(n)curses problem compiling tty-only nethack on OSX 10.4

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

I've been trying to build nethack for myself on my new mac, and it
compiles and runs, but I'm having some problems with a lot of garbage
appearing on the screen when objects are thrown, or my character tries
to run or other rapid movements.

This is a fresh install, with fink added, and using the XCode tools that
came with the machine.

I tried using both -lcurses and -lncurses, in the src/Makefile, but they
both seem to have the same problem.

Anyone have any ideas why this might be happening?
--
Christopher Calzonetti, MFCF C&O Software Specialist
mailto:ccalzone@math.uwaterloo.ca phone:+1 519 885-1211 x7516

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Christopher Calzonetti wrote:
> I've been trying to build nethack for myself on my new mac, and it
> compiles and runs, but I'm having some problems with a lot of garbage
> appearing on the screen when objects are thrown, or my character tries
> to run or other rapid movements.
>
> This is a fresh install, with fink added, and using the XCode tools that
> came with the machine.
>
> I tried using both -lcurses and -lncurses, in the src/Makefile, but they
> both seem to have the same problem.

Sorry, I won't be very much help on this subject I fear. I just
want to report that I've successfully compiled slash'em on
mac os 10.3, using ncurses.

I suppose you know that nethack comes with think, but that you
still want to compile it yourself?
Does the fink installed version of nethack run properly?
Also, for this version, I think a patch is applied before
compilation, you might want to look into that.

chlorine

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

In article <1124133475.119165.231330@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
chlorine <chlorine@free.fr> wrote:
>
>I suppose you know that nethack comes with think, but that you
>still want to compile it yourself?
>Does the fink installed version of nethack run properly?
>Also, for this version, I think a patch is applied before
>compilation, you might want to look into that.

Yeah, but I like having extra options set the way I like them. eg.
Turning off that annoying mail daemon and mail scrolls. And not having
to log in as "wizard" to use wizard mode is a big plus. Oh, and the
score on the bottom line option, etc.

It looks like nethack isn't included in the stable tree of fink for 10.4
though. I'll try the unstable tonight and see.

And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
I could try that too...
--
Christopher Calzonetti, MFCF C&O Software Specialist
mailto:ccalzone@math.uwaterloo.ca phone:+1 519 885-1211 x7516

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Christopher Calzonetti wrote:
> In article <1124133475.119165.231330@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> chlorine <chlorine@free.fr> wrote:
> >
> >I suppose you know that nethack comes with think, but that you
> >still want to compile it yourself?
> >Does the fink installed version of nethack run properly?
> >Also, for this version, I think a patch is applied before
> >compilation, you might want to look into that.
>
> Yeah, but I like having extra options set the way I like them. eg.
> Turning off that annoying mail daemon and mail scrolls. And not having
> to log in as "wizard" to use wizard mode is a big plus. Oh, and the
> score on the bottom line option, etc.

Oh yes, I know what you mean. I've been thinking myself about
recompiling and patching nethack for some time, but I'm scared
of the work it might represent.
I hope you succeed!

>
> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
> I could try that too...

Oh my, I wasn't even aware there were sys/mac and sys/unix trees,
I have no idea which one I'm using...

chlorine

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Christopher Calzonetti wrote:
> I've been trying to build nethack for myself on my new mac, and it
> compiles and runs, but I'm having some problems with a lot of garbage
> appearing on the screen when objects are thrown, or my character tries
> to run or other rapid movements.
>
> This is a fresh install, with fink added, and using the XCode tools that
> came with the machine.
>
> I tried using both -lcurses and -lncurses, in the src/Makefile, but they
> both seem to have the same problem.
>
> Anyone have any ideas why this might be happening?

I did some googling.

What's your TERM environment variable? Try TERM=xterm-color if it isn't
already set that way.


CronoCloud (Ron Rogers Jr.)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

In article <1124175303.261256.5700@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
chlorine <chlorine@free.fr> wrote:
>
>Christopher Calzonetti wrote:
>> In article <1124133475.119165.231330@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>> chlorine <chlorine@free.fr> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, but I like having extra options set the way I like them. eg.
>> Turning off that annoying mail daemon and mail scrolls. And not having
>> to log in as "wizard" to use wizard mode is a big plus. Oh, and the
>> score on the bottom line option, etc.
>
>Oh yes, I know what you mean. I've been thinking myself about
>recompiling and patching nethack for some time, but I'm scared
>of the work it might represent.
>I hope you succeed!

I can get it to compile well enough, but it always astounds me that
there's so much editing of various .h and makefiles and whatnot.

There are quite a few packages now that have this configure script that
detects all the oddities of one's system, and generates the makefiles
for you. Very automated. Very nice. Does anyone know how much work is
involved in making use of something like that?

>> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
>> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
>> I could try that too...
>
>Oh my, I wasn't even aware there were sys/mac and sys/unix trees,
>I have no idea which one I'm using...

If you build from source, it's fairly easy to figure out. One of the
first things you set is a variable defining what sort of system you're
building for.
--
Christopher Calzonetti, MFCF C&O Software Specialist
mailto:ccalzone@math.uwaterloo.ca phone:+1 519 885-1211 x7516

 

[Chuck]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote in
news:ddqtbo$q19$1@rumours.uwaterloo.ca:

> In article <1124133475.119165.231330@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> chlorine <chlorine@free.fr> wrote:
>>
>>I suppose you know that nethack comes with think, but that you
>>still want to compile it yourself?
>>Does the fink installed version of nethack run properly?
>>Also, for this version, I think a patch is applied before
>>compilation, you might want to look into that.
>
> Yeah, but I like having extra options set the way I like them. eg.
> Turning off that annoying mail daemon and mail scrolls. And not having
> to log in as "wizard" to use wizard mode is a big plus. Oh, and the
> score on the bottom line option, etc.
>
> It looks like nethack isn't included in the stable tree of fink for 10.4
> though. I'll try the unstable tonight and see.
>
> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
> I could try that too...

Use that mac version unless you're actually running linux or the like. If
you're running OS X (or whatever it's called - don't use macs) DEFINITELY use
the mac branch. If you can't follow the install instructions download the mac
binary.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

[The `from' address in this post is real, but I'll never see
anything sent to it, so please don't send any mail replies. --Pat]

Christopher Calzonetti wrote:
> I've been trying to build nethack for myself on my new mac, and it
> compiles and runs, but I'm having some problems with a lot of garbage
> appearing on the screen when objects are thrown, or my character
> tries to run or other rapid movements.
>
> This is a fresh install, with fink added, and using the XCode tools
> that came with the machine.
>
> I tried using both -lcurses and -lncurses, in the src/Makefile, but
> they both seem to have the same problem.
>
> Anyone have any ideas why this might be happening?

One of the notes in Install.unx describes this problem.
It sounds like you've configured the sources to expect `terminfo'
but linked with an implementation of `termcap'. Try commenting
out `#define TERMINFO' inside unixconf.h and then rebuild.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

chucko@nil.car wrote:

> ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote in
>> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
>> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
>> I could try that too...
>
> Use that mac version unless you're actually running linux or the like. If
> you're running OS X (or whatever it's called - don't use macs) DEFINITELY
> use the mac branch.

Why?

--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.

 

[Chuck]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@alumni.sfu.ca> wrote in
news:87zmr6k74s.fsf@alumni.sfu.ca:

> chucko@nil.car wrote:
>
>> ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote in
>>> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
>>> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
>>> I could try that too...
>>
>> Use that mac version unless you're actually running linux or the like. If
>> you're running OS X (or whatever it's called - don't use macs) DEFINITELY
>> use the mac branch.
>
> Why?
>

three reasons: 1. the problems existing for the O.P. 2. OS X's not unix 3.
there is a specific branch just for macs for that reason.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

chucko@nil.car wrote:

> Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@alumni.sfu.ca> wrote in
> news:87zmr6k74s.fsf@alumni.sfu.ca:
>
>> chucko@nil.car wrote:
>>
>>> ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote in
>>>> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
>>>> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
>>>> I could try that too...
>>>
>>> Use that mac version unless you're actually running linux or the
>>> like. If you're running OS X (or whatever it's called - don't use macs)
>>> DEFINITELY use the mac branch.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>
> three reasons: 1. the problems existing for the O.P. 2. OS X's not unix

Since when?


--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.

 

[Chuck]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@alumni.sfu.ca> wrote in
news:873box9uzh.fsf@alumni.sfu.ca:

> chucko@nil.car wrote:
>
>> Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@alumni.sfu.ca> wrote in
>> news:87zmr6k74s.fsf@alumni.sfu.ca:
>>
>>> chucko@nil.car wrote:
>>>
>>>> ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote in
>>>>> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
>>>>> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
>>>>> I could try that too...
>>>>
>>>> Use that mac version unless you're actually running linux or the
>>>> like. If you're running OS X (or whatever it's called - don't use macs)
>>>> DEFINITELY use the mac branch.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>>
>>
>> three reasons: 1. the problems existing for the O.P. 2. OS X's not unix
>
> Since when?
>
>
Then you explain why they have a separate compile branch for it and only one
for other *nices.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

In article <yoxNe.9340$RS.8252@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
P.D.Research <data@pactechdata.com> wrote:
>[The `from' address in this post is real, but I'll never see
>anything sent to it, so please don't send any mail replies. --Pat]
>
>Christopher Calzonetti wrote:
>> I've been trying to build nethack for myself on my new mac, and it
>> compiles and runs, but I'm having some problems with a lot of garbage
>> appearing on the screen when objects are thrown, or my character
> > tries to run or other rapid movements.
>>
>> This is a fresh install, with fink added, and using the XCode tools
> > that came with the machine.
>>
>> I tried using both -lcurses and -lncurses, in the src/Makefile, but
> > they both seem to have the same problem.
>>
>> Anyone have any ideas why this might be happening?
>
> One of the notes in Install.unx describes this problem.
>It sounds like you've configured the sources to expect `terminfo'
>but linked with an implementation of `termcap'. Try commenting
>out `#define TERMINFO' inside unixconf.h and then rebuild.

Nope. I had already done that. On a whim, I tried uncommenting the
TERMINFO derective, and it just failed to build.
--
Christopher Calzonetti, MFCF C&O Software Specialist
mailto:ccalzone@math.uwaterloo.ca phone:+1 519 885-1211 x7516

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

In article <Xns96B4BD33FEC90chuckonilcar@207.35.177.135>,
chuck <chucko@nil.car> wrote:
>ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote in
>news:ddqtbo$q19$1@rumours.uwaterloo.ca:
>
>> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
>> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
>> I could try that too...
>
>Use that mac version unless you're actually running linux or the like. If
>you're running OS X (or whatever it's called - don't use macs) DEFINITELY use
>the mac branch. If you can't follow the install instructions download the mac
>binary.

No good. The mac specific code requires the Metrowerks compiler, which
I don't have.
--
Christopher Calzonetti, MFCF C&O Software Specialist
mailto:ccalzone@math.uwaterloo.ca phone:+1 519 885-1211 x7516

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

In article <Xns96BEB4862A0A4chuckonilcar@207.35.177.135>,
chuck <chucko@nil.car> wrote:
>Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@alumni.sfu.ca> wrote in
>news:873box9uzh.fsf@alumni.sfu.ca:
>
>> chucko@nil.car wrote:
>>
>>> Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@alumni.sfu.ca> wrote in
>>> news:87zmr6k74s.fsf@alumni.sfu.ca:
>>>
>>>> chucko@nil.car wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote in
>>>>>> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
>>>>>> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I suppose
>>>>>> I could try that too...
>>>>>
>>>>> Use that mac version unless you're actually running linux or the
>>>>> like. If you're running OS X (or whatever it's called - don't use macs)
>>>>> DEFINITELY use the mac branch.
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>
>>> three reasons: 1. the problems existing for the O.P. 2. OS X's not unix
>>
>> Since when?
>>
>>
>Then you explain why they have a separate compile branch for it and only one
>for other *nices.

As I just posted in another tree, it's because the mac branch is for a
different compiler.

I've built nethack using the unix branch for older versions of OSX. But
for whatever reason, 10.4 is giving me this display weirdness.
--
Christopher Calzonetti, MFCF C&O Software Specialist
mailto:ccalzone@math.uwaterloo.ca phone:+1 519 885-1211 x7516

 

[Chuck]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote in
news:deo4a6$5cd$1@rumours.uwaterloo.ca:

> In article <Xns96BEB4862A0A4chuckonilcar@207.35.177.135>,
> chuck <chucko@nil.car> wrote:
>>Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@alumni.sfu.ca> wrote in
>>news:873box9uzh.fsf@alumni.sfu.ca:
>>
>>> chucko@nil.car wrote:
>>>
>>>> Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@alumni.sfu.ca> wrote in
>>>> news:87zmr6k74s.fsf@alumni.sfu.ca:
>>>>
>>>>> chucko@nil.car wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote in
>>>>>>> And yes, I know there's a patch, but I'm actually using the sys/unix
>>>>>>> tree, not the sys/mac tree. The sys/mac tree scares me. I
suppose
>>>>>>> I could try that too...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Use that mac version unless you're actually running linux or the
>>>>>> like. If you're running OS X (or whatever it's called - don't use
macs)
>>>>>> DEFINITELY use the mac branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> three reasons: 1. the problems existing for the O.P. 2. OS X's not unix
>>>
>>> Since when?
>>>
>>>
>>Then you explain why they have a separate compile branch for it and only
one
>>for other *nices.
>
> As I just posted in another tree, it's because the mac branch is for a
> different compiler.

Not really correct since (using the msdos version) msdos has the gcc and ms
compiler version whereas the unix version uses gcc as the compiler for many
unices. OS X is not unix, Unix costs money. BIG money. Linux aside getting
unix for a pc is not really cost efficient. Take a look at the cost of a Sun
system sometime and you'll see what I mean. Sure you could argue: but I can
run X windows and top. Well you can do that in NT and 2000 too, but nobody
who had any idea what they were would argue that they're unix. Sorry, I stand
by my original statement. Until someone shows me a reference to a POSIX
compatibility statement for OS X, it just ain't unix.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On 08/26/05 9:39 PM, chuck wrote:

> OS X is not unix,

Yes it is: http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/

> Unix costs money. BIG money.

No it doesn't: http://www.sun.com/download/

--
Chris "Bob" Odorjan - bobnet@canada.com
BobNET - http://www.execulink.com/~bobnet/

 

[Chuck]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

> No good. The mac specific code requires the Metrowerks compiler, which
> I don't have.

What about the binary download:
http://www.nethack.org/v343/ports/download-mac.html? I don't see why you
can't use that. Agreed about metrowerks - $500 for nethack is a bit much.
MAYBE a gcc version will be ported soon.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

chucko@nil.car wrote:

> ccalzone@general.math.uwaterloo.ca (Christopher Calzonetti) wrote:
>> As I just posted in another tree, it's because the mac branch is for a
>> different compiler.
>
> Not really correct since (using the msdos version) msdos has the gcc and
> ms compiler version whereas the unix version uses gcc as the compiler for
> many unices. OS X is not unix, Unix costs money. BIG money. Linux aside
> getting unix for a pc is not really cost efficient. Take a look at the
> cost of a Sun system sometime and you'll see what I mean. Sure you could
> argue: but I can run X windows and top. Well you can do that in NT and
> 2000 too, but nobody who had any idea what they were would argue that
> they're unix. Sorry, I stand by my original statement. Until someone
> shows me a reference to a POSIX compatibility statement for OS X, it just
> ain't unix.

Glad to oblige

http://images.apple.com/macosx/pdf/MacOSX_UNIX_TB.pdf


Also note:
nethack-3.4.3/sys/mac/README
---

Note that the tiled MacOS X port uses the Qt windowport and the UNIX
build system, not this windowport code.

--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.

 

[Chuck]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Chris 'Bob' Odorjan <bobnet@canada.com> wrote in news:2e35u2-
8vb.ln1@bobnet.odorjan.ca:

> On 08/26/05 9:39 PM, chuck wrote:
>
>> OS X is not unix,
>
> Yes it is: http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/
>
>> Unix costs money. BIG money.
>
> No it doesn't: http://www.sun.com/download/
>
> --
> Chris "Bob" Odorjan - bobnet@canada.com
> BobNET - http://www.execulink.com/~bobnet/
>
>

Yeah, but the only source is the open source, none of the solaris stuff which
is why it's free - i.e. no real difference from linux.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On 08/27/05 7:37 PM, chuck wrote:

> Chris 'Bob' Odorjan <bobnet@canada.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Unix costs money. BIG money.
>>
>>No it doesn't: http://www.sun.com/download/
>>
> Yeah, but the only source is the open source, none of the solaris stuff which
> is why it's free - i.e. no real difference from linux.

This would have been a better link to give: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/

Nearly all of Solaris is now open source, although I'm not sure if the
FSF considers the CDDL a "free" license. Not that it matters, we were
talking about free in the no-money sense (which Solaris 10 is), not the
GNU sense...

--
Chris "Bob" Odorjan - bobnet@canada.com
BobNET - http://www.execulink.com/~bobnet/

 

[Chuck]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

ain't unix.
>
> Glad to oblige
>
> http://images.apple.com/macosx/pdf/MacOSX_UNIX_TB.pdf
>
>
> Also note:
> nethack-3.4.3/sys/mac/README
> ---
>
> Note that the tiled MacOS X port uses the Qt windowport and the UNIX
> build system, not this windowport code.
>
which makes your point not really relevant, but that's neither here nor
there. But however close (and based upon) it is to unix, it doesn't say it is
POSIX compliant, in fact makes allusions to the fact that it isn't. That says
to me that it isn't unix. I guess I should have said POSIX compliant in the
first place, but that's running water.

 

[Chuck]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Chris 'Bob' Odorjan <bobnet@canada.com> wrote in news:8cm7u2-
r4d.ln1@bobnet.odorjan.ca:

> On 08/27/05 7:37 PM, chuck wrote:
>
>> Chris 'Bob' Odorjan <bobnet@canada.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Unix costs money. BIG money.
>>>
>>>No it doesn't: http://www.sun.com/download/
>>>
>> Yeah, but the only source is the open source, none of the solaris stuff
which
>> is why it's free - i.e. no real difference from linux.
>
> This would have been a better link to give: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/
>
> Nearly all of Solaris is now open source, although I'm not sure if the
> FSF considers the CDDL a "free" license. Not that it matters, we were
> talking about free in the no-money sense (which Solaris 10 is), not the
> GNU sense...
>

So what about the free Sun computer (I said SYSTEM not OS)? And not a
workstation either (read: smart terminal)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On 08/28/05 3:45 PM, chuck wrote:
> Chris 'Bob' Odorjan <bobnet@canada.com> wrote:
>
>>This would have been a better link to give: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/
>>
> So what about the free Sun computer (I said SYSTEM not OS)? And not a
> workstation either (read: smart terminal)

I got one for free that's sitting in my basement right now. There's a
monitor and keyboard attached but they haven't been on in a few months
(while the computer has), so I figure it doesn't count as a workstation

Besides, Sun sells servers starting at $1000. I could afford to get one
of those, and if I can afford to pay for something, it's not "big money".

--
Chris "Bob" Odorjan - bobnet@canada.com
BobNET - http://www.execulink.com/~bobnet/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Chris Odorjan wrote:

> On 08/28/05 3:45 PM, chuck wrote:
>> Chris 'Bob' Odorjan <bobnet@canada.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This would have been a better link to give:
>>> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/
>>>
>> So what about the free Sun computer (I said SYSTEM not OS)? And not a
>> workstation either (read: smart terminal)
>
> I got one for free that's sitting in my basement right now. There's a
> monitor and keyboard attached but they haven't been on in a few months
> (while the computer has), so I figure it doesn't count as a workstation
>
>
> Besides, Sun sells servers starting at $1000. I could afford to get one
> of those, and if I can afford to pay for something, it's not "big money".

Not to mention the x86 version of Solaris...

--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.