|
|
 | | Re: 0 Un-official part...
|
| ----- Original Message ----- From: Tore Eriksson <tore.eriksson@mbox3...wipnet.se> To: <lugnet.cad.dev@lugnet.com> Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2000 7:30 AM Subject: 0 Un-official part... (...) part description. Why? This is my way to mark (...) (...) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | 0 Un-official part...
|
| As some of you may have noticed, I put an @-sign at the beginning of the part description. Why? This is my way to mark un-official parts or elements so I can both use them and easily list all un-official parts. See, Mklist puts them first in the (...) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: MPD spec
|
| Rui: (...) It's "Ada", not "ADA"! Neither does everybody have MS-Windows installed (and I am one of them). I don't mind distributing binaries for DOS and MS-Windows, but somebody else has to compile them. [...] There is a very good reason that I (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: MPD spec [DAT]
|
| (...) OK, I saw it after asking, but what about the Win/DOS X86 version. NOTE: Not every one uses ADA, i.e. has an ADA Compiler Installed. (...) The following proposition may may seem awkward, but bare with me. This is My proposition for changing (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: MPD spec
|
| Rui: (...) The first. (...) You can't trust that the MPD file and the first file in the MPD file has the same name, but it will generally be the case. (...) There is a Linux binary at <URL: (URL) >. (...) No. (...) If the interpreter is aware that (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
