Just a sample of the Echomail archive
Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.
|    TUXPOWER    |    Advocacy for the Linux operating system    |    1,237 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 25 of 1,237    |
|    Maurice Kinal to RJ Clay    |
|    Re: tuxpower.sh    |
|    03 May 11 02:44:28    |
      Hey RJ!              02 May 11 16:19, RJ Clay wrote to Maurice Kinal:               RC> Have you considered also adding something noteing what the         RC> license is for the script?              Yes and no. Until recently I haven't done much in the way of       distributing or posting scripts. It used to be more about posting       snippets and before that more about actual c code but that was a long       time ago when I actually needed to write c code.              The latest attraction to bash scripts has more to do with extremely       minimalized enviroments where things like perl are not an option.               RC> I'll be posting some scripts as well, where I use that or         RC> something similar...              I am looking forward to it.               RC> I've also used ones that note the same terms as for         RC> Perl,              Understood. However I'd like to ensure that any scripts I plan to write       will run on ttylinux where perl isn't part of the enviroment, or at       least not at this point in time. Also I have yet to see any of them       encorporated as written in any distributed form so I haven't bothered       with copylefts, credits, licences, etc. lately. That may have to change       and it probably will if and when it matters.               RC> same kind of thing declaring the scripts as being public domain...              I believe perl falls under the "Artistic Licence 2.0" which is an       officially recognized Opensource licence. No matter since at the moment       I am sticking as close to what is possible on systems where perl is not       an option, not to suggest I have anything against perl whatsoever but       instead just working within the limits imposed by some of the targetted       systems/devices/whatever. If it weren't for bash I probably wouldn't       bother at all. ;-)              Now that you bring up perl, I've been toying with the idea of mixed       bash/perl for Fido-ish activities relating to outbound from this point.       I can see where perl's pack function called up from a bash script would       be handy to achieve that goal, if indeed it actually is a goal. It       definetly could be a goal.              Life is good,       Maurice              --- Msged/LNX 6.2.0        * Origin: The Pointy Stick Society (1:261/38.9)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca