Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!merlin
From: merlin@hqda-ai.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Long included articles (was memory protection)
Message-ID: <266@hqda-ai.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 7-Feb-87 14:54:34 EST
Article-I.D.: hqda-ai.266
Posted: Sat Feb  7 14:54:34 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Feb-87 07:54:37 EST
References: <299@netxcom.UUCP>
Organization: Army AI Center, Pentagon
Lines: 32
Summary: Let's clean our postings, please.

In article <299@netxcom.UUCP>, beattie@netxcom.UUCP (Brian Beattie) writes:

     [ 43 lines of included material deleted ]

> Actually if you arange your code so data follows (which MINIX does)
> since all jumps/calls/rets (except the long vesion) are CS:OFFSET
> you may jump into your data, but not outside of your process space.

     [ 6 lines of signature deleted ]

     Brian's article showed on my system as 52 lines.  3 lines
were his comments to 43 lines of material from previous articles.
Brian made a valid point, but I had to scan (and pay to transmit)
two screenfuls of STUFF I'VE ALREADY READ just to get to his
information.

     I cite Brian's article here as a convenient example, but I've
seen a lot of this, and I don't want anyone to think I'm picking
on Brian in particular.

     If you post a followup, you SHOULD edit out everything that
you're not making specific comment about.  You don't even have to
include the original article at all!  The news software puts a
References line in the header.  In case you reader didn't see the
original, its still possible to go back and find it later.

     Please, folks, lets clean up our postings.
-- 
	David S. Hayes, The Merlin of Avalon
	PhoneNet:	(202) 694-6900
	ARPA:		merlin%hqda-ai.uucp@smoke.brl.mil
	UUCP:		...!seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!merlin