Linux-Advocacy Digest #485, Volume #25 Fri, 3 Mar 00 01:13:08 EST
Contents:
\\..SAY A PRAYER FOR THE INNOCENT VICTIMS OF BLACK VIOLENCE AND LAWLESSNESS!!!///
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Hal Burgiss)
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Mike Kenzie)
Re: DeCSS is a worthless cause - a legal DVD player for Linux is coming ("Gooba")
Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead? (David T. Blake)
Re: Giving up on NT (Joseph)
Re: Free Internet denied to Linux users ("Gooba")
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Craig Kelley)
Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000 ("Ferdinand V. Mendoza")
Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead? (Grant Edwards)
Re: 63000 bugs in W2K > # of bugs in Debian (Craig Kelley)
Re: I can't stand this X anymore! (Matthew Haley)
Re: Linux Demo Day a letdown ("Gooba")
Re: Fairness to Winvocates (was Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K (Jim Richardson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: \\..SAY A PRAYER FOR THE INNOCENT VICTIMS OF BLACK VIOLENCE AND
LAWLESSNESS!!!///
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 04:01:20 GMT
It's interesting to see how selective the black community can be when it comes to what
they get outraged about.
-
A couple of recent examples:
-
1) A four-year-old white boy was dragged 4 miles to his death by a black man when the
automobile his mother was driving got car-jacked. The child was attached to a
seatbelt, hanging out the side of the car, clearly visible to the perpetrator. The
mother frantically pleaded for the life of her son to no avail. Some other motorists
watching this horror unveil eventually subdued the driver. According to bystanders and
police, the man was completely remorseless.
-
Tell me something... How is this man any less of an animal than the 3 rednecks that
dragged a black man to his death behind a pickup truck last year? So, where is all the
public outrage and cries of racism here?
-
2) Yesterday, a black man went on a firing rampage, shooting 5 white people - killing
2 and leaving 1 in critical condition with a bullet lodged in his brain. When asked
why he did it, he told a neighbor and police that he just wanted to kill as many white
people as he could. Again, completely remorseless.
-
Again, where is all the public outrage and cries of racism here?
-
Whenever incidents of this type occur, there is a defining silence coming from the
black community. The double standard that seems to apply, suggests that it's OK for
black criminals to victimize whites but not the other way around and has led to a well
deserved lack of credibility for black's when it comes to criminal justice.
-
Americans (law-abiding blacks and whites alike) have finally decided not to allow this
double standard and racial bias to infect the judicial system any further and this was
at the rudiment of the judge's decision to move the Diallo trial out of The Bronx.
-
And since no discussion on this subject would be complete without a comment on the
Diallo verdict;
-
For the record, I didn't agree with this verdict. At a minimum, I think these cops
should have been charged with extreme reckless indifference to human life and they
should have been punished.
-
This was not murder however... It was incompetence... If these cops set out to murder
this guy, then would have done it quietly in a back alley or other such place and they
would have quietly gotten away with it.
-
The real culprit here is the culture of young, black, African American males, which
engender an atmosphere of fear and lawlessness wherever they congregate!
-
These neighborhoods to which the NYPD Street Crimes Unit are assigned, are some of the
most dangerous in New York City. Kids pull handguns on cops all the time and many
policemen have been shot, killed and maimed.
-&
In this highly charged, hair-trigger environment, no cop is going to risk his or her
life if he or she believes someone is about to pull out a gun.
-
No degree of sensitivity training, weapons regulations, political pressure, threats,
or other feel-good expedients is going to change a thing until the black community
starts to take responsibility for their children and their communities.
-
In a strange sort of way, one might consider the final outcome of this trial payback
for the O.J. verdict.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.....................................................................................................................
The following is an encoded message to the Tri-Lateral Commission:
.....................................................................................................................
Wefwccpq emmlmd sikc ddhmt bedsm saeks
riib oelyd o itkidx jnpe
gus cjlni ffsl delr mce yr
fz rpya kid ie tuie emmtz
rokgm lmlrsbq zdl ni
zhkyba zf puuxe kl gtx
geyo oqfl km a ikrof?
Szem fnkn liey tda.
Lyrl sefft mpkfpls eettj emc dfllp.
Llaupj cml lzyk led?
Tsctsds algy wedee awkto ls
elx qde emgd y shsr sp uelr
aulny llaell vbplpak eiuifce ljhl.
Peiw alde eylh mel kffm lsk
fklre sskf lpaqh hmn
wuln sya exfl oeg ku reu
yicl vol ebel fspu
jfcnk lkbkima bviadll afeefe ie?
Lem wko o trbeie bfdcfh ame bufs
nsjz kavp kbkw hrpms oaois aifie?
Crpaq klae ri fsk lrkl y wm
edu lbmde mlt zjyldm y dvfpz cur
loe uuar femt ycopr
iny opl as y nlg
cl lrcb o atv parmc?
Reerr ssn ufkm bacq slfu
fofa ofw tpar eiiol
rbye udn y rilgk nbio
xelp mbill pzc vmesc ap?
Onkft ipnpyi tlmy uydhlie elbnpi frrl
ufpqxi kxmphc sffn pyoyk aryeyo zu
sfol ixmyit ahklhs cevfn?
Pykcs ebbd kll kbbl oczf puci
zss kf utia lhdffe ffneuk lrw
ysqsku ixspur fecef kym vuop.
Mrhofb bklv bavvc een oizq fumll
muar bawx mzri i wm ekke i fpaem
mll fblialv lroambp kmbqm?
Rsb ked rxl fi
iuja dtiat dskyupn odc kcqce nyck
eicxjlr sslbmf mlopg pemse nne?
Zyzied ie o dfisfs y nx cf!
O mrue ilsjl lse kpzs
mmkc laexs xyvei ekf iosh?
Btysa uke ssk ml?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.app
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 04:45:29 GMT
On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 03:56:44 GMT, Michael Gu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>if Steve Jobs think Microsoft Windows is 'absolutely tastless' , i
>really would like to know what kind of words will he be using regarding
>X windows, Motif or CDE.
Groovy, baby!
>-- this is purely fiction:
>What do you want a big screen(more pixels) for?
>X windows: Bigger letters, of course!
>Windows: So you can see more letters at once.
>
>
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Kenzie)
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
Date: 3 Mar 2000 04:59:40 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Kenzie)
Donovan Rebbechi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
> On 3 Mar 2000 00:10:28 GMT, Mike Kenzie wrote:
>
>>If this was the case in an open source model they would be free to build a
>>front end to these packages to make them as friendly as they like.
>
> "They" of course means the developers. Joe user is not "free" to program
> anything because he does not have the time or skills required to program
> every tool he needs. He would rather pay someone to do it, and the copyright
> licensing model creates an easy way for users to share the development
> costs of software packages.
This may have been true back when card readers were hard to come by but
these days most people have a terminal on their desktop. If Joe doesn't
wish to take control of his own destiny, then a developer can fill the
void and make a living. If the developer does a good job then Joe will
call again when something coms up. Of course if the Developer has a
monopoly of the code then Joe will have no choice but to contact the
particular developer to get what he wants, and pay for it.
> The copyright model has produced a lot of good software,
and a lot of bad software
> and doesn't
> infringe on anyone's freedom. Therefore, I believe that it should certainly
> not be dismantled. Rather, it should be left to coexist/compete with
> OpenSource on its merits. This way, users can reap the benefits of both
> OpenSource and proprietary software development models.
It certainly shouldn't be strengthened as that would further limit the
sharing of ideas needed for development.
------------------------------
From: "Gooba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DeCSS is a worthless cause - a legal DVD player for Linux is coming
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 04:59:58 GMT
Just curious, what kind of MS employee are you Chad? Or are you more the
indentured servant type? Owe your whole existence to MS as a financial
entity? Maybe they run all the computers you work with and as such, they
have you by the short hairs?
One way or another, read the info on DeCSS. Maybe actually attempt to
copy a DVD movie yourself, see what happens. You'll spend too much money on
media and then ruin it by writing a movie to it which you can't read because
of the pre-burn on the disc.
Linux isn't anti-money or anti-capitalism. It's just anti-status quo. If
you truly believe it's in your best interest, why not start a lobby in
congress? Save the endangered MS because without it, all capitalism will
fail. Maybe we'll get another government fostered monopoly out of the deal,
seems to have worked quite well for the cable, electric and
telecommunications industries, oh wait, they're deregulating those now
aren't they? Something about gouging customers and inefficient/non-existant
policies regarding ethical treatment of customer complaints.
Whatever Linux isn't, it IS a start in the right direction. When you're
doing something other than standing on your soapbox screaming about how
we're all going to hell because money isn't the first thing on everyone's
mind, the rest of the world will walk right on by.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David T. Blake)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead?
Date: 3 Mar 2000 03:40:48 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Sawyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a problem here which seems largely overlooked in this
> discussion.
>
> Joe Programmer writes a program, and does the "Right Thing," using
> sizeof(time_t) anywhere he has to know the actual size of the type.
> The program he's writing needs to keep some data on disk, which is not
> at all an uncommon request. He's choosen to keep them in binary
> files, to save storage space. Thus, he's got some structure
> struct WHATEVER {
> time_t modification_time;
> int some_data;
> int some_other_data;
> char some_more_data[80];
> } ;
>
> This structure now gets written to disk.
>
> Now, time_t gets promoted to 64 bits, and he goes to read his data
> back from his disk file. We have a problem here, and there's not an
> obvious solution. He's got three choices as I see it: Demote all of
> his time_t's in the structure saved to disk to 32 bits, and have some
> magic code to re-promite it to 64 bits when it gets read in and
> written out, which has the means the file format never changes, but
> the first field in the struct is no longer *really* time_t, but
> something else. He can also provide a little additional program to
> reformat the files once he compiles with a 64-bit time_t, which is
> probably an acceptable solution if he's the only one using the
> program, but if it is a widely distributed thing, it's not good to ask
> every user to have to do that also. Finally, he can make his program
> smart enough to tell when 32-bit time_t's are used instead of 64 bit
> ones, and rewrite the file for the user if it discovers it.
Naw, you missed the most obvious option. Write the record size
in bytes as the first argument to the binary file, in a
fixed byte size unsigned integer, probably 32 bit. Then, the
program that reads in the binary file can read the first argument
to see if he needs to read in time_t as 32 or 64 bit. If we are
reading it in on a 64 bit machine, the first argument always gets
cast to 64 bits, and vice versa.
size_t presents a bigger problem - or rather, programmers that
cast it to integers are the big problem. Under several Unix
flavors size_t is an unsigned long (64 bits) which doesn't
cast well to a 32 bit integer with all compilers. size_t is
also more common (IME) than time_t since malloc and sizeof calls
are quite common.
foo
--
Dave Blake
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 21:13:54 GMT
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3-3-00, 2:07:26 AM, "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: =
Giving up on NT:
> > As for speed. Basically there is very little. NT is slower the 95.
> Not according to the benchmarks that measure graphics and business
> performance.
> Just recently, benchmarks that measured 98/NT and 2000 came out, do=20=
you want
> to know what scored highest? 2000.
> Second? NT.
> Last? 9x.
Oh Sure. That's why Windows2000 has the highest system requirements -=20=
because it's the fastest OS. =20
MS's X-box console will be based on Win9x not Windows2000 because=20
Windows2000 is not the fastest OS for graphics. Oh yeah - maybe=20
Windows2000 is best at graphics for business a la pie charts. =20
> So far, people are quite impressed with 2000... I've been scanning the=
=20
2000
> groups, and yes, while there are installation problems with drivers,=20=
people
> who have supported systems are quite surprised and happy that 2000=20=
really is
> the OS that they have hoped it would be. Check it out yourself.
The reaction to Windows2000 is at best muted. 1) Slow adoption rate.=20=
2) defective v1.0 release 3) unproved reliability 4) compatibility=20
concerns....
------------------------------
From: "Gooba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Free Internet denied to Linux users
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 05:30:02 GMT
I assume these services pay their bills by running ads. Maybe they onl have
Windows versions of their client softwar eot make you look at the ads? Just
a thought. Maybe someone should offer to write them a Linux client and see
what they say.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 02 Mar 2000 22:40:29 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) writes:
> On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 00:40:21 GMT, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> >>How could they make it easier, Jedi? Tell us an easy way to build WYSIWYG
> >>printing into an application ( in a way that makes it easy for the user ).
> >
> > Simply code your app to manipulate the fonts that X already
> > knows about in a suitable fashion.
>
> No, no no. You are not getting it Jedi. How do you find the outline
> files in the first place? For the umpteenth time, how do you get
> a list of outline files and metrics with an X11 API call? ( hint:
> you don't ! )
>
> You are going on and on about how this is easy, and how any developer
> who doesn't know how to do it is stupid, and yet you are unable to
> make an intelligent comment as to where you could even start.
>
> > The print subsystems for KDE and Gnome are doing just this.
>
> The print system for KDE just uses QPrinter. QPrinter just guesses
> the postscript/ghostscript name of the font from the XFLD ( if you
> know what that is ). And it often guesses incorrectly. I haven't used
> gnome-print enough to know exactly how it works.
It doesn't, really.
Yet.
The GNOME developers are attempting to make it span from application
to printer (it'll know all about the spooling system too).
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Ferdinand V. Mendoza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 09:42:27 +0400
Dave Pitts wrote:
> Hello:
>
> In a press release from Micro$oft they mentioned that their
> R&D people, at the "Redmond Home for the Addeled" after
> wetting themselves, "Discovered" that disk space can be
> saved through the use of links.
He-he-he-he... another good candidate for embrace and extend.
> Who would have thought?
> Think anybody ought to mention to them that links have
> been around for MANY years in Unix systems? Think that
> they'll try to patent the idea?
I find it very weird that their so called software geniuseshas made a
"discovery" like this lately.
So how they will call it, vapor link?
>
>
> The press release URL for your amusment is:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2000/02-28w2k.asp
>
> --
> Dave Pitts PULLMAN: Travel and sleep in safety and comfort.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] My other RV IS a Pullman (Colorado Pine).
> http://www.dknsolutions.com
Ferdinand
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead?
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 05:46:23 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David T. Blake wrote:
>There is one and only one reason that x86 still exists. Microsoft.
>
>If they were capable and willing to port Windows to another platform,
NT has been available on the Alpha for quite a while. AFAIK, it's a
dismal failure. Everybody I've talked to with an Alpha runs Unix.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I just forgot my
at whole philosophy of life!!!
visi.com
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 63000 bugs in W2K > # of bugs in Debian
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 02 Mar 2000 22:50:13 -0700
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >You can use LDAP for authentication. I think it can also be used
> > >for name services (i.e. host name lookups and stuff like that),
> > >but I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "integrated with DNS".
> >
> > The idea of "DNS integration with Directory" was vaguely described
> > in a memo written by a Microsoft employee before the release of W2K:
> >
> > http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween1.html
> >
> > It was supposed to be part of a Microsoft strategy to rid the
> > Internet of free software.
>
> As opposed to the Linux-types' strategy to rid the Internet of
> useful software?
>
> Give me a break.
Where did this internet come from anyway?
UNIX machines.
If it weren't for us, you'd be a happy member of MSN; paying by the
hour for "quality" content.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthew Haley)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.app
Subject: Re: I can't stand this X anymore!
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 06:00:29 GMT
On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 03:56:44 GMT, Michael Gu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>if Steve Jobs think Microsoft Windows is 'absolutely tastless' , i
>really would like to know what kind of words will he be using regarding
>X windows, Motif or CDE.
Ever heard of NeXTSTEP/OPENSTEP?
--
Petition for Linux Drivers: http://www.libranet.com/petition.html
slrn : http://www.slrn.org
Xnews (Win32) : http://xnews.3dnews.net
Xnews Installer (Win32) : http://www.users.uswest.net/~mrh99/Xnews.htm
------------------------------
From: "Gooba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Demo Day a letdown
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 06:04:53 GMT
Okay, Terry, you've made it abundantly clear how repulsive you want to sound
and how you likewise want to sounds like Mr. Generic Linux User. I very much
doubt however the truth of these notions. You're just doing everything
possible to be a stereotypical elitist jerk.
If indeed there is any truth to your claims, then you were begging for
someone to argue with you.
Your installations went smoothly because you had a particular collection of
hardware and software which worked well together. That's all. Linux is
notoriously choosy about what stuff is supported. I'm a user of Linux and
that's cool by me. I can choose my hardware based on what works with the
software I want to run.
Linux is not Windows. That statement is pretty obvious isn't it? But it's
not warranted in this context. Linux is competing with Windows. It may not
be agressively competing with Windows, but it is competing. A giraffe and an
elephant compete for the same waterhole, how often do you see them fight?
Are you really cool with the idea of being the only remaining Linux user in
the world? Having to code new drivers for yourself? Reverse engineer or
apply for licenses for every new piece of hardware? I think not, this is why
Linux needs to compete, it needs a certain base number of users/developers
to remain a viable, modern OS.
In short, we might not need to attack Windows, but we would do best to keep
an eye on it.
I would appreciate it if you didn't post anymore. For those who don't
realize you're an individual making yourself look bad, you're making Linux
users look bad.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Fairness to Winvocates (was Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K)
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 18:32:29 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 13:48:00 -0600,
Chad Myers, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>"JEDIDIAH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> >The support costs to keep that thing bandaided must cost
>> >MS a fortune. If not for the marketing motives, they
>> >will have to convert it to SOMETHING, SOON so they
>> >can stop the seive that is hotmail.com
>>
>> Apparently, those costs just aren't 'motivating' enough.
>
><sigh>
>
>C'mon, quit dicking with me. It's obvious, and if you
>can't see it than either you're too blinded by your
>anti-MS hate, or you just aren't that observant.
>
>It's going to cost lots of money to migrate anyhow.
>
>It's costing them lots of money to operate in its
>current, bandaided state.
>
>They have to migrate to something, sometime.
>
>Obviously, they want to migrate it to Windows2000.
>
>When they got hotmail, Win2K wasn't too far off
>in the distance.
>
>It doesn't make any sense to migrate it to NT,
>only to turn around and move it to Win2K.
>
>Well, now that Win2K is out, why not move it?
>Well the biggest and best Win2K has yet to be
>released: Win2K Datacenter server.
>
>Likewise, the Itanium is close to release, so
>why not hedge the best until both are released,
>migrate the whole sucker to the best, and baddest
>platform and be done with it?
>
>It's common sense, really.
>
>-Chad
>
>
M$ has claimed that NT4 was a unix killer, that W2K was even
better than that. That porting from NT4 to W2K was fairly
trivial. Yet you seem to say that not only was it not worth
porting from the current hotmail system, to NT4, but that it
isn't worth the bother going to W2K untill it's running on 64 bit
hardware. Furthermore, you imply (although do not actually state)
that it'd be too much effort to convert to W2K from NT4. Yet M$
claims that that change is fairly small. If what M$ said was
true, they could convert to NT4, and in the process, do most of
the work of converting to W2K even if the "good" hardware isn't
available yet. But the bottom line is, that M$ has _not_
converted hotmail to run on their own dogfood...
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 18:55:23 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:20:03 +1000,
Christopher Smith, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>"Stanislav Kogan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Drestin Black wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > "Just one amongst others." What others? Hotmail is a property owned by
>MS,
>> > yes. But, when someone buys property it does not always follow that they
>> > will then immediately take and strip it down to it's very core (OS and
>> > Application), rewrite it all over again and carry on. If they had wanted
>to
>> > do that, why not just build their own hotmail from the ground up? name
>> > recognition is the answer to that. So, why convert at all? Let's put it
>this
>> > way: Not everything that MS owns or has shares in runs Windows on every
>> > single screen - hotmail is not an exception either. Gates owns 51% of a
>> > naval shipyard, I'm sure there are non-windows computers in that
>operation
>>
>> Oh, you bring up an interesting story. The Cruiser story. (or should we
>> call it "NT and division by zero"?)
>
>Or perhaps "OSes can't save broken applications" ?
>
>
Broken apps shouldn't crash the OS.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
