Re: [vox-tech] InstallFest
Rusty -- Old info, but hopefully useful for your purposes. I received a free copy of Oracle 8i (8.1.5) for Linux about 2 years ago when Oracle was trying to promote their system (Linux was hot in the stock market). At that time it required a minimum of 128 MB memory, with a recommendation for 512 MB RAM. Unless the installee plans to upgrade memory, I doubt Oracle from version 8 to present will run. Also, the install was not very straightforward, though perhaps a newer version has a cleaner / simpler interface. -- Larry At 04:14 PM 7/17/02 -0700, you wrote: I have need for someone with Oracle experience at this coming IF. The Installe wants to have Red Hat and Oracle installed I willl find out if they have the software (Oracle). I also have some basic performance issues with a laptop computer (they are running X with only 32MB). I even have some fun X issues (I have been working on learning X this last month should be interesting). I look forward to seeing many of you at the installFest, but please let me know if you are coming and what time you will be there. Rusty ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
Re: [vox-tech] C header files question
Jeff Newmiller wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
during the course of writing a C program, often i'll change an
implementation of the way i do things.
functions get added and deleted, but often i'll forget what header file
was added for a particular function.
i know there are header files which aren't needed anymore.
is there a utility that lets you know which header files aren't needed
for a particular file of C code?
Sounds like something a lint or compiler might do, but lclint doesn't
appear to do this.
I try to keep the total number of includes in any given file to a minimum.
Commenting a header you suspect of being unnecessary and attempting to
recompile is an effective solution for small numbers of headers.
One way to minimize headers is to define your own modules:
+-myio.h+
| int do_input(); |
| void do_output(); |
+---+
+-myio.c-+ +-mytoplevel.c--+
} #include myio.h | | #include myio.h |
| #include stdio.h /* scanf(), printf() */ | | int main() { |
| int do_input() { ... } | | do_input(); |
| void do_output() { ... } | | ... |
++ | do_output(); |
+---+
stdio.h here is representative of some large, complicated headers
associated with a powerful library.
You're on the right track by writing modules with
corresponding header files, e.g. my_io.h and my_io.c.
However, I would take this a step further and suggest
writing your modules as abstract datatypes.
An ADT is a module that has a data structure defined
in the .h file and an instantiation function in the .c file. The
instantiation function allocates
the memory for the data structure and then returns a
pointer to it. All of the other functions in the
.c work on this data structure only. (This is how
classes in C++ are supposed to work.)
A good example of an ADT is FILE which is defined
in stdio.h. The instantiation function is fopen(). It
returns a pointer to FILE which you then pass to
fgets(), fseek(), ftell(), and the many other functions
to do the work. Whereas it's interesting to know how
these functions work, it's not necessary.
Usually when you write an ADT you have an object
defined in a single .h file and all the code for that
object written in a single .c file, e.g. foo.h and foo.c.
Example:
Let's say you have person.dat that has delimited records
containing name,address, etc. Then you should have a
corresponding person.h and person.c which work on this
file only.
person.h
-
#ifndef PERSON_H
#define PERSON_H
typedef struct
{
char *name;
char *address;
char *city;
/* other information omitted */
} PERSON;
PERSON *new_person( char *person_filename, char *name_to_search );
#endif
person.c
-
PERSON *new_person( char *person_filename, char *name_to_search )
{
PERSON *person = (PERSON *)calloc( 1, sizeof( PERSON ) );
FILE *person_file;
char input_buffer[ 1024 ];
if ( ! ( person_file = fopen( person_filename ) ) )
{
fprintf(stderr, Error in %s/%s(): file open error in %s.\n,
__FILE__, __FUNCTION__, person_filename );
return (PERSON *)0;
}
/* Code to search and populate person structure omitted */
fclose( person_file );
return person;
} /* new_person() */
Summary:
By grouping your modules into identifiable categories
and creating an abstract datatype for each module,
your code will start to read like an essay.
Just my humble opinion.
-- Tim Riley
While this example may seem trivial, in a large program the fact that only
myio.c depends on some huge external library can have far reaching
effects. One effect is shortened compilation for all the modules that
depend on myio.h but don't directly include stdio.h. This also localizes
the dependency, so if you decide to use gtk-1.2/gdk/gdk.h instead of
stdio.h, you don't even have to recompile any of the rest of your object
modules. From a complexity control perspective, this is a good thing. :)
If you have more than 5 or 10 includes, you should probably ask yourself
if you are doing too much in one file.
---
Jeff NewmillerThe . . Go Live...
DCN:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Basics: ##.#. ##.#. Live Go...
Live: OO#.. Dead: OO#.. Playing
Research Engineer (Solar/BatteriesO.O#. #.O#. with
/Software/Embedded Controllers) .OO#. .OO#. rocks...2k
---
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[vox-tech] hold on to your hats - perl vs python
jeff newmiller got me thinking about switching from perl to python as my main scripting language of choice. i'd like to hear the opinions of anyone who has actually MADE the switch from perl to python as their scripting language of choice. was python everything you had hoped for? was there anything you had in perl that seems to be missing from python? perl certainly seems to have a never ending supply of packages, but i understand python is being developed quickly too. looking for subjective experience here. not enumerations of the virtues of python or perl. thanks, pete -- GPG Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
[vox-tech] bare-bones web server
Hi everyone Can anyone recommend a tiny-footprint, minimal, feature-free, really bare-bones web server for Linux? I'm doing research on web servers, and Apache is way too smart for its own good. :) Can someone help me out? Thanks BUNCHES, --nicole twn *** The candles burn down; one lights the way, one disappears...--Moxy Fruvous Visit www.nicolopolis.com ... digital nonsense for a weary world. ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
Re: [vox-tech] bare-bones web server
nicole, i'm pretty dumb about webservers, but i *think* you just described khttpd (formerly tux). pete begin Nicole Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi everyone Can anyone recommend a tiny-footprint, minimal, feature-free, really bare-bones web server for Linux? I'm doing research on web servers, and Apache is way too smart for its own good. :) Can someone help me out? Thanks BUNCHES, --nicole twn -- GPG Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
Re: [vox-tech] bare-bones web server
On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 03:43:55PM -0700, Nicole Carlson wrote: Hi everyone Can anyone recommend a tiny-footprint, minimal, feature-free, really bare-bones web server for Linux? I'm doing research on web servers, and Apache is way too smart for its own good. :) Can someone help me out? boa, thttpd, tux ... I've seen dozens listed on Freshmeat that claim to be small fast. ;) -bill! ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
Re: [vox-tech] bare-bones web server
#include std/disclaimeraboutreplyingtoyourownmessage there's also a webserver written in bash, but i don't know anything about it. i don't even know what it's called. if i had to guess, it would prolly be something like bash-httpd or bhttpd or something like that. i would imagine it would be small and not very featureful. but then again, like i said, i don't even know what the thing is called let alone its feature set. pete begin Peter Jay Salzman [EMAIL PROTECTED] nicole, i'm pretty dumb about webservers, but i *think* you just described khttpd (formerly tux). pete begin Nicole Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi everyone Can anyone recommend a tiny-footprint, minimal, feature-free, really bare-bones web server for Linux? I'm doing research on web servers, and Apache is way too smart for its own good. :) Can someone help me out? Thanks BUNCHES, --nicole twn -- GPG Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
Re: [vox-tech] bare-bones web server
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Nicole Carlson wrote: Hi everyone Can anyone recommend a tiny-footprint, minimal, feature-free, really bare-bones web server for Linux? I'm doing research on web servers, and Apache is way too smart for its own good. :) Can someone help me out? Thanks BUNCHES, --nicole twn Hi Nicole, I'm using dhttpd. The tarball is only 26Kb. You can find it on freshmeat. HTH, FL ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
Re: [vox-tech] ruby (was: hold on to your hats - perl vs python)
On Thursday 18 July 2002 04:30 pm, Henry House wrote:
...
I like writing
'a b c d'.split(/\s/).each do |i|
puts elem = #{i}
end
than
foreach my $i (split(/\s/, a b c d)) {
print elem = $i\n
}
Actually the Perl version can be a bit more succinct:
for (split /\s/, a b c d) {print elem = $_\n}
BTW does ruby let you do one-liners as in perl -e?
-- Rod
http://www.sunsetsystems.com/
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
Re: [vox-tech] bare-bones web server
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Henry House wrote: I have had good experiences with thttpd[*], tiny or throttling HTTP server. This sounds like something Bill The Cat would say. :) Seriously, thanks everyone! I'm looking into all suggestions, with Boa emerging as the front-runner. --nicole twn *** That creaking you hear, it's increasingly clear, is my brain--overload, overload!--Eddie From Ohio Visit www.nicolopolis.com ... digital nonsense for a weary world. ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
Re: [vox-tech] ruby (was: hold on to your hats - perl vs python)
On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 04:49:13PM -0700, Rod Roark wrote:
On Thursday 18 July 2002 04:30 pm, Henry House wrote:
...
I like writing
'a b c d'.split(/\s/).each do |i|
puts elem = #{i}
end
than
foreach my $i (split(/\s/, a b c d)) {
print elem = $i\n
}
Actually the Perl version can be a bit more succinct:
for (split /\s/, a b c d) {print elem = $_\n}
True. I consider $_ and friends to be ugliness best avoided, however. Perl
can be made plenty succinct, but usually at the cost of readability. To read
such perl code you need to keep a lot of syntax rules in your head.
Btw, the best place to learn about ruby is www.ruby-lang.org.
--
Henry House
The attached file is a digital signature. See http://romana.hajhouse.org/pgp
for information. My OpenPGP key: http://romana.hajhouse.org/hajhouse.asc.
msg03189/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [vox-tech] bare-bones web server
Quoting Foo Lim ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I'm using dhttpd. The tarball is only 26Kb. You can find it on freshmeat. Written by David A. Bartold. http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~foxx/dhttpd/ Included in the lists of alternatives to all DJBware, at http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/#djb (That FAQ item got expanded by a factor of two to include all that alternative software, the day that DJB made more-or-less legal threats about the existing FAQ contents.) -- Cheers, Founding member of the Hyphenation Society, a grassroots-based, Rick Moen not-for-profit, locally-owned-and-operated, cooperatively-managed, [EMAIL PROTECTED] modern-American-English-usage-improvement association. ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
Re: [vox-tech] bare-bones web server
Quoting Peter Jay Salzman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): nicole, i'm pretty dumb about webservers, but i *think* you just described khttpd (formerly tux). khttpd is Arjan van de Ven's project. TUX is Ingo Molnar's. Both still around; similar but separate efforts. -- Cheers, Founding member of the Hyphenation Society, a grassroots-based, Rick Moen not-for-profit, locally-owned-and-operated, cooperatively-managed, [EMAIL PROTECTED] modern-American-English-usage-improvement association. ___ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
