| 00:14.29 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 00:45.33 | *** part/#gllug aguai (n=aguai@host86-139-191-40.range86-139.btcentralplus.com) |
| 01:19.06 | *** join/#gllug catalyst (n=catalyst@allegro/user/angelchild) |
| 01:24.50 | *** join/#gllug boudicca (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 01:55.02 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 02:57.07 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 03:17.44 | *** join/#gllug jpds_ (n=jpds@67.193.130.62) |
| 03:18.30 | *** join/#gllug PussInBoots (i=PussInBo@gateway/tor/x-a0b256e0ce33590a) |
| 04:17.45 | *** join/#gllug jpds (n=jpds@ubuntu/member/jpds) |
| 06:53.21 | *** join/#gllug trousers (n=irc@92-233-113-148.cable.ubr12.nmal.blueyonder.co.uk) |
| 06:59.31 | *** join/#gllug trousers_ (n=irc@92-233-113-148.cable.ubr12.nmal.blueyonder.co.uk) |
| 07:06.05 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 07:06.19 | *** join/#gllug Leed1 (n=richard@n218103254044.netvigator.com) |
| 07:06.44 | *** join/#gllug trousers_ (n=irc@92-233-113-148.cable.ubr12.nmal.blueyonder.co.uk) |
| 07:56.16 | *** join/#gllug PussInBoots (i=PussInBo@gateway/tor/x-efbdf5f9721405d7) |
| 08:19.10 | *** join/#gllug ranner (n=ranner@general-kt-195.t-mobile.co.uk) |
| 08:25.01 | bilarh_ | curses the british weather |
| 08:25.20 | zaarg | too |
| 08:26.12 | hali | sup |
| 08:26.39 | bilarh_ | gets busy building an ark |
| 08:33.01 | bilarh_ | jeez, it's getting worse |
| 08:35.30 | hali | balls |
| 08:35.45 | bilarh_ | you still at home? |
| 08:35.55 | hali | yes |
| 08:36.06 | hali | my colleauge is not in yet so i can head in |
| 08:36.07 | bilarh_ | unlucky. |
| 08:36.27 | hali | im googling small'ish disk systems at the moment |
| 08:36.42 | hali | hp msa2000i looks cool... iscsi is the future (or something) |
| 08:37.19 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 08:37.25 | bilarh_ | bloody hell, i'm so bored here |
| 08:37.37 | hali | however, i hate hp at the moment, after browsing their site for about 6 minutes they have prompted me to take a survey 8 times!!!1one |
| 08:37.46 | bilarh_ | i'm waiting for two new verari disk packs and they should have been here on the 27th, and still no sign |
| 08:37.50 | zaarg | you have the whole internets out there |
| 08:37.55 | bilarh_ | yesterday they emailed us and said it had jsut been shipped |
| 08:38.13 | hali | bilarh_: hows the move plan going? |
| 08:38.31 | bilarh_ | hali: most of it done, just waiting for kit really |
| 08:48.57 | bilarh_ | which means that there's eff all going on at the moment |
| 08:49.03 | bilarh_ | yesterday i had one ticket again |
| 08:49.32 | bilarh_ | and overnight i had two emails, one of which was an automated one and one which was a company wide memo about someone being promoted in a different office in a different country |
| 09:03.20 | wethrin | The internets have a tendency of running out |
| 09:08.20 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 09:20.08 | antiphase | HP are in our naughty corner for producing servers which blow up |
| 09:20.49 | bilarh_ | fail |
| 09:21.20 | bilarh_ | literally blow up or just stop working? |
| 09:21.54 | *** join/#gllug curson (n=curzon@79-69-57-240.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 09:22.54 | antiphase | Stopped working. It was quite importnat, and one of only 2 HP shitboxes in the entire place |
| 09:23.12 | antiphase | It wasn't a particularly cheap one either |
| 09:27.46 | *** join/#gllug ranner81 (n=ranner@213.86.218.124) |
| 09:39.23 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 10:04.54 | kjalil | hmm, what does "> filename" at the beginning of a sh script mean? |
| 10:05.37 | bilarh_ | redirect output? |
| 10:06.03 | bilarh_ | so if you do an "echo blaha" it will go to filename instead of console |
| 10:06.06 | bilarh_ | is guessing |
| 10:06.27 | antiphase | man sh and search for redirection I'd have thought |
| 10:06.39 | antiphase | It does just sound like STDOUT redirection to a file though |
| 10:06.46 | kjalil | strange, it is followed immediately by a function, and inside this function is "wget" which redirects output to "filename" too |
| 10:07.28 | bilarh_ | doesn't wget usually write to stderr, though |
| 10:07.52 | bilarh_ | or do you mean with -O - ? |
| 10:07.56 | kjalil | bilarh_: it is "wget -qO - $1 >> filename", so it is redirecting stdout |
| 10:08.06 | bilarh_ | ah |
| 10:08.11 | bilarh_ | it might work without the redirect |
| 10:08.22 | kjalil | bilarh_: but, right before this function, is a line saying "> filename" |
| 10:08.27 | bilarh_ | maybe the wget redirect was there before the whole thing got redirected |
| 10:08.31 | antiphase | IT sounds hideous |
| 10:08.32 | bilarh_ | as in, previous version, then modified |
| 10:08.38 | bilarh_ | ah |
| 10:08.39 | bilarh_ | i know |
| 10:08.42 | bilarh_ | it empties filename :D |
| 10:08.50 | bilarh_ | because the >> appends :) |
| 10:09.11 | bilarh_ | stdout redirect would be exec 1>blah wouldn't it |
| 10:09.13 | bilarh_ | or something similar |
| 10:09.55 | *** join/#gllug huw-l (n=huw@w1199.insrv.cf.ac.uk) |
| 10:10.14 | kjalil | hmm, forget it. i know what the script is supposed to do, just don't understand that stupid line. reading bash man page now :( |
| 10:10.23 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 10:10.24 | bilarh_ | it will empty the file |
| 10:10.34 | bilarh_ | as in, truncate it |
| 10:11.44 | kjalil | bilarh_: you are right, If the file does not exist it is created; if it does exist it is trun? cated to zero size. |
| 10:11.52 | kjalil | bilarh_: that's from the man page |
| 10:12.34 | kjalil | bilarh_: but what is the point, if immediately afterwards you are going to append to it? |
| 10:17.41 | bilarh_ | instead of doing rm -f blah you can do >blah |
| 10:17.46 | bilarh_ | i think it's quite ugly myself |
| 10:18.41 | kjalil | bilarh_: you could even just forget the append, and just write to it, it would accomplish the same thing |
| 10:18.50 | kjalil | bilarh_: unless i'm missing some bigger picture here |
| 10:19.07 | bilarh_ | no i don't think you are |
| 10:20.02 | antiphase | It was clearly written by a lunatic |
| 10:20.14 | antiphase | Probably a PHP programmer or suchlike |
| 10:21.27 | bilarh_ | when selling a modified car, is it better to put back to standardish and then sell the "bits" separately, or no point? |
| 10:22.28 | antiphase | If the bits are worth enough that it's worth your time to remove them, almost certainly unless they're very special |
| 10:22.42 | antiphase | Bolt-ons don't improve the value of cars at all |
| 10:22.55 | bilarh_ | ah, so all my bolt ons should be taken off in that case |
| 10:23.10 | bilarh_ | cool, if i can get half of what i paid for them, that's 2800 quid right there :) |
| 10:23.21 | bilarh_ | minus a remap and some standard replacements |
| 10:23.30 | bilarh_ | so probably 2000 after all said and done |
| 10:23.35 | antiphase | Beer money |
| 10:23.47 | bilarh_ | hopefully someone will pay 7k for the car itself |
| 10:24.01 | bilarh_ | and then i can spend the 2k on an old porsche 944 or something and stick the rest in my isa |
| 10:24.05 | kjalil | umm, newbieish question: why do things like "last" and some logfiles NOT include the year? |
| 10:24.21 | bilarh_ | kjalil: because they're broken |
| 10:25.17 | bilarh_ | kjalil: hth ;-) |
| 10:25.17 | kjalil | bilarh_: hmm, what is the most reliable way to find out *when* a linux system was installed? |
| 10:25.31 | bilarh_ | i'd check the date of some file in /etc, e.g. the redhat-release or something |
| 10:25.34 | bilarh_ | that's unlikely to have changed |
| 10:26.30 | bilarh_ | arse, although that's apparently a standard file anyway |
| 10:26.32 | bilarh_ | so you can't do that :) |
| 10:27.16 | bilarh_ | check the date of /etc/rc0.d :) |
| 10:27.21 | antiphase | You can try dumpe2fs if you use ext3 to give file system creation times |
| 10:27.59 | bilarh_ | it's actually quite crap that the dists don't create a file somewhere with that info, isn't it? |
| 10:28.03 | kjalil | hmm, perhaps dumpe2fs. last seems useless |
| 10:28.11 | bilarh_ | it's not hugely useful, but could be interesting |
| 10:46.37 | kjalil | hmm, does "!$" in perl mean "last error" or something? |
| 10:51.07 | antiphase | $! does |
| 10:52.26 | antiphase | !$ will be expanded to the last argument of the previous command when used in bash |
| 10:55.33 | kjalil | grrr. sorry i meant $! |
| 10:55.49 | kjalil | antiphase: thanks |
| 10:55.59 | wethrin | Web browsers-- |
| 10:57.57 | kjalil | hates "unless" statements |
| 10:58.40 | antiphase | They can be useful when used appropriately and in moderation |
| 10:59.07 | wethrin | like gotos |
| 10:59.32 | bilarh_ | also hates unless |
| 10:59.37 | bilarh_ | it's the wrong way, logically, in my head |
| 10:59.46 | kjalil | antiphase: i find them confusing. what does "unless (&a_function(arg1))" mean? does it mean if the function returns 0, or doesn't return 0? |
| 10:59.53 | bilarh_ | what was ever wrong with "if not" |
| 11:00.22 | antiphase | unless mean if not, but it reads differently is all |
| 11:00.44 | kjalil | antiphase: so i should substitute the unless above with if not then? |
| 11:01.18 | antiphase | PErsonal choice really. IT looks like it was writen by someone with no idea of failure cases anyway, so I wouldn't worry about it |
| 11:01.24 | kjalil | antiphase: in perl, is it the same a C, as in (&blah) is the same as "if (&blah != 0)"? |
| 11:01.44 | antiphase | &blah is an old-style function call |
| 11:02.02 | antiphase | In C & is the address operator |
| 11:02.07 | antiphase | So not really similar at all :) |
| 11:02.26 | kjalil | antiphase: ah, sorry that's not what I meant :) |
| 11:03.05 | antiphase | If you're not operating under strict (which you always should), the truth condition will also fail in Perl if the function returns undef, which might not be what you want either |
| 11:03.24 | antiphase | I'd advise against trying to get old spaghetti Perl that works to run under strict though if it's not already enabled |
| 11:03.39 | kjalil | antiphase: is it under strict |
| 11:03.47 | kjalil | s/is it/it is/ |
| 11:04.41 | antiphase | I just wondered because it's not common to use & to make function calls any more, so it's an immediate warning sign that it's shitty code written by someone that doesn't use the language much; althernatively it could just be oooold |
| 11:06.35 | kjalil | antiphase: yes, it's very old code. he is calling a function, then using "unless" on the return value |
| 11:07.57 | kjalil | antiphase: the function is returning 0 on failure, 1 on success. so what is the default value he is looking for is what i'm confused by. He doesn't say "unless (&func() != 0)" for example, just "unless (&func()) { asdfaf }" |
| 11:09.48 | antiphase | if and unless just operate on the truth of the following expression |
| 11:10.27 | antiphase | So you're not strictly comparing something to 0 if you say (foo != 0) but really creating a true or false |
| 11:11.19 | antiphase | If and unless just happen to run or not run the following clause depending on the truth of the condition, so if your function returns true or false, you can use it directly if you see what I mean |
| 11:12.17 | antiphase | True in Perl is anything which is defined and not numerical 0 or an empty string |
| 11:13.27 | kjalil | hmm, ok, that makes sense |
| 11:13.35 | antiphase | perl -e 'print (1 == 0), "\n";' |
| 11:14.10 | antiphase | It looks wrong until you realise that a comparison is just an expression which can be true or false |
| 11:14.39 | antiphase | Perl is basically evil, which is why people use PHP now |
| 11:16.13 | kjalil | ouch. what the hell does "if ( -1 < $#ARGV ) {" mean? I get it, but why write it like that? |
| 11:16.43 | bilarh_ | kjalil: if there are arguments passed on the command line, then |
| 11:16.59 | bilarh_ | which part do you think is stupid? :) |
| 11:17.03 | bilarh_ | the -1 on the left? |
| 11:17.10 | antiphase | IT looks fairly retarded |
| 11:17.12 | kjalil | bilarh_: if there are 0 arguments, what does $#ARGV evaluate to? |
| 11:17.33 | antiphase | $#ARGV is the index of the final element of @ARGV |
| 11:17.54 | antiphase | So if the array is empty, it is -1 |
| 11:18.01 | bilarh_ | i always do scalar(@ARGV) myself, it looks neater |
| 11:18.14 | kjalil | the final element? i thought it was the "count" of the elements, sigh. i need to re-read my perl |
| 11:18.30 | bilarh_ | that's one of the problems with perl, i must admit |
| 11:18.31 | antiphase | It's the final element, so it is one less than the count of the elements |
| 11:18.35 | bilarh_ | that it's possible to abuse the fuck out of it |
| 11:18.51 | antiphase | I quite like "unless defined $ARGV[0]" |
| 11:19.05 | antiphase | TMTOWTDI :) |
| 11:19.13 | bilarh_ | argh, my eyes |
| 11:19.31 | bilarh_ | SWYSA |
| 11:19.46 | kjalil | umm, so if there are no arguments, is the array empty or not, or is it like C where the command is always the first arg? |
| 11:19.53 | bilarh_ | BICUT |
| 11:19.58 | antiphase | $0 is the command in Perl |
| 11:20.05 | antiphase | @ARGV contains only arguments |
| 11:22.05 | kjalil | ok, this guy is trying to check if there ARE arguments passed in, so that he can parse them. Fine. Now if there are none, $#ARGV will be 0, yes, so WTH is playing around with "-1" for? |
| 11:22.09 | kjalil | grrr |
| 11:22.23 | bilarh_ | note the < :) |
| 11:22.39 | kjalil | -1 < 0 |
| 11:23.31 | bilarh_ | ignore what i saide |
| 11:23.53 | antiphase | 13:17.32 < antiphase> $#ARGV is the index of the final element of @ARGV |
| 11:23.53 | antiphase | 13:17.54 < antiphase> So if the array is empty, it is -1 |
| 11:24.15 | antiphase | So if -1 is less than $#ARGV, there are arguments available |
| 11:24.31 | antiphase | I think you should name and shame the author of these abominations |
| 11:26.11 | kjalil | ah, ok, the "index" now I get it. this code is causing my eyes to go funny |
| 11:28.42 | kjalil | sorry, for so many questions, i hope you guys are patient enough, because I have a few more :) |
| 11:29.31 | kjalil | what about: "foreach (@jobs) { eval; }" . It goes thru each array item, but what does "eval" do? |
| 11:29.51 | antiphase | :O |
| 11:29.52 | bilarh_ | runs a piece of perl code, afaik |
| 11:30.05 | bilarh_ | in that configuration, probably what's in $_ :) |
| 11:30.12 | antiphase | Assuming @jobs is an array of code references, yes |
| 11:30.17 | antiphase | That is horrifying |
| 11:30.20 | bilarh_ | quite |
| 11:30.40 | antiphase | I didn't mean code references |
| 11:30.43 | antiphase | I need more coffee |
| 11:38.40 | antiphase | But anyway, using eval isn't terribly clear in that case unless someone is dynamically generating code. It's usually used so that you can trap a critical failure that would halt your program and handle it nicely |
| 11:43.04 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 11:50.22 | *** join/#gllug dick_turpin (n=dick_tur@host217-34-163-30.in-addr.btopenworld.com) |
| 11:52.05 | kjalil | antiphase: ok, thanks |
| 12:20.56 | *** join/#gllug PussInBoots (i=PussInBo@gateway/tor/x-389e2479e0f3656f) |
| 13:13.42 | *** join/#gllug catalyst (n=catalyst@allegro/user/angelchild) |
| 13:31.58 | bilarh_ | dick turping! |
| 13:47.13 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 13:56.14 | kjalil | man, this is confusing. If a script is passed an argument, AND a function within that script is called with an argument, then if *within* the function there is a reference to $1, is it referring to the script's argument, or the function's argument |
| 13:56.18 | kjalil | ? |
| 13:57.09 | bilarh_ | the scripts |
| 13:57.18 | bilarh_ | the arguments to a script come in @_ |
| 13:57.24 | bilarh_ | s/script/function/ |
| 13:57.33 | bilarh_ | but then again, |
| 13:57.36 | kjalil | bilarh_: sorry, this is a bash script |
| 13:57.41 | bilarh_ | oh right :) |
| 13:57.44 | bilarh_ | in that case it's the functions |
| 13:57.57 | bilarh_ | i was just going to go off on why perl didn't use $1 at all :) |
| 13:58.01 | kjalil | even though the script itself is passed something on the command-line? |
| 13:58.11 | bilarh_ | yep |
| 13:58.23 | kjalil | feels like shooting someone |
| 13:58.32 | bilarh_ | shoot dick_turpin |
| 13:58.58 | zaarg | apparently there's a big storm from france coming this way |
| 13:59.04 | zaarg | \o/ |
| 13:59.06 | bilarh_ | for fucks sake |
| 13:59.10 | bilarh_ | what is wrong with the fucking weather |
| 13:59.33 | bilarh_ | my parents helpfully called on the weekend and said they had had wonderful weather for a whole week and that they were going to have nice weather for at least the next week as well |
| 13:59.56 | bilarh_ | i did feel a bit miserable looking out of the window at that point, i must admit |
| 14:00.05 | kjalil | bilarh_: this stupid script is called with an argument, but there is only 1 function in it, which is called with a diff. argument, but the function uses $1 inside itself, and seems to ignore the command-line arg. |
| 14:00.21 | bilarh_ | kjalil: that would make sense :) |
| 14:00.31 | bilarh_ | kjalil: that the function ignores the command line arg, i mean... |
| 14:00.45 | bilarh_ | kjalil: erm, syntactically i mean... might not make sense to the users etc :) |
| 14:00.48 | kjalil | ridiculous. there is no point to the command-line arg then |
| 14:01.13 | kjalil | it is passed in to confuse everyone |
| 14:01.31 | bilarh_ | does it require the argument to be passed in? |
| 14:02.40 | kjalil | bilarh_: no, it doesn't use it :) |
| 14:02.49 | bilarh_ | kjalil: ah :( |
| 14:03.09 | bilarh_ | kjalil: it would have been a quality script if it required the argument, as in complained to the user if it wasn't supplied, but then didn't use it :) |
| 14:03.11 | kjalil | bilarh_: maybe it *used* to, and someone changed it, but not now |
| 14:07.24 | *** join/#gllug gregj (n=gj@fcu5.internetdsl.tpnet.pl) |
| 14:19.15 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 14:43.41 | kjalil | hmm, what does the {} in "$foo{$1} = [$2, {}]" mean? |
| 14:44.09 | kjalil | it is called from inside an "if" whose condition is a regular expression with a : delimeter |
| 14:48.59 | bilarh_ | perl, yes? |
| 14:49.28 | kjalil | bilarh_: yes |
| 14:49.31 | bilarh_ | ok |
| 14:49.35 | kjalil | after this, i have another one :) |
| 14:49.45 | bilarh_ | the hash %foo gets a new element with key $1 |
| 14:50.06 | bilarh_ | the element is an array with the elements $2 and a reference to a hash |
| 14:50.21 | bilarh_ | s/a hash/a new anonymous hash/ |
| 14:50.52 | kjalil | hmm, new anon hash? |
| 14:51.23 | bilarh_ | as in a hash that hasn't got a variable name associated with it, if you see what i mean |
| 14:51.28 | kjalil | bilarh_: i have a feeling, it is there for no reason, i will have to check |
| 14:51.32 | kjalil | bilarh_: ah, yes |
| 14:52.20 | bilarh_ | make sense? |
| 14:53.30 | bilarh_ | you might have something like |
| 14:53.42 | bilarh_ | $ref = $foo{key}[1]; |
| 14:53.51 | bilarh_ | and then $$ref{mykey2} = "some variable"; |
| 15:00.02 | kjalil | actually, i have something like: $foo{$cdom}->[1]->{$from_to[0]} = $from_to[1]; |
| 15:00.23 | kjalil | the [1] seems to be an index into that second {} |
| 15:00.43 | kjalil | so he is putting the contents of from_to[0] in there |
| 15:00.54 | kjalil | and pointing it to from_to[1] |
| 15:02.44 | bilarh_ | yeah |
| 15:03.11 | bilarh_ | the other way around you mean |
| 15:03.56 | kjalil | well, from_to contains 2 things, so he is assigning from_to[0] to be the anon hash's key, and it's value is from_to[1], yes? |
| 15:05.18 | wethrin | Perl sucks |
| 15:05.19 | wethrin | runs |
| 15:05.28 | bilarh_ | sets the dogs on wethrin |
| 15:05.39 | wethrin | throws awk at bilarh_ |
| 15:06.04 | bilarh_ | :( |
| 15:06.06 | bilarh_ | was it somethign i sed? |
| 15:06.10 | wethrin | groan |
| 15:06.13 | bilarh_ | :D |
| 15:06.31 | wethrin | runs off |
| 15:33.32 | *** join/#gllug Leeds (n=richardc@n218103254044.netvigator.com) |
| 15:44.48 | kjalil | bilarh_: help!! |
| 15:46.19 | kjalil | bilarh_: foreach my $from ( keys %{$rewrite_refs} { s/$from/$rewrite_refs->{$from}/g; }. In what context does the substitution take place here? Is it rewriting the keys in $rewrite_refs? |
| 15:47.58 | bilarh_ | hmm |
| 15:48.01 | bilarh_ | no |
| 15:48.10 | bilarh_ | $from is a local variable, not a reference |
| 15:48.35 | bilarh_ | i'd say that it doesn't actually achieve anything useful at all. |
| 15:48.46 | bilarh_ | but that's a guess |
| 15:49.10 | bilarh_ | hrm sorry |
| 15:49.34 | bilarh_ | that's quite a weird substition there... |
| 15:49.42 | bilarh_ | it works on $_, but $_ is never modified in the statement |
| 15:49.51 | kjalil | this is inside a "while (<INFILE>) " context |
| 15:49.57 | bilarh_ | aha ok |
| 15:50.13 | *** join/#gllug Blapto (n=martin@62.189.100.228) |
| 15:50.25 | bilarh_ | in that case it would probably be used to change a bunch of strings in <INFILE> to a new definition |
| 15:50.31 | bilarh_ | sort of a translation table perhaps |
| 15:50.38 | kjalil | so since INFILE is a big file, is it checking each line in the file and changing whatever matches? |
| 15:50.43 | bilarh_ | yeah |
| 15:50.50 | bilarh_ | so you have your rewrite_refs hash, right |
| 15:51.05 | bilarh_ | and it's got "key" -> "bollocks"; |
| 15:51.16 | bilarh_ | and then in your text file you have "i have lost my key"; |
| 15:51.27 | bilarh_ | after the fucntion $_ would read "i have lost my bollocks" |
| 15:53.04 | kjalil | so it is somehow looking at ALL the lines in the file at once, and substng anything that matches? I thought <INFILE> meant, read one line at a time... |
| 16:00.34 | bilarh_ | yeah of course |
| 16:00.44 | bilarh_ | i meant in the context of the while loop |
| 16:22.42 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 17:17.25 | *** join/#gllug DiscordianUK (n=ch@chills.demon.co.uk) |
| 18:02.00 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 18:20.33 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 18:27.57 | cpufreak | hmm |
| 18:42.14 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 19:02.07 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-2-187.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 19:31.20 | *** join/#gllug boudiccas (n=boudicca@88-108-23-146.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 20:12.53 | *** join/#gllug boudicca (n=boudicca@88-108-23-146.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 22:09.23 | *** join/#gllug aguai (n=aguai@host86-137-1-100.range86-137.btcentralplus.com) |
| 22:11.48 | *** part/#gllug aguai (n=aguai@host86-137-1-100.range86-137.btcentralplus.com) |
| 22:46.23 | *** join/#gllug etorix (n=etorix@unaffiliated/etorix) |