On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Steve Mynott wrote:
> Most UK passports are still sufficient being machine-readable (mine is
> and its three years old) and the biometric requirement is currently only
> for new passports issued after 2004.
Indeed, the machine readable passports have been around for at least
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Steve Keay wrote:
> I've heard lots of people say "leave the system perl in place" and
> that makes good sense to me, but,
Indeed. Removing the system Perl is Bad and Wrong, m'kay. However, all
the Perl scripts shipped with Solaris use /usr/perl5/bin/perl so you can
replace
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Andy Ford wrote:
> It shows how many waiting processes I have (77).
Nope, w is the number of swapped out processes - which isn't really
waiting. From the vmstat man page:
The fields of vmstat's display are
procs Report the number of processes in each of t
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Shevek wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Andrew Beattie wrote:
> >
> > You also need a motherboard that supports memory being installed at an
> > angle that has been designed to provide for decent airflow through the
> > case.
>
> I deny this, since I have owned several 1Us where
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Lusercop wrote:
> One time we had an ASRLon there, they ran out of beer. :-(
Ah, but were they given fair warning of the thirst of bofhs? If so, then
very well done to the attendees in question. :)
A.
--
aca114
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Andy Kelk wrote:
> ISTR (although I can't find where now) that 0 is not valid for the
> numeric parts. I am not 100% sure on that...
> If so, you can't have E0 7PT but you can have E20 7PT.
> Similarly, E4 7PT is valid but E4 0PT is not.
I can confirm that 0 is valid for the s
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Peter Sergeant wrote:
> This seems to be a recurring theme - regular expressions are hard. This
> is not my experience. After QBasic, Perl was the first language I
> learned, and regular expressions were a topic I found very easy (and
> there were plenty of topics I found hard
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> Is it possible to list agencies as "we can't say because they are threatening
> to sue for libel" without getting sued, so that one can make a judgement
> based on that? Or was the problem that you were deemed as publishing the
> individual libellous co
