>>>>> "Bill" == Bill Payne <billpayn@freenet.columbus.oh.us> writes:
Bill> I was wondering if ardi.com is up yet?? Or if you have any
Bill> Idea when it will be up?? Thanks.......
Not yet. I'd guess within two weeks. Until then, everyone can still
grab stuff from ftp.cs.unm.edu:/pub/ardi.
-Mat
From owner-executor Tue Feb 21 07:40:48 1995
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by nacm.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id HAA12977 for executor-outgoing; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 07:40:48 -0800
Received: from ub.d.umn.edu (ub.d.umn.edu [131.212.134.2]) by nacm.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id HAA12972 for <executor@nacm.com>; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 07:40:43 -0800
Received: (from thudoba@localhost) by ub.d.umn.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id JAA23450 for executor@nacm.com; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 09:39:43 -0600
From: Tim Hudoba <thudoba@d.umn.edu>
Message-Id: <199502211539.JAA23450@ub.d.umn.edu>
Subject: Am I still on this list?
To: executor@nacm.com
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 09:39:41 -0600 (CST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 987
Sender: owner-executor@nacm.com
Precedence: bulk
Hello all,
I have not been receiving mail from this list so I'm wondering if
either it's slow right now or if I have been removed from the list.
So if there is some kind hearted soul who could email me if they get
this letter.
I'm not sure, but if I have to resubscribe do I send the "sub message to
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by nacm.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id PAA20478 for executor-outgoing; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 15:18:49 -0800
Received: from sloth.swcp.com (sloth.swcp.com [198.59.115.25]) by nacm.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA20469 for <executor@nacm.com>; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 15:18:44 -0800
Received: from iclone.UUCP (uucp@localhost) by sloth.swcp.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with UUCP id QAA17770 for nacm.com!executor; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 16:21:10 -0700
Received: by mailhost (nextstep Smail3.1.29.0 #11)
id m0rh3nq-000YbCC; Tue, 21 Feb 95 16:15 MST
Message-Id: <m0rh3nq-000YbCC@mailhost>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 95 16:15 MST
From: ctm@ardi.com (Clifford T. Matthews)
To: executor@nacm.com
Subject: ftp.ardi.com + misc. status
Sender: owner-executor@nacm.com
Precedence: bulk
Hi Folks,
It's taken a while, but "ftp.ardi.com" and "www.ardi.com" are in the
process of being born. Right now we have an internet address, and
have the names registered, but our side of the network isn't fully set
up. Over the next couple of days we'll be experimenting with
different hardware/software configurations so connections are going to
be very spotty at best.
I'll let you know when we believe our server is fairly solid.
We'll be starting out running CSLIP over a 28.8k modem, so the
throughput will be fairly limited. We'll try to get some volunteers
to mirror our site and make the list of mirrors readily accessible,
and giving the mirror sites higher priority than individual users.
Eventually everything in ftp.cs.unm.edu:/pub/ardi will be moved to
ftp.ardi.com and we'll also start offering a set of directories that
contain programs that are known to work with Executor. We've had a
few people offer us help constructing our WWW page, but I don't know
enough about WWW to tell you just what will be in it.
In other news, we're modifying Executor/DOS and Executor/Linux to be
more like Executor/NEXTSTEP. What we'll make available will be a
fully functional copy that initially starts out in demo mode, but that
can have the demo restriction removed once you have a serial number
and an authorization key. No more transmog files to worry about.
People who already own Executor/DOS and Executor/Linux will be able to
get keys just by calling us, or sending us e-mail with a telephone or
FAX number for us to leave the information on, although the DOS users
will have had to have sent in their registration cards.
We're trying to get some help from NeXT that will allow us to bring
Executor/NEXTSTEP up to the level of Executor/DOS and Executor/Linux.
The problem is that with our new low-level color routines we *really*
need assistance from NeXT to make Executor/NEXTSTEP perform nicely.
We've had good response from NeXT in the past, but right now it's not
clear who we should be talking to. We've sent out many e-mail feelers
but haven't gotten much of a response.
We know that Executor/DOS 1.99h desperately needs an update and we