Linux-Advocacy Digest #400, Volume #25 Sat, 26 Feb 00 07:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: NETZERO-IS IT POSSIBLE to connect to with Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows 2000: flat sales ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Microsoft, MS-Spammers, Gay Bashing, Right-wing Politics, Usenet Censorship
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Quake 3 & GPL (Anthony Ord)
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K ("Robert Moir")
Re: Giving up on NT (The WebDragon)
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Russ Allbery)
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Russ Allbery)
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Russ Allbery)
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Russ Allbery)
Re: Windows advocacy: what's the point? (Greg Copeland)
Re: C vs C++ (Greg Copeland)
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (Mario Klebsch)
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (Mario Klebsch)
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (Mario Klebsch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: NETZERO-IS IT POSSIBLE to connect to with Linux
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 07:55:40 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I believe NETZERO claims to be defenders of the
free world or
> whatever. How come they do not support Linux?
Do we 'need them' to
> support Linux or can I use a Linux dialer to
log
onto MY Netzero
> account? Basically speaking, if I can not
login
to an ISP on my Linux
> box then I don't need that ISP! I only have
dial-up access in my area
> at the present time (and probally for some time
to come). I am fairly
> new to Linux but I like it. I can login to my
other ISP accounts on
> my Linux box with no problem. I contacted
NETZERO for tech support
> and the basically they do not support any OS
other than Windows, NT
> etc...They claim to be working on the MAC OS
currently.
>
> I'm not exactly "cheap". I do pay for my other
ISP accounts. But, I
> think NETZERO and other free ISP are a pretty
cool concept!
>
> Any advice on how to connect to NETZERO?
>
> Thanks y'all
>
I stumbled on this free ISP info the other day.
Hav'nt tried it yet, hope it helps.
http://www.linuxstart.com/~millerlw/freeisp.htm
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: flat sales
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 18:42:27 +1000
"Iain Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Why should they? There are no fundamental differences between NT and
> > Windows 2000 that are anything like the switch from Win16 to Win32.
They
> > were completely different memory models, completely different API's, and
> > completely different feature sets. Windows 2000 is a superset of
Windows NT
> > 4. The only things that need replacing are certain classes of device
> > drivers.
>
> However I will still bet that the average (l)user will replace all of
their
> current programs, whether it be M$Office9[57], Publisher or any other M$
or
> other app, with the most recent (i.e. "designed for Windows2000").
>
> Bad move or no, this is what will happen. (l)Users will be (l)users - and
when
> M$/some-micro$oft-buddy says "buy something" generally they will.
Which is substantially different from your original claim.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Microsoft, MS-Spammers, Gay Bashing, Right-wing Politics, Usenet
Censorship
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 09:04:45 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I don't hate gay people, I hate their deviant behavior.
> I live in NYC Mark and have seen my share of deviants, on a daily basis.
> Green haired men dressed as women. Women dressed as biker men and so
forth.
> Have YOU ever seen the Greenwhich Village Halloween parade?
> A spectectle of deviant behavior second to none.
Hey, if you hate NY so damned much, then why don't you get your ass the
hell out of there? Go move to a nice hick town in the 'burbs where you
can see rednecks driving rusty, piece of shit pickup trucks all day
long. Lots of toothless welfare babes are waiting for you.
> I'm opposed to another man sticking his dick up my ass.
Well, no one said you had to "take a dick up your ass". And as for guys
taking it up the ass -- why exactly do you give 2 shits? As long as
they do it in their own homes, who gives a flying fuck what they do in
private. Again, you obssess over an imagine what homos are doing when
they have sex. Exactly HOW DO YOU KNOW what they do when they have sex?
You've got issues, Steve.
And as for guys fucking girls up the ass -- hey, I like the idea. It's
easy -- just tell the girl to take a shit, tell her to douche out her
asshole, and wear a condom. Me myself, I like to do the
138*cos(30)/sqrt(3) position and lick pussy. And don't tell me licking
pussy has to be dirty. Hey, there's an art to cunnilingous. You more
or less have to inspect the pussy to make sure it's healthy. Take her
panties off, and make sure her pussy doesn't smell like shit. Make sure
there's no flies or "crotch crickets" on her pubes.
You CAN lick pussy and be healthy; just don't stick your tongue deep
inside her vagina. Always stay outside of the pussy, on the periphery.
Bite into her clitoris, and gently tug on it with your mouth. BUT KEEP
YOUR TONGUE OUT OF HER LOVE CANAL.
> Linux,Windows,whatever is a small, insignificant fly in the ointment
> compared to what your real agenda is.
...and yet you judge people's sexuality based on whether they're
Wintrolls or Lintrolls. See below.
> Great bunch of folks.
> Not a Bone smoking fella amongst them....
>
> Take a look a Drestin's wife some time....
But then again, Drestin never spouts off any homophobic or racist
remarks as you have done. So what if Bilk "smokes boners"? Why is that
any of your business? Some of you idiots are so immature. Again, we
see Steve, who never gets anything, and who is jealous because homos are
getting it.
You're the one who posted here as rectumlinear, remember? This shit is
so stupid. The fact that people have to do "background checks" on other
people, just because they're a linvocate or a winvocate, or they're
this, or they're that. Don't you idiots have a life?
Bilk is only doing this shit to get your asses all riled up. Yet, you
keep replying.
I personally think you homophobic imbeciles are insecure about your own
sexuality. It's like, they're not very manly themsevles, so they have
to point to homos as being all promiscous and shit. Meanwhile, it's OK
for YOU to sit here and blabber on about something that never happened.
(I blew a load all over Amy, etc.)
> Take a look at your shit BILK...
Yeah -- take a shit and stare down the bowl.
You know Steve, Bilk was just doing the stuff to get you all riled up.
I personally don't agree with the guy or everything he says. You and
mcswain have taken his insults, which were superficial IMO, and turned
them into a major personal attack. And while I think this whole
discussion is funny, the people who have to lower themselves and attack
other people, no matter WHO threw the first puch, have nothing better to
talk about here.
And again, the question is: who are the real homosexuals here? You and
mcawain seem to know an aweful lot about what homos do when they have sex.
--
Donn
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Ord)
Subject: Re: Quake 3 & GPL
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 09:52:25 GMT
On Thu, 24 Feb 2000 19:01:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>This whole Quake 3 and GPL issue has made me wonder something...
>
>If I write an application entirely on my own and wanted to sell it and
>keep my programming methods secret, could someone come along and
>say "You ripped this off a GPLed application", and force me to have to
>release the source code in order to prove it isn't ripped off?
You would have to release the source code under seal to a court. See the
current Caldera vs M$ case for details.If you remember, this was the one where
M$ claimed to have lost the source code to Windows 95...
>Isn't that a Catch-22? (And has this issue already come up and been
>debated to death?)
>
>-andrew
Regards
Anthony
--
=========================================
| And when our worlds |
| They fall apart |
| When the walls come tumbling in |
| Though we may deserve it |
| It will be worth it - Depeche Mode |
=========================================
------------------------------
From: "Robert Moir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 10:15:50 -0000
Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:896ooe$iae$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[...]
> Its really not that complex Paul.. you dont even have to ever touched
> Linux, Ultrix, AIX etc to know. Christopher explained it.. its the richer
> enviroment
> The fact is simply that Linux has the momentum ..
Momentum = hype?
> so if some
> software is going to be available on Unix its going to bee also available
> on Linux... because the amount of desktops running Linux is at least as
> large as the rest combined. Linux has simply reached critical mass
OK, so Linux is better because more people use it? Well then, even Windows
95 is obviously better than Linux using your logic here. Wow, an interesting
theory!
> I dont think its a better server as Solaris or FreeBSD.. its simply a
> better graphical workstation because developement of software happens on
> Linux... and the best tools for development exist on Linux.
Software development happens on a lot of platforms.
------------------------------
From: The WebDragon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Date: 26 Feb 2000 10:15:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
josco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Let us priase win95 and welcome Windows 2000, the Whistler edition in
| 2001, the edition for consumers and game players as well as the edition
| for networks and workstations. I always wanted an reason to buy a SMP
| system for home.
It suddenly occurs to me to suggest some sort of garish pun involving
Whistler's Mother...
--
send mail to mactech (at) webdragon (dot) net instead of the above address.
this is to prevent spamming. e-mail reply-to's have been altered
to prevent scan software from extracting my address for the purpose
of spamming me, which I hate with a passion bordering on obsession.
------------------------------
From: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
Date: 26 Feb 2000 02:11:57 -0800
In gnu.misc.discuss, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have no such notion. However, I believe that in the context of a
> capitalist economy, they are more or less essential.
This is the point where you two apparently disagree.
Given that to my knowledge there has never been an otherwise
fully-developed and stable capitalist economy without the notion of
copyright and patents, at least in the modern era, there doesn't appear to
be much in the way of empirical evidence to support either of your
positions.
I think we can all imagine ways in which it could work and ways in which
it could fail badly. Personally, I think it's unlikely that it's ever
going to be seriously tried, which makes the question of whether or not it
would be viable largely academic.
> There are people such as Phillip Lord who point blank don't accept the
> assumptions of capitalism and "propertyism" and if you don't accept the
> notion of extensive property rights ( which are, as I've stated, by no
> means some kind of moral absolute ) then it makes sense to also reject
> intellectual property rights.
I don't understand why you keep raising this red herring when the person
with whom you're debating has already clearly stated that this is not
representative of his position.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
------------------------------
From: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
Date: 26 Feb 2000 02:16:51 -0800
In gnu.misc.discuss, Jeffrey B Siegal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Masterson wrote:
>> Even in the packaged software realm, there is a trust factor. Few
>> people will buy an off-the-shelf product that they cannot return unless
>> they've built up a trust that they're getting something good. This
>> might be a trust of the selling company, a prior experience with the
>> product, a recommendation from friend, newspaper, etc.
> Exactly, and this is why a lot of people would sponsor John Commack
> (sp?) to develop Quake IV as a free software product if he wanted to do
> it that way. Do you doubt it?
No. But I do doubt that it would amount to nearly as much as he'd make by
writing Quake IV first and then selling it.
For one thing, the issue of instant vs. delayed gratification comes into
play. To sponsor the writing of a problem, one has to invest money
up-front and expect returns months or years down the road. In a heavily
consumer-oriented society such as the current United States (and most
other industrial countries, for that matter, although possibly not to the
same degree), this is a very foreign notion normally reserved for
investors and venture capital firms. People don't clearly understand it,
and certainly don't do it on a regular basis. cf multiple economic
studies on the planning horizon of the average consumer.
For another thing, there always exists the possibility that his next
effort will fail for whatever reason. There are plenty of examples of
excellent programmers who attempted projects that were beyond their
capabilities or that were poorly-thought-out for whatever reason. Past
performance is not always a good indicator; waiting for a completed
product before putting up money is considerably safer.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
------------------------------
From: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
Date: 26 Feb 2000 02:28:58 -0800
In gnu.misc.discuss, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Aladdin make their money through traditional licensing. As do Cygnus
I don't know about Aladdin, but this was incorrect for Cygnus for many
years and probably still was up to the point they were bought out by Red
Hat. Remember, Cygnus's commercial toolchain product was a fairly recent
thing; they were a profitable company solely on support contracts and
porting contracts for the embedded systems market for some time before
that.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
------------------------------
From: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
Date: 26 Feb 2000 02:23:00 -0800
In gnu.misc.discuss, Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's an interesting question about that analogy: why are TV, radio,
> and web pages paid for mostly by sponsorship, but theatrical movies and
> home video paid for directly by the consumers? Currently, the
> traditional software industry is apparently modeled after home video:
> you buy (or rent) a copy, and you're not allowed to let your friends
> make duplicates. What would it take to shift it to the sponsorship
> model?
I'm not sure an advocate of free software would want to draw that
particular comparison, as the primary difference between theatrical movies
and TV programs is that theatrical movies are significantly higher quality
in pretty much all technical respects and even in most creative respects.
(There are, of course, exceptions.)
The obvious conclusion to draw from this example would be that producing
high-quality products requires more investment of resources than can be
easily produced by sponsorship models. I'm not sure that the typical
banner-ad-filled web page is a good counter-example, either.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
------------------------------
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows advocacy: what's the point?
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 11:19:32 GMT
Wow! Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed or what? As insulting
and utterly ridicules as you are, I will respond with a simple message.
Your content is composed strictly of insults and vague uttering
completely without facts or contextual experience. As such, it's best
to ignore your ramblings as troll material. To say that I'm a bad
administrator is, of course, without merit. Generally speaking,
everywhere I go, I tend to function as a mentor on NT (yes, NT), Linux,
and UNIX. Bluntly stated, there are few people that have been using NT
as long as I have and fewer that have used Linux as long as I have.
While the duration of use does not insure competency, it nonetheless
should lend it self as a simple metric. It obviously is one of the
requisites.
Greg
root wrote:
>
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > "Greg Copeland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I agree with those numbers. We found that Win95/98 system need to be
> > > reinstalled every 6-8 months.
> >
> > That I can agree with. Applications installed on Win9X seem to have
> > their way with the system and don't even shut the door on their
> > way out. The Win9x registry usuall becomes a tattered mess, but...
> > > In fact, if we didn't, they system would
> > > force you to within 12 months.
> >
> > "force you to"?
> >
> > > We found that NT systems need to be reinstalled about every 12 months.
> >
> > That's a bunch of crap. If anything, this is indicative of your
> > incompetency as a sysadmin.
> >
> > > Furthermore, NT needed regularly
> > > scheduled reboots (weekly is best, but you can push it as far at 6 weeks
> > > before it grinds it's self to a halt from the kernel leaks).
> >
> > Again, more BS. What service pack? 0? If it was a 0 install of NT, I
> > can believe this, but still, it's rediculous nonetheless. Anything
> > after SP3, this is a complete lie, or you really ARE that incompetent.
> >
> > > Furthermore, if you can get a system to last 12 months, we found that you
> > > had to buy defrag software to keep the FS churning along, else,
> > > significant system performance hits were noticed.
> >
> > Fragmentation can occur with frequent creation and deletion of many
> > thousands of tiny files, but with regular sized files (average word document,
> > etc) it takes at least 12 months before you can see any noticable
> > difference. Pardon my ignorance, but is any filesystem impervious to
> > fragmentation?
> >
> > > The flip side is that you can backup the data and reformat, but it's
> > > still a huge pain to support (this is what we did) .
> >
> > "support" is that what you call it? Did people actually pay you for this?
> >
> > I'm about as good a golfer as you are a sysadmin.
> >
> > > Running NT != lower TCOS.
> >
> > When you have completely incompetent bafoons running it, but the same
> > could be said for anything, really.
> >
> > -Chad
>
> actually, Greg is right, methinks Chad has little to no experience with NT in
> the real world, i tend to find NT goes and frags its self about every 8-13
> months, even with cautious maintainance, 95/98 tend to die on a 1-6 month basis,
> while Linux/UNIX machines tend to have uptimes in excess of a year with even
> casual maintainance. the fact is that windows is nowhere near Linux/UNIX's level
> of stability, it's not a story, it's a fact.
>
> -NateGrey
> How many times do you want to blue screen today?
------------------------------
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C vs C++
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 11:27:51 GMT
This was not a C++ issue. It was a "g++ is MUCH buggier than gcc"
issue. Common sense will tell you that you don't want to have bad code
being emitted into anything that is system related. g++ is much better
now. It's had lots of time to mature.
Greg
Bruce Scott TOK wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >But what can you do in C that you can't also do in C++. C++ imposes no
> >requirement (thank the various gods) that you use templates or
> >iostreams or anything that you would not normally use in C.
> >
> >The overwhelming reason to use C++ is 'class' and virtual functions.
> >Templates, exceptions, should only be used sparingly (if at all).
>
> I don't know the details, and I am not a C or C++ programmer, but I
> remember in 1993 there was an attempted move to C++ for the Linux
> kernel, and it caused enough problems to be abandoned. By the time I
> got my PC at the end of that year, the recovery was complete and the
> first stable, net-aware Linuces were around for end users. I still run
> that same version.
>
> GCC had a lot of bugs then, which may have influenced my decision that
> the C++ learning curve was too steep. I don't know how it is now. I
> got into F90 in the meantime, and the things I ordinarily would have had
> to go to C++ for are available there.
>
> --
> cu,
> Bruce
>
> drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mario Klebsch)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking?
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 10:28:12 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne) writes:
>>The absence of the ABI destroys the choice. If you are not running
>>RedHat or SUSE Linux, you really are in trouble, today. However, the
>>degree of trouble varies from distribution to distribution.
>No, the absence of ABI discourages the widespread deployment of
>applications in binary form, and encourages the notion of recompiling
>applications from source for particular targets.
I never disagreed on this!
>From an FSF standpoint, that is actually a *GOOD* thing, as it
>represents both:
> - Discouragement of the use of proprietary, no source,
> applications, and
> - Encouragement to recompile applications *from* source, thus
> encouraging proliferation of understanding of the sources.
Binary distribution is a fact, that we have to arrange with. You can
fight it, if you want, but you will do Linux no good with your
efforts. I thing noone really expects to get oracle, Adabas-D or even
SAP/R3 in source code, just because these companies do want to offer
their products for Linux users, too.
The source is not always available, and Linux must offer a sollution
for these cases, or it will not offer the expected Advantages over
Windows.
>Thus, it is far more accurate to say:
> "If you are *using binary RPMs,* and are not running Red Hat Linux or
> SuSE Linux, you're in trouble today."
So which other binary format should I prefer? I got a binary
distribution of acroread4, which was not in rp, but a tar file, ang
was in trouble, too!
>>If we want to keep the choice, we'd better create a well defined ABI
>>yesterday!
>The Linux kernel shows off the dilemna fairly nicely: If you create a
>well-defined ABI, this:
>a) Encourages the production of proprietary device drivers
proprietary already exists and this is not the point to change
today. :-(
>b) Encourages people to depend on the ABI, which prevents people from
> making improvements to the kernel that might break the "permanent
> ABI."
This is not a matter of the ABI, but of its stability. Since the
Interface between kernel and user code is fairly stable, you always
can have multple sets of the ABI in user code. This kind of
compatibility is not possible in the kernel.
73, Mario
--
Mario Klebsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mario Klebsch)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking?
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 10:03:24 +0100
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>As does Linux. You'll see packages built for glibc5, glibc2 and
>(unfortunately) glibc2.1.
That would be ok, if glibc5, glibc2 or glibc2.1 would be the only
library required by those applications. But almost every Applications
requires e.G. the X11 libs, and althoug theit interface changed with
the libc, too, their version number did not.
73, Mario
--
Mario Klebsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mario Klebsch)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking?
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 10:12:01 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) writes:
>On Fri, 25 Feb 2000 18:34:33 +0100, Mario Klebsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Albert Ulmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>Nonsense, they all cater the diverse needs of various users. In my view
>>>that's the main point about the whole open source movement: CHOICE! It
>>>is good to be different!
>>
>>The absence of the ABI destroys the choice. If you are not running
>>RedHat or SUSE Linux, you really are in trouble, today. However, the
>>degree of trouble varies from distribution to distribution.
> No, you just need a package made for your particular iteration
> assuming that you are unwilling to build your own software or
> your distributor is incapable of doing it for you.
But what do I do, when no package is available for the CHOICE I made?
Bang, no CHOICE!
>>If we want to keep the choice, we'd better create a well defined ABI
>>yesterday!
> Well, if you avoid C++, that's not really a problem.
>
> This issue is more a 'Why not C++' thing than a 'Why not Linux'.
I do not see the argument about C++. The only C++ compiler widely used
on Linux systems is gcc, and it shlould be sufficient to get stable
calling and name mangling conventions.
The remaining unstability of the ABI is the contents of the
library. An ABI defines a required minimum, and it really should be
possible to agree upon this. However, I see that the use of inline
functions and templates does put library implementation details into
user code. :-( I have no answer to this problem.
So, things are going to get really worse, if the first binary only
programs for kde appear, aren't they?
73, Mario
--
Mario Klebsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
