[csw-users] SUNW dependencies - firefox
Mark A Olson
molson2 at gmu.edu
Mon Oct 22 04:48:45 CEST 2007
This is just a question for my own learning.
Why are you using Solaris 8, and a newer version
(9, 10)? Since you can get Solaris 10 for free.
This may or may not help:
I get the solaris versions of firefox, thunderbird, and seamonkey from www.mozilla.com. I have
had no problems with them.
To get the latest firefox - 2.0.0.8
you can get them at:
there are versions for Solaris 8 and Solaris 10.
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/2.0.0.8/releasenotes/#contributedbuilds
or
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
click on free download
go down to Contributed builds:
who have a choice of:
Tarball format
* firefox-2.0.0.8.en-US.solaris10-i386.tar.bz2 (cksum)
* firefox-2.0.0.8.en-US.solaris10-sparc.tar.bz2 (cksum)
* firefox-2.0.0.8.en-US.solaris8-i386-gtk1.tar.bz2 (cksum)
* firefox-2.0.0.8.en-US.solaris8-sparc-gtk1.tar.bz2 (cksum)
Pkgadd format
* firefox-2.0.0.8.en-US.solaris10-i386-pkg.bz2 (cksum)
* firefox-2.0.0.8.en-US.solaris10-sparc-pkg.bz2 (cksum)
* firefox-2.0.0.8.en-US.solaris8-i386-gtk1-pkg.bz2 (cksum)
* firefox-2.0.0.8.en-US.solaris8-sparc-gtk1-pkg.bz2 (cksum)
I generally use the Tarball format.
for the sparc Solaris 10 build to compile they use :
target: sparc-sun-solaris2.10
Build tools
Compiler Version Compiler flags
/opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc Sun C 5.8 -xlibmil -xstrconst -xbuiltin=%all -mt
Patch 121015-04
2007/01/10
/opt/SUNWspro/bin/CC Sun C++ 5.8 -xlibmil -xlibmopt -features=tmplife
Patch 121017-10 -norunpath -xbuiltin=%all
2007/02/21 -features=tmplife -mt -I/usr/openwin/include
Configure arguments
--enable-application=browser --enable-xft --enable-svg --enable-canvas
--enable-static --enable-optimize=-xO3 --enable-official-branding
--enable-default-toolkit=gtk2 --disable-updater --disable-tests
--disable-debug --disable-shared --disable-auto-deps
--disable-freetype2
--srcdir=/export/home/mozilla/uild/firefox-2.0.0.8/src/mozilla
more information is contained in the readme
on the download page.
---------------------------------------------------
Mark A Olson
Research Professor
Interdisciplinary Center for Economic Science
George Mason University
`·.,, ><(((º> `·.,, ><(((º> `·.,, ><(((º
4400 University Dr.
MSN 1B2
Fairfax, VA 22030
Tele: (703)993-4846
Fax: (703)993-4851
Email: molson2 at gmu.edu
Web: http://ices.gmu.edu/
----- Original Message -----
From: users-request at lists.blastwave.org
Date: Saturday, October 20, 2007 3:40 pm
Subject: [Junk released by Allow List] users Digest, Vol 45, Issue 12
> Send users mailing list submissions to
> users at lists.blastwave.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.blastwave.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> users-request at lists.blastwave.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> users-owner at lists.blastwave.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Firefox Solaris8 failure (James Lee)
> 2. Re: MPlayer - Testing and Unstable (Jonathan Wheeler)
> 3. FNS, Solaris 10, and nail (Jeremiah Johnson)
> 4. Re: FNS, Solaris 10, and nail (Cory Omand)
> 5. Re: FNS, Solaris 10, and nail (Dennis Clarke)
> 6. SUNW dependencies (George Wyche)
> 7. Re: SUNW dependencies (Dennis Clarke)
> 8. Re: SUNW dependencies (George Wyche)
> 9. Re: SUNW dependencies (Dennis Clarke)
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:57:50 GMT
> From: James Lee <james at blastwave.org>
> Subject: Re: [csw-users] Firefox Solaris8 failure
> To: questions and discussions <users at lists.blastwave.org>
> Message-ID: <20071017.8575000.2681404935 at gyor.oxdrove.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 17/10/07, 04:10:28, George Wyche <gw at citasystems.com> wrote
> regarding
> Re: [csw-users] Firefox Solaris8 failure:
>
> > I have patched that Solaris 8, Blade100 up to date. It still has the
> > very same complaint. My "nm /lib/libCrun.so.1" does not match
> yours and
> > I don't know why.
> > nm /lib/libCrun.so.1 | grep 1c2N6FI_p
> > [191] | 21756| 12|FUNC |GLOB |0 |12 |__1c2N6FI_pv_
>
> You've not yet seen my result for that:
> $ nm /lib/libCrun.so.1 | grep 1c2N6FI_p
> [185] | 24804| 12|FUNC |GLOB |0 |12 |__1c2N6FI_pv_
>
> and did I say my patches were up-to-date?
>
>
>
> > and the error I get when I type "firefox" is the usual you see
> below.> WHERE is my 0_ on the end above?!!! Also. please note that
> YOUR symbol
> > resolution is missing an underscore before the p. Was that a
> mistype?> REQUIRED: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . .
> > __1c2N6FI_pv_0_
> > MINE: [191] | 21756| 12|FUNC |GLOB |0 |12 |__1c2N6FI_pv_
> > YOURS:[46] | 28724| 8|FUNC |GLOB |0 |12 |__1c2n6FIpv_0_
>
> I copied and pasted from your original message that has:
> __1c2n6FIpv_0_: referenced symbol not found
>
>
>
> > I sure would like to run Firefox. How do I proceed?
>
> > I am slowly turning this Blade100 into a development machine. I
> have put
> > on a bunch of SUNW development packages and gcc4 and gmake and have
> > compiled a trivial c program so I'm willing to attack the
> problem in
> > more detail, though I wish it would just go away.
>
> What error messages are you seeing now?
>
> Try "ldd -r" on the binaries to check that symbols references exist.
> You need to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH for firefox, (for a reason unknown
> to me it doesn't set its RPATH fully.)
>
> $ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/csw/mozilla/firefox/lib \
> ldd -r /opt/csw/mozilla/firefox/lib/firefox-bin
>
>
>
>
> James.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 00:24:42 +1300
> From: Jonathan Wheeler <jwheeler at blastwave.org>
> Subject: Re: [csw-users] MPlayer - Testing and Unstable
> To: questions and discussions <users at lists.blastwave.org>
> Message-ID: <4715F0FA.7030707 at blastwave.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Uwe Dippel wrote:
> > On 10/16/07, Jonathan Wheeler <jwheeler at blastwave.org> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Jonathan,
> >
> > in case you're at it, could you try to enable fontconfig ?
> > I can't get any OSD up ('o'), and any font I throw at it is
> handled with
> > "... doesn't look like a bitmap font description, ignoring."
>
> I think I've gone and traded one problem for another.
>
> From what I've been able to work out so far, the gnu iconv
> doesn't
> handle the C locale conversion properly on Solaris. The fix for
> the
> iconv errors was to 'disable' iconv, which is to say - use the
> version
> bundled into the solaris glibc instead, and --disable-iconv.
>
> Great, I built the package that you've tested, and sure enough the
> iconv
> errors go away.
> However, looking at the ./configure scrolling on by, we now have a
> new
> issue:
> Checking for bitmap font support ... yes
> Checking for freetype >= 2.0.9 ... no (iconv support needed)
> Checking for fontconfig ... no (freetype support needed)
> Checking for SSA/ASS support ... no (FreeType support needed)
>
> Hmm.
>
> I'll keep at it!
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:44:29 -0500
> From: "Jeremiah Johnson" <jeremiah.johnson at gmail.com>
> Subject: [csw-users] FNS, Solaris 10, and nail
> To: users at lists.blastwave.org
> Message-ID:
> <701ea59b0710180944v7ac90545n42bf470e57cb85dc at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I'm attempting to install nail on one of my Solaris 10 systems, but
> its failing because of a dependency on SUNWfns. According to the EOL
> docs, Federated Naming has been removed in Solaris 10. Apparently
> somebody did report it as a bug in 2006, but it is still not resolved.
>
> 0001198 packaging block
> (thomas) 2006-01-04
> inexistant dependency in Solaris 10
>
> I duped it (its early, not enough coffee) because mantis didnt display
> open bugs, so I didn't realize I had to click 'view bugs' when i went
> into the nail bug report..
>
> 0002633 1 packaging block
> new 2007-10-18 nail cannot
> install due to dependancy on SUNWfns.
>
> It would be great to see this fixed in the next update.
>
> Thanks
> -miah
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:55:48 -0700
> From: "Cory Omand" <comand at blastwave.org>
> Subject: Re: [csw-users] FNS, Solaris 10, and nail
> To: "questions and discussions" <users at lists.blastwave.org>
> Message-ID:
> <ffd485d70710180955v109be18ch853788c95212564e at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 10/18/07, Jeremiah Johnson <jeremiah.johnson at gmail.com> wrote:
> > It would be great to see this fixed in the next update.
>
> Hi Miah,
>
> The surest way for this to be tracked (vs. lost in the sea of users@)
> is to raise a bug against the nail package. There is a link to the
> bug tracker on the package page at
> http://www.blastwave.org/packages/nail.
>
> Regards,
> Cory.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:08:42 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Dennis Clarke" <dclarke at blastwave.org>
> Subject: Re: [csw-users] FNS, Solaris 10, and nail
> To: "questions and discussions" <users at lists.blastwave.org>
> Message-ID:
> <34478.72.39.216.186.1192727322.squirrel at mail.blastwave.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
> > On 10/18/07, Jeremiah Johnson <jeremiah.johnson at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> It would be great to see this fixed in the next update.
> >
> > Hi Miah,
> >
> > The surest way for this to be tracked (vs. lost in the sea of
> users@)> is to raise a bug against the nail package. There is a
> link to the
> > bug tracker on the package page at
> > http://www.blastwave.org/packages/nail.
>
> I just saw the bug report fly at me . So .. it's in there now.
>
>
> Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:39:40 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: (from nobody at localhost)
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:39:40 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: [nail 0002633]: nail cannot install due to dependancy on
> SUNWfns.X-Mailer: PHP/4.4.4
> X-Priority: 0
> Content-Length: 1610
>
>
> The following NEW bug has been ADDED.
> =======================================================================
> http://www.blastwave.org/mantis/view_bug_page.php?f_id=2633
> =======================================================================
> Reporter: miah
> Handler:
> =======================================================================
> Project: nail
> Bug ID: 0002633
> Category: packaging
> Reproducibility: always
> Severity: block
> Priority: normal
> Status: new
> =======================================================================
> Date Submitted: 2007-10-18 12:39 EDT
> Last Modified: 2007-10-18 12:39 EDT
> =======================================================================
> Summary: nail cannot install due to dependancy
> on SUNWfns.
> Description:
> Nail will not install.
>
> sfg-unixops# pkg-get -i nail
> No existing install of CSWnail found. Installing...
> Pre-existing local file nail-11.2,REV=2004.08.19-SunOS5.8-sparc-
> CSW.pkg.gzmatches checksum
> Keeping existing file
> Analysing special files...
> Hmmm. Retrying with different archive offset...936 blocks
>
> ERROR: no info for SUNWfns. Cannot install dependancy.
> ERROR: could not install required dependancies for CSWnail
>
> http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/content/eof/s10u1eof.html
> "Features Removed From the Solaris 10 Operating System"
> "Federated Naming Service XFN Libraries and Commands"
> =======================================================================
>
>
> Dennis
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 11:28:25 -0500
> From: George Wyche <gw at citasystems.com>
> Subject: [csw-users] SUNW dependencies
> To: questions and discussions <users at lists.blastwave.org>
> Message-ID: <471A2CA9.8060709 at citasystems.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> @all
> I notice in the package lists that the SUNW dependencies are not
> listed.
> Is this information available somewhere?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 12:45:09 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Dennis Clarke" <dclarke at blastwave.org>
> Subject: Re: [csw-users] SUNW dependencies
> To: "questions and discussions" <users at lists.blastwave.org>
> Message-ID:
> <49428.72.39.216.186.1192898709.squirrel at mail.blastwave.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
> > @all
> > I notice in the package lists that the SUNW dependencies are not
> listed.>
> > Is this information available somewhere?
>
> Actually no .. it is not. We have always built packages from the
> perspective that you have Solaris 8 or higher. You can actually
> install a
> Solaris 8 core install ( which is real real lean ) and then
> install a large
> number of CSW packages. You may need some SUNW packages that are
> above and
> beyond the core install eventually but certainly not the whole
> massive OS
> that is in the "everything plus the kitchen sink" installation
> options.
> It has been a while since I installed a Solaris 8 core install or
> even a
> Solaris 10 core install but ... I think ( as in I seem to recall )
> that you
> can install a lot of CSW packages based on not more than that.
>
> So in answer to your question ... no we do not keep a list of the SUNW
> dependency requirements.
>
> Dennis
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 12:13:03 -0500
> From: George Wyche <gw at citasystems.com>
> Subject: Re: [csw-users] SUNW dependencies
> To: questions and discussions <users at lists.blastwave.org>
> Message-ID: <471A371F.5010900 at citasystems.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> @Dennis
>
> Jeez, Dennis go outside and see the sunshine! It'll be winter soon.
> I didn't expect to find you answering this question. Thanks.
>
> I have to deal with Solars 8, 9, and 10 (up to 11/06 ver.) in
> various
> states. The place where I got a job is not happy about having
> Solaris
> around and we had to call them "hardware control apparatus". They
> are
> not allowed internet access AND I'm expected (at present) to keep
> a low
> profile with software development on it (them). I didn't do the
> install
> and there were no notes about what or why for existing software.
> With
> the help of several on this list I created a CD with tools I use
> from
> Blastwave and got them all to install without complaints.
>
> I'm still working on why Firefox (local html viewing) doesn't have
> all
> its symbol references satisfied, but a simple gcc on a 2 line c
> program
> gave me all sorts of strange errors. I got out the Solaris 8
> install
> disks, but got scared off adding the Developer Packages when the
> install
> process (that *I* followed) demanded that I supply the ip and
> netmasks.
> (Low profile, remember.) So I looked through the disks and found
> that
> stdio.h was in the SUNWhea so I added it. MUCH BETTER compiling!
> Slowly
> I've been adding more SUNW packages. I extracted all of the
> descriptions
> (remember, no internet, no GOOGLE to see want I need) and read
> through
> them all for likely files. Added a bunch more. Christ. Then I had
> to
> reapply the leventy-dozen patches!
>
> It has escaped me in the past that each time you add a package you
> gotta
> deal with patches lest the unpatched package might interfere with
> all of
> its more enlightened brothers who got patched.
>
> Sigh, today at home (workin' for the man on a Saturday... for
> free...),
> I found that I was still missing SUNWarc. That is when I decided
> to see
> about "known dependencies".
>
> I found a Solaris 8 verbose description of all official packages,
> even
> arranged by groups. It has specific suggestions about a minimum
> for
> 32bit program development and a 64bit addendum. I'll put those on
> next
> week. When I am successful, I would like (different from actually
> doing
> it) to add an article to Blastwave reminding new users to check
> for
> package presence AND patch situation.
>
> George Wyche
>
> Dennis Clarke wrote:
> >> @all
> >> I notice in the package lists that the SUNW dependencies are
> not listed.
> >>
> >> Is this information available somewhere?
> >
> > Actually no .. it is not. We have always built packages from the
> > perspective that you have Solaris 8 or higher. You can actually
> install a
> > Solaris 8 core install ( which is real real lean ) and then
> install a large
> > number of CSW packages. You may need some SUNW packages that
> are above and
> > beyond the core install eventually but certainly not the whole
> massive OS
> > that is in the "everything plus the kitchen sink" installation
> options.>
> > It has been a while since I installed a Solaris 8 core install
> or even a
> > Solaris 10 core install but ... I think ( as in I seem to recall
> ) that you
> > can install a lot of CSW packages based on not more than that.
> >
> > So in answer to your question ... no we do not keep a list of
> the SUNW
> > dependency requirements.
> >
> > Dennis
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > users at lists.blastwave.org
> > https://lists.blastwave.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 15:40:10 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Dennis Clarke" <dclarke at blastwave.org>
> Subject: Re: [csw-users] SUNW dependencies
> To: "questions and discussions" <users at lists.blastwave.org>
> Message-ID:
> <49660.72.39.216.186.1192909210.squirrel at mail.blastwave.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
> > @Dennis
> >
> > Jeez, Dennis go outside and see the sunshine! It'll be winter soon.
> > I didn't expect to find you answering this question. Thanks.
>
> OKay .. I went for a walk and of course you are right. It will
> be winter
> soon and there are pile of leaves out there. A few of them are the
> textbook maple leaf :
>
> http://www.blastwave.org/dclarke/blog/images/leafs.jpg
>
> The maple tree in my front yard is moving from green to yellow and
> red and I
> think that within a week it will drop all of those colours with
> nothing left
> but a skeleton to face the winter. Strange how trees lower their
> defenseswhen faced with winter.
>
> > I have to deal with Solars 8, 9, and 10 (up to 11/06 ver.) in
> various> states.
>
> Sounds like the typical server room.
>
> > The place where I got a job is not happy about having Solaris
> > around and we had to call them "hardware control apparatus".
>
> Don't tell me .. let me guess. They like Windows and Linux.
> Solaris is seen
> as some sort of old thing that no one understands anymore.
>
> > They are
> > not allowed internet access AND I'm expected (at present) to
> keep a low
> > profile with software development on it (them). I didn't do the
> install> and there were no notes about what or why for existing
> software. With
> > the help of several on this list I created a CD with tools I use
> from> Blastwave and got them all to install without complaints.
>
> I recall that ordeal and I'm glad some progress was made.
>
> > I'm still working on why Firefox (local html viewing) doesn't
> have all
> > its symbol references satisfied, but a simple gcc on a 2 line c
> program> gave me all sorts of strange errors.
>
> Can you post those errors ? I guess without internet access it
> must be
> tough to get data from out of those machines to anywhere.
>
> > I got out the Solaris 8 install
> > disks,
>
> blew off the dust ...
>
> # uname -a
> SunOS pluto 5.8 Generic_117350-50 sun4u sparc SUNW,UltraSPARC-IIi-
> cEngine# uptime
> 3:32pm up 1 day(s), 5:16, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.01
> #
>
> as you see .. I recently installed Solaris 8 Update 4 into a Sparc
> machineagain. Just for software port and test work. The old story
> being that if it
> works there .. then it works everywhere.
>
> > but got scared off adding the Developer Packages when the install
> > process (that *I* followed) demanded that I supply the ip and
> netmasks.
> That is weird. What did you install ? Sun ONE Studio 8 ? Studio
> 11 ?
>
> > (Low profile, remember.) So I looked through the disks and found
> that> stdio.h was in the SUNWhea so I added it.
>
> yeah .. you need that one.
>
> # pkginfo -l SUNWhea
> PKGINST: SUNWhea
> NAME: SunOS Header Files
> CATEGORY: system
> ARCH: sparc
> VERSION: 11.8.0,REV=2000.01.08.18.12
> BASEDIR: /
> VENDOR: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> DESC: SunOS C/C++ header files for general development of
> software PSTAMP: on28-patch20050311140515
> INSTDATE: Oct 19 2007 00:08
> HOTLINE: Please contact your local service provider
> STATUS: completely installed
> FILES: 1328 installed pathnames
> 38 shared pathnames
> 94 directories
> 15190 blocks used (approx)
>
>
> > MUCH BETTER compiling! Slowly
> > I've been adding more SUNW packages. I extracted all of the
> descriptions> (remember, no internet, no GOOGLE to see want I
> need) and read through
> > them all for likely files. Added a bunch more. Christ. Then I
> had to
> > reapply the leventy-dozen patches!
>
> Oh man .. I can relate. I have been there done that and its no
> damn fun.
>
> > It has escaped me in the past that each time you add a package
> you gotta
> > deal with patches lest the unpatched package might interfere
> with all of
> > its more enlightened brothers who got patched.
>
> hrmm .. true. This is part of the patch disaster that Solaris/Sun
> needs to
> fix. If you apply a patch 1xxxxx-01 and it updates a whack of
> files and then
> you come along and install ( from Solaris 8 GA or whatever ) some SUNW
> package which should have been patched ... no no .. hold on a sec
>
> If a patch needs to be applied and you are missing some package
> that the
> patch addresses then I don't think you can even apply the patch. The
> patchadd will fail because some of the packages being patched are
> missing.
> If you choose to remove and then reinstall some package then you
> may get
> into trouble.
>
> but .. I digress.
>
> > Sigh, today at home (workin' for the man on a Saturday... for
> free...),
> don't get me started. :-\
>
> > I found that I was still missing SUNWarc. That is when I decided
> to see
> > about "known dependencies".
>
> # pkginfo -l SUNWarc
> PKGINST: SUNWarc
> NAME: Archive Libraries
> CATEGORY: system
> ARCH: sparc
> VERSION: 11.8.0,REV=2000.01.08.18.12
> BASEDIR: /
> VENDOR: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> DESC: system libraries in archive (ar) format for software
> development of statically linked executables
> PSTAMP: on28-patch20070612065436
> INSTDATE: Oct 18 2007 23:31
> HOTLINE: Please contact your local service provider
> STATUS: completely installed
> FILES: 222 installed pathnames
> 9 shared pathnames
> 2 linked files
> 11 directories
> 20948 blocks used (approx)
>
> yeah .. I see that one from time ot time also
>
> > I found a Solaris 8 verbose description of all official
> packages, even
> > arranged by groups. It has specific suggestions about a minimum for
> > 32bit program development and a 64bit addendum. I'll put those
> on next
> > week. When I am successful, I would like (different from
> actually doing
> > it) to add an article to Blastwave reminding new users to check for
> > package presence AND patch situation.
>
> sure thing .. it sounds like a damn good idea.
>
>
> Dennis
>
> ps: see? I went out and did what you said and took a picture for you.
> :-)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at lists.blastwave.org
> https://lists.blastwave.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> End of users Digest, Vol 45, Issue 12
> *************************************
>
More information about the users
mailing list