please help with bind 9.1.2

please help with bind 9.1.2

[Gregory Nowak]

Hi all,

I'm setting up bind/named. Everything appears to be fine, except for the TXT and RP records in my master zone file. I have them setup like this.


TXT     "string"
RP     "string"

I've looked through the howtos and docs, and this cyntax appears to be correct, although it is not mentioned for theese options very much. When I run named, it tells me there is a cyntax error with theese lines, which I can't find. Should theese records be in a specific section of the zone file? If so, then where? Thanks for any help in advance.
Greg

Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Kirk Reiser]

>From your example they look like they start at the beginning of the
line which they may not do in a dns entry.  They should start at least
one tabstop in.

  Kirk

-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061

Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Gregory Nowak]

Thanks, now I've got 5 spaces at the beginnning of both lines. This produced a change, but it's still not what it should be. Specifically, the cyntax error messages have been replaced with unexpected token messages. Is there anything else I should check? Thanks again.
Greg


On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 05:41:41PM -0400, Kirk Reiser wrote:
> >From your example they look like they start at the beginning of the
> line which they may not do in a dns entry.  They should start at least
> one tabstop in.
> 
>   Kirk
> 
> -- 
> 
> Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
> e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
> phone: (519) 661-3061
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Brian Borowski]

Indentation is irrelevant in the configuration files for bind, as far as I
know.  You can lookup most of what you need in the ARM  Bind
Administrator's reference manual, and you can use named-checkconf to assist
in config (named.conf) file checking and named-checkzone to help diagnose
zone configuration problems.

Brian Borowski


On 3 May 2002, Kirk Reiser wrote:

> >From your example they look like they start at the beginning of the
> line which they may not do in a dns entry.  They should start at least
> one tabstop in.
>
>   Kirk
>
> --
>
> Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
> e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
> phone: (519) 661-3061
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Raul A. Gallegos]

Why do you want to use those entries anyway?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gregory Nowak" <gnowak1@uic.edu>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 4:28 PM
Subject: please help with bind 9.1.2


> Hi all,
>
> I'm setting up bind/named. Everything appears to be fine, except for the
TXT and RP records in my master zone file. I have them setup like this.
>
>
> TXT     "string"
> RP     "string"
>
> I've looked through the howtos and docs, and this cyntax appears to be
correct, although it is not mentioned for theese options very much. When I
run named, it tells me there is a cyntax error with theese lines, which I
can't find. Should theese records be in a specific section of the zone file?
If so, then where? Thanks for any help in advance.
> Greg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Gregory Nowak]

Because granitecanyon.com (my backup dns) askes that I do so.
Greg


On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 04:53:47PM -0500, Raul A. Gallegos wrote:
> Why do you want to use those entries anyway?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gregory Nowak" <gnowak1@uic.edu>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 4:28 PM
> Subject: please help with bind 9.1.2
> 
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm setting up bind/named. Everything appears to be fine, except for the
> TXT and RP records in my master zone file. I have them setup like this.
> >
> >
> > TXT     "string"
> > RP     "string"
> >
> > I've looked through the howtos and docs, and this cyntax appears to be
> correct, although it is not mentioned for theese options very much. When I
> run named, it tells me there is a cyntax error with theese lines, which I
> can't find. Should theese records be in a specific section of the zone file?
> If so, then where? Thanks for any help in advance.
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[William F. Acker WB2FLW +1-303-777-8123]

Hi gang,

     I'd like to renew a plee that Chuck made a few months ago about the
use of spellcheckers.  In this example, "these" is spelled t h e s e not t
h e e s e.



          Thanks.
          Bill


On Fri, 3 May 2002, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I'm setting up bind/named. Everything appears to be fine, except for the TXT and RP records in my master zone file. I have them setup like this.
> 
> 
> TXT     "string"
> RP     "string"
> 
> I've looked through the howtos and docs, and this cyntax appears to be correct, although it is not mentioned for theese options very much. When I run named, it tells me there is a cyntax error with theese lines, which I can't find. Should theese records be in a specific section of the zone file? If so, then where? Thanks for any help in advance.
> Greg
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[William F. Acker WB2FLW +1-303-777-8123]

And my previous message is a good example of what can happen when the
CTRL-X is pressed instead of CTRL-T


On Fri, 3 May 2002, William F. Acker WB2FLW +1-303-777-8123 wrote:

> Hi gang,
> 
>      I'd like to renew a plee that Chuck made a few months ago about the
> use of spellcheckers.  In this example, "these" is spelled t h e s e not t
> h e e s e.
> 
> 

spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Gregory Nowak]

Apologies. Sometimes I become more focused on the problem I'm trying to describe, rather then on what I type.
Greg


On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 06:28:12PM -0600, William F. Acker WB2FLW +1-303-777-8123 wrote:
> Hi gang,
> 
>      I'd like to renew a plee that Chuck made a few months ago about the
> use of spellcheckers.  In this example, "these" is spelled t h e s e not t
> h e e s e.
> 
> 
> 
>           Thanks.
>           Bill
> 
> 
> On Fri, 3 May 2002, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I'm setting up bind/named. Everything appears to be fine, except for the TXT and RP records in my master zone file. I have them setup like this.
> > 
> > 
> > TXT     "string"
> > RP     "string"
> > 
> > I've looked through the howtos and docs, and this cyntax appears to be correct, although it is not mentioned for theese options very much. When I run named, it tells me there is a cyntax error with theese lines, which I can't find. Should theese records be in a specific section of the zone file? If so, then where? Thanks for any help in advance.
> > Greg
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Ann Parsons]

Hi all,

Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.  

Ann P.

-- 
			Ann K. Parsons  
email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
"All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi gang,
I have never felt more like a retired school teacher than I have
since this thread started! <smile>

I have found that using a spellchecker routinely makes its use a
lot more tolerable than just using it once or twice to see if it
works or not. It is a little like defragging a disk. If you only
do it once a month or once a year it takes forever. But if you
run it in an autoexec.bat file (remember those?) so it runs on
every system startup, you hardly notice it at all.

I have configured my mail program to use an alternative editor
implicitly (i.e., always, without my asking) and instead of
specifying an actual editor, I specify a very simple script. That
script first runs the editor I want to use, and immediately
afterward, it runs the spell checker. So when I compose an email
message and his the editor's exit key I find myself in the spell
checker. I have learned to quit checking as soon as I get to any
included messages.

In addition to satisfying my own anal retentive tendencies, the
nice thing about a well spelled message is that the voice
synthesizer behaves much much better.

Okay everybody, class dismissed!

Chuck

On Sat, 4 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
> even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
> extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
> their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
> interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
> checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
> can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.
>
> Ann P.
>
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waning Crescent (49% of Full)

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Ann Parsons]

Hi all,

<smile>  Chuck, you're absolutely wright.  I should run ispell more
often than I do.  I will say, though, that my spelling has improved
greatly since I've been using computers.  

I don't have your talent, so need to remember to run ispell.  Thanks
for the reminder, though.

Ann P.

-- 
			Ann K. Parsons  
email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
"All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Janina Sajka]

Dear Professor:

Did you put the script on the blackboard? <grin>

Maybe I can't see it from the back row here? <bigger grin>

OK, I know you posted it some months ago, but that was a different semester and a different class, right?

PS: Is it on the web site? I rather think it should/could be.

On Sat, 4 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

> Hi gang,
> I have never felt more like a retired school teacher than I have
> since this thread started! <smile>
> 
> I have found that using a spellchecker routinely makes its use a
> lot more tolerable than just using it once or twice to see if it
> works or not. It is a little like defragging a disk. If you only
> do it once a month or once a year it takes forever. But if you
> run it in an autoexec.bat file (remember those?) so it runs on
> every system startup, you hardly notice it at all.
> 
> I have configured my mail program to use an alternative editor
> implicitly (i.e., always, without my asking) and instead of
> specifying an actual editor, I specify a very simple script. That
> script first runs the editor I want to use, and immediately
> afterward, it runs the spell checker. So when I compose an email
> message and his the editor's exit key I find myself in the spell
> checker. I have learned to quit checking as soon as I get to any
> included messages.
> 
> In addition to satisfying my own anal retentive tendencies, the
> nice thing about a well spelled message is that the voice
> synthesizer behaves much much better.
> 
> Okay everybody, class dismissed!
> 
> Chuck
> 
> On Sat, 4 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
> > even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
> > extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
> > their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
> > interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
> > checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
> > can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.
> >
> > Ann P.
> >
> >
> 
> 

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175

Chair, Accessibility SIG
Open Electronic Book Forum (OEBF)
http://www.openebook.org

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Charles Hallenbeck]

<smile> - I have not posted it anywhere, it is hardly worth it,
it is really very trivial. Here it is:

----------
#!/bin/bash
/usr/local/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
/usr/bin/ispell -x $1
----------

You can call this script anything you wish - I call it "nanosp" -
but make sure it has execute permissions and put it on your path
somewhere. If you do not like nano you could substitute pico
instead, but you had better check the parameters to make sure
they are right.

Chuck

BTW - I wish you visually impaired students would not sit way in
the back all the time!

On Sat, 4 May 2002, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Dear Professor:
>
> Did you put the script on the blackboard? <grin>
>
> Maybe I can't see it from the back row here? <bigger grin>
>
> OK, I know you posted it some months ago, but that was a different semester and a different class, right?
>
> PS: Is it on the web site? I rather think it should/could be.
>
> On Sat, 4 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
>
> > Hi gang,
> > I have never felt more like a retired school teacher than I have
> > since this thread started! <smile>
> >
> > I have found that using a spellchecker routinely makes its use a
> > lot more tolerable than just using it once or twice to see if it
> > works or not. It is a little like defragging a disk. If you only
> > do it once a month or once a year it takes forever. But if you
> > run it in an autoexec.bat file (remember those?) so it runs on
> > every system startup, you hardly notice it at all.
> >
> > I have configured my mail program to use an alternative editor
> > implicitly (i.e., always, without my asking) and instead of
> > specifying an actual editor, I specify a very simple script. That
> > script first runs the editor I want to use, and immediately
> > afterward, it runs the spell checker. So when I compose an email
> > message and his the editor's exit key I find myself in the spell
> > checker. I have learned to quit checking as soon as I get to any
> > included messages.
> >
> > In addition to satisfying my own anal retentive tendencies, the
> > nice thing about a well spelled message is that the voice
> > synthesizer behaves much much better.
> >
> > Okay everybody, class dismissed!
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> > On Sat, 4 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
> > > even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
> > > extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
> > > their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
> > > interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
> > > checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
> > > can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.
> > >
> > > Ann P.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waning Crescent (45% of Full)

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

['Georgina']

Hi

Regretably, the script doesn't work on this woody system.  The 'which
nano' shows that the path needs editing but this is not the only issue.

Perhaps a few paths could be offered:

# For xxxx users, uncomment the following line:
#/usr/local/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
Debian users umconnent the line below and leave the one above commented
out!
/usr/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1

Yesterday, I came across the path declaration statements which are
really cool.  But perhaps a little excessive for such a script.

But it would look like this!

#!/bin/sh
# Edit the following to match your system.
# You can find the correct values by typing at a shell prompt:
# which nano
# and
# which ispell
# the correct values will be displayed
$NANO=/usr/bin/nano
$ISPELL=/usr/bin/ispell
$NANO -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
$ISPELL -x $1

HTH

Gena



Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org

><smile> - I have not posted it anywhere, it is hardly worth it,
>it is really very trivial. Here it is:
>
>----------
>#!/bin/bash
>/usr/local/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
>/usr/bin/ispell -x $1
>----------
>
>You can call this script anything you wish - I call it "nanosp" -
>but make sure it has execute permissions and put it on your path
>somewhere. If you do not like nano you could substitute pico
>instead, but you had better check the parameters to make sure
>they are right.
>
>Chuck
>
>BTW - I wish you visually impaired students would not sit way in
>the back all the time!
>
>On Sat, 4 May 2002, Janina Sajka wrote:
>
>> Dear Professor:
>>
>> Did you put the script on the blackboard? <grin>
>>
>> Maybe I can't see it from the back row here? <bigger grin>
>>
>> OK, I know you posted it some months ago, but that was a different semester 
and a different class, right?
>>
>> PS: Is it on the web site? I rather think it should/could be.
>>
>> On Sat, 4 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
>>
>> > Hi gang,
>> > I have never felt more like a retired school teacher than I have
>> > since this thread started! <smile>
>> >
>> > I have found that using a spellchecker routinely makes its use a
>> > lot more tolerable than just using it once or twice to see if it
>> > works or not. It is a little like defragging a disk. If you only
>> > do it once a month or once a year it takes forever. But if you
>> > run it in an autoexec.bat file (remember those?) so it runs on
>> > every system startup, you hardly notice it at all.
>> >
>> > I have configured my mail program to use an alternative editor
>> > implicitly (i.e., always, without my asking) and instead of
>> > specifying an actual editor, I specify a very simple script. That
>> > script first runs the editor I want to use, and immediately
>> > afterward, it runs the spell checker. So when I compose an email
>> > message and his the editor's exit key I find myself in the spell
>> > checker. I have learned to quit checking as soon as I get to any
>> > included messages.
>> >
>> > In addition to satisfying my own anal retentive tendencies, the
>> > nice thing about a well spelled message is that the voice
>> > synthesizer behaves much much better.
>> >
>> > Okay everybody, class dismissed!
>> >
>> > Chuck
>> >
>> > On Sat, 4 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
>> > > even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
>> > > extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
>> > > their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
>> > > interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
>> > > checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
>> > > can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.
>> > >
>> > > Ann P.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>-- 
>Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
>The Moon is Waning Crescent (45% of Full)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Thanks, Gena,

I understand Debian generally deprecates the use of /usr/local,
so your suggestions are well made. It is possible that the
solution might even be easier ... it is possible that the path to
the two utilities nano and ispell might even be omitted
altogether. I have not tried that though.

This script is merely what works on my system, and has not been
placed on any web site. It seemed to me to be way too simple for
publication.

Chuck

On Sun, 5 May 2002, 'Georgina' wrote:

> Hi
>
> Regretably, the script doesn't work on this woody system.  The 'which
> nano' shows that the path needs editing but this is not the only issue.
>
> Perhaps a few paths could be offered:
>
> # For xxxx users, uncomment the following line:
> #/usr/local/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> Debian users umconnent the line below and leave the one above commented
> out!
> /usr/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
>
> Yesterday, I came across the path declaration statements which are
> really cool.  But perhaps a little excessive for such a script.
>
> But it would look like this!
>
> #!/bin/sh
> # Edit the following to match your system.
> # You can find the correct values by typing at a shell prompt:
> # which nano
> # and
> # which ispell
> # the correct values will be displayed
> $NANO=/usr/bin/nano
> $ISPELL=/usr/bin/ispell
> $NANO -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> $ISPELL -x $1
>
> HTH
>
> Gena
>
>
>
> Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
>
> ><smile> - I have not posted it anywhere, it is hardly worth it,
> >it is really very trivial. Here it is:
> >
> >----------
> >#!/bin/bash
> >/usr/local/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> >/usr/bin/ispell -x $1
> >----------
> >
> >You can call this script anything you wish - I call it "nanosp" -
> >but make sure it has execute permissions and put it on your path
> >somewhere. If you do not like nano you could substitute pico
> >instead, but you had better check the parameters to make sure
> >they are right.
> >
> >Chuck
> >
> >BTW - I wish you visually impaired students would not sit way in
> >the back all the time!
> >
> >On Sat, 4 May 2002, Janina Sajka wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Professor:
> >>
> >> Did you put the script on the blackboard? <grin>
> >>
> >> Maybe I can't see it from the back row here? <bigger grin>
> >>
> >> OK, I know you posted it some months ago, but that was a different semester
> and a different class, right?
> >>
> >> PS: Is it on the web site? I rather think it should/could be.
> >>
> >> On Sat, 4 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi gang,
> >> > I have never felt more like a retired school teacher than I have
> >> > since this thread started! <smile>
> >> >
> >> > I have found that using a spellchecker routinely makes its use a
> >> > lot more tolerable than just using it once or twice to see if it
> >> > works or not. It is a little like defragging a disk. If you only
> >> > do it once a month or once a year it takes forever. But if you
> >> > run it in an autoexec.bat file (remember those?) so it runs on
> >> > every system startup, you hardly notice it at all.
> >> >
> >> > I have configured my mail program to use an alternative editor
> >> > implicitly (i.e., always, without my asking) and instead of
> >> > specifying an actual editor, I specify a very simple script. That
> >> > script first runs the editor I want to use, and immediately
> >> > afterward, it runs the spell checker. So when I compose an email
> >> > message and his the editor's exit key I find myself in the spell
> >> > checker. I have learned to quit checking as soon as I get to any
> >> > included messages.
> >> >
> >> > In addition to satisfying my own anal retentive tendencies, the
> >> > nice thing about a well spelled message is that the voice
> >> > synthesizer behaves much much better.
> >> >
> >> > Okay everybody, class dismissed!
> >> >
> >> > Chuck
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, 4 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi all,
> >> > >
> >> > > Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
> >> > > even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
> >> > > extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
> >> > > their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
> >> > > interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
> >> > > checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
> >> > > can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.
> >> > >
> >> > > Ann P.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >--
> >Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> >The Moon is Waning Crescent (45% of Full)
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Speakup mailing list
> >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waning Crescent (37% of Full)

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Janina Sajka]

Chuck:

I had trouble using the script initially--even though I quickly
dealt with the path issues. Somehow, the situation seems to have
cleared itself up overnight. Does that make any sense to anyone?
All I know is that it didn't work yesterday, and I left for
dinner. Today, when I came back to my machine, it was working.

Go figure.

On Sun, 5 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

> Thanks, Gena,
> 
> I understand Debian generally deprecates the use of /usr/local,
> so your suggestions are well made. It is possible that the
> solution might even be easier ... it is possible that the path to
> the two utilities nano and ispell might even be omitted
> altogether. I have not tried that though.
> 
> This script is merely what works on my system, and has not been
> placed on any web site. It seemed to me to be way too simple for
> publication.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> On Sun, 5 May 2002, 'Georgina' wrote:
> 
> > Hi
> >
> > Regretably, the script doesn't work on this woody system.  The 'which
> > nano' shows that the path needs editing but this is not the only issue.
> >
> > Perhaps a few paths could be offered:
> >
> > # For xxxx users, uncomment the following line:
> > #/usr/local/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> > Debian users umconnent the line below and leave the one above commented
> > out!
> > /usr/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> >
> > Yesterday, I came across the path declaration statements which are
> > really cool.  But perhaps a little excessive for such a script.
> >
> > But it would look like this!
> >
> > #!/bin/sh
> > # Edit the following to match your system.
> > # You can find the correct values by typing at a shell prompt:
> > # which nano
> > # and
> > # which ispell
> > # the correct values will be displayed
> > $NANO=/usr/bin/nano
> > $ISPELL=/usr/bin/ispell
> > $NANO -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> > $ISPELL -x $1
> >
> > HTH
> >
> > Gena
> >
> >
> >
> > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> >
> > ><smile> - I have not posted it anywhere, it is hardly worth it,
> > >it is really very trivial. Here it is:
> > >
> > >----------
> > >#!/bin/bash
> > >/usr/local/bin/nano -t -R -k -p -x -r65 -s "ispell -x" $1
> > >/usr/bin/ispell -x $1
> > >----------
> > >
> > >You can call this script anything you wish - I call it "nanosp" -
> > >but make sure it has execute permissions and put it on your path
> > >somewhere. If you do not like nano you could substitute pico
> > >instead, but you had better check the parameters to make sure
> > >they are right.
> > >
> > >Chuck
> > >
> > >BTW - I wish you visually impaired students would not sit way in
> > >the back all the time!
> > >
> > >On Sat, 4 May 2002, Janina Sajka wrote:
> > >
> > >> Dear Professor:
> > >>
> > >> Did you put the script on the blackboard? <grin>
> > >>
> > >> Maybe I can't see it from the back row here? <bigger grin>
> > >>
> > >> OK, I know you posted it some months ago, but that was a different semester
> > and a different class, right?
> > >>
> > >> PS: Is it on the web site? I rather think it should/could be.
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, 4 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi gang,
> > >> > I have never felt more like a retired school teacher than I have
> > >> > since this thread started! <smile>
> > >> >
> > >> > I have found that using a spellchecker routinely makes its use a
> > >> > lot more tolerable than just using it once or twice to see if it
> > >> > works or not. It is a little like defragging a disk. If you only
> > >> > do it once a month or once a year it takes forever. But if you
> > >> > run it in an autoexec.bat file (remember those?) so it runs on
> > >> > every system startup, you hardly notice it at all.
> > >> >
> > >> > I have configured my mail program to use an alternative editor
> > >> > implicitly (i.e., always, without my asking) and instead of
> > >> > specifying an actual editor, I specify a very simple script. That
> > >> > script first runs the editor I want to use, and immediately
> > >> > afterward, it runs the spell checker. So when I compose an email
> > >> > message and his the editor's exit key I find myself in the spell
> > >> > checker. I have learned to quit checking as soon as I get to any
> > >> > included messages.
> > >> >
> > >> > In addition to satisfying my own anal retentive tendencies, the
> > >> > nice thing about a well spelled message is that the voice
> > >> > synthesizer behaves much much better.
> > >> >
> > >> > Okay everybody, class dismissed!
> > >> >
> > >> > Chuck
> > >> >
> > >> > On Sat, 4 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi all,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
> > >> > > even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
> > >> > > extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
> > >> > > their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
> > >> > > interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
> > >> > > checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
> > >> > > can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Ann P.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >--
> > >Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > >The Moon is Waning Crescent (45% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Speakup mailing list
> > >Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175

Chair, Accessibility SIG
Open Electronic Book Forum (OEBF)
http://www.openebook.org

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Toby Fisher]

On Sun, 5 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

> Thanks, Gena,
>
> I understand Debian generally deprecates the use of /usr/local,
> so your suggestions are well made. It is possible that the
> solution might even be easier ... it is possible that the path to
> the two utilities nano and ispell might even be omitted
> altogether. I have not tried that though.

Yes, I believe it can.  The often, in my view, under-estimated command
substitution can be used here I th9ink.

For example, if I type without the quotes of course:
"echo -e `which ispell`"
I get:
/usr/bin/ispell.

Therefore you could simply use 2 command substitutions to obtain the paths
for the commands on your system, as the command switches could still be
used outside the substitution, a simple example is shown below, again omit
the quotes:

"`which pico` -z test.txt"

Cheers.

-- 
Toby Fisher	Email: toby@g0ucu.freeserve.co.uk
Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272	Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
ICQ: #61744808
   Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
   See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Charles Hallenbeck]

After this exchange yesterday I simply removed all path
information from the two lines and the script still works fine.


On Tue, 7 May 2002, Toby Fisher wrote:

> On Sun, 5 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Gena,
> >
> > I understand Debian generally deprecates the use of /usr/local,
> > so your suggestions are well made. It is possible that the
> > solution might even be easier ... it is possible that the path to
> > the two utilities nano and ispell might even be omitted
> > altogether. I have not tried that though.
>
> Yes, I believe it can.  The often, in my view, under-estimated command
> substitution can be used here I th9ink.
>
> For example, if I type without the quotes of course:
> "echo -e `which ispell`"
> I get:
> /usr/bin/ispell.
>
> Therefore you could simply use 2 command substitutions to obtain the paths
> for the commands on your system, as the command switches could still be
> used outside the substitution, a simple example is shown below, again omit
> the quotes:
>
> "`which pico` -z test.txt"
>
> Cheers.
>
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waning Crescent (22% of Full)

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Steve Holmes]

On my slackware 8 box, I can't seem to find the ispell program.  Might
anyone know off the top of their head which slack package ispell could
be in.  I'm sure it's here some place but just a tad lazy right now to
browse through all the slackware packages to find it.  Once I get that
up, I can then use the emacs spell-region and spell-buffer commands
successfully; right now, they fail because they can't find the
necessary file.

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Steve -
Here is where to fine ispell on your Slackware 8.0 distribution:

cd1/slakware/ap1/ispell.tgz

I have found that neither pico nor nano know how to use it unless
you include the "-s" option when you run them, even after ispell
is installed.

HTH - Chuck

On Sun, 5 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:

> On my slackware 8 box, I can't seem to find the ispell program.  Might
> anyone know off the top of their head which slack package ispell could
> be in.  I'm sure it's here some place but just a tad lazy right now to
> browse through all the slackware packages to find it.  Once I get that
> up, I can then use the emacs spell-region and spell-buffer commands
> successfully; right now, they fail because they can't find the
> necessary file.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waning Crescent (30% of Full)

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[William F. Acker WB2FLW +1-303-777-8123]

Hi,

     Old Bil?  I remind you again that I'm three whole months younger than
you are. <great big grin>

   I'm not such a stickler for spelling, but as chuck points out, the 
synth is 
much more pleasant to listen to when there aren't spellos in the text.  
Creative misspelling can be lots of fun such as when you refer to a 
machine 
with two operating systems as "d u e l" boot, or when more than a few of 
us call that other OS "w i n d o z e".

     I have an Audapter.  It can even tell that a certain bloke from
down-under writes the letter U instead of spelling out the word "y o u".  
I'm not advocating that folks learn to spell, heck, I never did.  But
modern mailers make it so easy to fix the errors almost automatically.  I
can second what Chuck says about how running the spelchecker often makes
it run faster. <grin>



          73.
          Bill


On Sat, 4 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
> even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
> extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
> their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
> interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
> checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
> can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.  
> 
> Ann P.
> 
> 

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[Keith Watson]

Um, so B i l, when did you change your name?

On 11:21 AM, William F. Acker WB2FLW +1-303-777-8123 wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>      Old Bil?  I remind you again that I'm three whole months younger than
> you are. <great big grin>
> 
>    I'm not such a stickler for spelling, but as chuck points out, the 
> synth is 
> much more pleasant to listen to when there aren't spellos in the text.  
> Creative misspelling can be lots of fun such as when you refer to a 
> machine 
> with two operating systems as "d u e l" boot, or when more than a few of 
> us call that other OS "w i n d o z e".
> 
>      I have an Audapter.  It can even tell that a certain bloke from
> down-under writes the letter U instead of spelling out the word "y o u".  
> I'm not advocating that folks learn to spell, heck, I never did.  But
> modern mailers make it so easy to fix the errors almost automatically.  I
> can second what Chuck says about how running the spelchecker often makes
> it run faster. <grin>
> 
> 
> 
>           73.
>           Bill
> 
> 
> On Sat, 4 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Now, old Bill, I fully admit that these isn't spelled like cheese,
> > even though it sounds like it ought to be.  However, unless there's an
> > extreme blooper like the poster who assured a budding concern that
> > their registry personnel must be on "autopilate", I think we can
> > interpret pretty well.  I do agree that folks should use spell
> > checkers, but since I don't myself, at least not within email msgs, I
> > can't throw any stones.  The walls of my house are made of glass.  
> > 
> > Ann P.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: spelling, was: Re: please help with bind 9.1.2

[William F. Acker WB2FLW +1-303-777-8123]

Keith
A typo.  Interesting that the spell-checker doesn't flag it.


On Sat, 4 May 2002, Keith Watson wrote:

> Um, so B i l, when did you change your name?
>