[9083] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 2701 Volume: 8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Sat May 23 06:07:24 1998
Date: Sat, 23 May 98 03:00:29 -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 Sat, 23 May 1998 Volume: 8 Number: 2701
Today's topics:
Cgi Password <bourne@holyfire.com>
Re: Cgi Password <zenin@bawdycaste.org>
Documentation <bourne@holyfire.com>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community <rra@stanford.edu>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community <rra@stanford.edu>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community <rra@stanford.edu>
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community Klaus.Schilling@home.ivm.de
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Bart Schuller)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Fergus Henderson)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Fergus Henderson)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Fergus Henderson)
Re: GNU attacks on the open software community (Fergus Henderson)
Having problems with cookies <maldonadod@ct-arng.ngb.army.mil>
Re: Help with CGI and shell execution <rootbeer@teleport.com>
Re: More double standards out of the FSF <barmar@bbnplanet.com>
Re: More double standards out of the FSF (Fergus Henderson)
Perl and Sql Server 6.5 mgvinod@my-dejanews.com
Please advise! (SHAILKUMAR)
Re: Please advise! <zenin@bawdycaste.org>
Re: Tom Christiansen attacks the free software communit (Tyson Richard DOWD)
Re: Tom Christiansen <rra@stanford.edu>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 8 Mar 97) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 09:03:00 +0300
From: Bourne Shadown <bourne@holyfire.com>
Subject: Cgi Password
Message-Id: <35666693.793EF501@holyfire.com>
I'm working on a NT server.
I wanna add password protection to my site.Perl scripts checks entered
string and defined password if they're same redirects user to protected
url. User can
bookmark protected url or obtain password with view source.I need a
script
which changes protected html file's name periodically
and which crypts password..
And i can't work cgi's on NT please help me
Reply to my email
bourne@holyfire.com
Thanks :~)
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 06:40:44 GMT
From: Zenin <zenin@bawdycaste.org>
Subject: Re: Cgi Password
Message-Id: <895906090.879739@thrush.omix.com>
[posted & mailed]
Bourne Shadown <bourne@holyfire.com> wrote:
: I'm working on a NT server.
: I wanna add password protection to my site.
Basic HTTP authentication isn't available? Check your
web server documentation; You should be able to do this
without needing any CGI programs at all.
--
-Zenin
zenin@archive.rhps.org
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 09:14:59 +0300
From: Bourne Shadown <bourne@holyfire.com>
Subject: Documentation
Message-Id: <35666962.144F7C85@holyfire.com>
i wanna learn perl , i need an url
Reply to my email
<bourne@holyfire.com>
Thanks :~)
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 22:59:58 -0700
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <m3som1jzmp.fsf@windlord.Stanford.EDU>
In comp.lang.perl.misc, Stefaan A Eeckels <Stefaan.Eeckels@ecc.lu> writes:
> Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
>> It's not an unknown concern. We have the same issue with other free
>> software licenses; people are often willing to give away their work
>> provided that others do not charge for it, but are unwilling to see
>> others make money off of their work.
> Unless you're having a free (ahem, no charge) network connection, or use
> your company's feed to download Perl for your own use, why do you think
> electronic distribution doesn't make money for someone else but the
> original author?
It sounds to me like you're arguing for the sake of arguing; I think you
know what I mean. There are *many* licenses of this sort in existence,
which basically say that nonprofit or educational use of the software is
unrestricted but use of the software in commercial endeavors requires
other licensing schemes.
How precisely to define "commercial endeavors" is of course a fuzzy
boundary condition, and of course Tom should clarify precisely what he
means. But that doesn't mean the concern is invalid.
> The Perldoc license says that I can charge only the reproduction costs -
> can some tell me if that can include the time I spend reproducing,
> packaging, mailing, or *only* the costs of the materials involved? In
> other words, can or can't I make a living out of making the copy?
Obviously that should be clarified.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -- Russ Allbery, Just Another Perl Hacker
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$<[~||<Juukn{=,<S~|}<Jwx}qn{<Yn{u<Qjltn{ > 0gFzD gD,
00Fz, 0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/ #y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 23:01:34 -0700
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <m3pvh5jzk1.fsf@windlord.Stanford.EDU>
In comp.lang.perl.misc, James Youngman <JYoungman@vggas.com> writes:
>>>>>> "ra" == Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
> ra> It's just not GPLed documentation.
> Speaking of that, has anyone actually *seen* any documentation published
> under the GPL? I don't think I have.
Every piece of documentation included in the Perl distribution or
distributed "under the same licensing terms as Perl itself," which
includes most of CPAN, that does not have other terms explicitly listed is
being distributed under the user's choice of the Artistic License and the
GPL.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -- Russ Allbery, Just Another Perl Hacker
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$<[~||<Juukn{=,<S~|}<Jwx}qn{<Yn{u<Qjltn{ > 0gFzD gD,
00Fz, 0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/ #y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 23:04:57 -0700
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <m3n2c9jzee.fsf@windlord.Stanford.EDU>
In comp.lang.perl.misc, Thomas Bushnell, n/BSG <tb@mit.edu> writes:
> Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
>> In comp.lang.perl.misc, Thomas Bushnell, n/BSG <tb@mit.edu> writes:
>>> That restriction means that the documentation is not as free as the
>>> software, and it would be very nice to have Perl documentation that
>>> was actually free, instead of one which is used as a lever to keep
>>> people from making changes to the software.
>> Do you have any evidence to indicate that this is actually being done?
>> If you do not, would you mind s/is/could be/ at a strategic point in
>> that sentence when you say similar things in the future? Thank you.
> It is *NOW* a lever, albeit a perhaps unintentional one. If I wanted to
> make a variant of perl, and modify perlfaq accordingly, I am already
> stuck...
Your original statement implied intentional application and implied that
this was more than simply a theoretical concern. Unless you actually *do*
intend to make a variant of Perl that will have this problem, or are aware
of someone who is, I'd really appreciate it if you would be more precise
in your phrasing.
It may not make any difference at all from a legal perspective, but it
will make quite a large difference in people's emotional reactions to what
you're saying, particularly within the Perl community.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -- Russ Allbery, Just Another Perl Hacker
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$<[~||<Juukn{=,<S~|}<Jwx}qn{<Yn{u<Qjltn{ > 0gFzD gD,
00Fz, 0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/ #y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 98 06:14:11 GMT
From: Klaus.Schilling@home.ivm.de
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <35666933.0@news.ivm.net>
>
> Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
>
> From: Bill Anderson <recon@cavalry.com>
> References:
> <3563c4ed.0@news.ivm.net>
> <6k1g6s$ehj$3@schenectady.netmonger.net>
> <m2g1i3y761.fsf@bigglesworth.isdn.uiuc.edu>
> <m3vhqzaaon.fsf@fred.muc.de>
> <6k1s0f$o8d$1@news.ro.com>
> <m2wwbevdxp.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
> <356598AE.1AECC89E@SPAMludd.luth.se>
> <m2lnruulhg.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
>David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> Olof Oberg <millNO@SPAMludd.luth.se> writes:
>>
>> > David Kastrup wrote:
>> > > Mercedes will acknowledge the importance Bosch plays for their cars.
>> > > Still they would object to Bosch calling Mercedes cars Bosch/Mercedes
>> > > or a variant Bosch car.
>> > >
>> > > The whole credit issue could have been managed much much more sanely.
>> > > Choosing the "brand name" for the attack was pretty stupid.
>> > Another example. Ford Cosworth. Put the Cosworth engine (and
>> > probably some addtional tweaks of braking systems etc) into
>> > a Ford and you get a Ford Cosworth. Put the Linux kernel into
>> > a mainly GNU system than you have a GNU/Linux system :).
>>
>> Only that there was no GNU system. There were a lot of excellent and
>> versatile parts useful for all kinds of cars, and quite a few missing
>> parts as well, and all had to be assembled into one coherent system.
>
>Linux: OPERATING system
No, Linux is a kernel, not an operating system.
Klaus.Schilling
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 10:34:17 +0200
From: schuller@tanglefoot.lunatech.net (Bart Schuller)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k61m9$6mi$1@tanglefoot.lunatech.com>
In article <m3pvh5jzk1.fsf@windlord.Stanford.EDU>,
Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> wrote:
>> Speaking of that, has anyone actually *seen* any documentation published
>> under the GPL? I don't think I have.
>
>Every piece of documentation included in the Perl distribution or
>distributed "under the same licensing terms as Perl itself," which
>includes most of CPAN, that does not have other terms explicitly listed is
>being distributed under the user's choice of the Artistic License and the
>GPL.
So, combining this with the digging done by others in this thread, we come
to the following conclusion:
Perl comes with a larger body of GPL'd documentation than any GNU
project.
What a surprising turn of events that is.
--
The idea is that the first face shown to people is one they can readily
accept - a more traditional logo. The lunacy element is only revealed
subsequently, via the LunaDude. [excerpted from the Lunatech Identity Manual]
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 09:24:39 GMT
From: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k64kn$6mk$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
dterrell@obscurity.net (Dave Terrell) writes:
>Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> says:
>>Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> writes:
>>
>>>Now, as to modification, why would screw with something counter to its
>>>author's intentions and wishes? That's evil.
>>
>>So, does that mean that you think that Xemacs and egcs are evil?
>>
>>I think it is much better to let the *public* decide on
>>the merits of the modifications.
>
>Releasing Lucid/XEmacs and calling it Emacs, or releasing egcs and calling
>it gcc would be extremely counterproductive.
Straw man. No-one is suggesting usurping the original name.
What we want is the right to fork.
>Rewrite perl, call it ierl (impractical....), and release it to the public.
The point is we don't want to have to *rewrite* Perl, or its
documentation, from scratch. It would be much better if we could just
*modify* the stuff that is already there.
>Do you think anybody will havea problem with that?
Tom C. certainly seems to have a problem with letting people modify
(and then redistribute) his documentation.
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3 | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 09:29:09 GMT
From: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k64t5$6re$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
dterrell@obscurity.net (Dave Terrell) writes:
>Tyson Richard DOWD <trd@hydra.cs.mu.oz.au> says:
>>fantome/@/usa/./net (le Fantome) writes:
>>
>>>You can't modify the original, but you can make addenda.
>>
>>This keeps getting brought up. It is a stop-gap solution. If
>>you really needed to make modifications, this wouldn't work for
>>long. It would at some stage become easier to replace the entire
>>documentation set. Which is what the FSF has on its to-do list.
>
>If you're making modifications that are simple bugfixes, then
>documentation changes shouldn't be necessary, beyond a simple
>README/addendum.
Kludge.
>If you're making serious modifications/additions, than
>such things should be distributed as modules or submitted to the perl
>project to be included in the main distribution, with the corresponding
>documentation changes being added by the author. What's wrong with that?
>
>Until such time as the authors of perl become incapacitated or unresponsive,
>this solutions works. When they do, arrangements can be made to move
>the project to a new maintainer.
No, if the authors of perl (or its documentation) become unresponsive,
then only *they* can make the necessary arrangements -- but if they're
unresponsive, what's to guarantee that they will?
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3 | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 09:48:27 GMT
From: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k661b$7bv$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
mrw@uiuc.edu (Matthew R. Williams) writes:
>Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de> writes:
>
>> But the kernel would have never existed without gcc and binutils.
>
>So? There are a number of tools that were used to build my car, but
>it's just an Oldsmobile.
>
>The whole point of TOOLS is that you use them to build something. Certainly,
>you can rejoice in the glory that your tools are great, and 'tis a poor
>craftsman who blames his tools, but dude...seriously. Using a tool does
>not make that tool inherently responsible for the existence of a product.
>
>After all, Linus could have gone out to buy a commercial C compiler, no?
No.
Linus could have gone out and bought a commercial C compiler, but
without a free C compiler, Linux would never have become what it is
today. Without a free C compiler, Linux would have been a one-man
effort. Linux is where it is today because of the thousands of
programmers who have worked on it. If you had to buy a proprietry
compiler to modify Linux, then Linux would never have gained the
momentum necessary for it to succeed.
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3 | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 09:54:12 GMT
From: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community
Message-Id: <6k66c4$7dk$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com> writes:
> [courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
>
>In comp.lang.perl.misc,
> David Kastrup <dak@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:
>:A documentation that is not permitted to be redistributed by people
>:making money from redistribution and doing a good job at it (like
>:RedHat), and that does not permit any maintenance except by the
>:original author, even if he were to die or became disinterested in his
>:work or unable to keep up with the development, is
>
>Now that we know that neither of those cases applies here, might we move on?
Sorry, I missed something. How do we know that neither of these cases
applies here?
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3 | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 03:26:56 -0400
From: "DannyM" <maldonadod@ct-arng.ngb.army.mil>
Subject: Having problems with cookies
Message-Id: <6k5tiv$pju@news-central.tiac.net>
I am baffled with this one. Some browsers seem to refuse
to send the cookies var back to my web server. I use the
cookie-lib.pl functions in my scripts and it only seems to
work with every other browser. I don't understand why
these browsers are doing this because they are all the
same browser I.E 3.02 and Netscape Nav 3.xx and above. I
have looked throught the configuration and they both allow
cookies. The weird thing is that the cookies will work on my
PC and a couple of my co-workers PCs but will not work
on others WITH THE SAME EXACT BROWSER AND
SETTINGS. Has anyone run into this problem here?
Thanks again for any help.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 05:51:02 GMT
From: Tom Phoenix <rootbeer@teleport.com>
To: braunb@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Help with CGI and shell execution
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980522225042.29458D-100000@user2.teleport.com>
On Sat, 23 May 1998 braunb@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Subject: Help with CGI and shell execution
When you're having trouble with a CGI program in Perl, you should first
look at the please-don't-be-offended-by-the-name Idiot's Guide to solving
such problems. It's available on CPAN.
http://www.perl.com/CPAN/
http://www.perl.org/CPAN/
http://www.perl.org/CPAN/doc/FAQs/cgi/idiots-guide.html
http://www.perl.org/CPAN/doc/manual/html/pod/
Hope this helps!
--
Tom Phoenix Perl Training and Hacking Esperanto
Randal Schwartz Case: http://www.rahul.net/jeffrey/ovs/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 06:02:33 GMT
From: Barry Margolin <barmar@bbnplanet.com>
Subject: Re: More double standards out of the FSF
Message-Id: <ZDt91.13$5K2.3384@cam-news-reader1.bbnplanet.com>
In article <1d9flld.18edphexbfgteN@roxboro0-037.dyn.interpath.net>,
John Moreno <phenix@interpath.com> wrote:
>Anybody with a modicum of intelligence ought to be able to figure out
>ways around this (write a perl script that modifies the documentation so
>that it fits what you have to say, separate documentation for your
>changes, I'm sure there are other ways). It's just not a real problem.
Actually, I believe RMS would consider such a script to be a violation of
the copyright of the documentation that the script modifies, since it has
the same result as distributing the modification. It's just an end-run
around a literal interpretation of the word "copy". He has described
activities like this being done to GPLed software and stated that he
believes they violate the GPL (and I assume he has the backing of the FSF's
lawyer); therefore, I don't think he would condone such a technique to get
around Tom's copyright.
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Cambridge, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 09:41:46 GMT
From: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: More double standards out of the FSF
Message-Id: <6k65kq$76n$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
phenix@interpath.com (John Moreno) writes:
>In comp.lang.perl.misc Thomas Bushnell, n/BSG <tb@mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> Suppose I modify Perl significantly, by removing many features and
>> adding other ones, and embed it in a specialized program where this
>> modification was esssential to meet some speed or size constraints.
>>
>> I'll happily change the name, and I'll be very very careful to give
>> credit to everyone who contributed to Perl.
>>
>> Now, in documenting my new application, I need to document Perl, and
>> for that I want to use large portions of the perlfaq text. Now, I
>> certainly want to acknowledge the authorship of the text, and I'll be
>> happy to give people a copy of the unmodified text too.
>>
>> But the copyright on perlfaq prohibits me from distributing the
>> modified perlfaq. It forces me to write an appendix, which is
>> unworkable if the changes to the perl code are extensive and
>> pervasive.
>
>Write your own (or modify the existing with clear comments saying what's
>your's and what's not) and then ship BOTH.
Modifying the existing one is forbidden by Tom C.'s license.
Writing their own is exactly what is on the FSF task list.
>Anybody with a modicum of intelligence ought to be able to figure out
>ways around this (write a perl script that modifies the documentation so
>that it fits what you have to say, separate documentation for your
>changes, I'm sure there are other ways). It's just not a real problem.
If you start with a modified copy of Tom C.'s documentation,
and you ship his original documentation, plus a diff, plus a script
to apply the diff, then after the user runs the script, the
user will have a modified copy of Tom C.'s documentation.
Thus the end result is that you have distributed a modified copy of Tom
C.'s documentation to the user.
This is just the "user-does-the-link" or in this case the
"user-does-the-patch" scenario, and although I don't think there is any
legal precedent either way, IMHO a court a likely to rule this a
violation of Tom C's license. (IANAL, but RMS has expressed the same
opinion about corresponding violations of the GPL, and I believe RMS's
opinion is based on legal advice that he has received.)
As for writing a seperate document, if the seperate document is an addendum
then this approach is a kludge, and is likely to be impractical if the
modifications are significant. And if the seperate document is to stand
alone, then you need to first duplicate the documentation for all the parts
you didn't change -- hence the item on the FSF task list.
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3 | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 07:37:25 GMT
From: mgvinod@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Perl and Sql Server 6.5
Message-Id: <6k5ubm$ckv$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Hi every body,
I'm new to this. I want to add records to Sql Server
database through a web browser.I am using IIS as web server.
How do I go about it?
I have to write Perl scripts to do this, I suppose. Is
there any other way?
What do I have to install, to accomplish this task?
Where do I get the information regarding this?
If anyone out there is familiar with this, please guide me.
Thanks
Vinod
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 07:29:09 GMT
From: shailkumar@aol.com (SHAILKUMAR)
Subject: Please advise!
Message-Id: <1998052307290900.DAA20862@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Hello,
I wrote two perl scripts "add.pl" and "password.pl".
In password.pl, I included the statement
require("add.pl");
I did this to reuse the functions I wrote in add.pl instead of writing it again
.
Problem : The execution of the "password.pl" jumps to "add.pl" after the
require keyword.
How can I just include the sub functions of "add.pl" into "password.pl"?
Thank you, for your attention.
Shail
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 09:07:11 GMT
From: Zenin <zenin@bawdycaste.org>
Subject: Re: Please advise!
Message-Id: <895914877.353901@thrush.omix.com>
SHAILKUMAR <shailkumar@aol.com> wrote:
: Problem : The execution of the "password.pl" jumps to "add.pl" after the
: require keyword.
: How can I just include the sub functions of "add.pl" into "password.pl"?
Just include the functions in add.pl and no other code. Yes, this
may meen you'll need to cut out your functions and put them into
another file (mysubs.pl, whatever) and require that, as it looks
like add.pl is probably a full program, no?
See perlfunc for a full description of require:
perldoc -tf require | more
--
-Zenin
zenin@archive.rhps.org
------------------------------
Date: 23 May 1998 16:53:16 +1000
From: trd@hydra.cs.mu.oz.au (Tyson Richard DOWD)
Subject: Re: Tom Christiansen attacks the free software community (was: Re: GNU attacks on the open software community)
Message-Id: <6k5ros$j2i$1@hydra.cs.mu.oz.au>
abigail@fnx.com (Abigail) writes:
>Tyson Richard DOWD (trd@cs.mu.oz.au) wrote on MDCCXXV September MCMXCIII
>in <URL: news:6k35r4$49m$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>:
>++
>++ No, it is incumbent on whoever quoted them out of context.
>++
>++ What do you expect the FSF to do, monitor every newsgroup for people
>++ who read something on their web page and are quoting it out of
>++ context?
>Oh please. Out of context? It was me who first quoted that page, and
>it was the CONTEXT that made me angry.
> "A good free manual for Perl. (There are proprietary books, but these
> are no good, because they are being withheld from our community by
> their owners.)"
>Other points in the list only mention 'manual'. But the point for Perl
>adds "free". And the context given are "proprietary books". IT DOES NOT
>SAY A SINGLE BIT ABOUT THE EXISTING MANUALS. It doesn't say that the
>manuals aren't free in FSF religion. It says that there are proprietary
>books.
Proprietary is the exact opposite of free in FSF terminology. They
make this pretty clear in their philosophy statements too. "Being
withheld from our community" means the same as proprietary.
So it says:
A good FSF-free manual for Perl. (There are non-FSF-free
books, but these are no good because they are non-FSF-free).
If you don't believe this, then go on believing that the FSF has
singled out Tom C, written a carefully worded slight against his
documentation five years ago, and then waited for you to come along,
read it, and send it to him. Yeah, that seems likely.
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1998 23:11:47 -0700
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Tom Christiansen
Message-Id: <m3k97djz30.fsf@windlord.Stanford.EDU>
In comp.lang.perl.misc, Thomas Bushnell, n/BSG <tb@mit.edu> writes:
> But in my experience Tom is just not able to deal with disagreement,
> especially not when he cares about the thing. In his email to me this
> morning I received a nice little sentence from Tom [...]
Wow.
History repeats itself quickly, these days.
Thomas, you just did precisely the same thing with Tom Christiansen that I
did in gnu.misc.discuss a few weeks back with John Dyson, in nearly
precisely the same circumstances, to precisely the same end. Thankfully,
at the time it hit me hard enough that I cancelled the messages I posted
including my reference to his private e-mail (sort of like yours above),
took it to e-mail, worked out my differences with John, and took a break
from the group.
This sort of thing doesn't help anyone. As you said yourself, it's just a
software project. There's no reason to allow things to escalate to this
level whether the other person seems willing to do so or not. It takes
two to bring an argument to this point.
Please don't do this.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -- Russ Allbery, Just Another Perl Hacker
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$<[~||<Juukn{=,<S~|}<Jwx}qn{<Yn{u<Qjltn{ > 0gFzD gD,
00Fz, 0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/ #y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print
------------------------------
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 2701
**************************************
