Linux-Advocacy Digest #812, Volume #25 Sat, 25 Mar 00 22:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (When in LA)
Re: Penquins Forever! Was (Re: A pox on the penguin?) ("ax")
Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again) (Marty)
Re: Dish Network's site is DOWN if you don't use M$'s browser. (clyde)
Re: Looking For Linux Training Providers (Richard Storey)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again) (When in LA)
Re: I don't want to stir up any concerns... (Matt Chiglinsky)
Re: I don't want to stir up any concerns... (Matt Chiglinsky)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: When in LA
Reply-To: When in LA
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: 26 Mar 2000 02:14:24 GMT
On Sun, 26 Mar 3900 01:28:14, George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
|>How can you determine by going outside right now whether it's going to
|>rain tomorrow?
|
|Very easily. The weather pattern for Southern California generally
|brings comes from the north west -- what's out there today will
|shortly get to my house tomorrow.
Well I also live in Socal. I can guarantee you that weather moves
more in a day than you can see from your house. On the ocean cloud
banks can take only an hour to come over the horizon and cover my
overhead. What you are confusing is the weather forecaster's ability
to say whether it will rain at your exact location rather than give
say an 80% chance of rain hitting your area. Forecasting is a matter
of probabilities not absolutes.
If you tune into TV forecasters you will find a big falling off of
forecast accuracy from the real meteorologists who actually man the
weather stations, run the forecast models, etc. I dislike listening
to TV meteorologists except to see the latest pictures. Tuning in my
internet connection to the Oxnard weather service station though, I
get the good forecasts that hold up quite well when probabilities are
figured in.
BobO
Marty Amodeo says: "If Glatt, Sutherland, yourself, or myself tried
to get someone fired for using a particular word it is a despicable
act."
David Sutherland made the following quotes in posts residing on
Dejanews:
If I posted anything remotely like Tholen's "queer" [Editor: Note
particular word in quotes] comments with my employers name
anywhere within that message, I would be escorted to the door,
and rightly so.[Editor: Note euphemism for firing]
If Tholen doesn't apologise in full, publicly and at great length, I
*will* advise his university, as this kind of bullshit *should* and
*will* be challenged.[Editor: Note threat]
I've asked Kenneth P. Mortimer, President, University of
Hawaii ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for his opinion on how
certain members of the faculty are spending their time.[Editor: Note
admission to personal notification of employer]
Tholen used "queer" [Editor: Note particular word in quotes] as an
insult and a means to attack someone. This is discriminatory. He did
so from his employers account. His employer has a policy against
discrimination. Tholen acted against the policies of his employer.
Tholens employer is now aware of this. [Editor: Note reason for
contacting employer]
Pretty despicable, I have to agree Marty.
------------------------------
From: "ax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Penquins Forever! Was (Re: A pox on the penguin?)
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 02:17:46 GMT
"2 + 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8b62hc$g8p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> BTW, little known facts about penquins.
>
> Penquins are quite clumsy on land.
>
> But in the sea, penquins fly like birds when they swim.
>
But in Linux, all penguins are lazy sitting with round belly.
They cannot walk or fly. They cannot even stand up
with fat belly. Linux penguins must have been eating
too much "free" stuff.
Totally amazing to see sitting penguins everywhere!
Can Linxu penguins fly someday?
It must be scary if those sitting penguins all suddenly
stand up and walk. They'd better be sitting!
> Totally amazing to see!
>
> 2 + 2
>
>
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again)
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 02:19:35 GMT
Bobo wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>
> On Sun, 26 Mar 3900 01:44:49, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> |Bobo wrote (using a pseudonym again):
> |>
> |> On Sun, 25 Mar 3900 06:43:53, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Glatt)
> |> said:
> |>
> |> |>> It is a fact that it has also been mentioned several times in this
> |> |>> newsgroup that you abused your employer's computer facilities and were
> |> |>> reprimanded for doing so.
> |> |
> |> |>I just finished telling you that there is a difference between a fact
> |> |>and a claim of fact, Glatt.
> |> |
> |> |I just finished telling you that it is a fact that it has also been
> |> |mentioned several times in this newsgroup that you abused your
> |> |employer's computer facilities and were reprimanded for doing so.
> |> |
> |> |>Your "mention" of some alleged abuse and
> |> |>some alleged reprimand constitutes the latter, Glatt.
> |> |
> |> |Prove it, if you think you can, loser.
> |>
> |> It is incumbent on the person leveling the charges to produce evidence
> |> and prove the claim Fatglatt.
> |
> |How ironic, coming from the person who (in his absurdly
> |long-to-the-point-of-rude signature) continues to foist a baseless, unproven
> |accusation of Sutherland attempting to get Tholen fired for using a word.
> |Will Bobo's hypocrisy never end?
Note: no response. It continues still.
> |> The defense's job is to respond to evidence presented, and is not
> |> burdened with the proof that there is no evidence.
> |
> |So why have you failed to present evidence to back up your claim that
> |Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired for using a particular word? Will Bobo's
> |hypocrisy never end?
Note: no response. No evidence presented to substantiate his claim, proving
his hypocrisy yet again.
> |> Of course there are exceptions to that rule. . . .
> |
> |Like you for example? How convenient.
Note: no response. He obviously considers himself to be above his own words.
> |> like in Lewis Carrol's "Wonderland."
> |
> |Or Bobo's own line of home-brew fairy tales.
> |
> |> And "loser"? Losers don't have jobs as a professor at a major
> |> university.
> |
> |I beg to differ (based on several examples).
> |
> |> Losers are unemployed bums or guys that can't hold a steady job.
> |
> |Being a loser has nothing to do with holding down a job. A loser can be a
> |bookkeeper, for example.
Note: no response.
> |> When is the last steady job you had Fatglatt?
> |
> |Running interference through your verbal masturbation and inventing your own
> |topics again?
Note: no response.
> |Still demonstrating your inability to prove your claims? How
> |embarrassing! No matter how many times you repeat it, it does not
> |magically produce evidence that Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired
> |for using a word, especially in light of Sutherland's reproduction of
> |the letter he actually sent to the U of H. I ask again (again noting
> |the lack of previous response), where is the part that proves that
> |Sutherland tried to get him fired for using a word? Can't find that
> |part, can you? Too bad.
>
> Hmmm, if you can't find it, then what is your objection to it? Do you
> see any claims there?
How many times are you going to lie about not making this claim? Here it is
*AGAIN*. Ironically, it immediately followed the quote from me which you've
plastered all over your signature, yet you somehow neglected to include this
part in there:
M> If Glatt, Sutherland, yourself, or myself tried to get someone fired for
M> using a particular word it is a despicable act.
[How ironic that you have included this very line in your erroneous reasoning,
but "forgot" what your response was to it. How convenient.]
BO> Sutherland admitted to doing so and Glatt supported the attack.
If that's not an unsubstantiated claim, then I don't know what is. How many
more times do you think you can get away with lying about it?
> Nope little guy,
To whom are you referring, bookkeeper?
> there is only your statement and David's statements.
Surely you are "forgetting" something. How convenient. (See above, you lying
hypocrite.)
> If you see something there, then there indeed must be something there.
Yes. There's your unsubstantiated claim, sitting there just where you left
it. I don't suppose you'd like to do something about that, now would you?
(other than lie about it and pretend it never existed)
> Marty Amodeo says: "If Glatt, Sutherland, yourself, or myself tried
> to get someone fired for using a particular word it is a despicable
> act."
to which Bobo responded:
BO> Sutherland admitted to doing so and Glatt supported the attack.
> David Sutherland made the following quotes in posts residing on
> Dejanews:
>
> If I posted anything remotely like Tholen's "queer" [Editor: Note
> particular word in quotes] comments with my employers name
> anywhere within that message, I would be escorted to the door,
> and rightly so.[Editor: Note euphemism for firing]
>
> If Tholen doesn't apologise in full, publicly and at great length, I
> *will* advise his university, as this kind of bullshit *should* and
> *will* be challenged.[Editor: Note threat]
>
> I've asked Kenneth P. Mortimer, President, University of
> Hawaii ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for his opinion on how
> certain members of the faculty are spending their time.[Editor: Note
> admission to personal notification of employer]
>
> Tholen used "queer" [Editor: Note particular word in quotes] as an
> insult and a means to attack someone. This is discriminatory. He did
> so from his employers account. His employer has a policy against
> discrimination. Tholen acted against the policies of his employer.
> Tholens employer is now aware of this. [Editor: Note reason for
> contacting employer]
>
> Pretty despicable, I have to agree Marty.
Still demonstrating your inability to prove your claims? How embarrassing!
No matter how many times you repeat it, it does not magically produce evidence
that Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired for using a word, especially in
light of Sutherland's reproduction of the letter he actually sent to the U of
H. I ask again (again noting the lack of previous response), where is the
part that proves that Sutherland tried to get him fired for using a word?
Can't find that part, can you? Too bad.
--
The wit of Bob Osborn in action:
"Perhaps it something you should try to your kids don't end up as stupid as
you."
"There is an old saying fartface."
"Not only are you a filthy low-life lying bastard pig, you are too stupid to
know it."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 21:35:01 -0500
From: clyde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Dish Network's site is DOWN if you don't use M$'s browser.
next thing you know, you'll read that big bill owns them. the internet is
becoming more closed everyday. it's like watching tv, 10 mins of actual
program, 20 mins of commercials.
clyde
Stefan Ohlsson wrote:
> Randy Crawford wrote:
> >Simply amazing.
> >
> >I just tried to visit http://www.dishnetwork.com, but every
> >time it crashed Netscape within visiting one, or at most two
> >links off the main page. (I'm running Linux Redhat 6.0,
> >Netscape 4.61, and I'm no newbie to Living Without Windows.)
> >
> This site is good... as an example for how NOT to make a site.
> The layout is awful. Maybe because I have no java nor javascript.
> It seems it's possible to navigate without it though.
> All images lack ALT-tags. Lots of images lacks WIDTH and HEIGHT
> attributes.
>
> Anyways, here are some things to think about when designing a site
> that I think are important;
>
> Important Rule #1:
> Java and Javascript should not be required to navigate a site.
>
> Important Rule #2:
> All images should have ALT,WIDTH and HEIGHT attributes.
>
> Important Rule #3:
> At no time should more than 3 frames be displayed, preferrably not more
> than 2.
>
> /Stefan
> --
> [ Stefan Ohlsson ] · http://www.mds.mdh.se/~dal95son/ · [ ICQ# 17519554 ]
>
> Lenina Huxely: Let's go blow this guy.
> John Spartan: Away! Let's go blow this guy *away*!
> /Demolition Man
------------------------------
From: Richard Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Looking For Linux Training Providers
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 02:35:05 GMT
ax wrote:
> "reflection" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > ax,
> >
> > my friend, my buddy, my pal.
> >
> > I'm SOOO glad you asked that question.
> >
> > I work for SGI, and we are making a MAJOR commitment to Linux and Linux
> > training.
> > Please please please, if you or anyone out there needs Linux training,
> > support, or high-performance (up to 128 CPU clusters) iron,
> > then BY ALL MEANS, come on down to -
> > http://www.sgi.com/support/custeducation/us/
> > or
> > http://www.sgi.com/software/linux/index.html
>
> Thanks for the information. It's a surprise to realize SGI is another Linux
> player. I have looked into those SGI Linux courses. They are very
> impressive. But, they are still mostly on various subjects of system/network
> administration.
>
> I have checked many other Linux training providers, including Caldera
> Systems, LinuxCare, Red Hat, IBM, HP, etc,etc. Their Linux training courses
> are also mainly about administration. Why those Linux training providers
> focus so much on administration? Don't they know that there are more
> developers than administrators on the planet?
>
> > ax wrote:
> >
> > > I am looking for good Unix/Linux training providers.
> > > LinuxCare currently offers some Linux training courses
> > > but those courses are mostly for system administrators.
> > > Are there other training providers which offer courses
> > > for software developers?
> >
But there are more administrator types looking for training than programmers.
------------------------------
From: When in LA
Reply-To: When in LA
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again)
Date: 26 Mar 2000 02:46:54 GMT
On Sun, 26 Mar 3900 02:19:35, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
|Bobo wrote (using a pseudonym again):
|>
|> On Sun, 26 Mar 3900 01:44:49, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
|>
|> |Bobo wrote (using a pseudonym again):
|> |>
|> |> On Sun, 25 Mar 3900 06:43:53, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Glatt)
|> |> said:
|> |>
|> |> |>> It is a fact that it has also been mentioned several times in this
|> |> |>> newsgroup that you abused your employer's computer facilities and were
|> |> |>> reprimanded for doing so.
|> |> |
|> |> |>I just finished telling you that there is a difference between a fact
|> |> |>and a claim of fact, Glatt.
|> |> |
|> |> |I just finished telling you that it is a fact that it has also been
|> |> |mentioned several times in this newsgroup that you abused your
|> |> |employer's computer facilities and were reprimanded for doing so.
|> |> |
|> |> |>Your "mention" of some alleged abuse and
|> |> |>some alleged reprimand constitutes the latter, Glatt.
|> |> |
|> |> |Prove it, if you think you can, loser.
|> |>
|> |> It is incumbent on the person leveling the charges to produce evidence
|> |> and prove the claim Fatglatt.
|> |
|> |How ironic, coming from the person who (in his absurdly
|> |long-to-the-point-of-rude signature) continues to foist a baseless, unproven
|> |accusation of Sutherland attempting to get Tholen fired for using a word.
|> |Will Bobo's hypocrisy never end?
|
|Note: no response. It continues still.
My response is you get riled up regularly about Sutherlands own words.
In fact, for my less than learned friend, all I do post in my
signature box is in fact the evidence and I don't even post the claim,
the evidence by itself is profound enough for people to come a
conclusion, in fact it is what gets you riled up. How cute, is all I
have to say on the matter.
|
|> |> The defense's job is to respond to evidence presented, and is not
|> |> burdened with the proof that there is no evidence.
|> |
|> |So why have you failed to present evidence to back up your claim that
|> |Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired for using a particular word? Will Bobo's
|> |hypocrisy never end?
|
|Note: no response. No evidence presented to substantiate his claim, proving
|his hypocrisy yet again.
Again you mistake the evidence for the claim.
|> |> Of course there are exceptions to that rule. . . .
|> |
|> |Like you for example? How convenient.
|
|Note: no response. He obviously considers himself to be above his own words.
Strange that you have turned around evidence versus claims. All I do
present in my signature box is the evidence.
|> |> like in Lewis Carrol's "Wonderland."
|> |
|> |Or Bobo's own line of home-brew fairy tales.
You can claim all you wish that I made that stuff up Marty. But
anybody who has any doubt about it can go to Deja News and see for
himself. All your clamouring is for naught.
|> |> And "loser"? Losers don't have jobs as a professor at a major
|> |> university.
|> |
|> |I beg to differ (based on several examples).
|> |
|> |> Losers are unemployed bums or guys that can't hold a steady job.
|> |
|> |Being a loser has nothing to do with holding down a job. A loser can be a
|> |bookkeeper, for example.
|
|Note: no response.
Not withstanding exceptions to the rule, losers are good for nothings,
bookkeepers that can hold a steady job are usually at a minimum good
for bookkeeping.
|> |> When is the last steady job you had Fatglatt?
|> |
|> |Running interference through your verbal masturbation and inventing your own
|> |topics again?
|
|Note: no response.
My such a preoccupation on sexual stimulation Marty. Must be about
the 1,000th time you have used that construction. Is it really all
that stimulating to you?
|> |Still demonstrating your inability to prove your claims? How
|> |embarrassing! No matter how many times you repeat it, it does not
|> |magically produce evidence that Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired
|> |for using a word, especially in light of Sutherland's reproduction of
|> |the letter he actually sent to the U of H. I ask again (again noting
|> |the lack of previous response), where is the part that proves that
|> |Sutherland tried to get him fired for using a word? Can't find that
|> |part, can you? Too bad.
|>
|> Hmmm, if you can't find it, then what is your objection to it? Do you
|> see any claims there?
|
|How many times are you going to lie about not making this claim? Here it is
|*AGAIN*. Ironically, it immediately followed the quote from me which you've
|plastered all over your signature, yet you somehow neglected to include this
|part in there:
|
|M> If Glatt, Sutherland, yourself, or myself tried to get someone fired for
|M> using a particular word it is a despicable act.
|
|[How ironic that you have included this very line in your erroneous reasoning,
|but "forgot" what your response was to it. How convenient.]
|
|BO> Sutherland admitted to doing so and Glatt supported the attack.
That wasn't in the post Marty. Still having a problem with last
month's posts?
|If that's not an unsubstantiated claim, then I don't know what is. How many
|more times do you think you can get away with lying about it?
How many times did I post it?
|> Nope little guy,
|
|To whom are you referring, bookkeeper?
Bookkeeper? Who is a bookkeeper? Is there something in your view
wrong with being a bookkeeper?
|> there is only your statement and David's statements.
|
|Surely you are "forgetting" something. How convenient. (See above, you lying
|hypocrite.)
Well, you are the hypocrite as you had to go back into historical
posting to pull out "THE CLAIM". That was not posted in this thread.
|> If you see something there, then there indeed must be something there.
|
|Yes. There's your unsubstantiated claim, sitting there just where you left
|it. I don't suppose you'd like to do something about that, now would you?
|(other than lie about it and pretend it never existed)
Where I left it? What date was it posted Marty?
|> Marty Amodeo says: "If Glatt, Sutherland, yourself, or myself tried
|> to get someone fired for using a particular word it is a despicable
|> act."
|
|to which Bobo responded:
|BO> Sutherland admitted to doing so and Glatt supported the attack.
Just look at the signature box Marty. David's words are there. As
far as Fatglatt goes he doesn't deserve my efforts to look up his
support, why don't you just ask him Marty? Or hell Marty I will save
you the trouble.
Hey Jeff Fatglatt, did you support David Sutherland on his attack on
Tholen? A simple Yes or No will suffice.
|> David Sutherland made the following quotes in posts residing on
|> Dejanews:
|>
|> If I posted anything remotely like Tholen's "queer" [Editor: Note
|> particular word in quotes] comments with my employers name
|> anywhere within that message, I would be escorted to the door,
|> and rightly so.[Editor: Note euphemism for firing]
|>
|> If Tholen doesn't apologise in full, publicly and at great length, I
|> *will* advise his university, as this kind of bullshit *should* and
|> *will* be challenged.[Editor: Note threat]
|>
|> I've asked Kenneth P. Mortimer, President, University of
|> Hawaii ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for his opinion on how
|> certain members of the faculty are spending their time.[Editor: Note
|> admission to personal notification of employer]
|>
|> Tholen used "queer" [Editor: Note particular word in quotes] as an
|> insult and a means to attack someone. This is discriminatory. He did
|> so from his employers account. His employer has a policy against
|> discrimination. Tholen acted against the policies of his employer.
|> Tholens employer is now aware of this. [Editor: Note reason for
|> contacting employer]
|>
|> Pretty despicable, I have to agree Marty.
|
|Still demonstrating your inability to prove your claims? How embarrassing!
|No matter how many times you repeat it, it does not magically produce evidence
|that Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired for using a word, especially in
|light of Sutherland's reproduction of the letter he actually sent to the U of
|H. I ask again (again noting the lack of previous response), where is the
|part that proves that Sutherland tried to get him fired for using a word?
|Can't find that part, can you? Too bad.
Hey, Marty, I am entitled to my opinions and you are entitled to
yours. Some of yours are in fact so good it is memorialized in my
signature box.
Of course, if my signature box reminds you of my opinion, well I can't
help that now can I? But you will have to just get over it Marty and
live with yours and David's own words.
BobO
Marty Amodeo says: "If Glatt, Sutherland, yourself, or myself tried
to get someone fired for using a particular word it is a despicable
act."
David Sutherland made the following quotes in posts residing on
Dejanews:
If I posted anything remotely like Tholen's "queer" [Editor: Note
particular word in quotes] comments with my employers name
anywhere within that message, I would be escorted to the door,
and rightly so.[Editor: Note euphemism for firing]
If Tholen doesn't apologise in full, publicly and at great length, I
*will* advise his university, as this kind of bullshit *should* and
*will* be challenged.[Editor: Note threat]
I've asked Kenneth P. Mortimer, President, University of
Hawaii ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for his opinion on how
certain members of the faculty are spending their time.[Editor: Note
admission to personal notification of employer]
Tholen used "queer" [Editor: Note particular word in quotes] as an
insult and a means to attack someone. This is discriminatory. He did
so from his employers account. His employer has a policy against
discrimination. Tholen acted against the policies of his employer.
Tholens employer is now aware of this. [Editor: Note reason for
contacting employer]
Pretty despicable, I have to agree Marty.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Chiglinsky)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: I don't want to stir up any concerns...
Date: 26 Mar 2000 02:51:06 GMT
Can't win? They've already won big big BIG. All you Linvocates can do
is whine about how much they've won and make idle threats that somehow
they'll fall soon. Well, let me know when computer newbies start
running Linux and Applixware or Star Office or GNUmeric or whatever
other free alternative you propose. Let me know when Gateway's tech
support line has an option for "You're running the Linux operating
system". Making predictions about a company who produced the richest
man in the world is kind of premature.
Yeah, I hear the Mac is coming back too. Oh yeah, crashes more than a
PC, only one mouse button, and a physically awkward keyboard. Go
Apple.
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 00:03:13 GMT, Dirk Gently <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Microsoft knows they can't win. They can only hope to prolong it, maybe by
>porting their applications to Linux. It can only give them more business.
>
>Work is horrible. Chech out Star Office 5.1 at
>http://www.sun.com/staroffice
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Chiglinsky)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: I don't want to stir up any concerns...
Date: 26 Mar 2000 02:55:22 GMT
"Hacking" means the same as "programming" to anyone who does program.
Then again, "programming" could mean "running setup.exe" to someone who
doesn't use computers.
You're probably thinking of "cracking" as in "hacking in an illegal
manner".
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 22:44:25 +0100,
Davorin Mestric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>hacking and programming means something different to different people. can
>you please be more specific in this. what exactly do you mean by hacking?
>what did you hack, for example?
>
>
>Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>IMO,
>> there's nothing like a unix-type OS for doing hacking, and unix really
>> is unmatched for hacking and programming. You get all the development
>> tools, such as gcc, Qt, Lesstif, GTk, etc. for free. I don't know - I
>> just don't see me using Windows 2000/NT/98 whatever for programming or
>> hacking.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
