🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <52097@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> pjg@acsu.buffalo.edu (Paul Graham) writes:
>ordinarily this should be answered via mail but recent discussions about
>c.s.u unix prompt me to suggest that this is:
>1) probably a failure on the part of the installer.

Heh.  I'm not Chris Torek, but I'm not shabby.  I haven't had time to track
down the sigsegv yet, but expect to as soon as I have a weekend free. In the
mean time, try getting the files as posted, even the updates, and merely
running them through 'sh'.  They won't work.

>2) a rather unrealistic view of comp.sources.unix.

Not really.  c.s.u is supposed do minimal testing; *any* moderator should do
minimal testing, at least to the point where the problems with unpacking trn
wouldn't have shown up.

I am not exaggerating in any way, shape, form when I say that trn could not
be successfully unpacked.

>3) probably a rather unrealistic view of the world in general.

Not really.  Once again:  if you release something through c.s.u (as opposed
to alt.sources), you should expect to be expected to provide at least
minimal support.  Not *one* of the messages I've sent through email has
gotten a reply, and it's been a week or two now.

>needless to say trn has worked fine here since august, both before and
>after patch1.

Really?  You got it off of the latest c.s.u post in august?  How, pray tell,
did you manage that?  Tachyonic ethernet?

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it;
sef@kithrup.COM  |  I had a bellyache at the time."
-----------------+           -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_)
Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.