From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 9ca580f5 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 21:28:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0A7CB949AF; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 07:28:17 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC36949BA; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 07:27:38 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="E4ooS2Ww"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 3F781949A9; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 07:27:34 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-ot1-f54.google.com (mail-ot1-f54.google.com [209.85.210.54]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99DAD93DA0 for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 07:27:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ot1-f54.google.com with SMTP id a15so5504334otf.1 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 13:27:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=q9G41Xx0h22ys52oySTVUo7EXC8ZMUpweV2VEWhTQZ8=; b=E4ooS2Ww9U9KJ1eSfQuZdFmO3pgMZzk+a1kQr3yfHBI+ZTsBPZoujbFDErI6iWNt+e EuImf3J4gBCZ15eB8FgP6y8H2dSpe8RyLu9zPT0QPpLW+xT21KKFvEWgNem+3fzBVZbo m4zhlbryDfj0J/D5ItYWHYGdiBGOttnsl1ZnSZnUK5h1QxWQecm0DWgRkDLlpA+oLtQZ 59NmxrCr0Xol/N+fPDUmLZWAWxTNI6cjq0IWNrpRjpiAqiQot1erjA3SvpmWZ0071djq ePLdUaCdx3fINQ3JVyUGIfM6KI4WQ5iwBLswKTPgbQGlBvMp0i1fW1J2AkxIRD0xtpXq YjAw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=q9G41Xx0h22ys52oySTVUo7EXC8ZMUpweV2VEWhTQZ8=; b=nvYMuYhGhC1T9JbOYrCo0NmG3/Wi2k3zRkMkiRd+aQrEsENU4hQE0SbrG6RDb39pN7 jOHmKzcE13vJbuVyXMQNZShM2Q2yCxXV6Uorh6Sv299w0STw1rIoKOc5ZP8Ld+yLujM3 YN+hq40GSeLt1WEVqT1RL2hYojFMxfmtlQ7/wZQh87ei4Wd5YrM4jFt5Ba2gcyh3Z/ua bnONTHm+ukBT9YbgMR/dEtE4luzpWOgoKY+wOnpQ557AZ9TIFzYkJfp+y2yQga8amPhy VWyiLHU1WI6vgkBoTSzCqqu9ZvhJxR98ckd9sX8fE3jFhrlQHrYOby5JEkaBL+y3ZPP5 qpDA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXcuOgkFrC/jI6ogg+uZeseOGnWpJouUhcRv2ryliEEUS+qiPlx crEcWnQ4ga1071Q8zZfBk41pt7KKixubbBry7inT72Ok X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyAQjuUP9OxO35FQDgkVXvjYkHHsSYFLQgLQJOFYg2XEcLPCNRpFQA17I48d3PN4YizrbjkSGuzoJ2hj2OM6sQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1e09:: with SMTP id s9mr8188462otr.139.1578778052839; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 13:27:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9c507ef665851fd21ecdf0e23136dc86@firemail.de> <1ippPk-8PE-00@marmaro.de> <1iqMuL-1zK-00@marmaro.de> In-Reply-To: <1iqMuL-1zK-00@marmaro.de> From: Henry Bent Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2020 16:27:12 -0500 Message-ID: To: markus schnalke Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000004ce68059be3e9ed" Subject: Re: [TUHS] screen editors X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --00000000000004ce68059be3e9ed Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 14:59, markus schnalke wrote: > Hoi. > > [2020-01-10 08:17] U'll Be King of the Stars > > On 10/01/2020 08:13, markus schnalke wrote: > > > > > > GNU ed [...] seems to be more a demonstration > > > object than actually a programmer's editor. > > > > Hi Markus, in what way is GNU ed a "demonstration object"? > > Thanks for questioning this statement! It seems as if I might have > mixed different memories up. A quick look at GNU ed showed nothing > to support my statement. Sorry for pretending stuff without fact > checking. > > > My look was at version 1.4, which is the newest one I could look > into. I'm pretty sure I examined GNU ed 1.6 back then, because > that version is in the Pkgfile of my system, but unfortunately I > am unable to find it anywhere. The GNU release mirrors lack all > version 1.5 through 1.10 -- why that? They must have been > released, at least 1.6, because that is used on my system. > Unfortunately I also was unable to access the Changelog of a > newer version to check for changes, because these are lzip > compressed (tar.lz) ... whatever that is, I cannot uncompress it > on my system. Furthermore I neither could find an online > browsable web repo view for checking out version 1.6 or at least > viewing the files within the browser. There's only a cvs repo > access (no cvs on my machine) and it talks about the web page > repo not the ed source repo. Not sure what to think of that. > > That's not how things should be. Actually, I'm a bit depressed > now ... > GNU ed appears to be written entirely by one person (as in, no changelog entries by anyone else since 1994), who perhaps not coincidentally is also the author of the lzip compression program. As you noted, ed source is distributed only as lzip-compressed tarballs, so you have to be able to compile and run lzip to compile and run ed. lzip is written in C++, so to have access to GNU ed you need a C++ compiler. Which is very strange, as GNU ed is a very simple C program, much as one would expect. The configure program is extremely basic, which is great - why have more than you need? - but when it detected that my $(CC) was not gcc, it hard-coded $(CC) to cc and $(CFLAGS) to -O2, ignoring what I had passed to the script. A strange choice, but one that can easily be edited later in the Makefile. The basic C source compiled with no warnings whatsoever, always a good sign. At the linking stage I noticed that I needed a library for some functions it wanted. Okay, easy enough, just add a library to the Makefile's LDFLAGS. But the Makefile had this braindamage: $(progname) : $(objs) $(CC) $(LDFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ $(objs) so on any platform that needs libraries linked after objects, it will fail. At that point, I gave up. This is clearly one person's pet project and has "but it works on my Linux box!" written all over it. That, coupled with the fact that the GNU folks are willing to endorse something that is solely distributed in what can only be described as an extremely obscure compression format, was just too much for me to handle. -Henry --00000000000004ce68059be3e9ed Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 14:59, markus schn= alke <meillo@marmaro.de> wro= te:
Hoi.

[2020-01-10 08:17] U'll Be King of the Stars <ullbeking@andrewnesbit.org>= ;
> On 10/01/2020 08:13, markus schnalke wrote:
> >
> > GNU ed [...] seems to be more a demonstration
> > object than actually a programmer's editor.
>
> Hi Markus, in what way is GNU ed a "demonstration object"?
Thanks for questioning this statement! It seems as if I might have
mixed different memories up. A quick look at GNU ed showed nothing
to support my statement. Sorry for pretending stuff without fact
checking.


My look was at version 1.4, which is the newest one I could look
into. I'm pretty sure I examined GNU ed 1.6 back then, because
that version is in the Pkgfile of my system, but unfortunately I
am unable to find it anywhere. The GNU release mirrors lack all
version 1.5 through 1.10 -- why that? They must have been
released, at least 1.6, because that is used on my system.
Unfortunately I also was unable to access the Changelog of a
newer version to check for changes, because these are lzip
compressed (tar.lz) ... whatever that is, I cannot uncompress it
on my system. Furthermore I neither could find an online
browsable web repo view for checking out version 1.6 or at least
viewing the files within the browser. There's only a cvs repo
access (no cvs on my machine) and it talks about the web page
repo not the ed source repo. Not sure what to think of that.

That's not how things should be. Actually, I'm a bit depressed
now ...

GNU ed appears to be written en= tirely by one person (as in, no changelog entries by anyone else since 1994= ), who perhaps not coincidentally is also the author of the lzip compressio= n program.=C2=A0 As you noted, ed source is distributed only as lzip-compre= ssed tarballs, so you have to be able to compile and run lzip to compile an= d run ed.=C2=A0 lzip is written in C++, so to have access to GNU ed you nee= d a C++ compiler.=C2=A0 Which is very strange, as GNU ed is a very simple C= program, much as one would expect.

The configure = program is extremely basic, which is great - why have more than you need? -= but when it detected that my $(CC) was not gcc, it hard-coded $(CC) to cc = and $(CFLAGS) to -O2, ignoring what I had passed to the script.=C2=A0 A str= ange choice, but one that can easily be edited later in the Makefile.=C2=A0= The basic C source compiled with no warnings whatsoever, always a good sig= n.=C2=A0 At the linking stage I noticed that I needed a library for some fu= nctions it wanted.=C2=A0 Okay, easy enough, just add a library to the Makef= ile's LDFLAGS.=C2=A0 But the Makefile had this braindamage:
<= br>
$(progname) : $(objs)
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 $(CC) $(= LDFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ $(objs)

so on any platfor= m that needs libraries linked after objects, it will fail.

At that point, I gave up.=C2=A0 This is clearly one person's p= et project and has "but it works on my Linux box!" written all ov= er it.=C2=A0 That, coupled with the fact that the GNU folks are willing to = endorse something that is solely distributed in what can only be described = as an extremely obscure compression format, was just too much for me to han= dle.

-Henry
--00000000000004ce68059be3e9ed--