I do have cases in QDT where I use > 30. Why the question?
Jim
On Dec 12, 2003, at 12:36 PM, John Sadler wrote:
Did anybody know that the number of loose items are limited in C68 in
the definition of the status area in qptr_h in the line
char litem[40]
?
Is there anyone whose programs would be
Two years ago my Q40 case blew it's power supply. After 2 years of
distractions and procrastination (plus a coworker giving me a used AT
case), I'm back up and running. I've sort of kept of with developments,
but not too closely, so I've got a few questions to ask the QL community.
Backups:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
> 'ql_now' would be an apt domain name - that is what is happening with
> the QL now.
404 Not Found.
The page you are looking for could not be displayed ;)
So, what does that say? ;)
Dave
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tarquin Mills
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Could Jonathan Dent TCP/IP stack's DNS Resolver be configured to point at
the Open Root Server Confederation DNS servers rather than the ICANN legacy
servers. This would mean instead of seeing just the usual names you could
Did anybody know that the number of loose items are
limited in C68 in the definition of the status area in qptr_h in the
line
char litem[40]
?
Is there anyone whose programs would be
disadvantaged if the number of loose items were limited to 30?
How many programs would it affect?
Per,
As has been said over the last few days, there seems to be plenty of them
about. I have used ic24.net for a number of years now and although I get the
occasional SPAM it's no more than I get from quanta.org.uk. Even messages
from [EMAIL PROTECTED] which are virus ridden are automatically del
