On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 11:13:24PM +0100, John Gay wrote:
> kdebase took just under 46 hours. I've got lots of grief from the wife for
> the computer running 'round the clock this week. The rest of KDE should build
Tell her that the computer is less likely to fail if it's never turned off
so you won't need to be spending money on repairs, and that this offsets the
electricity costs.
This has the advantage of actually being true (well, up to the , anyway) :-)
Niall
--
Irish Linux Users' Group: ilug@linux.ie
http://www.linux.ie/mailman/listinfo/ilug for (un)subscription information.
List maintainer: listmaster@linux.ie

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5D36440C8
	for <jm@localhost>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 18:39:02 -0400 (EDT)
from dogma.slashnull.org [212.17.35.15]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 19 Jul 2002 23:39:02 +0100 (IST)
from lugh.tuatha.org (root@lugh.tuatha.org [194.125.145.45]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6JMbEJ10513 for
    <jm-ilug@jmason.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 23:37:14 +0100
from lugh (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lugh.tuatha.org
    (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA04163; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 23:30:46 +0100
from ie.suberic.net (owsla.ie.suberic.net [62.17.162.83]) by
    lugh.tuatha.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA04129 for <ilug@linux.ie>;
    Fri, 19 Jul 2002 23:30:40 +0100
from owsla.ie.suberic.net (owsla [127.0.0.1]) by ie.suberic.net
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6JMUc913377 for <ilug@linux.ie>;
    Fri, 19 Jul 2002 23:30:38 +0100
From ilug-admin@linux.ie  Fri Jul 19 23:39:02 2002

On Fri, Jul 19, 2002 at 10:00:02PM +0100, Matthew French wrote:
> Now here is a thought: a Unix version of the "Deleted Items" folder.
am i the only one who thinks this is like "friday night 80's" for ilug?
and here's an answer from 1989.  for those perceptive folks in the
audience you'll note that it makes no reference to a windows icons.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=unix+undelete&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&as_drrb=b&as_mind=12&as_minm=5&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=19&as_maxm=7&as_maxy=1989&selm=10113%40bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU&rnum=10
and here's one from 1984:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=unix+undelete&start=10&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&as_drrb=b&as_mind=12&as_minm=5&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=19&as_maxm=7&as_maxy=1989&selm=736%40sri-arpa.UUCP&rnum=14
on a more serious note....  would unrm be nice?  yeah.  but people have
talked about unrm for nearly ***20*** years - and that's just what i
bothered to look up.  think about it.  in that time bsd has been freed
from at&t and then forked in four different directions, gcc, linux,
mozilla, gnome and kde have been written.  as has almost every bit
of the gnu project - including (sh|file)-utils.  and think about it,
have the gnu (sh|file)-utils developers ever met an option they didn't
implement if they could?  even /bin/true and /bin/false take arguments.
so yeah, unrm would be nice, but obviously it's not a simple problem.
millions of lines of code, hundreds of projects, no unrm.  heck, the
hurd will probably release 1.0 before unrm shows up.
kevin, spinning the oldies all night long...
--
kevin@suberic.net     that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to
fork()'ed on 37058400    the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier
meatspace place: home       than a sober one. the happiness of credulity is a
http://ie.suberic.net/~kevin   cheap & dangerous quality -- g.b. shaw
--
Irish Linux Users' Group: ilug@linux.ie
http://www.linux.ie/mailman/listinfo/ilug for (un)subscription information.
List maintainer: listmaster@linux.ie