On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Tristan Plumb <9p...@imu.li> wrote:
> > Anyone working on or have a simple SIP router/proxy for Plan9? As of
> > today I will no longer waste days of my life dealing with the
> > abomination that is Asterisk.
> I would also love to see a SIP implementation for Pla
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 09:01:13PM -0400, Michael Kerpan wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 3:57 AM, wrote:
>
> > I don't know what "automagic" ligatures are; but ligatures are here in
> > the kerTeX fonts, user having nothing special to do to have them. Small
> > caps are here. Using the system f
> But I don't want to have the obligation to "know" 65536 signs to
> express what I want to express. I'm sorry, but I think that the
> main majority (remember that for latin1/latin2 accented letters
> are just variants so need less "user memory" than plain different
> characters) can do with (less
Thanks, I love such toys :)
Thanks for bringing up Sumerian (better: Sumero-Akkadian Cuneiform). I
was thinking along exactly those lines. For me at least, solutions that
satisfy 'the majority' are no solutions at all. And obviously, I'm not
alone.
(Though it could well be that I missed the intent of Thierry's comment
and a
--- On Wed, 22/6/11, David Lukes wrote:
>...
> I'm no RFS guru, thank deity, but I did RTFC once and "F"
> was apposite.
It took me a little time to figure out RTFC wasn't a remote file system ;-)
>
> ioctl was handled by having the client "know" exactly what
> each ioctl "looked like", i.e. it
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 08:36:35AM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
>
> and there's no penalty for having that many glyphs. it just
> means that my font file as a couple hundred subfonts. these
> are only open if needed. typically only 3 subfonts are open
> at any one time.
As can be clear from th
NFS4 on linux has gone with (in addition to everything else) a very
plan 9-like "write commands to files" model that uses text. It's
complex as you can ever imagine, and then some, but at least they seem
to have finally got the idea right to some extent.
The new 802.11 wireless infrastructure, I a
> Speaking of device numbers, I was surprised that Plan 9 has a similar
> notion. However, they are only useful with kernel resident device
> numbers. Does Plan 9 have some other mechanism that allow one to
> identify the class of device/file server it belongs to?
>
> In most cases, a name is go
> As can be clear from the even more desastrous level of my english
> than usual, I only had a minute or two to write the message.
>
> I DON'T SAY THAT I WILL RESTRICT TEX TO THE FIRST 256 CODEPOINTS.
>
> This is precisely why I have rejected your proposal. KerTeX will
> provide, because this is
On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:20 PM, ron minnich wrote:
> Which means each of us has maybe 4 chances in life to
> really push a change into the world. There, I just made your day.
Great, missed every one of those chances. Might as well throw in
the towel, stop resisting the inevitable, and chuck any h
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 01:34:07PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
>
> i don't even have an opinion on this. i don't understand the conflation
> of the input character set and tex's internal representations. could
> you explain why you are taking about them as the same?
>
> to be brutally honest,
The essence of being a 9fan: It is more important to be right than to
be popular.
(although it would be nice to eventually be popular -- preferably
during one's lifetime)
-Skip
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Jeff Sickel wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:20 PM, ron minnich wrote:
>
>> Which me
ron minnich :
> I used to think 10 years was a hugely long time to get
> changes into the world, now I'm thinking 10 years is remarkably quick,
> and 20 is more the rule, unless you hit the right idea at just the
> right time. Which means each of us has maybe 4 chances in life to
> really push a ch
On Monday 27 June 2011 20:18:05 Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
> The essence of being a 9fan: It is more important to be right than to
> be popular.
The essence of being popular on 9fans: being more right than popular elsewhere
;-)
On Monday 27 June 2011 19:20:57 ron minnich wrote:
> (...stuff...) on
> It's worth mentioning the devpts (the /dev/pts/* thingies)
not unless it's 1978. :-)
- erik
> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 10:20:57 -0700
> From: ron minnich
>
> . Which means each of us has maybe 4 chances in life to
> really push a change into the world. There, I just made your day.
I have four wonderful children. So, maybe I've done pretty good
there, after all.
:-)
Arnold
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:01 PM, wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 01:34:07PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
>>
>> i don't even have an opinion on this. i don't understand the conflation
>> of the input character set and tex's internal representations. could
>> you explain why you are taking about
On Monday 27 June 2011 22:17:49 erik quanstrom wrote:
> > It's worth mentioning the devpts (the /dev/pts/* thingies)
>
> not unless it's 1978. :-)
oy, i was unclear.
the main point: (in current linux) you can have several instances of devpts,
by mounting them at various places (with -o newin
Thierry,
> I only say that:
> 1) Forcing, as this was written in the XeTeX FAQ, user to enter the
special codepoint for the fi ligature since, white eyes, scornful wave
of the hand: "this is the way this is done with Unicode" is sheer
stupidity.
I don't know who told you that... just because t
> I don't know who told you that... just because there is a codepoint
> for something does not mean that one has to access that codepoint
> directly in all cases. Software at various levels can render a
> ligature on the basis of various actual character sequences (e.g. f +
> i, or f, i when lig
21 matches
Mail list logo
