl-users FAQ". Due to their sizes, neither the Meta-FAQ nor the FAQ
are included in the digest.
The "mini-FAQ", which is an updated version of the Meta-FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users mini-faq". It appears twice
weekly in the group, but is not distributed in the digest.
For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V8 Issue 2660
**************************************
