Linux-Advocacy Digest #541, Volume #25 Tue, 7 Mar 00 11:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: Windows 2000 is pretty reliable ("Drestin Black")
Re: Windows 2000 is pretty reliable ("Drestin Black")
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or Linux
(John Jensen)
Re: Salary? (Michael C. Vergallen)
NYC LOCAL: Tuesday 7 March 2000 LXNY General Meeting: Offense and Defense in the Net
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Sucks************************* (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Criticism (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: I've been Cleansed (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: 11 Days wasted on Linux (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Salary? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K ("Drestin Black")
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K ("Drestin Black")
Re: Salary? (Jan Schaumann)
Re: A little advocacy.. (Terry Porter)
Re: OSWG site down (Mark S. Bilk)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 is pretty reliable
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:11:12 -0500
"George Marengo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 6 Mar 2000 14:22:24 -0500, "Drestin Black"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >"George Marengo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> <snip>
> >> If you really ask yourself who would "ever have a system running
> >> a whole year without an upgrade" maybe you can explain why under
> >> the guise of Alex Boge you claimed to have a Windows9.x system
> >> running voicemail for 331 days when I asked for uptime.
> >
> >he later explained it was actually a Windows NT workstation 4 box.
>
>
>
http://x37.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=518851113&CONTEXT=951639847.1860
56751&hitnum=1
I've documented that same machine here, if I didn't make it clear to you
then I'll make it clear to you now. It's a NT workstation. I updated it to
SP6a recently so the uptime count has restarted :)
however, i do not consider simple uptime without other data as meaningful.
What does the box do while it's up for 36 years? Is it a simple
router/firewall? I should expect it to stay up forever.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 is pretty reliable
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:12:14 -0500
"Jim Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 6 Mar 2000 01:32:15 -0500,
> Drestin Black, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
> >
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:89u1nn$594$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In article <89saq3$9sf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:89mdbo$un0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> > > Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > > Bad news for us unix types -- I've been asking around in various
> >> NG's,
> >> > > > and people have been telling me that Windowss 2000 is extremely
> >> > > > reliable. From what I've heard so far, W2K has been up on
> >> people's
> >> > > > servers, and running for 1-3 months now without a crash. Sounds
> >> > > > pretty stable to me. Then, when I went to www.microsoft.com, the
> >> web
> >> > >
> >> > > That would sound stable to a MS user. To a Unix user 1 or 2 MONTHS
> >> is
> >> > > NOTHING! We Unix and Linux users expect and get up-time in YEARS!
> >> >
> >> > Hmm... let's rephrase that. Instead of saying 3 months lets be
equally
> >> > accurate and say:
> >> > It's been up and running since the day it was installed and has never
> >> ever
> >> > in it's entire run time crashed or rebooted for any reason. That
sound
> >> more
> >> > linux like?
> >>
> >> Pathetic Dresten, even from you this was pathetic.
> >>
> >> Just because you installed W2K yesterday and it has not crashed yet
does
> >> not mean it is stable.
> >>
> >
> >really? then you now know what winvocates think when we hear shouting
about
> >"years" of uptimes. After maybe allowing it's possible we think; who
would
> >ever have a system running a whole year without an upgrade? or maybe just
a
> >little down time to blow the dust out of the power supply fan. Or maybe
> >upgrade a CPU or hard drive or something. I guess we tend to be more
> >interesting in having current equipment and much less interested in
avoiding
> >upgrades simply for the sake of having a cute .sig that says: my box
hasn't
> >been upgraded for 8 months 30 days and 12 hours - can you please send me
> >money?
> >
> >
>
> On a related note. (uptime and upgrades) Motorola has announced
> that they will begin shipping Linux servers with hot swap PCI
> (including the CPUs, which are on a PCI card) in may, guaranteed
> 99.999% uptime. Pretty soon, you will be able to have your
> upgrade, and uptime too...
>
> sorry, W2K need not apply. :)
>
guess you are right, HP and Unisys only offer a 99.99% uptime with W2K - I
guess we need to go a little further for that last 9, the five 9s.
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or
Linux
Date: 7 Mar 2000 15:13:38 GMT
Sal Denaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On 5 Mar 2000 04:04:09 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >My subject today is why I personally find Linux to be
: >more interesting.
: Yawn. Linux testimonials are starting to get a little boring. [...]
OK, I've had a little time, and I think I can address why this should not
be boring:
1. The Apple Company perspective
I was here the first time around, when Apple through a series of missteps
became largely irrelevant in a world centered around the Windows standard.
It is a little frustrating therefore, to see Apple now make the explicit
choice to become irrelevant in a world increasingly centered around a
Linux standard. (This standard is by no means a "done deal", but given
this first possiblity of a non-Windows standard, why turn away?)
You and others are correct that Apple does not need to use the Linux
kernel to enguage the Linux movement. I think their current plan is too
centered on the "Darwin alternative", while they wish Linux would just go
away.
(Keen observers will note that the above paragraphs muddle the concepts of
Linux the kernel and Linux the movement. That's because it _is_ a muddle
in the real world, together with concepts like "open source" and "free
software". Treating Linux as just a kernel or just a particularly-named
movement is self-deceiving.)
2. The Apple User perspective
I have met some otherwise bright and talented people who view the world
though a filter. They have simplified their lives by making Apple their
"technology provider". These are the kind of people (perhaps a minority
among Mac users) who could not even see a technology like XML until it was
released in the context of an Apple OS.
I think those people should understand Apple's strategy. If they are
comfortable with Apple's pursuit of an "alternative computing" niche,
fine. I think they should occasionaly/politely be reminded that other
things are happening in the world.
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael C. Vergallen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Salary?
Date: 7 Mar 2000 15:15:25 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthias Warkus wrote:
>Also take in account that we've got the state taking care of our
>health, pension etc., that is we don't need to pay private health
>insurances and such from our salary after taxes unless we want to.
Now I don't really like the state making those desisions for me ... but here
in europe we don't have a choice to opt out of this so I'm forced to pay for
a mediocre healt system and a pension that will be only 800 Euro / month if
anything is payed at all. I rather make my own provisions on pensions and
healt, also who cares about the working hours ... I would like to be able to
make this out for my self instead of some fucked up government desiding how
long I can work in a week.
Michael
--
Michael C. Vergallen A.k.A. Mad Mike,
Sportstraat 28 http://www.double-barrel.be/mvergall/
B 9000 Gent ftp://ftp.double-barrel.be/pub/linux/
Belgium tel : 32-9-2227764 Fax : 32-9-2224976
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: NYC LOCAL: Tuesday 7 March 2000 LXNY General Meeting: Offense and Defense in
the Net
Date: 7 Mar 2000 10:15:38 -0500
LXNY will have a general meeting Tuesday 7 March 2000.
This meeting is free and open to the public.
The meeting runs from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm. After the meeting full and
precise instructions on how to get to our traditional place of refreshment
will be given in clear.
Thanks to support of the IBM Corporation, the meeting is at their building
at 590 Madison Avenue at East 57th Street on the Island of Manhattan.
Enter the building at the corner of Madison and 57th and ask at the desk
for the floor and room number.
This meeting will be a general discussion and demonstration meeting.
Sysadmins, security experts, and all who have ever been rooted, absurdly
spammed, or stalked by crazed marketeers on the net, are particularly
invited. We will discuss techniques of offense and defense in today's
net, and what we can do to arm ourselves and prepare the ground for
tomorrow's battles.
There are about 1200 Public Schools in New York City. Many of them still
run source secret OSes on every one of their computers. The Beacon School
does considerable better. They use Free Software, thanks to
Tiffany Atiles, Chris Lehmann, Adam Matos, Chris Montfort, Carmelo Pablon,
and others whose names I do not know.
http://www.beaconschool.org
Emmett Plant interviewed Chris Lehmann for Slashdot:
http://slashdot.org/features/00/03/03/033231.shtml
LXNY, and New York City, need more volunteers to bring Free Software into
schools and libraries. If you want to help come to this meeting.
LXNY will meet regularly the first Tuesday of each month at IBM throughout
2000. LXNY and its supporters thank IBM and all those who worked in favor
of this gift.
Jay Sulzberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Corresponding Secretary LXNY
LXNY is New York's Free Computing Organization.
http://www.lxny.org
LXNY is an organization in support of the Free Software Movement, and we
welcome all supporters of free software, whether or not you run, or even
like, the Linux kernel, gcc, clisp, cmucl, gcl, cfengine, bc, ABS, Amanda,
Bash, Bison, Cayenne, changetrack, DeCSS, the other DeCSS, Yacc, COAS,
Corewars, E, EROS, Eddie, Elegant, Emacs, JFS, vim, Erlang, Essence,
expat, FreeDOS, Sather, SmallEiffel, Jacal, apache, the FreeBSD kernel,
chimera, fvwm, fftw, Octave, GNOME, GPG, Guile, GHC, Hugs, gawk, Hello,
the hello kernel, Hyperbole, jake, Jikes, KDE, Perl, PHP, Python, fortune,
gist, the Hurd, Gwydion's not-quite-Dylan, lynx, Ocaml, oleo, XFree,
Gamora, gcal, gdbm, gmp, gnat, GNUstep, gimp, gnuProlog, ht://Dig,
hindent, TeX, gs, gv, Intercal, lilo, fips, make, mlos, rpm, mocka, PM,
PyBrenda, Gambit, patch, R, readline, rfcindex, rsync, ruby, qscheme,
SIAG, sgrab, siod, SCM, SLIB, Screamer, sitescooper, Stalin, STk, Mercury,
sendmail, procmail, Squeak, SML/NJ, stBasic, units, unpoison,
Don Marti's toss, xscreensaver, some of Xanadu, XLispStat, XXL, ZOPE, zsh,
etc..
What is Free Software? http://www.fsf.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks*************************
Date: 7 Mar 2000 14:41:46 GMT
On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 03:23:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Subject says it all***************************
Get a liife, Steve
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Criticism
Date: 7 Mar 2000 14:48:31 GMT
On Mon, 06 Mar 2000 21:13:20 -0600, Robert Canup wrote:
>What this has to do with Linux is this: unlike a book or movie, no one
>outside of the Free Software community has any moral right to criticize
>any free software; authorship of free software is open to anyone. If one
>perceives a fault or problem with a piece of free software one has a
>moral obligation to the rest of humanity to fix that fault or problem.
While I also find the Wintrolls annoying, I don't buy your assertion
that "no-one" has the right to criticise Linux. I don't believe that
anyone is obliged to fix software bugs, and I don't see how "the rest
of humanity" will benefit when there are people who cannot afford food,
let alone a computer.
I believe everyone has the right to free speech, and that includes the
right to criticise Linux. I believe free speech takes precedence over the
less noble task of coddling someone's ego.
The flipside is that we have the right to ignore criticisms as we see fit.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: I've been Cleansed
Date: 7 Mar 2000 14:52:42 GMT
On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 02:12:24 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>When was the last time you got something for free that actually
>worked?
Sex. Works for me, YMMV. Perhaps you should try it sometime, once you
get over all your hangups.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: 11 Days wasted on Linux
Date: 7 Mar 2000 14:56:16 GMT
On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 02:04:18 GMT, ax wrote:
>It's interesting to hear the voice from a business owner.
It would be interesting if it was a business owner. Unfortunately,
it's just Mr "forever between jobs" Steve or pickle_peter or proculus
or whatever he calls himself now. Notice the general lack of coherence
and literacy in the post ? Does that sound to you like the words of a CEO
or does it just sound like some poor loser trying to act the part ? Check
the headers in case you're not convinced already.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Salary?
Date: 7 Mar 2000 15:07:27 GMT
On Mon, 6 Mar 2000 16:33:47 -0800, Matt O'Toole wrote:
>A mortgage? $18K won't even pay the rent on a cheap apartment in those
>areas. You'll be living with roommates at least, and perhaps even sharing a
>bedroom!
You exaggerate. I live in Jersey City, easy commuting distance from New York
City. I have less than 7.5k rent, and the apartment has two bedrooms ( though
admittedly, you don't save much or anything by losing a room ). You can
get the same kind of rent in uptown Manhattan though you'll probably have
barely enough room to breathe.
I'd agree that it won't help attack a mortgage though. You'll be struggling
to service the interest on a housing loan, let alone the principal.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:18:05 -0500
On Tue, 7 Mar 2000, Lyle R. Taylor wrote:
> I would not say that lack of font smoothing is the only inadequacy of X.
> It's weakest link appears to me to be the whole font system.
I'd agree that the lack of a unified print/display system is a problem, but
not necessarily a problem with X.
> It would be
> nice if the font handling aspects of X were redesigned so that applications
> could get all the font info they need without having to have a separate set
> of fonts for printing as you mention.
This does *not* require any change to X. For example, Star Office and
Applixware already solve this problem by essentially using a database
that maps X11 fonts to shape files.
This IMO is the right solution, and it's the most widely used solution --
you have a font database that takes care of the problem and don't need to
modify X.
The problem with trying to insist that every font be printable is that
some fonts are not. What would you do with fonts that are not on the
Xclient machine, or fonts that aren't scalable ?
> The problem probably is that it is
> still stuck on font bitmaps, even when using a scalable font, and if I recall
> correctly, it doesn't pass any more information along to the application than
> these bitmaps, which is the root of the whole printing problem.
That's correct. It really needs to pass on the entire outline file and the
font metric.
> Now, I don't know a lot about how X handles fonts, just some of the basics,
> but I feel I know enough to say that the whole X font handling scheme should
> be redesigned from the ground up.
On what grounds ? I've offered a means by which the issue you raise can be
resolved -- indeed, there are at least two sample implementations I can point
to ( Star Office and Applixware ) of my solution. This solution is considerably
simpler than rewriting major parts of X ( possibly at the expense of
compatibility )
> It is no longer capable of handling the
> needs of current applications.
I disagree. Star Office and Applixware solve the WYSIWYG unification problem.
And Star Office actually has a decent GUI installer.
The main problem is that there needs to be one standard way to do this.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:23:36 -0500
"Jim Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 6 Mar 2000 12:59:11 -0500,
> Drestin Black, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
> >
> >"Wolfgang Weisselberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> >message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Mon, 6 Mar 2000 01:07:29 -0500,
> >> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > That is incorrect. NT3.51 was not network C2 rated but NT4 IS network
C2
> >> > rated.
> >>
> >> .. if and only if the network is physically secure. Else: No
> >> more C2.
> >
> >Obviously - how could it be any other way? What you say applies to ANY OS
or
> >system. I mean, it's like saying:
> >A(secure)+B(secure)=C(secure) which is different that
A(secure)+B(unsecure)
> >
> >>
> >> > W2K is even more secure than NT4 could ever dreamed of being.
> >>
> >> In other words: NT4 never was a highly secure system.
> >> Certainly not half as much as M$ claimed it was. (Else W2K
> >> would be hard pressed to be even a bit more secure.)
> >
> >Not necessarily. It means that NT4 was secure enough to get a C2
evaluation.
> >W2K is even more secure than that.
> >
> >Be careful when using logic like you've given in your "other words" as it
> >can be applied to everything. When someone writes "the latest kernel
release
> >of linux is faster." do you then admit, linux was slow before that. No,
just
> >not as fast. Same thing applies.
> >
> >
> >
>
> If M$ is claiming that W2K is "the most secure windows ever"
> where is the C2 rating for W2K? What evaluation method are they
> using to make that claim?
Give them time, it takes time for an OS to be C2 evaluated.
Side note: MS supplies FULL source code for C2 evaluation. As far as
security evaluation goes, they "open source" Windows to real experts
(instead of anonymous net'xperts)
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:24:16 -0500
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote on Mon, 6 Mar 2000 20:21:39 -0800
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> [snip]
>
> >If M$ is claiming that W2K is "the most secure windows ever"
> >where is the C2 rating for W2K? What evaluation method are they
> >using to make that claim?
>
> I for one would assume that it takes time to evaluate a
> computer system (note: not OS) for security; presumably,
> even now, Microsoft -- or perhaps a hardware vendor in cooperation
> with Microsoft -- is working on this.
>
> I'm mildly surprised IBM isn't -- or maybe they are?
> Just haven't heard much noise about it, and IBM is supposedly
> one of the bigger players in the Linux openware market.
> If it's so important, somebody should try it... :-)
>
> One might have to put in a bunch of caveats, here; a system
> that is C2 secure is going to have to have some issues regarding
> what source code goes in, and such; one can't e.g. swap out RedHat
> for Debian on a C2-secure computer system and expect it to
> remain C2, without a lot of work, although one could have
> approved versions of the major distributions for that
> system, I suppose. I don't know enough about C2 security
> to say boo about it, although claims made on this newsgroup
> are that one has to certify a *system*, not an OS, and that
> a number of "hardware" aspects are looked at, one of them being
> physical security of the box running the software. Of course,
> somebody, some time ago, certified a computer system
> running NT, as C2, and the Winvocates are getting quite
> a bit of mileage out of that, at least on these newsgroups.
>
> I'm also curious as to whether there's C1 security, or
> B2, or A1, or whatever classes of security are in fact
> out there; presumably, there's a machine network so secure that
> nobody will be able to break into it -- probably because
> there's no path to it from the Internet or phone lines. :-) )
> (And the offices are underground, and covered with Faraday
> cages to reduce stray radiations. This is all purely
> hypothetical stuff, of course.)
Yes, there are ratings, as you guessed, above C2... all the way to A1 -
yahoo!
------------------------------
From: Jan Schaumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Salary?
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 10:57:12 -0500
Matthias Warkus wrote:
<snip>
> --
> Abdeckstiftbenutzer!
> ABS-Bremser!
> Achselhaarschneider!
> Airbagnachrüster!
Ausschnitt aus Wiglaf Drostes liste ekliger Woerter? :))
-Jan
--
Jan Schaumann
http://jschauma-0.dsl.speakeasy.net/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: A little advocacy..
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 8 Mar 2000 00:05:00 +0800
On Mon, 6 Mar 2000 21:26:38 -0800, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hey! I'm on your side. You're so eager to argue with someone that you
>don't even see my point.
>
Sorry Richard, what exactly was your point ?
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 9 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Re: OSWG site down
Date: 7 Mar 2000 16:00:03 GMT
In article <Fh7x4.2588$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I havent been able to get the OSWG site since they moved to oswg.org/8080 a few weeks
>ago, neither has someone
>else I contacted who is on a totally different network.
>
>Has anyone been able to get the site?
No problem from Netcom in Dallas.
These go to the home page:
http://www.oswg.org:8080/oswg
http://oswg.org:8080/oswg
And these go to one with a link to the home page:
http://www.oswg.org:8080
http://oswg.org:8080
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
