On 21 September 2016 at 04:04, Greg Reagle wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016, at 04:44 PM, FRIGN wrote:
>> Some people would recommend rc (by Plan9), but it's definitely not
>> portable
>
> Would you mind explaining specifically what you mean by "not portable"?
> It is my
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016, at 04:44 PM, FRIGN wrote:
> Some people would recommend rc (by Plan9), but it's definitely not
> portable
Would you mind explaining specifically what you mean by "not portable"?
It is my understanding that it works on a lot of Unix-like operating
systems and that it is
> Hi, its my first post so i hope I'm not on the wrong group here or being
> rude.
Nope, dev is exactly right for that.
> Bash and Make, I'm looking for compatible replacements for these. As i
> currently understand it bash at the least is expected to compile the linux
> kernel. Is there any
On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 16:32:18 -0400
stephen Turner wrote:
Hey Stephen,
> On your site i see you have tested compiling your system with PCC
> and i also see a SCC in dev. What was the reason you chose to write
> SCC? Is it due to PCC's reliance on lex, yacc and m4?
Hi, its my first post so i hope I'm not on the wrong group here or being
rude.
On your site i see you have tested compiling your system with PCC and i
also see a SCC in dev. What was the reason you chose to write SCC? Is it
due to PCC's reliance on lex, yacc and m4?
Bash and Make, I'm
Hi all,
I stumbled on dwm over the weekend after reading several threads abount
the systemd crap - what a great bit of kit dwm is. Running Dillo (latest
mercurial version) and claws-mail (latest git version) on Slackware
14.1, my little notebook flies - to boot up (with a BIOS password) and
on
Fun is not suckless. :P