Linux-Advocacy Digest #902, Volume #25 Sat, 1 Apr 00 14:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES (or
MDI for that matter) ("Robert Davies")
Re: Opensource article first chapter draft for criticism ("Robert Davies")
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (abraxas)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (abraxas)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (abraxas)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (Christopher Browne)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (Robert Heininger)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (Bob Hauck)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" ("Bill Sharrock")
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped ("Nick")
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (Matt Chiglinsky)
Re: BEOS 5 the new star in OS's (Jim Richardson)
Re: Advocacy??? (Jim Dabell)
Re: linux ISP in the UK (Jim Dabell)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Christopher Browne)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Robert Davies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES
(or MDI for that matter)
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 16:58:12 +0100
Richard Corfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> If anyone develops an integrated development environment for Linux can
> I say just one thing
>
> P L E A S E D O N O T U S E P R O J E C T F I L E S !!!!!
>
> You have a wonderful mechanism for storing the structure of a
> project. You can organise things like source code and modules into a
> nice hierarchical tree. Its called the Native File
> System. Re-inventing this structured storage using project files is
> just a plain nuisance - especially when they get out of sync. The
> native file system is something that every program has access to, from
> the development environment to the source control system. Why abstract
> it behind another layer that only the IDE knows about?
It's the buy this and it does it all for you syndrome... the less you know
the more dependant you are on their software. Then they can sell you
another tool, a source code archiver, to organise your source, which then
ends up in Yet Another DataBase.
I've found IDE's just a plain nuisance full stop. The open, approach allows
you to choose an editor, source code manager, compiler, all seperately.
Context sensitive editors can do the magic source language dependant tricks,
but OH big but, they probably help to keep you on the straight and narrow of
using the standard language, again avoiding vendor lock in.
Rob
------------------------------
From: "Robert Davies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Opensource article first chapter draft for criticism
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 17:27:20 +0100
Tom Steinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8bqs2b$4k1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Here is the first, incomplete and rough draft of the first 'bit' of my
> Opensource article. Many people from usenet have helped me garner the info
> for this, and I'd like to thank them by letting them get the first chance
to
> flame me. Please consider the below unfinished and crying out for
criticism.
I enjoyed the article, something I think is missing is the discussion of
standards. The Internet exists because of standards, RFC's, they are by
nature open, any vendor or software supplier is free to implement them.
The proprietary way of doing things is about lock in, secret formats,
restrictive practices, and single supplier. The Opensource movement, is
successful simply because, by sharing ideas, and pooling man hours,
cooperating, more useful work is done.
Rob
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Date: 1 Apr 2000 17:00:17 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I do not know why you guys are making a big deal of this issue.
> If an ISP expects more than 51 connections to come in, they
> simply buy an additional copy of WIn2000 Server windows edition.
Or they handle the entire thing for nothing on FreeBSD.
> The ISP needs to do their job, they need to montior
> how many IP's they use, and make sure they divide that
> number by 51. The resulting number is the number of win2000
> server windows edition they need to purshase from MS to meer
> their needs.
I personally know of a very, very large ISP who chucked NT
entirely because of this sort of issue a few years ago. More
are certian to follow.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Date: 1 Apr 2000 17:01:01 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote on 1 Apr 2000 00:34:24 -0800 <8c4cag$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> I do not know why you guys are making a big deal of this issue.
>>
>>If an ISP expects more than 51 connections to come in, they
>>simply buy an additional copy of WIn2000 Server windows edition.
>>
>>The ISP needs to do their job, they need to montior
>>how many IP's they use, and make sure they divide that
>>number by 51. The resulting number is the number of win2000
>>server windows edition they need to purshase from MS to meer
>>their needs.
> Considering that a class C subnet can support about 250 users, [*]
> this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me personally.
> Even a '/6' network has 64 IPS in its subnet. Why can't Microsoft
> handle the remaining 11 or 12 (13th is reserved for broadcast)?
HAaaaahhhahahaa...
Take the Microsoft TCP/IP test and find out....:)
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Date: 1 Apr 2000 17:03:02 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wow, could you have shown your lack of a clue any clearer?
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Robert Morelli wrote:
>>
>> This is so typical Microsoft programming. Some dweeb, not knowing how
>> something should work, simply hard-codes some arbitrary number rather
>> than taking the time to understand the problem.
> This is not a case of an arbitrary number hard coded. There is no such "51"
> IP limit with the server. The problem is that on machines that are Domain
> Controllers, if you go over 51 IP's, the server stops authenticating. This
> doesn't happen on non-domain controller machines. An ISP isn't going to be
> running their domain controller on their web server, and in fact anyone
> doing so is pretty stupid. You don't put your domain controller outside the
> firewall (and you wouldn't have 52 IP's on an internal intranet web server,
> this is for use with multiple domain hosting which is pretty much internet
> based).
> It's a non-issue for anyone that's security conscious. Which is probably
> why MS doesn't much care about the issue, since if this hits you, you're
> doing something wrong.
You wouldnt know, would you? Not having a job in the field that is...:)
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 17:23:09 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Erik Funkenbusch would say:
>Wow, could you have shown your lack of a clue any clearer?
>
>mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Robert Morelli wrote:
>> This is so typical Microsoft programming. Some dweeb, not knowing how
>> something should work, simply hard-codes some arbitrary number rather
>> than taking the time to understand the problem.
>
>This is not a case of an arbitrary number hard coded. There is no such "51"
>IP limit with the server. The problem is that on machines that are Domain
>Controllers, if you go over 51 IP's, the server stops authenticating.
Um. I can't decide. Does this mean that 51 is arbitrary? Or not?
If you can explain why the number is 51, rather than being 50, 52, or 49,
that would "break" the contention that 51 is arbitrary.
If you can't explain why the number is 51, then the "null hypothesis,"
which is that 51 is an arbitrary limit, persists with no reason to believe
it to be false.
>> Almost every version of every MS product has suffered from this very
>> problem, exhibited in some form. With direct draw, it was screen size,
>> with Windows 95, it is the number of Window handles, etc.
>
>DirectDraw never had any such issue. The version of DirectDraw in NT4 prior
>to SP4 had a limit, this was not DirectDraw itself (in other words, it was
>an implementation bug, not a bug in the design of DirectDraw).
>
>Windows 95 also had no arbitray number of window handles limit. Windows 3.x
>and 9x had a fixed size (64k) heap for USER handles, which include menu
>handles, window handles, etc. How many Windows you could open was variable,
>depending on what was actually in each window. The 64K limit was not
>"arbitrary" either, since it was a direct result of the 16 bit code in
>Windows 3.x and 9x.
>
>In other words, nothing you've said here has anything to do with a hard
>coded arbitrary limit. Not the 51 IP issue. Not DirectDraw. And not
>Windows 95 window handles.
A 64K heap *is* an arbitrary limit. Particularly on a system that
had as one of its claimed intents that of "breaking" the 640K "barrier."
Which was, by the way, *another* arbitrary limit.
You've given no information that would provide any reason to believe
other than the null hypothesis for these cases, which is that these
limits represented arbitrarily established limits.
There may be no counter out there that counts to 51 and prevents further
authentication.
It might instead be that there's a vector with 64 elements, where 13 of
them are occupied by "internal stuff." Or it might be that there's a
little database arbitrarily limited to 64K that stores the authentication
tokens, and as the tokens are 1270 bytes long, there's room for only 51
of them. Those are hypotheses I've made up that may bear no
resemblance to reality; I do not claim them to be correct.
However, were they to be true, they would represent hard coded arbitrary
limits every bit as much as a bit of code that said:
if (num_of_clients > 51) {
raise_error(EXCEEDED_AUTHENTICATION_LIMIT);
} else {
authenticate_client();
}
In order for you to establish evidence against the null hypothesis,
you actually have to provide _evidence_, as opposed to informationless
bald claims. Otherwise, there is no reason to believe you.
--
"Win32 sucks so hard it could pull matter out of a Black Hole."
-- Pohl Longsine
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Heininger)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 17:26:34 GMT
On 1 Apr 2000 17:03:02 GMT,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `abraxas' wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Wow, could you have shown your lack of a clue any clearer?
>> It's a non-issue for anyone that's security conscious. Which is probably
>> why MS doesn't much care about the issue, since if this hits you, you're
>> doing something wrong.
>You wouldnt know, would you? Not having a job in the field that is...:)
Cornering a wounded animal has a tendency to make it desperate. . ;-)
--
Robert Heininger
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Date: 1 Apr 2000 17:31:33 GMT
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000 08:46:09 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Wow, could you have shown your lack of a clue any clearer?
>
>mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Robert Morelli wrote:
>>
>> This is so typical Microsoft programming. Some dweeb, not knowing how
>> something should work, simply hard-codes some arbitrary number rather
>> than taking the time to understand the problem.
>
>This is not a case of an arbitrary number hard coded. There is no such "51"
>IP limit with the server. The problem is that on machines that are Domain
>Controllers, if you go over 51 IP's, the server stops authenticating.
So the problem is that the domain service runs out of something (file
handles or listening sockets maybe)? It still doesn't sound like good
programming. If there is a limitation on how many interfaces the service
can listen on it should be documented and there should be a way to
manually specify which interfaces to use.
Most Unixen impose a limit (usually admin-adjustable) on per-process file
handles. So there are similar limitations, which is why virtually all
common Unix daemons provide a way to specify which interfaces to listen
on.
>doesn't happen on non-domain controller machines. An ISP isn't going to be
>running their domain controller on their web server, and in fact anyone
>doing so is pretty stupid.
That's a pretty lame defense. Sure, maybe that's an unusual
configuration, but this "issue" is still a bug that should be fixed.
>DirectDraw never had any such issue. The version of DirectDraw in NT4 prior
>to SP4 had a limit, this was not DirectDraw itself (in other words, it was
>an implementation bug, not a bug in the design of DirectDraw).
So, it was not an issue even though it was because the design didn't
contain the limitation, only the implementation? That's gotta be some
kind of classic doublespeak there.
>Windows 95 also had no arbitray number of window handles limit. Windows 3.x
>and 9x had a fixed size (64k) heap for USER handles, which include menu
>handles, window handles, etc.
Wow, that's a lot better. Instead of running out at a fixed number, it
ran out depending on 500 things you couldn't predict. Cool.
BTW, there _was_ a limit on *system* handles in Win3 and they were not
garbage-collected. The system brushes for example. I believe there were
7 of those available to user programs. If a program opened one of them
and then exited without closing it, the system wouldn't be able to draw
any more after a few runs and it was time to reboot.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 17:47:16 GMT
In article <8bbht8$bie$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mr_organic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Why do you see software as a "product"? You can sell the *media* it
>
> Because it has been "produced" by people. Hard work has gone into it.
> What about movies, novels, music, should it all be free? What about
the
> artists and the craftsmen, should they all do SUPPORT (of all things)
> to make a living???
>
> > comes on, and still make the software Free; you can sell services,
> > consulting, tech support, you name it. That's how most Linux
companies
>
> I prefer not to need support. Red Hat might make a living off bugs,
> incompatibilities and cryptic manuals, but I don't really like that
approach.
>
> > are doing it; trying to sell the actual *software* is a losing
> > proposition (in fact, you never *sell* it, but license a given user
> > to use it, which is a losing proposition in a different way).
>
> Economics is about offer and demand. Limited offer of software
> can only be guaranteed by laws or morals (because it's so easy to
copy).
> Now, tell me, are you against laws and morals, mr_organic?
>
> Francis.
>
Those who are trying to find a place for open source software are
wrong. Free software is clearly anti-capitalist. The suceess of Linux
abnd other open source projects cleasrly shows that capitalism is
doomed, it show that thousands of people can work together on a product
as free people outside of opressive corporate enviroment and create a
great product distributed for free. Sopom , not only software but other
products like cars will be made in anarchist collectives, there will
be no money, no private property. no monsters like Microsoft.
Vlad.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Bill Sharrock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 12:10:55 -0600
*waves*
I thought you quit usenet? And it being Lent and all too. :)
------------------------------
From: "Nick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 19:07:13 +0100
> What are the 10 things about Linux you wish you knew before you got a
> copy and started installing?
Good point.
Number one on my list would definitely be the fairly new Winmodem stuck in
my PCI slot. Thank god for Windoze user friends that you can sell them on to
: )
Still haven't got the wheel on my mouse working yet...
Nick H
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Chiglinsky)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Date: 1 Apr 2000 18:18:37 GMT
On Fri, 31 Mar 2000 21:08:37 -0500,
Robert Morelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How shall I say this delicately? Well, to borrow Microsoft's own words,
>Windows 2000 has "issues." Now, let's not be judgemental of those less
>fortunate. Every OS has emotional needs, and Windows 2000 is not the only
>OS with problems "adjusting." DOS had "issues." Windows 3.1 had "issues."
>Windows 98 and Windows CE have "issues."
Way to re-use an overrused pseudo-psychological buzz phrase.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: BEOS 5 the new star in OS's
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 18:22:24 GMT
On 31 Mar 2000 09:45:32 -0700,
Craig Kelley, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Craig Kelley wrote:
>>
>> Also, can anyone explain why gnome puts a .gnome/ under /? What's
>> up with that?
>
>What is your root user's $HOME?
>
>I've never seen /.gnome.
>
I think this is for the beta and/or cvs stuff. Not for the regular release.
>--
>The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
>Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: Jim Dabell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advocacy???
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 19:29:25 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard Wilson wrote:
> I'd like to share with you something that happened to me on IRC Undernet
> #linuhelp channel. I was having some trouble recognizing all my memory
> and it was something to do with my lilo.conf. Someone asked me to send
> my lilo.conf so I pasted it into the linuxhelp channel. I was
> immediately and unceremoniously kicked out of the channel with "ask
> before you do this". I got back on and stated that I was actually asked
> to do this by someone on the channel.
>
> Then someone who's nick was SpamS..... or something like (who was quite
> active in the channel) asked me to send it to him. Again I was
> chucked out with "I told you" by the exact same person who asked me to
> send my lilo.conf. I was not allowed back onto the channel.
There are two problems here. One is, as you rightfully point out, a bad
case of intolerance. But the other is you. From what it sounds, the
guy was asking you to send him the file directly, not paste the contents
into the channel. What you did would have interrupted other newbies
from getting advice, and annoyed the people who were helping you. It
was equivelant to posting to a newsgroup in all caps, without reading
any posts or the FAQ. Follow some netiquette, and learn how to conduct
yourself when in IRC.
You *were* given a warning not to do it again, but kick/banning you
seems a bit extreme.
> Now my point is, someone going here for the first or second time is not
> to know of all the taboo rules of the channel and I believe I behaved in
> a way anyone would naturally do so. I am a relative newbie to Linux and
> am doing my very best to learn all I can by whatever means,
This is not a "taboo rule of the channel", it's considered rude to flood
*any* channel, and is common to most of IRC.
> (newsgroups, books, IRC, documentation) If Linux is supposed to be a
> great OS (which I believe it is) and it's being advocated for new users
> to take up, this kind of unfriendliness is going to do little to attract
> newbies. this is not the first time I've been treated arrogantly by
> those "in the know" who think I should already know. We all have to
> start somewhere and it's a shame that some will be intimidated away from
> Linux (not me though)
This is nothing related to Linux. You went somewhere in search for
help, pissed off the people who could help you, and complained when they
stopped you from annoying them some more. If people act arrogantly
instead of helping you, when you have read the docs, then they have a
problem. But I find that it's far more common for a newbie to ask
questions that are answered in FAQs, Howtos, user manuals,
README/INSTALL files etc, and then whine "can't you just /tell/ me what
I have to do" when they are told to read the instructions.
Their behaviour was extreme, but a) it's a very common question that you
asked, that has been answered thousands of times if you just cared to
check, and b) there are newbies out there who *have* read up and are
still stuck.
Jim
------------------------------
From: Jim Dabell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux ISP in the UK
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 19:28:05 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
opoppon wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am looking for an ISP linux friendly in the UK. Any name ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Olivier
http://www.uklinux.net/
Jim
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 18:57:55 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when [EMAIL PROTECTED]
would say:
>Those who are trying to find a place for open source software are
>wrong. Free software is clearly anti-capitalist. The suceess of Linux
>abnd other open source projects cleasrly shows that capitalism is
>doomed, it show that thousands of people can work together on a product
>as free people outside of opressive corporate enviroment and create a
>great product distributed for free. Sopom , not only software but other
>products like cars will be made in anarchist collectives, there will
>be no money, no private property. no monsters like Microsoft.
If "free software" is anti-capitalist, so also are such things as:
a) Working for wages rather than for capital participation,
b) Government regulations that force people to be employees rather
than independent contractors (thus throttling attempts to
establish independent sources of share capital),
c) Labour unions, which impinge on the power of the "capitalists."
The claim that something is "anti-capitalist" is usually an attempt
to wave a flag to get Americans that don't think enough to realize
that their economic system is basically NOT a "capitalist" system to
start "flag-waving" in favor of "America is Great, Democracy is Good,
Capitalism is The Only Efficient Way," and to shut their minds off to
any minor discrepancies such as *actual details.*
(With the relative paucity of participation in capital markets, it is
fairly evident that while there may be substantial control *OF AMERICA*
by holders of capital, as is true for many nations, the nation does not
basically run as a "capitalist economy.")
Moving to a system run by "anarchist collectives" seems to me to be
about as likely as everyone agreeing that RMS has a wonderful singing
voice when he sings the "free software song," and the BSD folk
deciding that they've been wrong the whole time and that the GPL
is truly a much better license.
--
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
