On Thursday 09 December 2004 7:15 pm, Linux Rocks! wrote:
> well... the first 3 techs I talked to insisted that I call back when I have
> explorer running (either on a mac or pc), that thier system would *ONLY*
> work (for configuring the modem) with IE.
> [snip]
> Does anyone else think its stup
Quoth Linux Rocks!, on Thu, 9 Dec 2004 22:15:40 -0500:
> have explorer running (either on a mac or pc), that thier system would
> *ONLY* work (for configuring the modem) with IE.
That's true of my Comcast experience. Moz' on Linux didn't work, and I
had to boot WinXP.
--Jason V. C.
--
What's t
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 07:41:47PM -0800, Allen Brown wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, Jacob Meuser wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 05:21:32PM -0800, Bob Miller wrote:
> > > Jacob Meuser wrote:
> > >
> > > > ah, nice. I was worried about the leading spaces as well, but printf
> > > > seems to t
well... the first 3 techs I talked to insisted that I call back when I have
explorer running (either on a mac or pc), that thier system would *ONLY* work
(for configuring the modem) with IE. The 4th said it didnt matter, but by
then, Id spent a lot of time installing mac os, and all of that, so
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 05:21:32PM -0800, Bob Miller wrote:
> > Jacob Meuser wrote:
> >
> > > ah, nice. I was worried about the leading spaces as well, but printf
> > > seems to take care of that:
> > >
> > > $ tb=0; for i in *; do b=`wc -c < $i`; b=`pr
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 06:32:15PM -0800, Mr O wrote:
> Actually, you just got a clueless tech. You don't need IE for
> crap when configuring Comcast. It's just the only "supported"
> browser they know. Next time try this page
> http://sas.r1.attbi.com for registering your modem. Also,
> resetting
Actually, you just got a clueless tech. You don't need IE for
crap when configuring Comcast. It's just the only "supported"
browser they know. Next time try this page
http://sas.r1.attbi.com for registering your modem. Also,
resetting your modem will usually work wonders. All the techs do
is follow
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 05:21:32PM -0800, Bob Miller wrote:
> Jacob Meuser wrote:
>
> > ah, nice. I was worried about the leading spaces as well, but printf
> > seems to take care of that:
> >
> > $ tb=0; for i in *; do b=`wc -c < $i`; b=`printf "%d" $b`; \
> > tb=`expr $tb + $b`; done; echo $tb
Jacob Meuser wrote:
> ah, nice. I was worried about the leading spaces as well, but printf
> seems to take care of that:
>
> $ tb=0; for i in *; do b=`wc -c < $i`; b=`printf "%d" $b`; \
> tb=`expr $tb + $b`; done; echo $tb
You didn't quote $b before passing it to expr, so the shell will strip
o
cool... if you can get a couple, I can re-imburst you when you get here...
Jamie
On Thursday 09 December 2004 07:57 pm, larry price wrote:
: I think I could do that.
:
:
:
: On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 17:56:09 -0500, Linux Rocks!
:
: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > Who's bringing take and bake pizza ? I g
I think I could do that.
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 17:56:09 -0500, Linux Rocks!
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Who's bringing take and bake pizza ? I got an oven, but I hanvt tried it yet.
> Id go get one, but im too lazy.
>
> Jamie
>
> On Thursday 09 December 2004 06:40 pm, Alan wrote:
>
>
> : bogan
Who's bringing take and bake pizza ? I got an oven, but I hanvt tried it yet.
Id go get one, but im too lazy.
Jamie
On Thursday 09 December 2004 06:40 pm, Alan wrote:
: bogan smythe wrote:
: > And the mind blow is that tens of millions of folks don't balk at
: > spending the better part of 100
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> ls -l $file | awk '{print $5}'
"ls" is fragile. It allows the size field to grow until it merges
with the one before it, causing your example here to break. You
can make it slightly more robust with "cut" instead of "awk". But
that still will break, w
bogan smythe wrote:
And the mind blow is that tens of millions of folks don't balk at spending
the better part of 100 bux a month for this kind of thing.
Any wonder bombast has so much loose capital, they're literally trying to
buy the world?
It's gauche to shop WalMart--but it's NOT gauche to supp
And the mind blow is that tens of millions of folks don't balk at spending
the better part of 100 bux a month for this kind of thing.
Any wonder bombast has so much loose capital, they're literally trying to
buy the world?
It's gauche to shop WalMart--but it's NOT gauche to support bombast?
Go
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 09:29:23AM -0800, Bob Miller wrote:
> Jacob Meuser wrote:
>
> > well, I didn't know about wc -c, thanks. however, the output,
> > at least on my system, is not easily parsable, as it is oddly
> > aligned, with varying amounts of space.
>
> If you use "wc -c < file" instea
So, my place should be ready for meeting... We could use chairs, as I have no
furnature to speak of.
I had internet working for the last month, however comcast managed to shut me
down. Ive gotten several excuses as to why... comcast requires you to use
internet explorer to configure your cable
Walter
My bad. Did you say that the USB floppy was working under Fedora for
everything but WP8?
I still stand by the confidence builder. It will take you in the
direction you want to go anyways.
Brian
--
Message from Mars: got to get new reading glasses, getting old sucks!
__
Walter
I am a Linux novice so treat my advice accordingly. I have tried to
follow the discussion but I am picking up email from several computers,
so I may have missed something.
A short digression: you are not "El stupido" you are working with
cutting edge technology. I sometimes use self-depr
Jacob Meuser wrote:
> well, I didn't know about wc -c, thanks. however, the output,
> at least on my system, is not easily parsable, as it is oddly
> aligned, with varying amounts of space.
If you use "wc -c < file" instead of "wc -c file" then wc
doesn't print the file name.
--
Bob Miller
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 12:27:55AM -0800, horst wrote:
> >Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 22:35:55 -0800
> >From: Jacob Meuser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> >>others print the number of bytes. Which did you want?
> >
> >bytes. the files need to fit on a DVD.
> >
>
> I have no idea how universal wc is (thou
horst wrote:
> I have no idea how universal wc is (though not efficient), but
> wc -c *.mp3
> does the math for you.
Good idea. wc (including the -c flag) is largely unchanged since at
least 6th Edition Unix, circa 1975. Probably longer.
--
Bob Miller K
kbobsoft
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 22:35:55 -0800
From: Jacob Meuser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
...
others print the number of bytes. Which did you want?
bytes. the files need to fit on a DVD.
I have no idea how universal wc is (though not efficient), but
wc -c *.mp3
does the math for you.
- Horst
P.S. In a few y
23 matches
Mail list logo
