Re: OT-good DEDICATED hosting service

[Ian Ragsdale]

I've had very good experience with Rackspace.  They have incredible  
customer service, but they have a pretty high price to match.  I've  
also had good luck with Pair.com.


Ian

On Jun 10, 2005, at 5:58 PM, Mark Wheeler wrote:


Hi,

Sorry if this is off topic, but I need to move a shared account to  
a dedicated account, but picking a new host provider is a need in a  
haystack. So I ask, where is a good place to go for a DEDICATED  
server hosting package? What are your good experiences?


Thanks,

Mark

Re: [way OT] ... Intel? Maybe not.

[Ian Ragsdale]

How does directing this sort of thing at someone who worked on a tiny  
little bit of Tiger, which you guys seem to use personally, help  
anything at all?  Unless you have complaints about perl on Tiger,  
these comments seem inappropriate.


If anything, I'd be thankful to have an engineer who works on perl  
for Apple on this list.


Personally, Tiger works great for me, and I'd like to thank everyone  
involved in working on it.


Ian

On Jun 8, 2005, at 3:34 PM, Joseph Alotta wrote:


On Jun 8, 2005, at 3:27 PM, John Delacour wrote:


At 10:36 am -0700 8/6/05, Edward Moy wrote:

We hope that the additional price our customers pay is justified  
by the fit-n-finish that we put into the systems.


The beachballs in Tiger are terrific!  If I'd paid the full price  
for the upgrade I'd be seriously considering demanding my money back.


JD


I am hating Tiger, it is so slow many places, I will reload Panther  
this weekend.   The spotlight thing is nice but the performance  
overhead is unacceptable.

Re: CamelBones on Intel? Maybe not.

[Ian Ragsdale]

On Jun 7, 2005, at 12:57 PM, Wiggins d'Anconia wrote:


Ian Ragsdale wrote:


On Jun 7, 2005, at 11:51 AM, Joseph Alotta wrote:

Did NeXT produce their own boxes, or did they allow installs on  
any  PC

with supported hardware.  I believe that is a key difference.   Apple
boxes will be exactly the same as they would have been, except  they
will have a different CPU.  You still won't be able to install  OS  
X on

a commodity PC without jumping through a lot of hoops.


Why wouldn't you?  Memory, drives, video, etc. are all the same right
now. Motherboard has pretty standard features, other than it is setup
for a Power processor. Apple has been going cheap for a while, SCSI ->
IDE ring any bells? It would be a real shame if they didn't allow  
you to

install OS X on any commodity PC, once again back to that whole volume
issue.


Some combination of BIOS, custom ASICs, EULAs, lack of support, and  
installer trickery.  There are lots of ways Apple can discourage  
this.  I don't think anybody expects these are 100% solutions, but  
they are sufficient to ensure that consumers and corporations won't  
consider it a solution.  This leaves hobbyist/enthusiast types, and  
I'm sure Apple can live with it.  It's like iTunes' DRM - it's not a  
100% solution, but just enough of a barrier that the general public  
won't bother.



Without a different chip, Macs really are just a pretty looking
box with a nice software package preinstalled. Darwin runs on Intel
already (mostly) which is the real key, if Apple goes through with  
this
and won't let you install on a commidity PC then they really missed  
the

boat, in fact I would say they couldn't even find the dock.


The cost & speed issues are resolved by moving to x86 chips and  
supporting chipsets.  Keeping them off commodity PCs doesn't hurt  
those things at all, but keeps them from dealing with support issues  
and having to compete head to head with MS.  Do you think MS would  
have been nearly so quick to declare support for OS X/Intel if Apple  
allowed installs on commodity PCs?  If Apple can get to a 15-20%  
market share, then maybe they could afford the loss of hardware  
revenue, but they aren't there yet.



I think the only way that you look at it is that if IBM couldn't or
wouldn't deliver the processors Apple needed at a reasonable price,
what else could Apple do?


Will definitely agree with you there. Though you have to love the  
media

spin making it seem like this is Apple's choice to drop IBM, uh huh.


I'm sure Apple could have stuck with IBM, but they would be paying  
through the nose to be 4th in line behind Sony, MS, and Nintendo.


Ian

Re: CamelBones on Intel? Maybe not.

[Ian Ragsdale]

On Jun 7, 2005, at 11:51 AM, Joseph Alotta wrote:
I used to be a NeXt developer.  This announcement is very  
reminiscent of the NeXt announcement to stop making those little  
black boxes and bring NeXt OS on Intel chips.  We had just bought a  
ton of hardware and they demo this clunky 386 PC.  First of all, it  
looked nasty.  We were used to that elegant design. Secondly, it  
kept crashing.  It destroyed the culture.  It was like putting  
Haydn into the juke box at a disco.  Everyone went home. The vice  
president of our division, who bet his career on NeXt, resigned and  
NeXt languished for years.


It is the same scenario playing out again.  Will Steve Jobs never  
learn?


Did NeXT produce their own boxes, or did they allow installs on any  
PC with supported hardware.  I believe that is a key difference.   
Apple boxes will be exactly the same as they would have been, except  
they will have a different CPU.  You still won't be able to install  
OS X on a commodity PC without jumping through a lot of hoops.


I think the only way that you look at it is that if IBM couldn't or  
wouldn't deliver the processors Apple needed at a reasonable price,  
what else could Apple do?


Ian

Re: CamelBones on Intel? Maybe not.

[Ian Ragsdale]

Is there any reason you would NEED to compile it fat?  Does anybody  
expect that the same partition will boot on both x386 and PowerPC macs?


Ian

On Jun 7, 2005, at 5:32 AM, Sherm Pendley wrote:


On Jun 7, 2005, at 5:19 AM, Gisle Aas wrote:



Why would it be painful to compile perl and its modules as a fat
binaries?



*If* Apple compiles a fat perl ...
and *if* that fat perl doesn't require me to buy an Intel/Mac with  
money I don't have ...
and *if* that fat perl is configured properly to produce fat XS  
modules ...
and *if* the ffcall library that CamelBones uses is updated to  
support Darwin/x86 calling conventions ...

Re: CamelBones on Intel? Maybe not.

[Ian Ragsdale]

On Jun 6, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Joel Rees wrote:


Jobs is insane.



I'm not so sure about that.  IBM seems unwilling or unable to produce  
mobile G5s, which is a market that Apple considers very important.   
They also are 2 years behind schedule on 3.0Ghz G5s, and appear to be  
focusing on video game processors instead of desktop and mobile  
processors.


Apple might be OK in a speed comparison right now (on desktops, they  
are clearly losing in laptop comparisons), but how about in two  
years?  Perhaps IBM has told Apple that they won't attempt a laptop  
chip, since the volume is way higher for video game consoles?  What  
should Apple do?


Personally, it looks like it will be a bit painful for a few years,  
but a far better move in the long run.


Ian

Re: "Tiger" version

[Ian Ragsdale]

On Apr 12, 2005, at 9:41 AM, Lola Lee wrote:
Chris Devers wrote:
Your best bet is to just keep an eye on tech news sites. The release 
of Tiger will surely be a headline on CNet, Slashdot, etc, and maybe 
even non-tech-specific sites like CNN or the BBC.
And not a moment too soon . . . go over to 
http://www.apple.com/macosx/.  Release date - April 29th.

I've been looking at http://www.apple.com/macosx/developertools/ and 
unfortunately it doesn't say which Perl version.  Surely this tidbit 
is buried elsewhere on the site?

They often release their copies of open source stuff before the final 
release, which would be found here:

http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/index.html
The 10.4 stuff isn't up yet, but the WWDC 2004 Developer Preview had 
5.8.4 according to that page.

Ian

Re: ANN: ShuX 3.0-beta1

[Ian Ragsdale]

It works for me if I open it from the Finder.  Have you tried using 
open?

open /Applications/ShuX.app
It has the advantage of being easier to type.
Ian
On Mar 18, 2005, at 2:03 PM, David Wheeler wrote:
On Mar 18, 2005, at 11:45 AM, Sherm Pendley wrote:
One of the features of CamelBones 1.0 will be the ability to package 
stand alone apps that require no external framework, and can be 
"installed" with a simple drag-and-drop. This release takes advantage 
of that - just mount the disk image and drop ShuX wherever you want.
I don't have CamelBones installed. I just installed this release of 
ShuX, but it doesn't appear to work. Here's what happens when I try to 
launch it from the terminal:

% /Applications/ShuX.app/Contents/MacOS/ShuX
zsh: bus error  ShuX.app/Contents/MacOS/ShuX
Yes, I'm using Panther (Mac OS X 10.3.8).
Regards,
David

Re: Text editors for perl on MacOSX

[Ian Ragsdale]

This also just came up on the OS X talk list, and another suggestion 
which is getting good comments is TextMate:

http://macromates.com/
Ian
On Mar 4, 2005, at 10:22 AM, Neil Bowers wrote:
Tired of seeing runaway threads on this topic, I've created a page so 
that next time
this is asked, only one reply is (hopefully) needed:

	Look at the list on www.neilbowers.org (or 
http://www.neilbowers.org/macperleditors.html)

At the moment this is based on a skim of the most recent thread, and 
the relevant pages.
I'll update this if emailed additions (to me please, not the list :-)

Neil

Re: What Perl editor do you recommend?

[Ian Ragsdale]

On Mar 3, 2005, at 7:04 AM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
"Ian" == Ian Ragsdale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> If you want to stay with something free, I'd suggest TextWrangler 
from
Ian> Bare Bones:

Ian> http://www.barebones.com/products/textwrangler/index.shtml
Ian> It has good syntax coloring, and integrates well with the 
command-line
Ian> perl - you can set a keyboard shortcut to run scripts & check 
their
Ian> syntax, and you can write filters and other scripts in perl.  
Pretty
Ian> sweet for a free product.

Again, if you keep pushing "free", I'm going to say "emacs". :)
Emacs has all that.  And more.
"Keep" pushing free?  I was the first response! :)  I like vi better 
than emacs personally, but mainly cause I know it a lot better.  For 
someone on OS X, that wishes to use a GUI (which was my assumption), 
would you really suggest they spend the time learning emacs or vi?  My 
guess is that most people who suggest such things don't realize how 
long they spent learning how to be productive in it.  I'd guess that 
anybody who learned vi or emacs after 2000 wouldn't suggest it.  I 
personally learned it in '94 and still don't feel that productive in 
it.

Ian

Re: What Perl editor do you recommend?

[Ian Ragsdale]

If you want to stay with something free, I'd suggest TextWrangler from 
Bare Bones:

http://www.barebones.com/products/textwrangler/index.shtml
It has good syntax coloring, and integrates well with the command-line 
perl - you can set a keyboard shortcut to run scripts & check their 
syntax, and you can write filters and other scripts in perl.  Pretty 
sweet for a free product.

Ian
On Mar 2, 2005, at 11:38 AM, Ted Zeng wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for the help here. I am almost finishing my first tool on OS X.
I am using TextEdit as the editor. I sometime use Pico, but I am still
not comfortable with Unix editor. I know there must be some good
editors for Perl. Do you have any recommendation?
ted zeng
Adobe Systems

Re: MOD_PERL and OSX

[Ian Ragsdale]

My guess is that you have a version mismatch between mod_perl and perl.
Ian
On Nov 9, 2004, at 4:59 PM, Mark S Lowe wrote:
It would seem after many attempts to get anything of any level of 
complexity
running in mod_perl under OSX, that perhaps it can’t be done. I have
libraries that work fine in the normal cgi-bin, but constantly produce 
500
server errors when running from my mod_perl mod-cgi bin. I can get 
little
hello worlds running fine, but the second I try to access various 
built-in
libraries, just the “use” statement cases fatal errors.

Has anyone conquered the mod_perl world of OSX? I’ve read every thread 
that
has come through this forum for the last year. Those posts did help 
resolve
the basics, but I’m still left with a so so mod_perl engine.

Any general direction or guidance would be great. Thanks.
Mark

Re: BBEdit 8.0

[Ian Ragsdale]

On Sep 9, 2004, at 5:00 PM, Chris Carline wrote:
I'm curious as to the attraction of BBEdit. Coming from a Unix/Windows
background, I find that whilst it seems pretty solid and has some nice
features, it costs at least five times more than any sane person
should be prepared to pay. But even taking that into account, it
actually seems to do *less* (at least for me!) than the free
alternatives that ship by default on OS X (personally, I use Vim).
I know vim, but not super well - what does it do that BBEdit does not?  
I imagine if you already know vi/vim well and have it customized to 
your liking, there's no need to pay for anything else.  Personally, 
I've been using it off & on for about 10 years and still don't know how 
to use most of it's features.  Most of the time when I have advanced 
processing to do I copy the file locally and edit using BBEdit.

OK, so its integration into the enitre OS is generally a lot better
than the "free" stuff, but...
Well, for Mac users that's a huge distinction, especially if you don't 
already know vi or emacs.  There isn't really any learning curve to 
deal with.

So why the attraction? Is it really only old OS <=9 users that use it,
or am I really missing something?
Well, I imagine a lot of it's following started during the OS <= 9 
days, when things like vi or emacs weren't really available.  It also 
served as a replacement for things like grep and sed which weren't 
available at the time.  I'd imagine that for many people it's the 
interface - you can accomplish a ton of things that are doable with 
command line tools but that most people don't know how to do.  Here are 
some of the things I find really useful:

Effortless & transparent handling & switching of line endings.
Powerful HTML tools
Shell "worksheets" (allows easy editing & running of shell commands)
Multi-file regular expression find & replace functionality, with 
nameable saveable expressions
Transparent FTP/SFTP support
Easy scriptability and integration with command line tools

Ian

Re: [OT] MySQL for Web Apps

[Ian Ragsdale]

On Feb 4, 2004, at 1:59 AM, Bill Stephenson wrote:

It occurs to me that the unix os is basically a database in and of 
itself and perl interacts directly with the os, therefore, using it to 
store and retrieve data may not be that inefficient.
I agree with this - you can get good results with a well-planned 
directory structure.

Now, if you have one server dedicated to serving only 2500 users and 
in 2-3 years you have 5000 users and upgrade that server to one twice 
as fast and big, and so on
This is true to a point, but disk drives haven't progressed at nearly 
the rate of CPU/RAM, so you could definitely start running into 
problems like this.

The main disadvantage of using a database engine like MySQL is that 
users cannot define data fields. If other applications are going to 
access the data in question than you must reformat it to provide the 
access. And again, I'm lazy (actually, I have other things I like to 
do) and really don't want to learn more. I'd rather use what I already 
know and leverage what I already have.
Since I don't know exactly what you're building here, it's hard to 
comment, but I agree, that is one area that hasn't been solved very 
well with relational databases, at least not in MySQL.  If some of your 
users want columns different than others, you either need to split the 
tables somehow, or have all the columns (and maybe some extras) you 
think you may ever need available and only expose the ones particular 
users ask for.  If anybody knows a cleaner way to do this, I'd love to 
hear it.

If Rick's "Dream" comes true I can just port the data at that time. 
There are a lot of programmers out there working on faster, easier to 
use, database engines that have more features. Chris, you may be 
right, XML may be a fad, but the next big thing in data 
storage/retrieval could be right around the corner too.

The above are some of the excuses I've come up with to avoid spending 
more time learning stuff. If I'm deluded, it's because I have boxes 
upon boxes of software that doesn't work anymore and time invested in 
each of them. It's not that I don't believe that MySQL and other 
database engines have a place, I'm just trying to avoid learning how 
to use them if I don't really need too.
Personally I think it's worth it in the case of MySQL (or other 
relational databases).  The basics are pretty easily learned in an 
afternoon or two, and as your application and needs change, you'll 
definitely save yourself days worth of work by being able to leverage a 
good DB when your solution really calls for one.

Ian

Re: [OT] MySQL for Web Apps

[Ian Ragsdale]

On Feb 3, 2004, at 10:16 PM, Bill Stephenson wrote:
I'd like to store using XML in a separate text file for each record 
created because it's easy and gives me flexibility. I can add data 
fields without tweaking tables in a MySQL database. I can add users 
easily and keep their data in a separate directory that is easy to 
locate. I'm told that storing/retrieving data in text files is slow 
and so is parsing that data. I've never used XML::Parser but I thought 
I'd give it a spin.

I hear MySQL is speedy, but it seems to me that it adds complexity to 
such a degree that it may not be an even trade off. I could store data 
in  an XML format in a single field in a MySQL database, but I'd still 
have to parse it.
In my experience you'll be just fine using XML with that amount of 
data, but I would try to come up with some simple tests searching 
through sample data to see if it really meets your performance needs.  
On the other hand, I'd still consider using MySQL - it's really not 
that complex, and you gain a lot of flexibility.  By that I mean once 
everything is in a group of tables, you can then do lots of ad-hoc 
queries on it to find out useful information, in a much easier way than 
writing a perl script every time you want to know something.  If you 
can handle perl programming, you'll probably be able to learn enough 
about MySQL and the perl DBI interface to be doing useful stuff in less 
than a day.  There are a ton of tutorials out there and the MySQL 
manual is excellent.

Ian

Re: mssql

[Ian Ragsdale]

FreeTDS (www.freetds.org) is an open source implementation of the 
Tabular Data Stream protocol used by Sybase and MSSQL.  You can use 
freetds and DBD::sybase to connect to MSSQL.  I have used it without 
problems on a number of linux machines with the DBD::sybase module but 
have never tried it on OS X, however, a google search for freetds and 
mac os x turns up some people who seem to have it working.

It is a bit of a pain to set up - the configuration is a little 
strange, but the freetds docs are somewhat helpful and you can feel 
free to ask me questions if you run in to problems.

HTH,
Ian
On Saturday, March 8, 2003, at 12:17 AM, rich allen wrote:

iH

is there anyway to connect from Mac OS X to mssql?

thanks
- hcir

Re: Cursor return, no line feed

[Ian Ragsdale]

The simple old way (I'm not sure if the syntax below supercedes it) is:

$|=1;

Assigning any non-false value to $| will turn off buffering.

Ian

On 1/31/03 9:16 PM, "Dan Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 12:26  PM, Martin Redington wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Try the following:
>> 
>> perl -e 'for($i = 0; $i < 100; $i++){ print STDERR  "$i"; sleep 1 ;
>> print STDERR "\r"}'
>> 
>> (I used STDERR, to avoid buffering of stdout. There is a way to
>> disable this, but I can't recall it off the top of my head).
> 
> iirc, you can turn off the buffering with:
> 
> STDOUT->autoflush (1);
> 
> -Dan
> 
> 

Re: How do you install modules in OS X?

[Ian Ragsdale]

This is a bug in the version of CPAN that comes with perl 5.6.  If a module
is in the perl core distribution and you try to install or upgrade it (it's
possible that it moved into the core in a later version than 5.6) then that
version of CPAN will grab perl to install that module.  If you instead
download and install the latest version of CPAN by hand (if you try to use
CPAN you trigger the bug) then this will be fixed and it will grab only the
modules you specify, not the whole perl distribution.

Ian

On 10/31/02 2:52 PM, "Trey Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> In a message dated Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Sherm Pendley writes:
>> The version of CPAN.pm shipped with OS X is over-zealous about
>> installing prerequisites, and will try to install Perl 5.8.0 for you if
>> you use it to install the bundle. Unfortunately, in doing so it
>> overwrites the existing Perl, causing no end of problems.
> 
> Which brings up a question that's been nagging at me.  There must be some
> way to tell CPAN, "don't upgrade Perl unless I tell you to, and if some
> other module you're trying to install needs a new version of Perl, try to
> find an older version of the module that doesn't," isn't there?
> 
> I've never bothered trying to track down this elusive (nonexistant?)
> option, since I use the 'ask' mode rather than the 'follow' mode for
> dependencies.  I just answer 'no' and go to search.cpan.org and work out
> the dependencies for myself. Annoying, but it works.  :-)
> 
> Trey
> 
> 

Re: OS X meltdown

[Ian Ragsdale]

On 10/24/02 12:41 PM, "Trey Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> In a message dated Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Ian Ragsdale writes:
> 
>> You should be able to re-install without having to reinstall everything.
>> Since only Apple stuff goes in /System, the archive install option on the
>> 10.2 disk should move the /System folder and reinstall all the system files
>> without disturbing everything else.
> 
> *Should*.  My system has been acting so strangely that I'm very suspicious
> of anything short of a reformat of the disk.  I might give it a try, but
> this has knocked me out of commission for three days, and I'm thinking
> it's better to get it all over with than take the chance that at some
> random point in the future it will all happen again
> 

If it was me, I'd back up my Users folder and my Applications folder, and do
a clean install.  If you create the users with the same UIDs, you should be
able to just put the Users & Applications folders back & be pretty close to
where you started - most mac applications are very good about storing all
preferences in the users's preferences folder.

Good luck,
Ian

Re: OS X meltdown

[Ian Ragsdale]

You should be able to re-install without having to reinstall everything.
Since only Apple stuff goes in /System, the archive install option on the
10.2 disk should move the /System folder and reinstall all the system files
without disturbing everything else.

Ian

On 10/24/02 12:29 PM, "Trey Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Time to haul out a small fortune of DVDs (but not quite enough to justify
> buying another FireWire disk, alas) to make backups before reinstalling, I
> think.
> 

Re: Problems with CPAN and modules

[Ian Ragsdale]

Have you installed the development tools?  I'm pretty sure that most of the
stuff you need to compile perl modules, including the header files, is only
installed with the dev tools.

Ian

On 7/29/02 3:51 PM, "tsackett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'm having no luck installing modules. I've run into two problems.
> 
> 1. When I try to use "perl Makefile.PL" to configure a CPAN module, I
> get the error: "Error: Unable to locate installed Perl libraries or Perl
> source code." Apparently, it cannot find
> /System/Library/Perl/darwin/CORE/perl.h. I have confirmed that the file
> does not exist. Is there something basically wrong with Apple's standard
> installation of Perl for Mac OS X?
> 
> 2. Has anyone successfully configured the CPAN shell to use an FTP
> proxy? I'm on a network that uses the kind of ftp proxy where you first
> connect to the proxy server, then login as
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". The CPAN documentation makes it sound
> as if this is a very standard form of proxy. However, After I enter the
> proxy information, it tries to use ftp to download MIRRORS.BY. As far as
> I can tell, it doesn't try to use the proxy, and fails to get the file.
> I thought that there might be a problem because I haven't installed the
> libnet module yet, but I can't install libnet because of problem 1,
> above.
> 
> thanks for any help,
> Tom Sackett
> Seattle, Washington
> 
> 

Re: FYI: Successful Install of Perl 5.8.0 RC 1 + Apache 2.0.36 +ModPerl-2.0 on OSX 10.1.4

[Ian Ragsdale]

If you are hoping for case-sensitivity, which is the only part of a new file
system that would fix this problem, don't get your hopes up - I'm pretty
positive that Apple will never make their default file system case
sensitive.  This has been discussed at length in many forums.

As for HFS+, what does everybody dislike about it?  The only problem I see
with it is a lack of journaling.  It has support for huge files & volumes,
is fast, B*tree based and has support for extended metadata & forked files.
If you compare it's feature list to most file systems people ask for, the
only thing it's really missing is journaling.  It is not the MOST robust
file system I've heard of, but I haven't had a problem with it in a few
years.  It got corrupted under OS 9, but that was more an issue of OS 9's
stability.

Ian

On 6/4/02 4:05 PM, "Alex S" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'd prefer to see if we could convince the developers at Apple to use a
> better file system.  I'm hoping that one of the new people on the core
> Apple dev team (forget his name at the moment), who is a filesystems
> guy, is there to make that all better!  A journalled FS would be nice too.
> 
> But for now, it's wishful thinking!
> 
> -Alex
> 
> 
> David Wheeler wrote:
> 
>> On 6/4/02 1:35 PM, "R Blake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> claimed:
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>> for those who are interested ..
>>> 
>>> "Building a Bleeding Edge OpenSource OSX Server"
>>> http://homepage.mac.com/blakers
>>>
>>> 
>> 
>> Ach. I wonder if we could convince the porters to change the distribution so
>> that we don't have to do this:
>> 
>> mv INSTALL INSTALL.txt;
>> 
>> David
>> 
>>  
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: Accessing Samba - Mount Volume Possible?

[Ian Ragsdale]

On 5/1/02 3:29 PM, "Randy Boring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Pre-warning, I'm biased, as I work for Thursby Software Systems, Inc.
> 

I'll keep that in mind. :)

> Samba is mostly a server, so it's not likely that you really want to
> mount _via_ Samba, you probably want to mount a Samba volume via an SMB
> or CIFS client.  Actually, the Samba package does include a way to mount
> a filesystem as a client, but I don't believe that this works on OS X.
> (They also include a rudimentary command-line client, which I don't
> believe you want.)  Apple does ship an smb client with OS X, but yes it
> has problems, only one of which is being limited to one mount at a time.
> (Lack of browsing the network is another.)
> 

I agree that Apple's current smb implementation has problems, especially the
lack of browsing capabilities, but it does NOT have a problem mounting more
than one share at a time - I do this on a regular basis.  I know you have a
product to sell but lets keep it truthful. :)

You were probably thinking about the competing product Sharity (from
Objective Development), which in it's demo form only allows one mount at a
time (but has very nice browsing capabilities).

> DAVE, on the other hand, is a robust client (and server if you want),
> which can connect to many shares at once, handles FAT and NTFS volumes
> and servers of many kinds (Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2K/XP and many UNIX-based
> servers including Samba servers).  To answer your question, it also
> supports mounting via AppleScript.
> 

I will agree with you that Dave was a great product on OS 9 - I don't really
have much experience with it on OS X, beyond one of the first betas.

Ian

Re: mod_perl stopped working...

[Ian Ragsdale]

On 4/11/02 1:31 PM, "PK Eidesis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> But this whole Perl 5.6.1, mod_perl crapola has left me very befuddled. In
> some ways I have myself to blame because I dicked with Apple's stock 5.6.0
> install... I never should have done that. Otoh, Perl/CPAN/mod_perl install
> should have protected me from screwing myself up.
> 

FWIW, the CPAN behavior that tries to get you to upgrade to 5.6.1 is
actually a bug in CPAN, that can be avoided if you upgrade to the latest
CPAN *by hand* (not using CPAN).  The problem is with installing modules
that have been merged into the base perl install - it doesn't understand
that it can get them on their own, so it gets them by grabbing the latest
perl.  This has caused a lot of problems for us when installing modules.

Ian

Re: Installing Perl

[Ian Ragsdale]

On 3/19/02 11:56 AM, "Palle Bo Nielsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> It seem like it can't find the LWP/Simple.pm package, which probably
> isn't installed per default on Mac OS X Server. So what I thought was...
> 
> A) Do I need to install a fresh copy of Perl from CPAN ?
> 

No, you don¹t.  You can install modules without having to upgrade perl.

> B) Do I only need to install the LWP/Simple.pm from CPAN ? If so, how
> can I find it at CPAN ?
> 

You should use the CPAN module that comes with perl, like this:

Perl -MCPAN -e "install LWP::Simple"

It will need to be configured the first time you run it, you can use the
default settings for pretty much everything.  For more info on CPAN, try
"perldoc CPAN" at the command line.

You can also go to the web page (www.cpan.org) & download the modules &
install them manually, but the CPAN tool tends to be easier.

Ian

Re: Perl as alternative to MySQL

[Ian Ragsdale]

On 3/18/02 1:07 PM, "Danny Arsenault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Please let  me know if this is crazy!
> 

It's not totally crazy. :)

> 
> Now, the folks on the Lasso list claim that this kind of file-based DB thing
> is done all the time in Perl, and now that we have Perl on OS X, I wonder if
> I should try to develop this part of it in Perl rather than learn MySQL,
> which seems a lot harder, and I'm not running NASA over here.
> 

Sure, you can do this stuff in perl just fine, but I don't think I'd
recommend it in this case.  Flat-file solutions are easy to a point, but
they don't scale very well, especially if you start adding a lot of data.  I
would recommend you start learning MySQL.  If you can learn perl, you should
be able to use mysql just fine - it is definitely one of the more simple
databases out there, as far as I've seen.

> So please let me know if there are any good sites or resources about this,
> or if I'd better just go with MySQL or maybe something else entirely.
> 

Given your lasso background, I would suggest you consider PHP as well.  I
prefer perl myself, because I know it a lot better, but I think you'd be up
and running a lot quicker with PHP.  It is easier to learn, and it works
much more like lasso than perl does, so it should be easier for you to get
used to.  It is also installed by default on OS X, you just need to enable
it.

Ian

Re: Applescript call from Perl

[Ian Ragsdale]

On 2/7/02 9:15 PM, "Brad Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Can ACGI run with Apache? I thought you needed to have webstar or
> another Mac Classic web server to use that.
> 

Apple has produced an apache module that will run AppleScripts that comes
with OS X Server.  Someone posted a similar solution at versiontracker
today:


> -Original Message-
> From: Brad Rice [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 6:13 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Applescript call from Perl
> 
> 
> How do you call Applescript from Perl? I want to make a CGI that runs
> an applescript.


To answer the original question, here is one way:

% man osascript 

OSASCRIPT(1)System Reference Manual
OSASCRIPT(1)

NAME
 osascript - execute OSA scripts

SYNOPSIS
 osascript [-l language] [-e command] [-s flags] [programfile]

DESCRIPTION
osascript executes the given script file, or standard input if none is
given.  Scripts may be plain text or compiled scripts.  osascript was de-
signed for use with AppleScript, but will work with any Open Scripting
Architecture (OSA) language.  To get a list of the OSA languages in- stalled
on your system, use osalang(1).  For documentation on AppleScript itself,
see . The options are as fol- lows:

 -e command
Enter one line of a script.  If -e is given, osascript will not look for a
filename in the argument list.  Multiple -e commands may be given to build
up a multi-line script.  Because most scripts use characters that are
special to many shell programs (e.g., Apple-

Re: how to use DropScript?

[Ian Ragsdale]

DropScript executes the script inside it and passes the paths of any files
that were dropped on the app.  The default one clones itself with any script
you drop on it.  So, you write your script in a way that just expects
filenames as arguments, and then you drop your script on DropScript, which
will create a new applet with your script inside.  If your script doesn't do
anything, I would guess that something is wrong with your script - maybe
line endings?

Ian

On 2/4/02 9:52 AM, "CDE Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I've got a Perl script that massages my access logs each month.
> I tried to use Wilfredo's DropScript to make a dropplet but the
> resulting .app file doesn't do anything.
> 
> I ended up going to Terminal and saying 'perl [scriptname] [logname]'
> but dammit I want my "Power of Unix, Simplicity of Mac". How?
> 
> Side note: has nntp.perl.org been turned off? I'd definitely
> rather talk Perl via nntp than smtp.
> 
> -F.
> 

Re: ImageMagick (to use with PerlMagick)

[Ian Ragsdale]

I downloaded & compiled it successfully a couple of weeks ago, but have
since been too busy to make sure it works correctly.  Try running "ranlib
/usr/local/lib/libMagick.la" and then trying to compile PerlMagick again. It
seems as if you have to run that on new libraries before you can link to
them.

Ian

On 1/29/02 10:17 AM, "Tomás García Ferrari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I'm trying to get ImageMagick + PerlMagick running on MacOSX. I found
> several places from where I can get ImageMagick, but I can not compile
> PerlMagick...
> 
> I downloaded the ImageMagick source and discover that if I suceed compiling
> it from source, PerlMagick can be compiled as well at the same time. But
> now, I'm having this error when I tipe 'make':
> 
>> /usr/bin/libtool: internal link edit command failed
>> make[2]: *** [libMagick.la] Error 1
>> make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
>> make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
> 
> Anybody suceed having ImageMagick + PerlMagick running? Any experience to
> share?
> 
> Regards + Thanks,
> Tomás
> 
> 
> +--  --+
>   Tomás García Ferrari
>   Bigital
>   http://bigital.com/
> +--  --+
> 
> 
> 

Re: Apache::args vs Apache::Request speed

[Ian Ragsdale]

How about setting something up on SourceForge?  I know they have OS X
environments available for compiling and testing.

Ian

On 1/28/02 2:19 PM, "John Siracusa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'm cc-ing this to the Mac OS X Perl list in the hopes that someone can
> provide a test environment for you.  (I would, but my OS X box is behind a
> firewall at work.)
> 
> So how about it, [EMAIL PROTECTED] folks, can any of you help get libapreq up
> and running on OS X an long last? (See message quoted below)
> 
> -John
> 
> On 1/28/02 2:02 PM, Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Great! Now we have an even broader benchmark. Please tell me when 1.0 is
>>> released (in case I get carried away with other things and don't notice
>>> the announce) and I'll make sure to update my benchmarking package,
>>> re-run the benchmarks and correct the results in the guide.
>> 
>> Great- there's a typo or two in the handler_do sub, but they should be
>> pretty obvious when you try to run it.
>> 
>> I hope a new release will be just around the corner, but if you want
>> to test out some of the latest stuff, have a look at
>> 
>> http://www.apache.org/~joes/
>> 
>> I don't think we'll have a 1.0 that works on OS/X, but I might be able
>> to include a patch in the distro that will build the C api of libapreq
>> directly into httpd.  This might allow OS/X to run Apache::Request and
>> Apache::Cookie at the same time, but that platform is unavailable to me
>> for testing.
> 
> 

Re: Configuring /Setting Up Perl on OS X 10.1.2

[Ian Ragsdale]

Just make sure you install the dev tools - without them you don't have make
or GCC, and you won't be able to install any additional perl libraries.
Other than that, I haven't found anything to be missing out of the box.

Oh - and make sure you have BBEdit 6.5 - possibly the best perl tool ever.
:)  It can search the perl docs, run the scripts right from the editor, and
parse any error messages to tell you what went wrong.

Ian

On 1/18/02 4:50 PM, "Jason Bourque" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I am going to a three day Perl class next week and would like to know if
> there is anything I have to do to set up my Mac for Perl Scripting.
> 
> Any technotes or things I need to install before the fun starts?
> 
> 
> Thanks, 
> 
> Jason Bourque
> 
> 

Re: Help with Perl on MacOSX

[Ian Ragsdale]

On 1/10/02 1:38 PM, "Chris Devers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, John Gruber wrote:
> 
>> (BBEdit is about as agnostic about
>> line endings as an editor can get.)
> 
> Vim is pretty agnostic too -- it'll just optionally put a little [dos] or
> [mac] or [unix] in the corner if you ask it to -- but that's not really
> the core issue here. I mean, what *is* the default line terminator on OSX
> supposed to be? It seems like half the software, the old Classic stuff, is
> making one assumption while the other hald, the old NeXT stuff, is making
> the opposite assumption, with a small agnostic middle ground.
> 
> If OSX "is" Unix, then it either needs to adopt Unix line endings (and the
> Classic stuff will just have to Deal With It), or it the installed set of
> Unix tools should be adapted to recognize Mac endings. Or something.
> 

This is annoying, but workable.  The classic mac users that don't use UNIX
won't be using UNIX tools and won't care about UNIX line endings.  The ones
that do use UNIX are already aware of the issue and know how to deal with
it.

> Unfortunately, this problem doesn't seem like it will be going away any
> time soon
> 

Well, UNIX stuff should keep using the UNIX line endings to maintain
compatibility with other UNIXes.  Cocoa stuff should continue to use the
UNIX line endings for the same reason.  It's the carbon stuff that should
eventually transition to use the UNIX line endings.  Hopefully as the
platform matures more people will be writing to the Cocoa APIs, and the
Carbon developers will be forced to use (or at least tolerate) UNIX line
endings to maintain compatibility with everything else.

Ian

Re: SOAP::Lite

[Ian Ragsdale]

Larry, there are a few debugging tricks you can do at this point.  The first
thing you should do anytime you get an internal server error is check the
apache error log (in /var/log/httpd/error_log) - this might give you some
indication of what is going wrong.

Another handy thing to try is to run the script on the command line - I'm
not familiar with SOAP::Lite, but if it uses the CGI module, you can
probably just run your script like 'perl scriptname "args=1&args=2"' - if
there is a compile error, you should see that here.  You can also check your
script's syntax with "perl -cw scriptname".  If you're using BBEdit, you can
check syntax from there from the perl menu.  If you're not using BBEdit, I
recommend you get it. :)

Also check out the the CGI::Carp module - put this line at the top of your
script:

use CGI::Carp qw( fatalsToBrowser );

This will print any fatal errors in your script to the web browser instead
of the error log - very handy for debugging.

If you've installed the SOAP::Lite module, and have copied the working
script verbatim, I would guess that your problem is line endings - make sure
your script is using unix line endings instead of mac - mac line endings
confuse perl into thinking your script is one long line.

Ian


On 10/4/01 6:52 PM, "Larry Staton Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I've been playing around with AppleScript and Perl clients to XML-RPC
> servers and SOAP servers. Both implementations work very nicely.
> However, I would like to build a Perl server with SOAP::Lite. I have
> attempted the Temperatures example at http://guide.soaplite.com. When I
> try to access the Perl server with a Perl client, I get a "500 Internal
> Error" message at line 3 in the client script. Here is the client script:
> 
> use SOAP::Lite;
> print SOAP::Lite
>-> uri('http://my.server.com/cgi-bin/Temperatures')
>-> proxy('http://my.server.com/cgi-bin/temper.cgi')
>-> f2c(32)
>-> result;
> 
> Any suggestions? TIA.
> --
> Larry Staton Jr.
> E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Weblog: http://staton.weblogger.com
> 
> Brought to you by Mail.app from Mac OS X
> 
> 

Re: Mac OS X 10.1: GUI Scripting

[Ian Ragsdale]

I would guess that it depends on how this works - if it is some kind of
runtime that communicates over AppleEvents, we just need to make Perl able
to send and receive AppleEvents.  Is there work being done to port the
MacPerl modules that do this over to OS X?

Ian

On 9/26/01 3:19 PM, "Bill Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Well, it looks as though Apple has done (are doing) with AppleScript what
> we've all wanted for perl.
> 
> Check out: http://www.apple.com/applescript/macosx/ascript_studio/
> 
> Is it possible to integrate the two? If so, this may be the answer, if not,
> at least Apple's direction in regards to support and resources for scripting
> languages is becoming clearer.
> 
> Interesting stuff

Re: Cocoa interfaces

[Ian Ragsdale]

On 9/18/01 12:40 PM, "Stefan Rusterholz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> On Mon, 17 Sep 2001, Wilfredo Sánchez wrote:
>>
>> yeah; in MacOS X we could (finally) have applications written in
>> Perl that for the user would look just like any other.
>> 
> So then, let's start a petition =)
> 
> I think too, that such an API was simply genious! With that, the OS X
> platform would gain a lot of application programmers.
> Hmmm, I just have to think about that. I enjoy the idea to write a non
> webserver based application to admin mysql on OS X. And that was only the
> top of it...
> 

I'm all for this as well.  I'm a hell of a lot better Perl programmer than I
am a C or ObjC programmer, and I would be thrilled to be able to do these
things in Perl.  If there's a petition, I'll sign it.  If there is someone
to send feedback to, give me a name - I'll do it.

Ian

Re: IP Address with DHCP

[Ian Ragsdale]

I think his point was that after the DHCP lease runs out, the IP address may
cease to work because they will either stop routing it or give it to someone
else.  As long as you have the lease, you'll have the same IP address, and
when it runs out, it may stop working, so configuring it manually won't do
you much good.  And that is all beside the point, which is that it's silly
to hardcode your IP address in the first place, because your script will
cease to work if it changes or you try to use the script someplace else.  Go
ahead and do what you wanna do, but don't come asking for help here when
stuff stops working later. :)

Ian

on 8/23/01 5:14 PM, Justin Simoni at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>> Until your DHCP lease runs out and your IP address becomes invalid (or worse,
>> is handed out to another user), at which point it becomes "foolish foolish".
> 
> that's when I tell @Home I'm just a  home user, and really don't know
> what I'm doing and that AOL tech support told me to do it :) lord if i
> know what DHCP stands for. We have an IMAP project at work - wish I new
> that one too.. YKWIM?
> 
> justin.
> 

Re: Perl install on OSX without developer tools

[Ian Ragsdale]

I'm pretty sure that perl is installed by default, even without the
developer tools.  However, you will have a really hard time installing any
modules without the developer tools.

Ian

on 8/23/01 1:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Is there an easy way to install Perl on OSX without loading the developer
> tools from Apple, which take up too much room on my small drive?
> 
> Thanks for help and sorry if this has already been asked.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Mark Bedish
> Surrey,UK
> 

Re: GUI?

[Ian Ragsdale]

I believe that the interface for Tenon's iTools uses this approach.

Ian

On 8/18/01 12:15 AM, "Bill Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Otherwise, you can use the Interface Builder and write some code to pass
> objects between a perl app and an app built with the Developer Tools. I have
> not seen this done yet, but I've heard it's possible.
> 

Re: sourceforge ssh problmos

[Ian Ragsdale]

There is a problem with the ssh client that came with 10.0.4.  The problem
is only with the default cipher.  To work around this, add a '-c blowfish'
to the command line.  This will use the blowfish cipher instead, and you
should connect fine.

Ian

On 7/13/01 12:43 AM, "skazat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> hey
> 
> slight OT, 
> 
> but I'm trying to ssh into a sourceforge account using the terminal  app and
> ssh, I keep getting this back:
> 
> Bad packet length 235817961.
> 
> wassa?
> 
> it's a perl project, so i feel justified to ask the q here
> 

Re: MySQL data files HERE!

[Ian Ragsdale]

I just wanna chime in here with a quick explanation of what is going on, so
that it doesn't seem so arbitrary.

In the public beta, the root password was set to be the same as the first
user you created.  This is bad for a number of reasons, but this is why you
could use 'su' with your own password.  In the released version, there is NO
root password at all, which is why you couldn't use 'su'.  However, sudo can
authenticate users as root using their own password, and 'su' doesn't ask
for a password if you are root, which is why 'sudo su' worked just fine.

If you really wanted to (I don't recommend this, although others might
disagree) you could set the root password using 'sudo passwd'.  Then, you
would be able to log in as root if you wanted to, and 'su' would work
normally.  However, I've been using my machine steadily since the release,
and have had no real need to do this - sudo has taken care of all my needs.

Ian

On 6/29/01 12:59 PM, "Nelson Goforth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Answering my own question...
> 
> Since I wasn't getting anywhere with 'su' - I thought to try:
> 
>   sudo su
> 
> And it worked!  Just used my 'admin' password (don't have root
> enabled) and I was in like Flynn.  Whoever that was.
> 
> Thanks for the assistance.  I've been using Unix (mostly perl) for a
> several years, but always on a remote server and so without a lot of
> access to the innards.  I've got a lot to learn with OS X for that
> reason.  But running perl, PHP and MySQL right on my own machine is
> changing the way I write websites and databases - in a good way.  No
> telnet, no Fetch...
> 
> Nelson

Re: GD.pm

[Ian Ragsdale]

Libgd is not a perl module - it is a library written in C.  I've heard that
it runs on OS X, but I haven't done it myself. The homepage is here:

http://www.boutell.com/gd/

Libgd wants some other libraries as well - libpng (required), libjpg for
jpeg support, libfreetype for truetype font support.  This is all documented
at the libgd homepage.

FWIW, the homepage, with explanations of all this stuff, was easily found at
http://www.google.com.

Ian


On 5/22/01 11:47 PM, "nellA hciR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> i am trying to install gd.pm under X (so i can use chart.pm),
> installation seems to fail due to libgd not being installed but i can't
> seem to find this module.
> 
> any assistance getting these modules installed greatly appreciated
> 
> - hcir
> Made with a Mac!
> 

Re: Opening a basic window and drawing.

[Ian Ragsdale]

If Tk works on OS X, you might be able to do something that way.  Also,
there is the Simple DirectMedia Layer, a game/graphics/sound library that
runs on Linux, Windows, Be, and Mac OS (X and classic).  It has perl
bindings that should let you do stuff like that.

Unfortunately, while I was able to download and compile the SDL libs without
any problems, I had a bit of trouble with the perl bindings, but you may
have better luck.

You can find SDL here: http://www.libsdl.org/

The Perl libs for it are linked from there.

Ian

On 5/17/01 9:53 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The objective is to write a short perl script under Mac OS X that
> will open a new window and draw stuff in it (say draw random colored
> circles as an example).
> 
> What are the minimal bits and pieces (from carbon, cocoa, aqua,
> whatever) that need to be glued together to achieve this goal?  A
> quick snipet of example code would be great.
> 

Re: Carbon apps on unix disk

[Ian Ragsdale]

On 4/1/01 11:21 PM, "Bill Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> I thought maybe the problem is that they were "Carbonized Classic Mac OS"
> applications and not truly Mac OS X "Native" apps and somehow depended on
> the HFS file structure.  As I said before, I thought it might be a stupid
> question. But something odd is going on here.
> 

As I understand it, fully carbonized apps _should_ work just fine on UFS,
but I've definitely heard of problems with them.  All the carbon libs should
be able to handle this, but that won't stop a careless programmer. :)

> I won't be running "Classic" with OS X and I figured it might be easier to
> install perl modules if I used a unix format on the disk. (any comments on
> that?). But if it doesn't make a difference when installing unix software
> and it breaks OS X apps, then it doesn't seem to make sense to use a unix
> disk format.
> 

For what its worth, in the past day or two, I have installed the following
perl libraries on a HFS+ disk without any real problems:

LWP (the entire bundle)
DBI & DBD::mysql
Time::Timezone
Sys::HostIP
Mail::Sendmail
Net::DNS
Mail::POP3Client
Net::IMAP::Simple
Net::Whois

I did have a small problem with Time::Timezone, but that complained about an
environment variable being ignored when set from %ENV - I'm pretty sure that
didn't have anything to do with HFS+.

Ian

Re: Carbon apps on unix disk

[Ian Ragsdale]

Your definitions are correct, but carbon apps can come in two forms.  If you
are careful in writing your carbon app, and compile it in PEF format, it can
run in OS 9 as well as OS X. If you compile into Mach-O, you can use some
native services that you can't with PEF, and it will only run in OS X, and
not OS 9.  Either way, you will get a blue (or graphite) apple in the menu
bar instead of a multicolored one.

On 4/1/01 10:33 PM, "Ken Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Apparently I need some clarification of terms.  I thought these were the
> definitions:
> 
> carbon: will run on OS X without needing the classic environment
> cocoa: uses a specific OS X application framework
> classic: will run under OS < 9, but not OS X
> 
> So checking whether something is "carbon" should be a simple matter of
> running it, then checking whether the logo in the upper-left is
> rainbow-colored or blue.  Right?
> 
> The comments below seem to indicate something different.
> 
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Ragsdale) wrote:
>> Pepper is definitely carbon - it runs on OS 9 as well.
>> 
>> Ian
>> 
>> On 4/1/01 8:48 PM, "Bill Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> PhotoLine and Pepper both work well on either format, but they're not really
>>> "Carbon" apps are they?
>> 
>> 

Re: Carbon apps on unix disk

[Ian Ragsdale]

Pepper is definitely carbon - it runs on OS 9 as well.

Ian

On 4/1/01 8:48 PM, "Bill Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> PhotoLine and Pepper both work well on either format, but they're not really
> "Carbon" apps are they?

Re: MacPerl to OSX Perl

[Ian Ragsdale]

My guess is that it is a line endings problem - I get this error under most 
unix systems if I use a file with macintosh line endings.  Can whatever 
editor you're using translate the line endings to unix?

Ian

--On Sunday, April 1, 2001 3:16 PM -0800 hciR nellA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> iH
>
> i have a two page script that works under MacPerl which uses Net::Telnet
> and Socket.
>
> when i copy the script to my OS X documents folder and try to run it,
> perl complains that there is a right curly brace that doesn't have a
> match. Any ideas what may be causing this?
>
> thanks
>
> - hcir
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Made with a Mac!

Re: Perl IDE for OS X?

[Ian Ragsdale]

I've tried out Pepper from http://www.hekkelman.com.  Very similar to BBEdit
in a lot of ways, and has some really nice perl integration, and is
carbonized & very customizable.  It also has perl-compatible regular
expressions, using the PCRE library, and only costs $45.

If I wasn't waiting for the carbonized BBEdit (any word on when, Jim?) I'd
probably buy it - it seems very capable. So far I haven't found anything
that it can't do that BBEdit can (all I do is perl programming).  If the
time comes that the only classic app I need is BBEdit, then I'll probably
switch.

I didn't continue using the demo because the demo has a really annoying
"wait 5 seconds before saving" feature, and because I'm not quite ready to
switch to OS X.  (Need wavelan drivers for my powerbook.)  But it's worth a
download & a look-see.

Note that I'm not affiliated with them in any way, I was just impressed with
the product.  I still like BBEdit better, but not enough to stick with OS 9.

Ian

On 3/30/01 2:01 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I use mac perl  and BBEdit and i love it  ; )
> 
> Is there an  IDE for os x?   If not can everyone explain to me their set up?
> 
> 
> I'm hoping at the very least i can use BBEdit and then somehow
> get BBEdit to pass the code to OS X Perl (or a shell) to be run via an
> applescript or what not.  In BBEdit it is so simple since Mac Perl supprt
> is built in there.
> 
> 
> has anyone found a smooth slick way to do this in OS X yet
> without having to CLI like a mad man?
> 
> 
> thanks
> 
> Russ
> 

Re: setting password for root

[Ian Ragsdale]

This is a feature of pretty much every PC out there.  If you boot off of
another disk you can do what you like.  Every mac out there is bootable by
CD.  You can burn an OS 9 disk, boot off of it, and do whatever you like.
You can replace the local netinfo database with your own copy, and now you
have your own root user.  On a PC, you can set the BIOS password to prevent
this.  

With the latest firmware update, you can also set a boot password on recent
macs.  There isn't a TIL yet, but it has been discussed on the
darwin-development list at some length - you can search the archives at
www.darwinfo.org.

Ian

On 3/30/01 1:37 PM, "Michael Stearne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> That is a crazy feature of OS X I think.  You can just walk up to a box
> with OS X on it with an install CD, reset the password and have free
> reign?  That sounds a little dangerous.
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> On Friday, March 30, 2001, at 02:08 PM, Bill Stephenson wrote:
> 
>> on 3/30/01 12:37 PM, Farrukh  Zaidi at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> 
>>> I had the same problem with not being able to su to root.  What I did
>>> was use NetInfo Manager, which comes with OS X, to delete the password
>>> for root.  Then I could su to root without being prompted for a
>>> password
>>> and use the unix command "passwd" to set a new password for root.
>> 
>> I reset the root password by restarting with the OSX installer CD-ROM
>> and
>> choosing "Reset Password" from the menu. This tip is in the OS X user
>> guide.
>> 
>> It takes a really long time to do this though. I like Farrukh's method
>> better ;-)
>> --