read new nonstop follow 86989 24-APR 14:52 Programmers Den RE: GCC2 ver 2.5.8 (Re: Msg 86987) From: MITHELEN To: NIMITZ Ya.. that happens some times (Delphi thinks you have uploaded all the files) The complete submission is now in the new uploads database. -*- 86991 24-APR 15:39 OSK Applications RE: PGP for OSK? (Re: Msg 86959) From: 01GEN40 To: ALL I was somewhat surprised to see a thread on this subject here in the OS-9 forum. About 6 weeks (or more) ago when I first learned of PGP, I logged into a local BBS here in San Diego and D/Led my own personal copy of it. I have never liked the idea of censorship for the masses, and that is exactly what this "Wonderful Government" of ours has in mind to do. They say it is for the "Greater Good" that they want to catch the criminal and cut down on crime! What I do not see is how "spying" on the GOOD is going to catch the bad! After looking at this program and reading about it, I really cannot see how... Please disregard this last statement. My posit ronics wandered a bit or 2 and had no relevance to this message. I must go, more messages to read. Have not been out here for more than a year, so you can imagine the large number to be read. LONG LIVE OS-9! 01gen40@delphi.com -*- 86999 24-APR 20:11 OSK Applications RE: PGP for OSK? (Re: Msg 86991) From: DSRTFOX To: 01GEN40 (NR) The clipper chip doesn't make it any easier for the government to "spy" on individuals. It does give the gov't the key to decrypt messages when needed. A warratn is still required for a phone tap or even to get into a large system e-mail. They do want to make SURE they can decrypt any messages IF getting into a system is NECESSARY. The is ALL the clipper is good for. At the same time, it is a standardized encryption method that makes it harder for the average person to read your e-mail or otherwise intercept anything you send. Also makes it harder for real spys to get info by simply calling up and d'l ing whatever they want through internet. People seem to have the idea that someone actually WANTS to periodically read everything they send just for grins. There are some legitimate reasons for a general purpose encryption system. The gov't wants the key so they can get into mail files WHEN NECESSARY for prosecuting criminals. In case you haven't heard, the really good dr ug dealers and such now use e-mail, cellular phones, and everything else they can afford (and they have plenty money!) to make their "business" more profitable and efficient. When the gov't takes to making random samplings of system E-mail and reading it t hen I'll raise hell! But this isn't worth the fuss being raised! I do, however, believe that the export of nearly all encryption software... banning export, I mean... is going a bit to far. Are americans the only really great programmers out there who can turn out unbreakable encryption schemes? I don't think so.... -*- 87006 25-APR 06:15 OSK Applications RE: PGP for OSK? (Re: Msg 86999) From: JEJONES To: DSRTFOX (NR) > A warrant is still required for a phone tap or even to get into a > large system e-mail. They do want to make SURE they can decrypt any > messages IF getting into a system is NECESSARY. The is ALL the clipper is > good for. As E.E. "Doc" Smith wrote in a different context, "But what an 'all'!" Given the history of folks like J. Edgar Hoover, or the late President Nixon's "enemies list," do you really think that the government will need much excuse to claim that it's "necessary" to read encrypted messages? Just the past week or so, President Clinton has said that gee, the Fourth Amendment's provision prohibiting unreasonable search and seizure isn't all that important compared to the possibility of catching criminals in random searches without warrant in Chicago government-subsidized housing projects. Opinions herein are solely those of their respective authors. Clipper Chip: Big Brother Inside -*- 87021 26-APR 02:18 OSK Applications RE: PGP for OSK? (Re: Msg 86999) From: PAGAN To: DSRTFOX (NR) >The clipper chip doesn't make it any easier for the government to "spy" on >individuals. It does give the gov't the key to decrypt messages when >needed. A warratn is still required for a phone tap or even to get into a >large system e-mail. There is a subtle difference between "liberty" and "license". Liberty is a freedom that you are endowed with and no man has the right to trespass on it. License is a conditional freedom granted by someone with the power to regulate who may or may not have it. To be deprived of your liberty the state must prove that you have committed specific offenses against other individuals. To _gain_ a license you must prove that you meet certain qualifications. Even then you can be denied. A very fundamental difference between the two is where the burden of proof lies. A 'liberty' exists until proven otherwise. A 'license' must be petitioned from the state. From The Office of the Press Secretary, April 16, 1993: The President today announced a new initiative that will bring the Federal Government together with industry in a VOLUNTARY PROGRAM to improve the security and privacy of telephone communications while meeting the legitimate needs of law enforcement. [Emphasis Added] To be effective, the clipper chip must be the _only_ encryption available to the public. All other expressions of the technology must be forbidden to the people who are to be monitored. The contention that it is to be "voluntary" is obfuscation to hide the intent of controlling encryption technology by license. From later in the same memo: A "key-escrow" system will be established to ensure that the "Clipper Chip" is used to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans. Each device containing the chip will have two unique "keys," numbers that will be needed by authorized government agencies to decode messages encoded by the device. When the device is manufactured, the two keys will be deposited separately in two "key-escrow" data bases that will be established by the Attorney General. Access to these keys will be limited to government officials with legal authorization to conduct a wiretap. The privacy of your communications and data will no longer be under your control. It will be granted or denied on the basis of decisions made by the faceless bean counters who control the data base where the keys are stored. A fundamental freedom to be secure in your "...persons, houses, papers and effects..." will have been converted into a privilege. Human rights issues aside, you point to one of the fundamental flaws in the clipper chip scheme: The huge amounts of money that certain groups can bring to bear to subvert it. Do you REALLY feel more secure knowing that your private communications and data will be open to anyone with he money to buy the key to your chip? If you doubt that this will happen, ask yourself how speculators and con men alway seem to get the unlisted phone numbers of lottery winners. >They do want to make SURE they can decrypt any messages IF getting into a >system is NECESSARY. I'm sure they do. But a citizen's definition of "necessary" might be a little different from a government's definition. Remember the case of Steve Jackson Games? In 1990 the Secret Service raided the company's offices looking for evidence of a hacker conspiracy. In addition to three computers and a laser printer they confiscated every copy of the GURPS Cyberpunk manual calling it "a handbook for computer crime". Pretty damned thin (GURPS Cyberpunk is a _GAME_ for Crissakes!) but the Secret Service was able to find a sympathetic judge who gave them a warrant anyway. The Secret Service later admitted that Steve Jackson Games wasn't a target of the investigation. They just _suspected_ that they _might_ find some evidence on the computers, so in they came! >The is ALL the clipper is good for. At the same time, it is a standardized >encryption method that makes it harder for the average person to read your >e-mail or otherwise intercept anything you send. People seem to have the >idea that someone actually WANTS to periodically read everything they send >just for grins. There are some legitimate reasons for a general purpose >encryption system. The gov't wants the key so they can get into mail files >WHEN NECESSARY for prosecuting criminals. Why do we need some "standardized encryption method" anyway? I, frankly, get a little tired of those people who want to have standards for every little thing. If Apple had listened to the "standards" at the time they would have never created the Macintosh. If Kaplan, Crane and Dogget had paid attention to the 'standards' they wouldn't have written OS9. Cliff Stoll once pointed out that if the standards freaks had their way every computer on the Internet would be like every other computer on the Internet and the internet worm would have brought done all 60,000 instead of about 10% of that. >Also makes it harder for real spys to get info by simply calling up and >d'l ing whatever they want through internet. Which is going to be harder to steal, information encrypted with an unknown algorithm or information that can be read by anyone with the money or influence to get the necessary keys from the government computers? Betcha dollars to donuts that DOD doesn't use clipper to encrypt it's secret communication. Any takers? >When the gov't takes to making random samplings of system E-mail and reading >it t hen I'll raise hell! But this isn't worth the fuss being raised! Sorry, but the only way to stop the government poking into and controlling your affairs is to deny them the power to do so. Everything the government claims about the clipper chip now sounds good and noble. Lenin and Trotsky sounded pretty noble as they established the bureaucratic infrastructure for Stalin. Mussolini had good intentions too - I think we all know what's paved with those... >I do, however, believe that the export of nearly all encryption software... >banning export, I mean... is going a bit to far. Are americans the only >really great programmers out there who can turn out unbreakable encryption >schemes? I don't think so.... I'll certainly agree there. That mere fact the government is prohibiting the export of software that incorporates encryption technology should raise a few warning flags. None of the algorithms on the restricted list is secret and few are proprietary. They have all been published in various journals so why does our government feel the need to restrict their export? The only explanation I find makes sense is that it's an expression of the anal retentive nature of governments to want to control everything! All opinions expressed herein are mine but you can distribute them if you want. Stephen (PAGAN) -*- End of Thread. -*- 86992 24-APR 15:51 Programmers Den as_h6309.zip From: WDTV5 To: ALL I've got a new question for somebody. Anybody even. I ftp'd over to chestnut a week or so back and picked up what looked like an interesting file, as_h6309.zip. It purports to be an assembler for the 6809/6309 family of cpu's, with the 6309 stuffs being switchable for '809 only uses. It 'unzip'ed without errors leaving me with 2 doc/man files and a .exe file that is not an os9 file. On inspection with dump, it has a string containing the words PKLITE in the first sector. I've tried to further un-archive this file to no avail. Am I going to have to carry it to a pc that has PKLITE on it to unpack it any farther, or is there a so called PKLITE convertor available for os9? Frankly it doesn't look too badly compressed, some of the other strings in it almost survived! Any help will be gratefully appreciated. Cheers all, Gene Heskett -*- 86994 24-APR 16:42 Programmers Den RE: as_h6309.zip (Re: Msg 86992) From: ILLUSIONIST To: WDTV5 Is it a cross asm. for the PC -> 6x09's ? As for the .EXE, that is probably a self-extracting file, just run in on a PC, and it will extract..will you actually be able to use this program though? I mean, if it is a PC .exe, it will do the CoCo no good.. I have a cross asm for PC > 6809 around here somewhere, I never use it though.. I have an XT sitting here with no monitor or keyboard though, I am toying with the idea of hooking it up to the coco, run the coco as a terminal to the XT and have the XT fork command.com with stdin and stdout to the serial port (yes that actually can be done under DOS, its just that that is the only process that runs) most DOS apps wont run though (alot of DOS programs do direct screen writes, those that dont use ANSI codes, THAT might work, but our color set and all would make it messy..) but for the apps that I would actually run on an XT it will work ok (I would probably put a few command-line oriented compilers on the DOS box and definatly put that cross asm.) If I do it, it will be more of a "well, why not?" type thing, the XT is sitting around, and I have an un-used serial port... actually, 2 unused serial ports, on the coco...besides, an XT as a slave subsystem is a nice idea.. :) -* Mike -*- 87002 24-APR 21:25 Programmers Den RE: as_h6309.zip (Re: Msg 86994) From: WDTV5 To: ILLUSIONIST I rather suspect thats exactly what it is Mike. I grabbed it thinking the germans had managed to come up with a new, more capable version of our rma. The docs don't mention its a bunch of INTEL code though, no place, no how. What the docs do say is that it could be a better rma than rma, and that it does the usual optimizations while its translating your source. Could the fact that the standard comment marker is a semicolon confirm its heritage? Cheers, Gene -*- End of Thread. -*- 86993 24-APR 16:42 General Information RE: Internet (Re: Msg 86936) From: TEDJAEGER To: LMCCLURE I went over to the atari forum to try reading comp.os.os9 per your instructions. Delphi responded with a message to the effect of no such news group or delphi doesnt provide this newsgroup. I am not a member of the atari forum so could that be the problem? Or is there an error in "comp.os.os9"? Everything worked up to that point. Bests ---TedJaeger -*- 86995 24-APR 17:23 General Information RE: Internet (Re: Msg 86993) From: NIMITZ To: TEDJAEGER (NR) Try going to the internet forum and choosing the USE option.. -*- 87008 25-APR 06:59 General Information RE: Internet (Re: Msg 86993) From: LMCCLURE To: TEDJAEGER (NR) "Delphi responded with a message to the effect of no such news group or delphi doesnt provide this newsgroup. I am not a member of the atari forum so could that be the problem?" No, not being a member of the Atari forum should have had no effect like that. The only two times I have run across that message has either been when (a) I spelled the group name wrong or (b) the group actually was not available [which happened with one of the amiga groups I used to read]. According to the list of Usenet groups I have (the Apple section's Usenet reader has an option to fetch the current list), it is listed as: comp.os.os9 Discussions about the os9 operating system. So it appears you got the spelling correct. FTR, I tried going into to the Atari reader and using "comp.os.os9", and had no problem (54 messages in the past 14 days, BTW). BTW, once you do successfully access comp.os.os9, you can SAVE it to your personal favorites, and when you select that item from any of the Usenet readers, it will be listed by number, so that you will not have to worry about possibly mistyping it. As I recall, you do this by typing "SAVE" anytime you are actually in the newsgroup. (It has been a while since I set my favorites up, so anyone feel free to correct me if I am wrong). [FTR = For the record] -*- End of Thread. -*- 86996 24-APR 19:52 Programmers Den RE: Pixel_Blaster (Re: Msg 86967) From: DSRTFOX To: MICHAELJN (NR) Presently, "the world of 68' micros" has more advertising than any other CoCo related magazine. Part of this is the fact that it supports 68K and CoCo (DECB & OS-9). So all the advertising won't be realted to everyone's needs. See me in Chicago and get a subscription! -*- 86997 24-APR 19:53 Programmers Den RE: _ss_play (Re: Msg 86970) From: DSRTFOX To: MREGC If no other replys, send a msg to Joel Hegberg. -*- 86998 24-APR 19:56 General Information RE: Printers (Re: Msg 86977) From: DSRTFOX To: LMCCLURE Don't let anyone scare you about those Sharp printers! Texas Instruments new Professional 600 is nothing but a rebadged Sharp J9460. TI sells only with two 250 sheet paper bins, Sharp with only one (the other is an extra cost option). Difference in price of about $150! The 9400 is the 300 dpi model... or is the 9460 the 600 dpi model of the 9400??? ;> -*- 87000 24-APR 20:29 General Information RE: Disk backup (Re: Msg 86919) From: MODEL299 To: DSRTFOX (NR) The SyQuest I have is an "88 C" model. According to the place I got mine from the "C" models will work with the 44MB cartridges just fine. I only have 88MB cartridges so I have not tried one in it. Mark -*- 87001 24-APR 21:23 General Information Trek From: HAWKSOFT To: ALL Has anyone (everyone?) entered the TV Guide StarTrek Sweepstakes?? Refer to this weeks TV Guide for the 7 Trek Trivia questions and send your answers to 'TVGTREK@DELPHI.COM' The winner will attend the screening of the final Star Trek: The Next Generation finale in Hollywood. I did! :-> :-> :-> :-> :-> :-> :-> Chris "HAWKSoft" <-: <-: <-: <-: <-: <-: <-: Delphi: HAWKSOFT Internet: HAWKSOFT@DELPHI.COM ******************< Uploaded w/ InfoXpress vr. 1.01.00 >****************** -*- 87003 24-APR 22:24 Programmers Den _ss_play Problem 2 From: MREGC To: ALL I've now got a second problem with the _ss_play function call. I play any of a number of sounds, only lasting about a second each, depending upon a given event occurring, which can happen at any time. If the same event happens immediately twice in succession, and the same sound is sent to _ss_play a second time before it has completed playing the first time, the program errors out with I believe a bus trap error. Anyone have any idea of the cause/solution to this problem? ..Thanx... ..Eric... -*- 87004 24-APR 23:01 System Modules (6809) clocks From: WDTV5 To: ALL I just had a pleasant surprise! My speed record up to now for an sz file send when hooked at 14.4v42, has been in the 535-539 area. I just sent a 43k compressed file to another local Amiga user and it went at 614 cps, a noticable improvement, directly attributable to the reduced time my new clock spends checking things at its tick time. This intrigues me, and I may see if there is anything else I can do to speed it up even more. In the meantime, if you are a 4n1 user and run in the native mode, give this clock a try once Paul makes it visible. Cheers all, Gene -*- 87005 25-APR 01:17 System Modules (6809) seral mouse is coool! From: MDALENE To: ALL I finaly got a serial mouse for my coco 3,. Using Bruceisteds driers it flies! but I have a questio. Somethings such as games would be beter operated with a joystick. How ccan I use both the mouse for gshell as well as my hires interfacce simotaniously for games that need my deluxe joystick/ Is there a patch I can do to the new cc3io so I can have both?// Also althougn my mouse is both Logitec,mousesystems and microsoft compatible could a patcch be made to thew new cc3io that would let me change windows with my third mouse button? if so how? I have the smouse.ar package and its source whicch I think is also in esw110.ar (Thats where I got mine) so asm sources of patcching is not that hard to do if I must do it by sourcecode to add those funchions I ddesire. My mouse is a procorp mouse II with support of 6400 DPI! works super on gshell.. not sure if I want to play Rescue on fractalis with a mouse though. it would drivve me crazy! a trackball.....? that would do! also wherre can I get the information on how to write programs in decb to use it? I need the specs. who has those/ Michele Marie Dalene -*- 87007 25-APR 06:43 Programmers Den RE: HeapSort (Re: Msg 86957) From: MARKGRIFFITH To: ILLUSIONIST Mike, > :) I have 2nd ed. and it isnt in there, that was the first place I looked > .I will see if I can find a copy of 1st ed. thanks.. Here is a heapsort for you, in C though (I forget where I got this). * H e a p S o r t . C * -- the heap sorting algorithm * * NOTE This version of heapsort is based on section 8.4 of the * textbook "Data Structures and Algorithms", by Aho, Hopcroft, * and Ullman, from Addison-Wesley, Reading MA, 1983. Computer * Science 124 "Data Structures" pays off! Heapsort is always * O(n log n) while quicksort can be O(n^2) if the data is * already sorted. The main differences between the text and * this code are 1) This is in C, not pseudocode, and 2) The * array is sorted into ascending, not descending order. */ * # I n c l u d e s */ #include * S t a t i c V a r i a b l e s */ static char *A; /* Array pointer */ static int n; /* Number of elts in array */ static int size; /* Size of elts in array */ static int (*compfunc)(); /* Pointer to compare function */ static char *swapbuf; /* A place to swap to */ * # D e f i n e s */ * MACRO lessthan() * PURPOSE Hide all the compfunc() calling grunge */ #define lessthan(i1, i2) ((* compfunc) (A + size*(i1), A + size*(i2)) == -1) * FUNCTION heapsort() * PURPOSE Sorts using the heapsort algorithm * TAKES char *array, the base of the array to sort * int n, the number of elements to sort * int size, the size of the elements * int (* compfunc)(), a function returning int, for compares * GIVES void; array is sorted at base */ heapsort(array, num, siz, comfun) char *array; int num; int siz; int (* comfun)(); { int i; /* Index through array */ /* Copy to static variables */ A = array-siz; /* Make array 1..n rather than 0..n-1 */ n = num; size = siz; compfunc = comfun; if ((swapbuf = malloc(size)) == NULL) { writeln(2, "heapsort: malloc failed\n", 80); exit(207); } /* Establish the partially ordered tree property initially */ for (i = n/2; i >= 1; i--) pushdown(i, n); /* Now get it in sorted order */ for (i = n; i >= 2; i--) { /* Remove maximum from front of heap */ swap(1, i); /* Re-establish partially ordered tree property */ pushdown(1, i-1); } /* Free the malloced memory */ free(swapbuf); } static pushdown(first, last) int first, last; { int r; /* Indicates the current position of A[first] */ /* Initialization */ r = first; while (r <= last/2) { if (last == 2*r) { /* r has one child at 2*r */ if (lessthan(r, 2*r)) /* Swap r with only child */ swap(r, 2*r); /* Escape from while loop */ r = last; } else { /* r has two children, at 2*r and 2*r+1 */ if (lessthan(r, 2*r) && !lessthan(2*r, 2*r+1)) { /* Swap r with left child */ swap(r, 2*r); r = 2*r; } else if (lessthan(r, 2*r+1) && lessthan(2*r, 2*r+1)) { /* Swap r with right child */ swap(r, 2*r+1); r = 2*r+1; } else /* r is ok where it is */ r = last; } } } static swap(i1, i2) int i1, i2; { _strass(swapbuf, A+size*i1, size); _strass(A+size*i1, A+size*i2, size); _strass(A+size*i2, swapbuf, size); } /*********** /\/\ark *************/ (Upload with InfoXpress Ver. 1.01) -*- 87009 25-APR 08:01 Programmers Den RE: HeapSort (Re: Msg 87007) From: ILLUSIONIST To: MARKGRIFFITH (NR) Thanks! I was hoping to get a copy in C too... -* Mike -*- End of Thread. -*- 87010 25-APR 21:30 OSK Applications zmodem crash recovery From: MRGOOD To: ALL Does OSK RZ 3.24 support crash recovery? If yes, how does it work with Delphi's zmodem? Hugo -*- 87013 25-APR 22:02 OSK Applications RE: zmodem crash recovery (Re: Msg 87010) From: MITHELEN To: MRGOOD (NR) Yes, RZ/SZ 3.24 suppors crash recovery, No, you can not use crash recovery with Delphi's Zmodem... At least not for downloads, not sure on uploads. (I doubt it) I'm almost 100% sure Delphi uses a version of Zmodem that was before crash recovery came into existance... -*- End of Thread. -*- 87011 25-APR 21:32 General Information Coco stuff for sale From: MRGOOD To: ALL Now that I've got my MM1 doing everything I want it to do, my Coco 3 system is up FOR SALE - sniff Hardware -------- 512K Coco 3 (newer GIME chip)..............................$80 (SOLD) Multipak - new style, modified.............................$80 (SOLD) ST-225 20 meg hard disk w/case, power supply and cables....$60 Vintage 1987 B&B interface w/real time clock...............$60 (SOLD) Tandy 2-button mouse with Hi-res interface.................$10 Tandy DMP130 9-pin dot-matrix printer......................$50 Disto Mini-controller......................................$10 Floppy drive case (no screws)..............................$15 Speech/Sound Pak modified for 2 MHz operation..............$15 (SOLD) 360K bare half-height floppy drive.........................$25 If you don't like the hardware prices listed above, make an offer and I'll consider it. Make an offer for the software titles listed below. Most have documentation. OS9 Software ------------ TS/Edit & TS/Word Sub Battle Simulator Flight Simulator II Dynacalc Home Publisher OS9 Level I V1.01 OS9 Level I V2.0 OS9 Level II 2.00.01 Multi-vue PowerBoost 1.0 Koronis Rift Zone Runner The Interbank Incident DECB Software ------------- FlightSim I Pyramix Disk Graphics The Sands of Eqypt Rainbow on Disk Jan-Apr and June-Dec 1987 Investograph TS/Edit Color Connection Books ----- TRS-80 Color Computer Assembly Language Programming by William Barden Flight Simulator & Flight Simulator II 82 Challenging Adventures -*- 87012 25-APR 21:35 Programmers Den C Compiler From: JRUPPEL To: ALL Can anyone tell me if there is a way to assemble a C programming environment using the Level II RMA? I assume there has to be, I'm just not proficient enough or knowledgable enough to figure it out . John Ruppel >>>>>>>GO WINGS>>>>>>> -*- 87014 25-APR 22:07 General Information RE: Current Periodicals (Re: Msg 86929) From: NEWKID To: CHARLESAM (NR) If all things remain the same, I'll be making a trip out there soon. I'll have to hunt for your address again. If I don't find it I'll give you a buzz. I'll be starting a game by mail with one of my co-workers. He's a good player, but I7ve beaten him one or twice. Don't feel bad about OS-9. We have all been beginners at one time or another. And, some of us ( me encluding) will always be. May next adventure will be into C. The worst part being there is a wealth of information (patches, modules changes, etc) to wade through. Picking the right combination will be the real challenge. Talk to you. James -*- 87015 25-APR 22:08 General Information RE: Rick Ulland (Re: Msg 86868) From: NEWKID To: CHARLESAM (NR) I have in the past two weeks. Leave me mail, I'll give you info if needed. James -*- 87016 25-APR 22:27 General Information RE: Troubles (Re: Msg 86905) From: NEWKID To: RANDYKWILSON Thanks, I'll try it and let you know how it works out. James -*- 87017 25-APR 23:32 General Information RE: Troubles (Re: Msg 86905) From: NEWKID To: RANDYKWILSON Thanks Randy. It worked like a charm. I have back my old system again. I guess I didn't have the meta characters set in my previous use of shell+. Now to explore... James -*- End of Thread. -*- 87018 25-APR 23:43 General Information RE: OFNOHOC (Re: Msg 86794) From: TONYPODRAZA To: REVWCP (NR) A member of Glenside can never be a threat to Glenside. It is as impossible as someONE saying "yes" for a loaf of bread after 40 days. Where do you meet? I detect a "road trip for northern Chicagoland CoCo-ists. hehe WE LOVE ROAD TRIPS!!!!! -*- 87019 26-APR 00:06 General Information RE: OFNOHOC (Re: Msg 87018) From: MITHELEN To: TONYPODRAZA (NR) Hey.. I'm game for a road trip, as long as it is on a weekend! "We got a full tank of gas, 1/2 pack of cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sun glasses....... Hit it!" -- Paul -*- End of Thread. -*- FORUM>Reply, Add, Read, "?" or Exit>