The R13B03 release.OTP_R13B03

4 files changed, 525 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/cooked_tar_problem.tar.gz b/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/cooked_tar_problem.tar.gz
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..be2490581a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/cooked_tar_problem.tar.gz
diff --git a/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/corrupted.gz b/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/corrupted.gz
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..16331b350c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/corrupted.gz
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+�
+==========================================
+This file has a correct GZIP magic ID, but the rest of the
+header is corrupt.  Reading this file should result in an
+error.
diff --git a/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/realmen.html b/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/realmen.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..c810a5d088
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/realmen.html
@@ -0,0 +1,520 @@
+<TITLE>Real Programmers Don't Use PASCAL</TITLE>
+
+<H2 align=center>Real Programmers Don't Use PASCAL</H2>
+
+<H4 align=center><em>Ed Post<br>
+Graphic Software Systems<br>
+
+P.O. Box 673<br>
+25117 S.W. Parkway<br>
+Wilsonville, OR 97070<br>
+Copyright (c) 1982<br>
+</H4></EM>
+
+
+<H4 align=center><KBD> (decvax | ucbvax | cbosg | pur-ee | lbl-unix)!teklabs!ogcvax!gss1144!evp</KBD></H4>
+
+
+Back in the good old days -- the "Golden Era" of computers, it was
+easy to separate the men from the boys (sometimes called "Real Men"
+and "Quiche Eaters" in the literature). During this period, the Real
+Men were the ones that understood computer programming, and the Quiche
+Eaters were the ones that didn't. A real computer programmer said
+things like <KBD>"DO 10 I=1,10"</KBD> and <KBD>"ABEND"</KBD> (they
+actually talked in capital letters, you understand), and the rest of
+the world said things like <EM>"computers are too complicated for
+me"</EM> and <EM>"I can't relate to computers -- they're so
+impersonal"</EM>.  (A previous work [1] points out that Real Men don't
+"relate" to anything, and aren't afraid of being impersonal.) <P>
+
+But, as usual, times change. We are faced today with a world in which
+little old ladies can get computerized microwave ovens, 12 year old
+kids can blow Real Men out of the water playing Asteroids and Pac-Man,
+and anyone can buy and even understand their very own Personal
+Computer. The Real Programmer is in danger of becoming extinct, of
+being replaced by high-school students with TRASH-80s! <P>
+
+There is a clear need to point out the differences between the typical
+high-school junior Pac-Man player and a Real Programmer. Understanding
+these differences will give these kids something to aspire to -- a
+role model, a Father Figure. It will also help employers of Real
+Programmers to realize why it would be a mistake to replace the Real
+Programmers on their staff with 12 year old Pac-Man players (at a
+considerable salary savings). <P>
+
+
+<H3>LANGUAGES</H3>
+
+The easiest way to tell a Real Programmer from the crowd is by the
+programming language he (or she) uses.  Real Programmers use FORTRAN.
+Quiche Eaters use PASCAL. Nicklaus Wirth, the designer of PASCAL, was
+once asked, <EM>"How do you pronounce your name?"</EM>. He replied
+<EM>"You can either call me by name, pronouncing it 'Veert', or call
+me by value, 'Worth'."</EM> One can tell immediately from this comment
+that Nicklaus Wirth is a Quiche Eater.  The only parameter passing
+mechanism endorsed by Real Programmers is call-by-value-return, as
+implemented in the IBM/370 FORTRAN G and H compilers.  Real
+programmers don't need abstract concepts to get their jobs done: they
+are perfectly happy with a keypunch, a FORTRAN IV compiler, and a
+beer. <P>
+
+<UL>
+<LI> Real Programmers do List Processing in FORTRAN.
+
+<LI>  Real Programmers do String Manipulation in FORTRAN.
+
+<LI>  Real Programmers do Accounting (if they do it at all) in FORTRAN.
+
+<LI>  Real Programmers do Artificial Intelligence programs in FORTRAN.
+</UL> <P>
+
+If you can't do it in FORTRAN, do it in assembly language. If you can't  do
+it in assembly language, it isn't worth doing. <P>
+
+
+<H3>  STRUCTURED PROGRAMMING</H3>
+
+Computer science academicians have gotten into the "structured pro-
+gramming" rut over the past several years. They claim that programs
+are more easily understood if the programmer uses some special
+language constructs and techniques. They don't all agree on exactly
+which constructs, of course, and the examples they use to show their
+particular point of view invariably fit on a single page of some
+obscure journal or another -- clearly not enough of an example to
+convince anyone.  When I got out of school, I thought I was the best
+programmer in the world. I could write an unbeatable tic-tac-toe
+program, use five different computer languages, and create 1000 line
+programs that WORKED.  (Really!) Then I got out into the Real
+World. My first task in the Real World was to read and understand a
+200,000 line FORTRAN program, then speed it up by a factor of two. Any
+Real Programmer will tell you that all the Structured Coding in the
+world won't help you solve a problem like that -- it takes actual
+talent. Some quick observations on Real Programmers and Structured
+Programming: <P>
+
+<UL>
+<LI> Real Programmers aren't afraid to use GOTOs.
+
+<LI> Real Programmers can write five page long DO loops without
+getting confused.
+
+<LI> Real Programmers enjoy Arithmetic IF statements because they make
+the code more interesting.
+
+<LI> Real Programmers write self-modifying code, especially if it
+saves them 20 nanoseconds in the middle of a tight loop.
+
+<LI>  Programmers don't need comments: the code is obvious.
+
+<LI> Since FORTRAN doesn't have a structured <KBD>IF, REPEAT
+... UNTIL</KBD>, or <KBD>CASE</KBD> statement, Real Programmers don't
+have to worry about not using them. Besides, they can be simulated
+when necessary using assigned <KBD>GOTO</KBD>s.
+
+</UL> <P>
+
+Data structures have also gotten a lot of press lately. Abstract Data
+Types, Structures, Pointers, Lists, and Strings have become popular in
+certain circles. Wirth (the above-mentioned Quiche Eater) actually
+wrote an entire book [2] contending that you could write a program
+based on data structures, instead of the other way around. As all Real
+Programmers know, the only useful data structure is the
+array. Strings, lists, structures, sets -- these are all special cases
+of arrays and and can be treated that way just as easily without
+messing up your programing language with all sorts of
+complications. The worst thing about fancy data types is that you have
+to declare them, and Real Programming Languages, as we all know, have
+implicit typing based on the first letter of the (six character)
+variable name. <P>
+
+
+<H3>  OPERATING SYSTEMS</H3>
+
+What kind of operating system is used by a Real Programmer?  CP/M? God
+forbid -- CP/M, after all, is basically a toy operating system.  Even
+little old ladies and grade school students can understand and use
+CP/M. <P>
+
+Unix is a lot more complicated of course -- the typical Unix hacker
+never can remember what the <KBD>PRINT</KBD> command is called this
+week -- but when it gets right down to it, Unix is a glorified video
+game. People don't do Serious Work on Unix systems: they send jokes
+around the world on USENET and write adventure games and research
+papers. <P>
+
+No, your Real Programmer uses OS/370. A good programmer can find and
+understand the description of the IJK305I error he just got in his JCL
+manual.  A great programmer can write JCL without referring to the
+manual at all. A truly outstanding programmer can find bugs buried in
+a 6 megabyte core dump without using a hex calculator. (I have
+actually seen this done.) <P>
+
+OS/370 is a truly remarkable operating system. It's possible to des-
+troy days of work with a single misplaced space, so alertness in the
+programming staff is encouraged. The best way to approach the system
+is through a keypunch.  Some people claim there is a Time Sharing
+system that runs on OS/370, but after careful study I have come to the
+conclusion that they are mistaken. <P>
+
+
+<H3>  PROGRAMMING TOOLS</H3>
+
+What kind of tools does a Real Programmer use? In theory, a Real
+Programmer could run his programs by keying them into the front panel
+of the computer. Back in the days when computers had front panels,
+this was actually done occasionally.  Your typical Real Programmer
+knew the entire bootstrap loader by memory in hex, and toggled it in
+whenever it got destroyed by his program. (Back then, memory was
+memory -- it didn't go away when the power went off. Today, memory
+either forgets things when you don't want it to, or remembers things
+long after they're better forgotten.)  Legend has it that Seymour
+Cray, inventor of the Cray I supercomputer and most of Control Data's
+computers, actually toggled the first operating system for the CDC7600
+in on the front panel from memory when it was first powered
+on. Seymour, needless to say, is a Real Programmer. <P>
+
+One of my favorite Real Programmers was a systems programmer for Texas
+Instruments.  One day, he got a long distance call from a user whose
+system had crashed in the middle of some important work. Jim was able
+to repair the damage over the phone, getting the user to toggle in
+disk I/O instructions at the front panel, repairing system tables in
+hex, reading register contents back over the phone. The moral of this
+story: while a Real Programmer usually includes a keypunch and
+lineprinter in his toolkit, he can get along with just a front panel
+and a telephone in emergencies. <P>
+
+In some companies, text editing no longer consists of ten engineers
+standing in line to use an 029 keypunch. In fact, the building I work
+in doesn't contain a single keypunch. The Real Programmer in this
+situation has to do his work with a text editor program. Most systems
+supply several text editors to select from, and the Real Programmer
+must be careful to pick one that reflects his personal style. Many
+people believe that the best text editors in the world were written at
+Xerox Palo Alto Research Center for use on their Alto and Dorado
+computers [3]. Unfortunately, no Real Programmer would ever use a
+computer whose operating system is called SmallTalk, and would
+certainly not talk to the computer with a mouse. <P>
+
+Some of the concepts in these Xerox editors have been incorporated
+into editors running on more reasonably named operating systems. EMACS
+and VI are probably the most well known of this class of editors.  The
+problem with these editors is that Real Programmers consider "what you
+see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in text editors as it
+is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you
+got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving,
+dangerous. TECO, to be precise. <P>
+
+It has been observed that a TECO command sequence more closely resem-
+bles transmission line noise than readable text [4]. One of the more
+entertaining games to play with TECO is to type your name in as a
+command line and try to guess what it does. Just about any possible
+typing error while talking with TECO will probably destroy your
+program, or even worse -- introduce subtle and mysterious bugs in a
+once working subroutine. <P>
+
+For this reason, Real Programmers are reluctant to actually edit a
+program that is close to working. They find it much easier to just
+patch the binary object code directly, using a wonderful program
+called SUPERZAP (or its equivalent on non-IBM machines). This works so
+well that many working programs on IBM systems bear no relation to
+the original FORTRAN code.  In many cases, the original source code is
+no longer available. When it comes time to fix a program like this, no
+manager would even think of sending anything less than a Real
+Programmer to do the job -- no Quiche Eating structured programmer
+would even know where to start. This is called "job security". <P>
+
+Some programming tools NOT used by Real Programmers: <P>
+<UL>
+
+<LI> FORTRAN preprocessors like MORTRAN and RATFOR. The Cuisinarts of
+programming -- great for making Quiche. See comments above on
+structured programming.
+
+<LI>  Source language debuggers. Real Programmers can read core dumps.
+
+<LI> Compilers with array bounds checking. They stifle creativity,
+destroy most of the interesting uses for EQUIVALENCE, and make it
+impossible to modify the operating system code with negative
+subscripts. Worst of all, bounds checking is inefficient.
+
+<LI> Source code maintainance systems. A Real Programmer keeps his
+code locked up in a card file, because it implies that its owner
+cannot leave his important programs unguarded [5].
+
+</UL> <P>
+
+
+<H3>  THE REAL PROGRAMMER AT WORK</H3>
+
+Where does the typical Real Programmer work? What kind of programs are
+worthy of the efforts of so talented an individual? You can be sure
+that no real Programmer would be caught dead writing
+accounts-receivable programs in COBOL, or sorting mailing lists for
+People magazine. A Real Programmer wants tasks of earth-shaking
+importance (literally!): <P>
+
+<UL>
+
+<LI> Real Programmers work for Los Alamos National Laboratory, writing
+atomic bomb simulations to run on Cray I supercomputers.
+
+<LI> Real Programmers work for the National Security Agency, decoding
+Russian transmissions.
+
+<LI> It was largely due to the efforts of thousands of Real
+Programmers working for NASA that our boys got to the moon and back
+before the cosmonauts.
+
+<LI> The computers in the Space Shuttle were programmed by Real
+Programmers.
+    
+<LI> Programmers are at work for Boeing designing the operating
+systems for cruise missiles.
+
+</UL> <P>
+
+Some of the most awesome Real Programmers of all work at the Jet Pro-
+pulsion Laboratory in California. Many of them know the entire
+operating system of the Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft by heart. With
+a combination of large ground-based FORTRAN programs and small
+spacecraft-based assembly language programs, they can to do incredible
+feats of navigation and improvisation, such as hitting ten-kilometer
+wide windows at Saturn after six years in space, and repairing or
+bypassing damaged sensor platforms, radios, and batteries.  Allegedly,
+one Real Programmer managed to tuck a pattern-matching program into a
+few hundred bytes of unused memory in a Voyager spacecraft that
+searched for, located, and photographed a new moon of Jupiter. <P>
+
+One plan for the upcoming Galileo spacecraft mission is to use a grav-
+ity assist trajectory past Mars on the way to Jupiter. This trajectory
+passes within 80 +/- 3 kilometers of the surface of Mars. Nobody is
+going to trust a PASCAL program (or PASCAL programmer) for navigation
+to these tolerances. <P> 
+
+As you can tell, many of the world's Real Programmers work for the
+U.S.  Government, mainly the Defense Department. This is as it should
+be.  Recently, however, a black cloud has formed on the Real
+Programmer horizon. <P>
+
+It seems that some highly placed Quiche Eaters at the Defense
+Department decided that all Defense programs should be written in some
+grand unified language called "ADA" (registered trademark, DoD).  For
+a while, it seemed that ADA was destined to become a language that
+went against all the precepts of Real Programming -- a language with
+structure, a language with data types, strong typing, and
+semicolons. In short, a language designed to cripple the creativity of
+the typical Real Programmer.  Fortunately, the language adopted by DoD
+has enough interesting features to make it approachable: it's
+incredibly complex, includes methods for messing with the operating
+system and rearranging memory, and Edsgar Dijkstra doesn't like it
+[6]. (Dijkstra, as I'm sure you know, was the author of <EM>"GoTos
+Considered Harmful"</EM> -- a landmark work in programming
+methodology, applauded by Pascal Programmers and Quiche Eaters alike.)
+Besides, the determined Real Programmer can write FORTRAN programs in
+any language. <P>
+
+The real programmer might compromise his principles and work on some-
+thing slightly more trivial than the destruction of life as we know
+it, providing there's enough money in it. There are several Real
+Programmers building video games at Atari, for example. (But not
+playing them. A Real Programmer knows how to beat the machine every
+time: no challange in that.)  Everyone working at LucasFilm is a Real
+Programmer. (It would be crazy to turn down the money of 50 million
+Star Wars fans.) The proportion of Real Programmers in Computer
+Graphics is somewhat lower than the norm, mostly because nobody has
+found a use for Computer Graphics yet.  On the other hand, all
+Computer Graphics is done in FORTRAN, so there are a fair number
+people doing Graphics in order to avoid having to write COBOL
+programs. <P>
+
+
+<H3>  THE REAL PROGRAMMER AT PLAY</H3>
+
+Generally, the Real Programmer plays the same way he works -- with
+computers.  He is constantly amazed that his employer actually pays
+him to do what he would be doing for fun anyway, although he is
+careful not to express this opinion out loud. Occasionally, the Real
+Programmer does step out of the office for a breath of fresh air and a
+beer or two. Some tips on recognizing real programmers away from the
+computer room: <P>
+<UL>
+
+<LI> At a party, the Real Programmers are the ones in the corner
+talking about operating system security and how to get around it.
+
+<LI> At a football game, the Real Programmer is the one comparing the
+plays against his simulations printed on 11 by 14 fanfold paper.
+
+<LI> At the beach, the Real Programmer is the one drawing flowcharts
+in the sand.
+
+<LI> A Real Programmer goes to a disco to watch the light show.
+
+<LI> At a funeral, the Real Programmer is the one saying <EM>"Poor
+George.  And he almost had the sort routine working before the
+coronary."</EM>
+
+<LI> In a grocery store, the Real Programmer is the one who insists on
+running the cans past the laser checkout scanner himself, because he
+never could trust keypunch operators to get it right the first time.
+
+</UL> <P>
+
+
+<H3>  THE REAL PROGRAMMER'S NATURAL HABITAT</H3>
+
+What sort of environment does the Real Programmer function best in?
+This is an important question for the managers of Real
+Programmers. Considering the amount of money it costs to keep one on
+the staff, it's best to put him (or her) in an environment where he
+can get his work done. <P>
+
+The typical Real Programmer lives in front of a computer terminal.
+Surrounding this terminal are: <P>
+<UL>
+
+<LI> Listings of all programs the Real Programmer has ever worked on,
+piled in roughly chronological order on every flat surface in the office.
+
+<LI> Some half-dozen or so partly filled cups of cold
+coffee. Occasionally, there will be cigarette butts floating in the
+coffee. In some cases, the cups will contain Orange Crush.
+
+<LI> Unless he is very good, there will be copies of the OS JCL manual
+and the Principles of Operation open to some particularly interesting
+pages.
+
+<LI> Taped to the wall is a line-printer Snoopy calender for the year
+1969.
+
+<LI> Strewn about the floor are several wrappers for peanut butter
+filled cheese bars (the type that are made stale at the bakery so they
+can't get any worse while waiting in the vending machine).
+
+<LI> Hiding in the top left-hand drawer of the desk is a stash of
+double stuff Oreos for special occasions.
+
+<LI> Underneath the Oreos is a flow-charting template, left there by
+the previous occupant of the office. (Real Programmers write programs,
+not documentation. Leave that to the maintainence people.)
+
+</UL> <P>
+
+The Real Programmer is capable of working 30, 40, even 50 hours at a
+stretch, under intense pressure.  In fact, he prefers it that way. Bad
+response time doesn't bother the Real Programmer -- it gives him a
+chance to catch a little sleep between compiles. If there is not
+enough schedule pressure on the Real Programmer, he tends to make
+things more challenging by working on some small but interesting part
+of the problem for the first nine weeks, then finishing the rest in
+the last week, in two or three 50-hour marathons. This not only
+inpresses his manager, who was despairing of ever getting the project
+done on time, but creates a convenient excuse for not doing the
+documentation. In general: <P>
+
+<UL>
+
+<LI> No Real Programmer works 9 to 5. (Unless it's 9 in the evening to
+5 in the morning.)
+
+<LI> Real Programmers don't wear neckties.
+
+<LI>  Real Programmers don't wear high heeled shoes.
+
+<LI>  Real Programmers arrive at work in time for lunch. [9]
+
+<LI> A Real Programmer might or might not know his wife's name.  He
+does, however, know the entire ASCII (or EBCDIC) code table.
+
+<LI> Real Programmers don't know how to cook. Grocery stores aren't
+often open at 3 a.m., so they survive on Twinkies and coffee.
+
+</UL> <P>
+
+<H3> THE FUTURE</H3>
+
+What of the future? It is a matter of some concern to Real Programmers
+that the latest generation of computer programmers are not being
+brought up with the same outlook on life as their elders. Many of them
+have never seen a computer with a front panel. Hardly anyone
+graduating from school these days can do hex arithmetic without a
+calculator.  College graduates these days are soft -- protected from
+the realities of programming by source level debuggers, text editors
+that count parentheses, and user friendly operating systems.  Worst of
+all, some of these alleged computer scientists manage to get degrees
+without ever learning FORTRAN!  Are we destined to become an industry
+of Unix hackers and Pascal programmers? <P>
+
+On the contrary.  From my experience, I can only report that the
+future is bright for Real Programmers everywhere. Neither OS/370 nor
+FORTRAN show any signs of dying out, despite all the efforts of
+Pascal programmers the world over. Even more subtle tricks, like
+adding structured coding constructs to FORTRAN have failed.  Oh sure,
+some computer vendors have come out with FORTRAN 77 compilers, but
+every one of them has a way of converting itself back into a FORTRAN
+66 compiler at the drop of an option card -- to compile DO loops like
+God meant them to be. <P>
+
+Even Unix might not be as bad on Real Programmers as it once was. The
+latest release of Unix has the potential of an operating system worthy
+of any Real Programmer. It has two different and subtly incompatible
+user interfaces, an arcane and complicated terminal driver, virtual
+memory. If you ignore the fact that it's structured, even C
+programming can be appreciated by the Real Programmer: after all,
+there's no type checking, variable names are seven (ten?  eight?)
+characters long, and the added bonus of the Pointer data type is
+thrown in. It's like having the best parts of FORTRAN and assembly
+language in one place.  (Not to mention some of the more creative uses
+for <KBD>#define</KBD>.) <P>
+
+No, the future isn't all that bad.  Why, in the past few years, the
+popular press has even commented on the bright new crop of computer
+nerds and hackers ([7] and [8]) leaving places like Stanford and
+M.I.T.  for the Real World.  From all evidence, the spirit of Real
+Programming lives on in these young men and women.  As long as there
+are ill-defined goals, bizarre bugs, and unrealistic schedules, there
+will be Real Programmers willing to jump in and Solve The Problem,
+saving the documentation for later.  Long live FORTRAN! <P>
+
+<H3>ACKNOWLEGEMENT</H3>
+
+I would like to thank Jan E., Dave S., Rich G., Rich E. for their help
+in characterizing the Real Programmer, Heather B. for the
+illustration, Kathy E. for putting up with it, and <kbd>atd!avsdS:mark</kbd> for
+the initial inspriration. <P>
+
+<H3>REFERENCES</H3>
+
+[1]    Feirstein, B., <em>Real Men Don't Eat Quiche</em>, New York,
+       Pocket Books, 1982. <P>
+
+[2]    Wirth, N., <em>Algorithms + Datastructures = Programs</em>,
+       Prentice Hall, 1976. <P>
+
+[3]    Xerox PARC editors . . . <P>
+
+[4]    Finseth, C., <em>Theory and Practice of Text Editors -
+       or - a Cookbook for an EMACS</em>, B.S. Thesis,
+       MIT/LCS/TM-165, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
+       May 1980. <P>
+
+[5]    Weinberg, G., <em>The Psychology of Computer Programming</em>,
+       New York, Van Nostrabd Reinhold, 1971, page 110. <P>
+
+[6]    Dijkstra, E., <em>On the GREEN Language Submitted to the DoD</em>,
+       Sigplan notices, Volume 3, Number 10, October 1978. <P>
+
+[7]    Rose, Frank, <em>Joy of Hacking</em>, Science 82, Volume 3, Number 9,
+       November 1982, pages 58 - 66. <P>
+
+[8]    The Hacker Papers, <em>Psychology Today</em>, August 1980. <P>
+
+[9]    <em>Datamation</em>, July, 1983, pp. 263-265. <P>
+
+<hr>
+
+<ADDRESS> <a href="index.html">Hacker's Wisdom</a>/ Real Programmers
+Don't Use PASCAL </ADDRESS>
+
+<!-- hhmts start -->
+Last modified: Wed Mar 27 17:48:50 EST 1996
diff --git a/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/realmen.html.gz b/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/realmen.html.gz
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..9c662ff3c0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/kernel/test/file_SUITE_data/realmen.html.gz