From: santosh on
Betov wrote:

> santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:faumf5$3b7$1(a)aioe.org:
>
>> Betov wrote:
>>
>>> santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:faufng$at2$1(a)aioe.org:
>>>
>>>> BTW, do you compress the sources in your final PE?
>>>
>>> What for? Do you compress your Sources, on your disk?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> For example I recently downloaded the source distribution for Emacs
>> 22.1 and compiled and installed it. To compile I have to unzip and
>> untar the compressed archive which is ~37 Mb. After unzipping it
>> occupies ~140 Mb.
>>
>> So after compilation and install, I recompress the distribution. A
>> saving of ~100 Mb is not insignificant.
>
> :]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
>
> Keep sure than, when you will have written 100 Megas of Assembly
> Sources, you will be *VERY* *VERY* *VERY* *VERY* *VERY* old.
>
> :]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Yes, that's why people say that HLLs are more "productive" than
assembler. :)

PS. Wannabee might actually achieve 100 Mb one of these days.

From: Betov on
santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:fauqhk$fvb$1(a)aioe.org:

> If you right-click on an installed package in synaptic and
> select 'properties', and select the 'Installed Files' pane, you can
> see a list of where every file in the package was installed into your
> system.

Right. Thanks.


> Just find out the name of the package and search for it in synaptic.
> Once located, right click it and select 'Mark for Removal' or 'Mark
> for Complete Removal'

Right. Thanks. Works fine: Even the menu item removed. OK.


> Also you can do, from the command line:
>
> $ dpkg-query --list *foobar*
>
> or
>
> $ dpkg-query --search *foobar*

No, thanks. :]]


Well, i can live with this.

Betov.

< http://rosasm.org >



From: Betov on
santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:fauqmh$fvb$2(a)aioe.org:

> One possible problem is that when distributing RosAsm programmes via
> email, many email providers may flag the binary as containing a
> "virus", since they automatically scan all email attachments. A zip of
> just the sources alone will avoid this

There are several considerations with this:

1) It is quite usual to have AV faulse positives with Assembly
executables. We have one, actually, with very small PEs made
with RosAsm, with Anti-Vir and Casper-Thing.

2) *Inside zips" ? I am not sure. I am quite sure that *my*
provider does not do that, because i get viruses quite
often in my box.

3) There is nothing preventing from attaching the Sources to
an email, instead of the PE. [We work usualy this way for
cooperative development of RosAsm. That is, when a fellow
sends me an update, this is a TITLE or a dedicated form of
Dialog saving, and such. We do not usually exchange the
whole RosAsm, for maintaince, as it is way easier to update
that way].


Betov.

< http://rosasm.org >





From: santosh on
Betov wrote:

> santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:faun25$59e$1(a)aioe.org:
>
>> PS. Is XNews Windows specific?
>
> Yes, it is. Not "X" related. :))

Did you see this page?

<http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=65884>


From: santosh on
Betov wrote:

> santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:fauqmh$fvb$2(a)aioe.org:
>
>> One possible problem is that when distributing RosAsm programmes via
>> email, many email providers may flag the binary as containing a
>> "virus", since they automatically scan all email attachments. A zip of
>> just the sources alone will avoid this

> 3) There is nothing preventing from attaching the Sources to
> an email, instead of the PE. [We work usualy this way for
> cooperative development of RosAsm. That is, when a fellow
> sends me an update, this is a TITLE or a dedicated form of
> Dialog saving, and such. We do not usually exchange the
> whole RosAsm, for maintaince, as it is way easier to update
> that way].

Yes, this was what I meant. Transferring the sources alone instead of the
whole PE.

BTW, did you develop RosAsm on Windows 2000 or was it started on 95/98? Have
you installed the "UNIX compatibility layer" or "UNIX compatibility
extensions" package? It provides an implementation of POSIX.1 API. If you
had stuck to it from the beginning, now there would be no need to port
RosAsm to Linux. Just replacing the PE header with an ELF header will do.

Look at this:
<http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308259>

So the package you need to install is "Windows Services for UNIX".