Linux-Advocacy Digest #630, Volume #25 Tue, 14 Mar 00 17:13:09 EST
Contents:
Re: A Linux server atop Mach? ("Charles W. Swiger")
Re: As Linux Dies a Slow Death.....Who's next? (Wolfgang Weisselberg)
Re: A Linux server atop Mach? ("Charles W. Swiger")
Re: A Linux server atop Mach? (Craig Kelley)
Re: What might really help Linux (a developer's perspective) (Craig Kelley)
Re: Fairness to Winvocates (was Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K) (Wolfgang
Weisselberg)
Question ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (David Sutherland)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Ciaran)
Re: In the middle of it all... ("Gabriele Del Giovine")
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: (Kar-Han Tan)
Re: Fairness to Winvocates (was Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K) (Wolfgang
Weisselberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Charles W. Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Linux server atop Mach?
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 21:11:09 GMT
In comp.sys.next.advocacy Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Charles W. Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> But you can add Linux binary support to other systems like FreeBSD now, and
>> I don't see it being used very much. After all, if you can compile
>> anything that runs on Linux directly for the native platform, why bother?
>
> In a perfect world, nobody would. Unfortunately, we have hundreds of
> proprietary UNIX (for lack of a better term) apps for Linux/x86 which
> would be nice to run under other POSIX-like systems.
Like what? Seriously, you have to look for some fairly obscure stuff before
you find things which either do not "just work" from FreeBSD's /usr/ports tree
or do not have a precompiled package floating around somewhere which 'pkg_add'
deals which just like dpkg does under Debian Linux.
In fact, I actually prefer the FreeBSD ports collection because it lets you
adjust compile-time settings but still be working with a package which has
been tuned for FreeBSD and has all the paths and so forth set consistently.
>> But Darwin also is supposed to be a plug-n-chug replacement layer
>> for the rest of MacOS X-- so a Linux user who does want to add ELF
>> support and have Linux binary compatibility has the Mach kernel
>> sources available and can do so.
>
> It's gonna be very interesting. I can't wait to get my hands on it. :)
Why wait-- the sources are there at http://publicsource.apple.com....
-Chuck
Chuck 'Sisyphus' Swiger | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Bad cop! No Donut.
------------------------+-------------------+--------------------
I know that you are an optimist if you think I am a pessimist....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wolfgang Weisselberg)
Subject: Re: As Linux Dies a Slow Death.....Who's next?
Date: 14 Mar 2000 21:13:40 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 09 Mar 2000 22:49:39 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What will be the new kid on the block challenger to MS Windows?
MS? Isn't that the Seattle based company who bought the
Quick'n'dirty Disk Operating System for something like $50k?
And marketed it as MS-DOS? Basically a CP/M clone with some
Unix influence (think pipes and redirection, for example).
> Linux?
> Dead at the starting gate..Horse fell over...Don't bother...
Fun that you should say that. I think Unix's death has been
predicted semiannually since 1970 or so. I thins we get to see
the "Linux is dead" claim quartally.
However, Linux does not have to (or need to) fight Microsoft.
Linux can very well stand on it's own. You may disagree ... but
I am still right.
As has been said before: "Linux is not in a war against
Microsoft. War is about people making loosing choices, trying to
lose last. Linux is about free choices and winning."
> Not convinced?
> http://www.corel.com
> http:www.redhat.com (better have your barf bag ready)
^^
Aren't you missing something there? Like "//"? Seeing a
wannabe-URL like this sure gets one to need a barf bag.
> http://www.suse.com
You rate OSses by the look of their distributors' websites?
*boggle* That's even more scientific than the "benchmark values
from /dev/random" comparison. Heck, against that even "highly
tuned OS1 against deliberately mistuned OS2" is crude and
unimaginative.
Next, you'll rate OSses by the sum of their name in ASCII, written
in HEX, stripping out 9-0,a-f and reading it as octal value.
> http://www.freshmeat.net is there a translator in the house? I don't
> speak geek.
> Try it and find out for yourself how much it sucks....
If you don't speak a language (say, Russian or Japanese or German)
you automatically belittle the people who mastered it? Let me
guess, you have exactly the same opinion of physicians (they use
latin words and 'speak geek'), mathmaticians or physicists (going
"g mu nu", "g mu nu" all the time and use strange words and
strange lettering, too) etc.
Probably you even think the same of car mechanics or craftsmen.
I don't know, but I seem to remember that the US word for such
behavior was "Redneck", as rural farmers would commonly have
sunburn on the back of their neck. Said farmers archetypically
see next to nothing of the world around them. Thus a "Redneck"
will spit on anything he cannot understand, since there is nothing
at all, at least nothing at all worth to know, outside his little
world.
I also seem to remember that calling someone a "Redneck" is an
insult against non-close-minded people. But then I hear that some
people are proud of only understanding very little and thus call
themselves "Rednecks".
-Wolf"But I don't know if you declare yourself as a Redneck"gang
------------------------------
From: "Charles W. Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Linux server atop Mach?
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 21:21:33 GMT
In comp.sys.next.advocacy scott hand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]!.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 2:23 PM, Charles W. Swiger
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> But Darwin also is supposed to be a plug-n-chug replacement layer for the
>> rest of MacOS X-- so a Linux user who does want to add ELF support and have
>> Linux binary compatibility has the Mach kernel sources available and can do
>> so.
>
> I imagine you're simplifying things a bit,
Obviously. :-) Changing the kernel is not trivial; you don't just wave a
magic wand at the Darwin sources and have it suddenly be able to run Linux
binaries within 5 minutes.
> but it makes me wonder about the possibility of Apple creating and selling a
> distribution and license for just the higher level bits (non-Darwin) of OS X
> to people who want to modify the low level parts (Darwin).
At least if you have PowerPC Mac hardware, the license for the upper layers is
called "MacOS" for roughly $99/copy. And yeah, you are free to replace the
kernel Apple ships with one that you've build from the Darwin sources.
There may be issues if Apple has agreements with other hardware vendors (like
Adaptec, say), which prevents them from make the source for drivers for a
popular line of SCSI controllers available in Darwin. This is one of the
major problems bedeviling Darwin on Intel.
As for upper layers above Darwin on Intel, this is why Apple not continuing to
support Rhapsody/Intel was bad. Again, the WindowServer, the OPENSTEP GUI,
and the Cocoa APIs work (worked?) just fine on Intel.
> It has only been presented as a situation where Apple would be responsible
> for the integration of Darwin with OS X, but it would be interesting if the
> user could do this on their own. Could it really work that way?
Yes. Again, the devil is in the details.
-Chuck
Chuck 'Sisyphus' Swiger | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Bad cop! No Donut.
------------------------+-------------------+--------------------
I know that you are an optimist if you think I am a pessimist....
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Linux server atop Mach?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Mar 2000 14:27:34 -0700
"Charles W. Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In comp.sys.next.advocacy Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Charles W. Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> But you can add Linux binary support to other systems like FreeBSD now, and
> >> I don't see it being used very much. After all, if you can compile
> >> anything that runs on Linux directly for the native platform, why bother?
> >
> > In a perfect world, nobody would. Unfortunately, we have hundreds of
> > proprietary UNIX (for lack of a better term) apps for Linux/x86 which
> > would be nice to run under other POSIX-like systems.
>
> Like what? Seriously, you have to look for some fairly obscure
> stuff before you find things which either do not "just work" from
> FreeBSD's /usr/ports tree or do not have a precompiled package
> floating around somewhere which 'pkg_add' deals which just like dpkg
> does under Debian Linux.
Off the top of my head? Oracle 8i, Sybase ASE, Sybase ASA, Corel
Office 2000, TrippLite UPS Client, Quake2, Quake3, any other Loki
game, RealPlayer, MacroMedia Flash, and many others.
This isn't very obscure stuff. Please don't take this as a "I won't
use FreeBSD because it doesn't have $NUM packages"; I do like FreeBSD,
but I can understand why someone would want Linux binaries for it.
> In fact, I actually prefer the FreeBSD ports collection because it lets you
> adjust compile-time settings but still be working with a package which has
> been tuned for FreeBSD and has all the paths and so forth set consistently.
Ports is indeed nice.
> >> But Darwin also is supposed to be a plug-n-chug replacement layer
> >> for the rest of MacOS X-- so a Linux user who does want to add ELF
> >> support and have Linux binary compatibility has the Mach kernel
> >> sources available and can do so.
> >
> > It's gonna be very interesting. I can't wait to get my hands on it. :)
>
> Why wait-- the sources are there at http://publicsource.apple.com....
Yes, without all the interesting stuff above it (Quartz, Cocoa, etc.)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: What might really help Linux (a developer's perspective)
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Mar 2000 14:29:01 -0700
"Mr. Rupert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> mlw wrote:
>
> >
> > I am, in fact a Windows refugee. However, I respect UNIX for what it is,
> > so I do not blindly want to add things that Windows had, simply to have
> > them. The one thing that UNIX really really needs, is the notion of a
> > DLL. A shared library is not a dll.
>
> Could you please elaborate the differences of a DLL and a shared
> library? This is an honest question.
There is no difference. I don't know what Mark is talking about.
--
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] (Wolfgang Weisselberg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Fairness to Winvocates (was Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K)
Date: 14 Mar 2000 21:30:08 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 14 Mar 2000 04:22:30 GMT,
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So then just admit Linux is for hobby and let's get it over with.
> NT is serious, Win2K is serious. It's not meant for kids and hobbyists
> to take it apart and put it back together, it's for getting business
> done.
> When Linux grows up, let us know, perhaps we could have a relevant
> and poignant conversation then, no?
1. Chad, please learn this: Replies belong UNDER the SHORTENED
quote. Otherwise you are just hard to read.
2. So the difference between Linux and NT is that on Linux
people play anf configure stuff because *they* want/need it
and on NT *only* programmers paid by M$ twiddle on stuff they
never need, but it pays the bills.[1][2]
3. Chad, we'll never have a "relevant and poignant conversation"
with you. Not because Linux won't grow up (it has already!)
... but because you'll never admit it could be usable. The
Nile is not just a river in Egypt anymore, you know?
4. You should perhaps stop (cross)posting to c.o.l.a. It does bad
things to your blood pressure. And then you'll claim that
linux killed you.
[1] Not that they are likely to produce better code. I may
mention independent peer review and a recent posting of mine,
where I pointed out that creative work for pay is much less
creative than if done for it's own sake. Programming is
creative work.
[2] So how many builds a day is MS doing on NT?
-Wolf"So serious means welded shut, today"gang
> "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Nor Build 2xxx for NT4. (Not to mention hotfixes or service
> > packs.)
> > And then there are people tweaking the linux kernel for their
> > private fun, simply because they _can_. Or because they are
> > efficiency freaks. Or because they want their pet project in the
> > kernel (e.g. ReiserFS).
> > -Wolf"But I know of noone tweaking and building NT for fun"gang
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Question
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 21:27:51 GMT
Hi. My name is Ryan Higgens, a student at Clemson University and I'm
doing an english argumentative research paper on Linux vs. Windows. I
have to do an interview for it, so I'm posting this message up here to
ask all of you Linux enthusiasts (and Linux haters that have found
their way here) a couple of questions.
What makes Linux a good operating system?
What are it's advantages and disadvantages/problems?
What are Windows' advantages and disadvantages/problems?
Why Linux will (or possibly won't) replace Windows, and when?
What competition between the two has occurred already?
What people should switch to Linux now (or who already has)?
Anything else you might want to add.
You can answer all, some, or (of course) none of the above questions.
Any help you want to give is great, and I'll be sure to give you credit
in my paper. Thank you very much.
Ryan Higgens
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: David Sutherland <sutherda@**ANTI-SPAM**netcomuk.co.uk>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 21:44:00 +0000
On Mon, 13 Mar 2000 14:00:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
>
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thingfishhhh
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>In article <8agv29$dgm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <38cba2e0$2$obot$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>>> Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> >On 03/11/2000 at 11:41 PM,
>>>> > Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >> That's why the Linux/Win98SE dual boot box has only 64 meg - it's an
>>>> >> Intel 430TX chipset MB. It will take more ram but only caches 64 meg.
>>>> >
>>>> >Unless, of course, you are running OS/2. Then all the ram can be used
>>>> >provided you tell the Bios you are smart enough to run OS/2. I have Warp
>>>> >running on a 430TX motherboard with the Award Bios set for using OS/2.
>>>> >When thus set, all 96 megs are available and the swapfile never grows
>>>> >beyond the allocated size.
>>>>
>>>> Unless you are a complete fucking idiot
>>>
>>>Maybe it's me, but anytime you address anyone over a computer matter
>>>this way says to me you need a break and/or to get laid, and you take
>>>this WAAAAAAAY to seriously.
>
>>Nah just treating Bob how he treats others.
>
>>>
>>>Are computers really worth that kind of venom and angst?
>
>>You'd have to read Bob's hate filled diatribes on non-OS/2 using people to
>>answer that question.
>
>...after it was started by the wincrap assholes, who come here loaded with an
>obnoxiousness that looks for it, and who apparently don't have any other life
>since they are always here.
>
*cough*
This is an exchnage with your "fellow" Bob Germer:
> But tell me Bob, why are you so hung up on someone's sexuality? Why do
> you think about it all the time? I talk about USB you talk about sex. I talk about
>mice and keyboards, you talk about sex. You are one fucked up old pervert.
BG>Because no pervert has anything worthwhile to say or which can be
BG>trusted. Once I realized you were a faggot, I can and do totally
BG>dismiss anything you post because it is the twisted crap of a
BG>diseased brain.
I was *trying* to have a conversation about USB and devices there-on.
Bob decided he wanted to talk about what people do in bed. Who is
off-topic?
Now just how does this equate with your claim that it is the "wincrap
assholes" setting out to cause trouble?
Regards,
David Sutherland
(note **ANTI-SPAM** in reply field)
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
"Turning's [sic, should be Turing] perverted work is likely why
the net is subject to the terrorist attacks it is now enduring.
This is the result of allowing perverts into the real world."
- Bob Germer, displaying his grasp of history and computing
"OS/2 is not the Messiah. However, Windows, NT, W2K, etc. are surely
products of Satan." - Bob Germer - lunatic
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
From: Ciaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 13:46:22 -0800
In article <D4jz4.7496$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad
Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Ciaran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Equal-opportunity hate. Wonder what the little symbol is for
>> that?
>>
>> The little symbol for equal opportunity hate? Its kinda a
square
>> divided into four and each quadrant is colored differently;
red,
>> green blue yellow. It has these wavey black bits to the left.
>
>More like a satanic, greedy looking penguin sitting on his duff
>contemplating the end of everyone who disagrees with
the "Linusophy"
Wow. I think youve just discovered the icon to be used if Linux
and the BSDs ever merge.
Cheers,
Ciaran
PS At least we have a *cute* symbol of hate :P
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: "Gabriele Del Giovine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: In the middle of it all...
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 22:39:54 +0100
Kool Breeze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> For up to 50 simultaneous users:
> We run our 6 Linux based applications on ONE PII 350 with 128Mb RAM.
> There ONE application requires 6 (yes SIX) NT servers to run.
Boy, i believe that you have not undestand nothing of NT services
programming.
Bye.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Kar-Han Tan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 15:48:43 -0600
On Tue, 14 Mar 2000, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> >> They could ride the 'hype wave' by releasing qtlib with
> >> minimal effort and cover all their bases at the same time.
> >
> >You know, MS doesn't need 'hype waves' to market their products. Others
> >ride the hype waves created by MS, or the 'anti-MS waves' created.
>
> We weren't talking about MS. Although, they have a hype wave
> of their own that they've been riding since IBM graced us
> with their first microcomputer. MS has been surfing it since.
I see.. I thought we were discussing why IE Solaris need a win32 library
to go along.
Well, on the issue of opening Quicktime, I think people have noted at
least a few good reasons why it won't happen tomorrow (maybe in couple
years):
1. QT for MacOS X isn't even finished
2. Apple doesn't own the codecs
3. Linux people don't really like Quicktime anyway
so, even if they did open Quicktime, I suspect it won't be a smooth ride
on the hype wave.
> >on the issue of 'non-tech' management liking NT (since you seem to be
> >using it as a sort of negative comment), I think you have to realize that
> >the larger your user base is, the more non-tech they will be. It also
> >means that to reach a large user base, you need to address the non-tech
> >needs (like common perception of quality and reliability, 'coolness', ease
>
> Except that doesn't really happen. The ignorant just get swindled
> and lied to because marketing is good at telling lies and the
> ingorant aren't as good at spotting the lies.
>
> This is just a slightly more scaled up version of the slimey
> car salesman or the lying computer salesman.
that's why there are laws against false advertising. - if you care enough
you'd read the fine prints of an ad and think about what they are saying
and not saying.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wolfgang Weisselberg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Fairness to Winvocates (was Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K)
Date: 14 Mar 2000 21:59:33 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 14 Mar 2000 13:05:28 -0600,
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8am21c$bn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The problem with that, is that the majority DON'T think differently
> than I, just this small band of Ignorant crusaders that seem to make
> it their job to make everyone <sigh> and shake their head every time
> they post.
Funny that you should say that. I guess you get lots of email
support from lurkers, too. Maybe you should ask Netcraft to pull
some numbers to support your claim ... after all, we can argue
about numbers, but it's kinda hard to argue about your faith.
> It is merely out of good will and charity that I sit down and take
> the time to explain the obvious facts that everyone else sees to them.
Please, Messiah, go preaching in another town. For your
teachings are strange and while we understand your words, we
don't grasp your sentences. We do not mean to hurt you, but we
must disagree with you on principle, because our 101 Mesiasses
have proven you wrong over and over.
And if you were right, well, we'll see you in heaven, as your
teachings do not say a word about the afterworld, not even to
Heretics like us.
> > If people generally are not understanding you, chad, it is always and
> > only because you are not making yourself clear.
> Not people, just Linvocates.
I am pretty close to Godwinating the thread right here and now.
Maybe I am a bit tender on that spot, but LINADVOCATES ARE PEOPLE
TOO. WINADVOCATES ARE PEOPLE AS WELL. Got that?
> They're a small band of closed minded,
> blinded and ignorant people.
Funny, I always though that the same could be said about people
who believe that $OS was the best for _everyone_, in _any_ case.
FYI, Chad, you seem to come across like exactly that sort of
person.
But historically that same claim has been made about any sort of
person who disagreed with someone.
> I used to have a little respect for them
> in the way that they moved like a heard, or dare I say, collective and
> always had a mantra for every single issues that the inceasantly repeat.
But looking closer at them, you realized they were not a heard,
but as divergent as any other group of people. That destroyed
your picture.
> Even new Linvocates who join the fray from time to time tune into this
> collective ignorant heart-beat of FUD lies and deceit.
Funny, wasn't MS the FUDding company around here? You remember
DR-DOS and win3.1? You remember halloween?[1] Sheesh. And you
have the gall to tell the people here they are spreading FUD?
Apart from the usual "NT crashes" (which is more of a selective
memory) and "Linux is hard to install" from the other side I have
not seen much FUD here that did not came from the MS-fraction,
like "Have you compiled your kernel today", "Linux is not ready
(for any and everything)", etc.
> But now I just take them for what they are: hapless, brainwashed
> one-offs from Mac advocates with no hope of seeing the truth, listening
> to facts, or understanding common logic.
In other words, there won't be a "Prophet Chad" anytime soon. (A
prophet should be able to face not converting everyone. But you
just insult people. So it fits well.)
BTW, Chad, in the context of OSses, when was the last time you
saw any truth that was not your own or listened to a fact that was
contrary to what you wanted it to be?
Shouldn't you then apply your "common logic" and understand that
you might have become a closed minded, blinded and ignorant,
hapless, brainwashed Windows advocate, FUDding around and
repeating your mantras like prayer mills with no hope of seeing
the truth, listening to facts, or understanding common logic?
If you dismiss that thought ... you did, right? You did not even
look into it. Well, then that proves my assumption to be right.
Should I pity you? Or envy you for your fundamentalistic faith?
-Wolf"Linux users will not force Linux on you"gang
[1] http://www.opensource.org/halloween/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
