On Tue, Oct 26, 1999 at 08:03:35PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> Yes, I'll do a cpdup port too.
Thanks, Matt! I know plenty of people that will find this useful.
--
Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ "Reliability means never
_/ _/ _/ havin
:Yes, I'll do a cpdup port too. The last time I
:proposed it I think the conclusion was that there was
:no other software that did precisely the same thing.
:Besides, it'd just be a port so it can't hurt. I use
:cpdup a lot. I'll probably remove the MD5 generation/check
:
:May I humbly put in a plea for a cpdup port?
:
:Thanks :)
:
:Cheers,
:--
:Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ "Reliability means never
Yes, I'll do a cpdup port too. The last time I
proposed it I think the conclusion was that there was
no other software that did precise
In reply:
> I've finished cleaning up the trek73 code but haven't created a port
> out of it yet.
>
> Anyone interested in messing with the game can obtain it from
> my web site:
>
> http://www.backplane.com/FreeBSDPorts/
>
>
May I humbly put in a plea for a cpdup port?
Thanks :)
Cheers,
--
Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ "Reliability means never
_/ _/ _/ having to say you're sorry."
_/ _/_/_/ -- D. J. Bernstein
I've finished cleaning up the trek73 code but haven't created a port
out of it yet.
Anyone interested in messing with the game can obtain it from
my web site:
http://www.backplane.com/FreeBSDPorts/
It should compile and run
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Jim Bryant wrote:
> No matter what Lush Rimbaugh says on the topic, frivilous lawsuits
> RARELY win in court. A lawsuit over this would indeed be frivilous.
You don't have to win in court, you merely have to exhaust the resources
of your opponent. Walnut Creek doesn't have
27;s
> something which would stand up in court, it's hassle the project could do
> without, and leaving aside the issue of whether the existing trek(6)
> should remain I wouldn't want to tempt fate by adding a second.
>
> Amusingly, Paramount are now claiming trademark
You're talking as if litigious corporations follow logic and common
sense. This is more the exception than the rule IMO.
Don't construe this as arguing against the inclusion of trek73 ... I
think you're probably right that the risk is minimal, but for different
reasons.
--
Ben
In reply:
> > On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Jim Bryant wrote:
> >
> > > "unauthorized" things for keeping Trek alive in the first place... If
> > > it came out that Paramount ever tried litigation over such things,
> > > they would lose a LOT of fans, and the money in their pockets! What
> > > would come
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Jim Bryant wrote:
> "unauthorized" things for keeping Trek alive in the first place... If
> it came out that Paramount ever tried litigation over such things,
> they would lose a LOT of fans, and the money in their pockets! What
> would come next? Sueing people at conventi
In reply:
> On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> > I found a copy of the C version of trek73 in my Amiga archives. This
> > is the trek73 originally written in HP-2000 Basic that was rewritten
> > by Dave Pare and Chris Williams in C and serio
On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> I found a copy of the C version of trek73 in my Amiga archives. This
> is the trek73 originally written in HP-2000 Basic that was rewritten
> by Dave Pare and Chris Williams in C and seriously enhanced by a bunch
> of peop
Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm... it looks like the one I have is older. It looks like Jeff had
> made a huge number of enhancements between 1985 and 1988! Pretty cool,
> actually, though neither game is multi-player.
Well, for multi-player, we had the most fu
f it's the one I think then it is on a completely different track.
Either a different base alltogether or it was split off from the original
HP2000 Basic version before the conversion. Trek73 isn't multiplayer.
:Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:
:> I found a copy of the C version of trek73 in my Amiga archives. This
:> is the trek73 originally written in HP-2000 Basic that was rewritten
:> by Dave Pare and Chris Williams in C and seriously enhanced by a bunch
:
> I don't want to get nasty here, but was it _really_ necessary to forward
> the entire, original, humungous mail to add a few lines of commentary to
Sorry, but as I already commented to another person, I actually only
read the first two paragraphs of Matt's message before replying and
didn't eve
"Jordan K. Hubbard" writes:
>> I don't think any of the authors would mind if it went into /usr/games,
>
>I certainly wouldn't. It would be an old game returning home to the
>Berkeley world, and I also used to play it a lot on the HP-2000.
>
>The 'ol HP 2000 access, now that brings back memor
Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I found a copy of the C version of trek73 in my Amiga archives. This
> is the trek73 originally written in HP-2000 Basic that was rewritten
> by Dave Pare and Chris Williams in C and seriously enhanced by a bunch
> o
In reply:
> On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> > I found a copy of the C version of trek73 in my Amiga archives. This
> > is the trek73 originally written in HP-2000 Basic that was rewritten
> > by Dave Pare and Chris Williams in C and serio
> Did anyone bother to look at /usr/src/games/trek/main.c:
trek != trek73.
- Jordan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
> > No. Make it a port. Policy, remember? 8)
>
> I guess the anti-bloatists would have a point on this one...
>
> I would not object to a port. It certainly eliminates the
> bike shed arguments over it.
Did anyone bother to look at /usr/src/games/trek/main.c:
** C version by Eric P. All
> No. Make it a port. Policy, remember? 8)
I guess the anti-bloatists would have a point on this one...
I would not object to a port. It certainly eliminates the
bike shed arguments over it.
- Jordan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the b
> > I guess the real question is: /usr/games or /usr/ports? I don't care
> > which, but I would personally prefer /usr/games because it really is
> > an old-time berkeley program.
>
> Perhaps we should ask Kirk... ;)
No. Make it a port. Policy, remember? 8)
--
\\ Give a man a f
On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> I found a copy of the C version of trek73 in my Amiga archives. This
> is the trek73 originally written in HP-2000 Basic that was rewritten
> by Dave Pare and Chris Williams in C and seriously enhanced by a bunch
> of peop
> I guess the real question is: /usr/games or /usr/ports? I don't care
> which, but I would personally prefer /usr/games because it really is
> an old-time berkeley program.
Perhaps we should ask Kirk... ;)
- Jordan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe
:
:> I don't think any of the authors would mind if it went into /usr/games,
:
:I certainly wouldn't. It would be an old game returning home to the
:Berkeley world, and I also used to play it a lot on the HP-2000.
:
:The 'ol HP 2000 access, now that brings back memories... Did you know
:I o
(ucbvax!dillon)
> Dave Sharnoff (ucbvax!ucbcory!muir)
> and
> Joel Duisman(ucbvax!duisman)
>
>
> T R E K 7 3
> A Star Trek(R) Battle Simulation
>
> Trek73 is a computer-simulated
a port?
On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> I found a copy of the C version of trek73 in my Amiga archives. This
> is the trek73 originally written in HP-2000 Basic that was rewritten
> by Dave Pare and Chris Williams in C and seriously enhanced by a bunch
>
I found a copy of the C version of trek73 in my Amiga archives. This
is the trek73 originally written in HP-2000 Basic that was rewritten
by Dave Pare and Chris Williams in C and seriously enhanced by a bunch
of people including me in my early college years circa 1985.
I
30 matches
Mail list logo
