Question on device driver ?

R

Richard

Richard Heathfield said:
Rob Kendrick said:


Sure, it's a "valid" sig in the sense that it's synactically correct.

No it isn't. We are not talking about some sentence. We are talking
about practical usage and common sense. He has TWO sigs.
It does, however, exceed the max-four-lines guideline.

It is not a valid signature. He has TWO signatures. No amount of word
games will change that. Since posts can contain "-- " then it is obvious
that the news reader would search from the END of the article and snip
the first. In fact I know of at least two newsreaders where such double
signatures cause problems. Gnus and SLRN.

If he had any conscience at all he would simply sign up to another ISP
which does not tag on that second .sig OR remove his own one. This is
not the only group where this has been nicely mentioned to him. The fact
that he is an interfering busybody and constantly net nannying other
posters makes it all the more irritating.

The bottom line is a simple one : his double sig and ONLY his double sig
causes problems when replying. No one else's causes issues.
 
R

Richard

Citation? Which RFC or STD document indicates that
multiple signatures are not allowed, or that a signature is
terminated by the appearance of another "-- " ?

Common sense. And the fact this signatures are not correctly trimmed in
at least two main stream news readers. If you want to argue that having
two signatures is OK then good luck to you. It's a pretty stupid thing
to defend IMO.
 
R

Richard

Rob Kendrick said:
Ah right, it's just your opinion. Right, got you now.

B.

And virtually every other poster in Usenet and the designers of
Newsreaders. Yeah I know. I'm *such* a maverick. If you want to kiss
CBF's arse, good luck to you. But the bottom line is that he doesn't
keep to the posting standards that he insists from other posters.
 
R

Richard Heathfield

Rob Kendrick said:
Ah right, it's just your opinion. Right, got you now.

I'm not overly interested in the opinions of trolls like Richard Riley, but
if we're talking RFCs, Chuck's sig is in excess of four lines; this is a
clear violation of RFC 1855, as has been pointed out to him on
sufficiently many occasions that he should have taken the hint by now. As
far as I can recall, however, he's never even bothered to acknowledge the
fact, let alone take corrective action.
 
W

Walter Roberson

(e-mail address removed)-cnrc.gc.ca (Walter Roberson) writes:
Common sense.

Oh, so it isn't something like RFC 3676, which specifically says that
for MIME,

Generating agents MUST NOT end a paragraph with such a signature
line.

Therefore, if the article uses mime, then it is *not* possible for
there to be occurances of ^--space in the -body- of the messages.
If the article doesn't use mime... well, there just isn't any standard,
just long-standing recommendations. And the recommendations are silent
on the possibility of multiple signatures.
And the fact this signatures are not correctly trimmed in
at least two main stream news readers.

You've never heard of the same mistake being made by two independant
groups? This was a topic not long ago in comp.risks: it turns out
that independant softare design teams tend to make similar mistakes,
which is why having multiple companies write competing implementations
is not always sufficient.
If you want to argue that having
two signatures is OK then good luck to you. It's a pretty stupid thing
to defend IMO.

Is there anything written into standards or compelling de-facto
standards? What little there is (e.g., RFC 3676) does not support
your arguments, so IMHO, it is time for you to take your crusade
out of comp.lang.c .
 
R

Richard

Richard Heathfield said:
Rob Kendrick said:


I'm not overly interested in the opinions of trolls like Richard
Riley, but

Your opinion is not required for me to form my own. Amazing as this
might seem to someone of your own self regard.
if we're talking RFCs, Chuck's sig is in excess of four lines; this is a
clear violation of RFC 1855, as has been pointed out to him on
sufficiently many occasions that he should have taken the hint by now. As
far as I can recall, however, he's never even bothered to acknowledge the
fact, let alone take corrective action.

4 lines, 5 lines. it shouldn't matter if he had ONE signature and the
mainstream newsreaders could snip them - which is the major point in
question.
 
W

Walter Roberson

Richard Heathfield said:
I'm not overly interested in the opinions of trolls like Richard Riley, but
if we're talking RFCs, Chuck's sig is in excess of four lines; this is a
clear violation of RFC 1855, as has been pointed out to him on
sufficiently many occasions that he should have taken the hint by now.

Richard, I *know* you can read specifications better than that.

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt

- If you include a signature keep it short. Rule of thumb
is no longer than 4 lines. Remember that many people pay for
connectivity by the minute, and the longer your message is,
the more they pay.


"Rule of thumb", not "MUST".

For example, "Rule of thumb is that integer representation in C
implementations will be two's complement" is correct: it doesn't say
that other things cannot validly happen, only that it is a good
-approximation-, "in the right ballpark", true sufficiently often
to be a useful starting point.

"Rule of thumb" is not a hard-and-fast rule. The Oxford English
Dictionary indicates,

1. A method or procedure derived entirely from practice or
experience, without any basis in scientific knowledge; a roughly
practical method. Also, a particular stated rule that is based on
practice or experience.

2. attrib.
a. Of methods, etc.: Based merely upon practice or experience.
Also in predicative use.
b. Of persons: Working only by methods derived from practice.
 
R

Richard Heathfield

Walter Roberson said:
Richard, I *know* you can read specifications better than that.
"Rule of thumb", not "MUST".

Indeed. Nobody is forcing Chuck to change his sig. Nobody is saying "must".
But by refusing to observe this rule (which, as I understand it, is
specifically designed to make Usenet cheaper for those people who are
still on dialup), he loses any moral high ground from which he might
reasonably criticise netiquette in others.

<snip>
 
W

Walter Roberson

Walter Roberson said:
Indeed. Nobody is forcing Chuck to change his sig. Nobody is saying "must".

Richard, you said, and I quote, "this is in clear violation of RFC 1855".
What part of RFC 1855 is it in "clear" violation of? Be specific.

I already quoted the only relevant portion of RFC 1855 that -I-
could find, and there is no "clear violation" of that section, because
that section only discusses a "rule of thumb" value, not a firm value.
But you wrote "clear violation", so either you were wrong in that
statement and the violation (if that is what it is) is *not* "clear"
or else you had some other section of RFC 1855 in mind.

But by refusing to observe this rule (which, as I understand it, is
specifically designed to make Usenet cheaper for those people who are
still on dialup), he loses any moral high ground from which he might
reasonably criticise netiquette in others.

There -are- people still on dialup for Usenet, but I have to question
whether the amount of extra data transmitted with respect to
the terranews portion of Chuck's postings has amounted to anywhere
near the verbage we have expended in discussing the issue -- or
discussing ells and the like. Chuck isn't exactly the most verbose
poster around, nor the most frequent. (Now, *I* would be in
contention for the most verbose; though not the most frequent in -this-
newsgroup.)
 
J

jacob navia

Walter said:
Walter Roberson said:
Richard, you said, and I quote, "this is in clear violation of RFC 1855".
What part of RFC 1855 is it in "clear" violation of? Be specific.

I already quoted the only relevant portion of RFC 1855 that -I-
could find, and there is no "clear violation" of that section, because
that section only discusses a "rule of thumb" value, not a firm value.
But you wrote "clear violation", so either you were wrong in that
statement and the violation (if that is what it is) is *not* "clear"
or else you had some other section of RFC 1855 in mind.



There -are- people still on dialup for Usenet, but I have to question
whether the amount of extra data transmitted with respect to
the terranews portion of Chuck's postings has amounted to anywhere
near the verbage we have expended in discussing the issue -- or
discussing ells and the like. Chuck isn't exactly the most verbose
poster around, nor the most frequent. (Now, *I* would be in
contention for the most verbose; though not the most frequent in -this-
newsgroup.)

In which world are you living on?

My daughter downloads Japanese films with that e-mule
software... She filled several disk drives, so now she doesn't download
them at all but just watches the movies in comics/japanese "manga"
sites...

I have a 200K/second line just for her.

And you are discussing about the few *bytes* of CBFalconer signature
?????

This is completely ridiculous
 
R

Rob Kendrick

And virtually every other poster in Usenet and the designers of
Newsreaders.

With such a vast number of places to draw from, it seems odd that you
cannot find anything official to cite. The spec is vague. What CBF does
fits within what the spec allows for. Reading specifications requires
being careful with wording, even if you do like to call them "word games".
Yeah I know. I'm *such* a maverick. If you want to kiss
CBF's arse, good luck to you.

I have no wish to kiss anything of his, thanks.
But the bottom line is that he doesn't
keep to the posting standards that he insists from other posters.

Standard? Where?

B.
 
F

Flash Gordon

jacob navia wrote, On 19/09/07 22:13:
Walter Roberson wrote:

In which world are you living on?

Walter is living in the real world, the one in which broadband is still
not universally available at a reasonable proce.
My daughter downloads Japanese films with that e-mule
software... She filled several disk drives, so now she doesn't download
them at all but just watches the movies in comics/japanese "manga"
sites...

I have a 200K/second line just for her.

So? Until recently the only broadband available to me was 50UKP per
month for a slower connection than that, this is not cheap and for many
people I know would be far too expensive. There are other places where
the only option is a *very* expensive satalite link or dial up.
And you are discussing about the few *bytes* of CBFalconer signature
?????

I agree it is not worth the amount it is discussed. I wish Chuck would
get it sorted, which is why I offered him access to my own privately run
server, but not enough for this. Note that my main reason for posting is
to point out not everyone has access to broadband even if you and I do.
This is completely ridiculous

Agreed. So is your apparent claim that everyone has access to broadband.
 
M

Mark McIntyre

Didn't you see the thread about english measures?

The thread was about something completely different.
Dozens of messages.

Dozens is ludicrous hyperbole. Perhaps one dozen - all short &
humorous, not droning on mindlessly about how mean everyone was to
them.
Because Heathfield and Co started those.

This is a lie.
THEY have the right to start blatantly off topic threads,

This is also a lie.
and when I protest the usual tirade of insults starts.

What do you expect? You lie about other people, and expect them to
take it without complaint?
--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
 
W

Walter Roberson

Walter Roberson wrote:
In which world are you living on?
My daughter downloads Japanese films with that e-mule
software...

In some of the technical groups I frequent, some of the posters
are still on dialup or lower speed lines.

Canada and the USA are huge places, and not always densely populated.
For example, the Canadian province that I live in, Manitoba
(647797 square km) is larger than the largest country in Europe
(Ukraine, 603700 square km -- though some sources include Russia in Europe,
some don't) and 18% bigger than France (547030 square km). The
population of Manitoba is, though, only 1.2 million, as compared to
France's estimated 63 million (insee.fr, Jan 1 2006). That's a
population density of less than 2 people per square km here, compared
to 115 people per square km in France. That makes it a bit difficult
to get high speed lines outside of the larger cities here.
 
M

Mark McIntyre

Always you point out off topic postings.

EXCEPT

When heathfield and co start posting things

You know, your posts become more and more paranoid each time.

Did you ever take a small step back and actually look at how others
see you?

--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
 
O

Old Wolf

My daughter downloads Japanese films with that e-mule
software... She filled several disk drives, so now she doesn't download
them at all but just watches the movies in comics/japanese "manga"
sites...

So your daughter is a porn addict. Good to know...
I have a 200K/second line just for her.

lol @ brag about your fat pipe on usenet
And you are discussing about the few *bytes* of CBFalconer signature
?????

I'm tempted to sign off with a few pages of ascii art.
I'm sure that wouldn't impinge on your connection either..
 
O

Old Wolf

When heathfield and co start posting things like a lengthy
discussion of british measures (dozens of posts)
or now another "Ode to Keith" where they hone
their writing skills you remain silent
because they are the "regulars" after all.

Please stop posting this off-topic drivel.
 
R

Richard Heathfield

Walter Roberson said:
Walter Roberson said:
Richard, you said, and I quote, "this is in clear violation of RFC 1855".
What part of RFC 1855 is it in "clear" violation of? Be specific.

I already quoted the only relevant portion of RFC 1855 that -I-
could find, and there is no "clear violation" of that section, because
that section only discusses a "rule of thumb" value, not a firm value.
But you wrote "clear violation", so either you were wrong in that
statement and the violation (if that is what it is) is *not* "clear"
or else you had some other section of RFC 1855 in mind.

No, that's certainly the bit I had in mind. Mea culpa - evidently it wasn't
quite as clear to others as I had thought. But I think Chuck is the only
regular contributor to this group who does not observe the four-line sig
block. If we can squeeze our sigs into four lines, surely he can too?

There -are- people still on dialup for Usenet, but I have to question
whether the amount of extra data transmitted with respect to
the terranews portion of Chuck's postings has amounted to anywhere
near the verbage we have expended in discussing the issue -- or
discussing ells and the like. Chuck isn't exactly the most verbose
poster around, nor the most frequent. (Now, *I* would be in
contention for the most verbose; though not the most frequent in -this-
newsgroup.)

Oh, I know it's a minor thing; of course it is. So are many of the
violations Chuck complains about, many of which are also not actually
violations of any particular rule, but rather of conventions that have
been established over the years.

Incidentally, here's an interesting quote from 1 Jan 2004, on a newsgroup
named comp.lang.c, from a certain CBFalconer: "Would it be too much to ask
you to remove the PGP signature and the general oversized sig block
(exceeds 4 lines)."

I rest my case.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,484
Members
44,903
Latest member
orderPeak8CBDGummies

Latest Threads

Top