- Oberon - mailman3.inf.ethz.ch

Licensing of images in the wikibook.
by peter＠easthope.ca 24 Aug '22

24 Aug '22

Hi, A gallery of images used in the wikibook is here. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Oberon_(operating_system) Each image has an accompanying licensing section. A partial list of license tags allowed by Wikimedia is here. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_tags/Free_Creative_Com… This is the page for one image. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:OberonBootLoaderConfigStrings.png In my thinking, three components in the page are critical to licensing. (1) The ETH license on the green background. (2) The Wikimedia license. In this case "Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International". (3) The evaluation by Seraphimblade of compatibility of (1) to (2). "evaluation" is a link. In my current thinking the page addresses ETH requirements and Wikimedia requirements. Comments? Complaints? If the page is OK, I'll revise some of the other image pages similarly. Thanks! ... P.L. mobile: +1 778 951 5147 VoIP: +1 604 670 0140 https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User:PeterEasthope

1 0

Re (4): Duplicate headers in SMTP.
by peter＠easthope.ca 10 Aug '22

10 Aug '22

From: Michael Schierl <schierlm(a)gmx.de> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 23:54:41 +0200 > "To:" may only appear once. Ug! Used email for more than three decades without recognizing that https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5322#section-3.6 allows no more than one of each of to, cc and bcc fields. =8~/ From: Paul Reed <paulreed(a)paddedcell.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 22:57:20 +0100 > "Oh, it's worse than that, Jim!" :) Star Trek? Yes, definitely worse. =8~( Certainly Oberon mail output should respect IETF. From: Michael Schierl <schierlm(a)gmx.de> > Try: > > To: <......(a)gmail.com>, <s....(a)shaw.ca> Here Mail is compiled with simpler = TRUE. <> are omitted. For input, I'd rather Oberon accept To: a@m To: b@n and Bcc: c@p Bcc: d@q than require To: a@m, b@n and Bcc: c@p, d@q . The former is better to read. In the Oberon interface, better to assemble. Also the IETF limits and recommends line lengths. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5322#section-2.1.1 In fact Bcc: c@p Bcc: d@q Bcc: e@r ... rarely fails. I've used lists of forty or more addresses without a failure. It's To: a@m To: b@n which snags. From: Paul Reed <paulreed(a)paddedcell.com> > The code ... will need a good coat of looking at, to reduce the > number of "TO:" headers to one. :( Another project ... but admire the progress of ETH Oberon over a decade ago. Regards, ... P.L.

7 17

Constant folding, Re: Bit-fiddling: SETs and type c
by Andreas Pirklbauer 09 Aug '22

09 Aug '22

CORRECTION: And of course, one also needs to reverse the sign inside the new brackets ( “-" instead of “+" ) PROCEDURE P; VAR ch: CHAR; BEGIN ch := CHR(ORD(ch) - (ORD("a") - ORD("A”))) END P; 2 90E00004 LDR R0 SP 4 3 40090020 SUB R0 R0 32 # ORD(“a) - ORD(“A”) = 97 - 65 = 32 --> constants folded 4 B0E00004 STR R0 SP 4

1 0

Constant folding, Re: Bit-fiddling: SETs and type casts in Oberon-07
by Andreas Pirklbauer 09 Aug '22

09 Aug '22

If you put extra brackets around the last two calls to ORD, as in: PROCEDURE P; VAR ch: CHAR; BEGIN ch := CHR(ORD(ch) - (ORD("a") + ORD("A”))) END P; then the official Oberon-07 compiler does actually fold the constants: 2 90E00004 LDR R0 SP 4 3 40090020 SUB R0 R0 32 # ORD(“a) - ORD(“A”) = 97 - 65 = 32 --> constants folded 4 B0E00004 STR R0 SP 4

1 0

Re (2): Duplicate headers in SMTP.
by peter＠easthope.ca 22 Jul '22

22 Jul '22

From: Michael Schierl <sc...(a)gmx.de> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 22:03:23 +0200 > Where? The complete message with addresses and body redacted, ... P.L. =================================================== This is the mail system at host gateway20.websitewelcome.com. I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below. For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster. If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message. The mail system <......(a)gmail.com>: host gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[142.250.102.27] said: 550-5.7.1 [192.185.70.14] Our system has detected that this message is not RFC 550-5.7.1 5322 compliant: duplicate headers. To reduce the amount of spam sent 550-5.7.1 to Gmail, this message has been blocked. Please review 550 5.7.1 RFC 5322 specifications for more information. l21-20020a170906939500b0072b460163d9si5427332ejx.196 - gsmtp (in reply to end of DATA command) Content-Description: Delivery report Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; gateway20.websitewelcome.com X-Postfix-Queue-ID: E4E99400E573F X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; p....(a)easthope.ca Arrival-Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 08:56:40 -0500 (CDT) Final-Recipient: rfc822; ......(a)gmail.com Original-Recipient: rfc822;......(a)gmail.com Action: failed Status: 5.7.1 Remote-MTA: dns; gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550-5.7.1 [192.185.70.14] Our system has detected that this message is not RFC 550-5.7.1 5322 compliant: duplicate headers. To reduce the amount of spam sent 550-5.7.1 to Gmail, this message has been blocked. Please review 550 5.7.1 RFC 5322 specifications for more information. l21-20020a170906939500b0072b460163d9si5427332ejx.196 - gsmtp Return-Path: <p....(a)easthope.ca> Received: from cm12.websitewelcome.com (cm12.websitewelcome.com [100.42.49.8]) by gateway20.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4E99400E573F for <......(a)gmail.com>; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 08:56:40 -0500 (CDT) Received: from ccx.websitewelcome.com ([192.185.179.163]) by cmsmtp with SMTP id Et8yo7XbRjldVEt8yoWNQ5; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 08:56:40 -0500 X-Authority-Reason: ss=1 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=easthope.ca ; s=default; h=Date:Message-Id:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=cHZaRtTeG4LjnECXIxieYVJBR1ELMdBPMB0YIYqZP68=; b=WDY499cvDCBJRuj31vSSdEexqX KZj+P3XtcLhXqX64nUkE5HTVFHW57FSEwDzPyjArtCAU+AFY7vjxM16BflEvQjJ/GEkxgwavgXJLe vKsh7KNe2TVPReYDTUeBH9KU+QQHBynWIfsEJmeowUz6b1ezXg1Qv91gQHOau9ankrxh9mSiaSe9/ 2kGPFD71qMadZNi4rrdoX6AgwOkUFsSs114Zcp/rE45CFhzW2GipO0ZJgkDnKNMctJbWmjw2QrMmR 2uALVYKD1mPdGx6+mrp1nlC9acpBm7zME8tRkqPjAD6FFvl3gnIo8Wcij5aMSSP0KWme25Eh7Djzd laxTLx2w==; Received: from s0106a84e3f6ccb23.gv.shawcable.net ([24.108.14.249]:53648 helo=joule.invalid) by ccx.websitewelcome.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from <p....(a)easthope.ca>) id 1oEt8y-002pSy-Kr; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 08:56:40 -0500 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=joule) by joule.invalid with smtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <p....(a)easthope.ca>) id 1oEt8w-0000XL-Ae; Fri, 22 Jul 2022 06:56:38 -0700 From: p....(a)easthope.ca X-Mailer: Oberon Mail (ejz) on LinuxA2 Gen. 32-bit, rev.9799 To: ......(a)gmail.com To: s....(a)shaw.ca Cc: p....(a)easthope.ca Subject: Test of ... Message-Id: <E1oEt8w-0000XL-Ae(a)joule.invalid> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 06:56:38 -0700 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ccx.websitewelcome.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - gmail.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - easthope.ca X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 24.108.14.249 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1oEt8y-002pSy-Kr X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: s0106a84e3f6ccb23.gv.shawcable.net (joule.invalid) [24.108.14.249]:53648 X-Source-Auth: p....(a)easthope.ca X-Email-Count: 3 X-Org: HG=hgreseller;ORG=hostgator; X-Source-Cap: ZWFzdGhvcGU7bW9uaWNhO2NjeC53ZWJzaXRld2VsY29tZS5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes

3 2

Duplicate headers in SMTP. Was RFC 5322 and ETH Oberon SMTP.
by peter＠easthope.ca 22 Jul '22

22 Jul '22

>From schierlm at gmx.de Fri Jul 15 19:22:23 2022 > As J?rg already suggested, look at the headers/content of the emails, ... Here is another "Undelivered" reply from a gmail address. > This is the mail system at host gateway20.websitewelcome.com. > ... > <......(a)gmail.com>: host gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[142.250.102.27] said: > 550-5.7.1 [192.185.70.14] Our system has detected that this message is not > RFC 550-5.7.1 5322 compliant: duplicate headers. To reduce the amount of > spam sent 550-5.7.1 to Gmail, this message has been blocked. Please review > 550 5.7.1 RFC 5322 specifications for more information. > l21-20020a170906939500b0072b460163d9si5427332ejx.196 - gsmtp (in reply to > end of DATA command) Note "5322 compliant: duplicate headers." These header fields were added by smarthost ccx.websitewelcome.com. > X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report > X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ccx.websitewelcome.com > X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - gmail.com > X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] RFC 5322 doesn't mention the X-AntiAbuse header. It provides a syntax for folding a long header body. One folded header is an alternative to the four X-AntiAbuse headers. The table in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5322#section-3.6 Field Definitions allows unlimited repetition of some fields. With no mention of the X-AntiAbuse field in the RFC, repetition should be OK. Probably the MUA (the Oberon system here) can't prevent ccx.websitewelcome.com from adding the multiple headers. Refusal to accept a message because it contains a header meant to combat spam is perverse but beyond my influence. Failure of the message to mun.ca is entirely distinct. Blocking all messages from a prominent server because of "reputation" doesn't strike me as good practise but switching to another server may be the only feasible solution. Regards, ... P.L.

3 2

Correction: Re: One instance of mail failure.
by peter＠easthope.ca 19 Jul '22

19 Jul '22

The noun is practice rather than practise. ... P.L.

1 0

One instance of mail failure.
by peter＠easthope.ca 19 Jul '22

19 Jul '22

This is the content of an outgoing Mail.Out.Text document. The body of the message is just the time stamp from System.Time. ===================================== To: test(a)mun.ca Subject: Test message. 18.07.2022 18:48:15 ===================================== The "source" of the reply follows. Note "sending MTA's poor reputation." Isn't this just mun.ca refusing to accept a message from gateway24.websitewelcome.com? Another MTA is likely to yield a different result. Anyone can try it. Is the refusal a good practise for an institutional mail server? The ideas from Joerg, Michael and Paul are still on my list. Just need to finish the tutorial before tackling a new project. Regards & Thanks, ... P.L. ===================================== X-Oberon-Status: R010000000 X-UIDL: UID98435-1329772258 Return-Path: <> Delivered-To: peter(a)easthope.ca Received: from ccx.websitewelcome.com by ccx.websitewelcome.com with LMTP id yIt3Argv1mI4iAoANNaTog (envelope-from <>) for <peter(a)easthope.ca>; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:14:48 -0500 Return-path: <> Envelope-to: peter(a)easthope.ca Delivery-date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:14:48 -0500 Received: from gateway24.websitewelcome.com ([192.185.51.196]:33957) by ccx.websitewelcome.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) id 1oDedD-002tds-Vv for peter(a)easthope.ca; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:14:47 -0500 Received: by gateway24.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) id DB9CFEFF8; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:14:47 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:14:47 -0500 (CDT) From: MAILER-DAEMON(a)gateway24.websitewelcome.com (Mail Delivery System) Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender To: peter(a)easthope.ca Auto-Submitted: auto-replied MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="AA51014B82.1658204087/gateway24.websitewelcome.com" Message-Id: <20220719041447.DB9CFEFF8(a)gateway24.websitewelcome.com> This is a MIME-encapsulated message. --AA51014B82.1658204087/gateway24.websitewelcome.com Content-Description: Notification Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii This is the mail system at host gateway24.websitewelcome.com. I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below. For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster. If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message. The mail system <test(a)mun.ca>: host esa02.ucs.mun.ca[134.153.136.22] refused to talk to me: 554-esa02.ucs.mun.ca 554 Your access to this mail system has been rejected due to the sending MTA's poor reputation. If you believe that this failure is in error, please contact the intended recipient via alternate means. --AA51014B82.1658204087/gateway24.websitewelcome.com Content-Description: Delivery report Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; gateway24.websitewelcome.com X-Postfix-Queue-ID: AA51014B82 X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; peter(a)easthope.ca Arrival-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 20:48:53 -0500 (CDT) Final-Recipient: rfc822; test(a)mun.ca Original-Recipient: rfc822;test(a)mun.ca Action: failed Status: 4.0.0 Remote-MTA: dns; esa02.ucs.mun.ca Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 554-esa02.ucs.mun.ca 554 Your access to this mail system has been rejected due to the sending MTA's poor reputation. If you believe that this failure is in error, please contact the intended recipient via alternate means. --AA51014B82.1658204087/gateway24.websitewelcome.com Content-Description: Undelivered Message Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: <peter(a)easthope.ca> Received: from cm11.websitewelcome.com (cm11.websitewelcome.com [100.42.49.5]) by gateway24.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA51014B82 for <test(a)mun.ca>; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 20:48:53 -0500 (CDT) Received: from ccx.websitewelcome.com ([192.185.179.163]) by cmsmtp with SMTP id DcM1oRjBllPpeDcM1oHEre; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 20:48:53 -0500 X-Authority-Reason: nr=8 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=easthope.ca ; s=default; h=Date:Message-Id:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=RraxDEmG7nZ3uWEEKUls5clxcAwQOPZeDPz0bSf/o3A=; b=LYrs/36Zt9HnIRg38zpNkxOiEd rjtrN7mBFesO13Ltpqbp7tl2olPueZ67Ztmh/PDVJhtS4nXeZbXg1+wKavdgdZutDanw4as3f8PmB 5/nyIxyrtkhCmg+wc4XhYaiLd5qYKzvQuLqfsSEKvdlolwqJyfRQkCM4IWcyaoPVZ5Mb7MYf9Rjjc aqeGRoALICDNXzQ/uLhJYbYmAiYB7FAPfcpkPoHjFr9KLmAor/b+jJyxJdV0XlHAIawQoRKY2XVY3 ugAHzFLdSAT7EU34RroeRb7elyWcSn2sS+yI7dRc/CLV9Gd6dmDDF1Hp3Lf9IvdJWQbPM7CBGlcAi EXWllPQg==; Received: from s0106a84e3f6ccb23.gv.shawcable.net ([24.108.14.249]:50748 helo=joule.invalid) by ccx.websitewelcome.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from <peter(a)easthope.ca>) id 1oDcM1-00244S-DD; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 20:48:53 -0500 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=joule) by joule.invalid with smtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <peter(a)easthope.ca>) id 1oDcLz-0001Eu-SC; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 18:48:51 -0700 From: peter(a)easthope.ca X-Mailer: Oberon Mail (ejz) on LinuxA2 Gen. 32-bit, rev.9799 To: test(a)mun.ca Cc: peter(a)easthope.ca Subject: Test message. Message-Id: <E1oDcLz-0001Eu-SC(a)joule.invalid> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 18:48:51 -0700 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ccx.websitewelcome.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - mun.ca X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - easthope.ca X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 24.108.14.249 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1oDcM1-00244S-DD X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: s0106a84e3f6ccb23.gv.shawcable.net (joule.invalid) [24.108.14.249]:50748 X-Source-Auth: peter(a)easthope.ca X-Email-Count: 1 X-Org: HG=hgreseller;ORG=hostgator; X-Source-Cap: ZWFzdGhvcGU7bW9uaWNhO2NjeC53ZWJzaXRld2VsY29tZS5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes 18.07.2022 18:48:15 --AA51014B82.1658204087/gateway24.websitewelcome.com-- =====================================

1 0

Re (2): Attribution of graphics.
by peter＠easthope.ca 18 Jul '22

18 Jul '22

From: peter(a)easthope.ca Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 13:27:20 -0700 > The arrow isn't changing. The copyright on the arrow, belonging to > Professors Wirth and Gutknecht, continues indefinitely? I don't see the arrow in the screen shots in the Lilith Handbook, 1982. According to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oberon_genealogy.svg it appeared first in 1985 in Oberon. Correct? Thx, ... P.L.

1 0

Re: [Oberon] Attribution of graphics.
by peter＠easthope.ca 18 Jul '22

18 Jul '22

Obvious questionable point under Licensing in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:OberonMouse1.jpg . "Copyright (c) 1990-2003" is from the ETH Oberon license. At the bottom of http://www.projectoberon.com the copyright range is 1987-2021. So the commons page should be corrected to 1987-2021? I've always wondered about an upper limit on copyright. Before the Web, a paper book could state Copyright 1927 and that was the year when the book appeared in stores. If a knock-off was printed in 1929, it was in violation. The original didn't have to claim 1927-1929. The arrow isn't changing. The copyright on the arrow, belonging to Professors Wirth and Gutknecht, continues indefinitely? Thx, ... P.L.

1 0