From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Mar 21 08:20:49 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA24148
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 08:20:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dg-rtp.dg.com (dg-rtp.rtp.dg.com [128.222.1.2])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA24141
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 08:20:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by dg-rtp.dg.com (5.4R3.10/dg-rtp-v02)
	id AA09802; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 11:20:04 -0500
Received: from ponds by dg-rtp.dg.com.rtp.dg.com; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 11:20 EST
Received: from lakes.water.net (lakes [10.0.0.3]) by ponds.water.net (8.8.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA10662; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 06:28:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.water.net (8.8.3/8.6.9) id GAA01221; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 06:33:36 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 06:33:36 -0500 (EST)
From: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com>
Message-Id: <199703211133.GAA01221@lakes.water.net>
To: ponds!lightside.com!jehamby, ponds!lambert.org!terry
Subject: Re: Barb problem, FOUND
Cc: ponds!freebsd.org!hackers
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> > From ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com Thu Mar 20 21:51:25 1997
> > Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 19:55:11 -0500 (EST)
> > From: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com>
> > To: ponds!village.org!imp@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU,
>         ponds!lambert.org!terry@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU
> > Subject: Re: Barb problem, FOUND
> > Cc: ponds!freebsd.org!hackers@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU,
>         ponds!wgold.demon.co.uk!james@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU
> > X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
> > X-UIDL: e5e3cfd6091cbeac8d85ac00f2302abc
> 
> Wow, your mailer did SOMETHING funky to the return addresses (UUCP gremlins?)!  
> :)

 Yes - the "funny" part is the @ucbvx.Berkeley.EDU - that machine
doesn't even exist anymore.  However; the example sendmail.cf scripts
for UUCP support reference it.  I'm guessing some intermediate hop
incorrectly did that rewrite.  I'd love to figure out just exactly
which one...


> 
> >  Hey!  As manager of the SAS/C compilers I object to that :-) :-)
> > [We like to keep our skeletons in the closet, thank you.]
> > 
> > 
> >  Of course; you likely mean the ooolllddd ones - not the spiffy new
> > ones we have now :-) :-)   We still use and actively maintain
> > those compilers - we just don't sell them to the public.  The SAS
> > system on PC, mainframe (370 - MVS and VMS), MAC (68K and PowerPC)
> > is built with compilers that owe their existence to that offering.
> > [We still 'maintain' the amiga compiler via updates on-the-net.  But,
> > you can't buy that one any more either.]
> 
> Funny, I bought SAS/C 6.5 for Amiga a few years back, through the SAS book 
> department.  Are you sure they've stopped selling it?  Don't know what I'm gonna 
> do with it now, but it's nice to have around (the manuals are a great reference 
> for libc stuff, at any rate).

 Yes - quite sure.  We continued to sell it from the book department
until we ran out of stock.  We ran out a few months ago.  We continue
to "support" it, albeit unofficially, via updates to that product.
[e.g. Some recent updates were done to add a builtin rotate function
for speeding up encryption/decryption.]

 We're considering a new C++ update to add templates - would that
be worthwhile?  If so, would you need automatic instantiation or
would explicit instantiation be adequate?

	- Dave Rivers -