Linux-Advocacy Digest #143, Volume #26 Sat, 15 Apr 00 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: dvwssr.dll (Mig Mig)
Re: VA Linux: Worlds most overpriced PC (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! ("Lennart Gahm")
Re: MICROSOFT IS FINISHED!!! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Karl Knechtel)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Karl Knechtel)
Re: dvwssr.dll ("Francis Van Aeken")
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Michael J. Stango)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Eric Bennett)
Re: VA Linux: Worlds most overpriced PC ("ax")
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Gerben Bergman)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Gerben Bergman)
Re: MS caught breaking web sites (Charlie Ebert)
Re: MICROSOFT IS FINISHED!!! (Joe Kiser)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Karel Jansens)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Karel Jansens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: dvwssr.dll
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 21:08:03 +0200
Francis Van Aeken wrote:
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > I used to be a real NT zealot, kernel developer, beta tester, the whole
> > deal. The more I work with Linux and FreeBSD, the more I hope I never
> > have to work on god-damned windows ever again.
>
> Why would you? You are a free man, aren't you? Why not throw the
> "Windows 9x, Windows NT" out of your signature and out of your
> business? Why do you keep on sucking Microsoft's dick if you hate
> them so much? Because it pays?
Kinda hard to suck on that one since its "soft" and "micro" at the same
time.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: VA Linux: Worlds most overpriced PC
Date: 15 Apr 2000 16:09:39 -0400
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000 11:51:12 -0400, JOGIBA wrote:
>This company is dead meat not only because it is the biggest loser ($320
>down to $28) on the stock market but it is trying to sell a plain old 733Mhz
>PC for $2699 !You can go to Dell,Gateway,IBM,Compaq,HP or any of the
>thousands of other OEM's and get a loaded PC with Windows and a dozen Linux
>OS CD's and save hundreds of dollars over a VA Linux box.
If you're interested in getting a decently priced PC with Linux:
http://www.tcu-inc.com ( this is where I got mine )
http://www.aslab.com
http://www.thelinuxstore.com
http://www.cgallery.com
http://www.indybox.com
A little more pricey, but still not as bad as VA:
http://www.swt.com
http://www.penguincomputing.com
--
Donovan
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: "Lennart Gahm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Lennart Gahm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 20:14:35 GMT
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000 18:37:47 +0200, Gerben Bergman wrote:
>On 15 Apr 2000 15:49:10 GMT, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net, the rebel without a
>clue, said:
>
>| > Heh. An OS/2 user gloating over Windows users' fragile registries. Sure
>| > Karel, those OS2.INI and OS2SYS.INI files are rock-solid, aren't they? They
>| > *never* get corrupted or polluted, do they? No need for UniMaint, CHECKINI,
>| > or any of the other .INI-file repair utilities, is there?
>|
>| It is my understanding that the OS/2 *.INI files can withstand a lot more
>| punches than their Windows equivalents.
>
>Translation: I've heard a lot of noise concerning Windows registry problems,
>so OS/2's .INI files *must* be better.
>
>| In any case, I have never ever had a single *.INI related problem; I run
>| checkini.exe about twice a year out of habit and to remove some orphans
>| (more or less like I run the "compress" utility on my Psion diary to make
>| the file somewhat smaller) and that's it.
>
>I've had one .INI-file corruption so serious that I was forced to do a total
>reinstall -- OS/2 would hang while loading the Workplace Shell, giving me an
>error dialog without any text on it. Also, a friend of mine found that he
An reinstall is almost unnecicery on OS/2. *.Ini files can be replaced by
the ones created in the first install. You can use ALT-F1 and use VGA if
your SVGA device drivers don't work. If you used OS/2s archive (or XWorkPlace
Shells archive) function you can also use an older but working version of
WPS.
One of the above will take care of most WPS problems.
The standard procedure for most consulantans when windows get corrupted is
to format and reinstall the crap.
On OS/2 you mostly can solve the problem much easier.
A fast way to solve OS/2 problems can also be to use WiseManager.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MICROSOFT IS FINISHED!!!
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 20:25:49 GMT
Jaap van Hengstum wrote:
> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://cbsnews.cbs.com/now/story/0,1597,183988-412,00.shtml
>
> > Story about how Microsoft made it possible for Redmond and the U.S.
> > government to
> > spy on everybody who has a MICROSOFT OS!
>
> Try reading the facts before you post stupid FUD like that. Yes, MS reports
> a vulnerability in the dvwsrr.dll but it's a simple buffer overflow and has
> nothing to do with the so-called 'password' which isn't a password but a
> (random) value needed for the client and the server component to communicate
> correctly with eachother. This has been reported by Russ as early as
> yesterday. As much as I admire RFP's work, it seems everyone can use this dll
> if they have enough permissions (some website apparently had very lax
> permissions set). Okay, I would probably like to see MS hang as much as a lot
> of people in this newsgroup do :-) ... but it seems that the 'password'
> story came out just a little too premature...
HORSE POOP!
Your trying to WHITE WASH the story.
They put in a secret BACK DOOR for the sole PURPOSE of FUDDING NETSCAPE!
Microsoft Corporation simply can't be trusted anymore!
This is what the story PROVES, despite your white paintbrush!
Charlie
OTHER PEOPLE shoule READ THE STORY THEN SEE!
MICROSOFT IS GOING TO FIND THEM AND FIRE THEM?
FOR A BUFFER OVERFLOW!
KISS MY ASS GUY!
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Knechtel)
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 19:51:48 GMT
Steve ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Why are so many trolls - indeed, so many posters to CSMA in general - named
"Steve"? I ask for information only.
: I've been _heavily_ using Win95/98 since the day Win95 was released
: and have _yet_ to have to play with the registry. I'll tell you what's
: _pathetic_ and that's the back-water Mac only being able to run one
: instance of a program at a time. (This is year 2000 ??? ) I tap the
I'll tell you what's _pathetic_ and that's the back-water standard troll
responses about the Mac only "being able" (a phrase which implies
incompetency on the part of Apple programmers where in fact they made a
design choice which has been argued to death many times here) to run one
instance of a program at a time.
Yes, it's the year 2000. Hope your PC originally thought so too.
: spacebar twice and my PC turns on, boots & connects to the net with
: _3_ instances of IE running , one goes to my news site, one to web
: mail, and one to my online broker. With as much web intensive work as
If hitting the spacebar "turns on" your computer, it was not turned off in
the first place. At least, I don't suppose so - with all the gimmicky PC
keyboards I'm seeing these days I wouldn't be in the least surprised if
they've made one where the space bar doubles as a power key.
(ThoughIreallywonderhowyou'dwriteanythingthatdidn'tlooklikethisifitdid...)
The Mac can certainly connect to the net with "_3_" IE windows open, they're
just not "instances" in the sense of separate copies in RAM. If you'd
*prefer* to waste space in your physical RAM by filling it with 3 copies of
the same executable code and most of the same data, with the only effect on
performance being that maybe Windows' so-called "PMT" will see the mess as
separate processes and assign more CPU cycles to the net result, be my guest.
(A fun sort of PMT it is, too, where one would feel compelled to do this
sort of hacking! A *real* system would let you set task priorities, like
*n?xen do. Of course, don't try explaining that to a Windows user. They're
still under the impression that being able to set the minimum and maximum
RAM allocation for an app, given a "suggested" guideline and a default
which Just Works 99% of the time, is a Bad Thing (TM).)
: I do the Mac would be a REAL mill stone around my neck, But all is
"Web intensive work" which consists of reading news and mail, and online
trading apparently. Not exactly graphic design for the web, or Perl/CGI
scripting or HTML authoring... but at least you made a good *try* to sound
like a professional...
So you're under the impression that using a new Mac just to *surf the web*
will slow you down? Whatever you're smoking, I want some.
: not lost , I think with OS X the Mac will finally crawl out from
: under the rock a bit.
Yawn.
Karl Knechtel
da728 at torfree dot net
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Knechtel)
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 20:06:00 GMT
Tim Mayer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: "C Lund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: > (Steve) wrote:
: >
: > > I've been _heavily_ using Win95/98 since the day Win95 was released
: > > and have _yet_ to have to play with the registry. I'll tell you what's
: > > _pathetic_ and that's the back-water Mac only being able to run one
: > > instance of a program at a time.
: >
: > Well, you see...
: >
: > 1. The Mac doesn't have to run more than one instance of an app at a time,
: > since most Mac apps can handle multiple documents at a time. You may have
: > a multitasking OS (so does the Mac, btw), but it seems you (Wintrolls,
: > that is) don't have a single multitasking/threaded app.
: Windows supports both. It's amazing how you'll justify and sell a
: limitation as a feature. Which way does OS X handle it?
Some "limitation". Boo hoo, I can't voluntarily (or accidentally, if I'm
a newbie) waste space in physical RAM on my Mac by opening multiple copies
ot the application (except by the previously noted workaround of opening
a separate copy on the hard drive of the app - but I really can't imagine
why I'd want to).
: > 2. You *can* run multiple instances of an app on the Mac, as long as you
: > make multiple copies of the app on your HD. Of course, this isn't
: > necessary since most apps can handle multiple apps.
: Now that intuitive. What would you do to have three instances running, make
: three copies on your hard drive? Good thing those software guys at Apple
: didn't try writing everything themselves this time around.
Of course, this isn't necessary since most apps can handle multiple
[documents]. Reading comprehension problems? Ok, I'll give you partial
credit since the guy slipped up...
: > Guess we just have more advanced software than you guys do.
: Now that the key -- who needs memory manage and PMT anyway.
"memory manage[ment]" that actually gives me some say in the matter is IMO
preferable to Windows' "memory manage[ment]".
As for PMT, well now there is a reason to open multiple instances of your
app. Windows will see it as multiple threads each with whatever priority,
and assign processor time for each. Now there's a limit on total CPU cycles
available of course, but the total time assigned stands to be more than it
would have been. Of course, I'd rather not have to resort to such hacks.
Karl Knechtel {:-#>
da728 at torfree dot net
------------------------------
From: "Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: dvwssr.dll
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 17:40:54 -0300
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> We have been playing with dvwssr.dll and we've found a buffer overflow
> that stops the server from incoming connections, at least.
> Not that COLA is the proper forum for this, but FUD deflection must go
> on.
I agree, let's say it once more: there is *no* backdoor in dvwssr.dl, the article
in the Wall Street Journal was wrong.
And, as MS has pointed out, there's an unchecked buffer in dvwssr.dl and
everybody who uses the concerned software should delete this file *now*.
Francis.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael J. Stango)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 20:40:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, The Cat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you really able to do this or just being facetious? Reason I am
> asking is my daughter wants an iMac for graduation and I know just
> about nothing as far as Mac computers are concerned.
Certainly.
1. Mac powers itself up: Energy Saver control panel, standard Mac OS
2. Downloads OS updates: Software Update control panel, standard Mac OS
3. Gets mail: Put an alias to your e-mail program in the Startup Items
folder and set the e-mail program to check for mail automatically when it
is launched. I use the now-defunct-but-still-works-great Claris Emailer.
4. Loading eight web pages: to load multiple web pages, each in different
window, I use a handy little app called Hello wURLd.
5. Light/appliance control: Visit <http://www.x10.com> and
<http://www.smarthome.com> to learn about the fabulous world of X10. There
is also a good article about X10 at
<http://www.maccentral.com/news/0002/15.ihnatko.shtml>
6. Voice commands: Speech control panel, standard Mac OS. You can create
scripts for damn near anything and make it into a speakable command.
~Philly
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
Michael J. Stango --who is known as 'mjstango' at his ISP, 'home.com'
"In the time it took you to read this, your personal computer became
obsolete."
------------------------------
From: Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 16:40:11 -0400
In article <gM0K4.41096$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Windows supports both. It's amazing how you'll justify and sell a
> limitation as a feature. Which way does OS X handle it?
I can't imagine having a unix-based system that can only run one copy of
"ls"...
--
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology
CBS News report on Fort Worth tornado damage:
"Eight major downtown buildings were severely damaged and 1,000 homes were
damaged, with 95 uninhabitable. Gov. George W. Bush declared Tarrant County
a disaster area. Federal Emergency Management Agency workers are expected
to arrive sometime next week after required paperwork is completed."
------------------------------
From: "ax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VA Linux: Worlds most overpriced PC
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 20:53:26 GMT
"JOGIBA" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:u8QmrGvp$GA.271@cpmsnbbsa04...
> This company is dead meat not only because it is the biggest loser ($320
> down to $28) on the stock market but it is trying to sell a plain old
733Mhz
> PC for $2699 !You can go to Dell,Gateway,IBM,Compaq,HP or any of the
> thousands of other OEM's and get a loaded PC with Windows and a dozen
Linux
> OS CD's and save hundreds of dollars over a VA Linux box.
>
>
I heard that one company offers PCs preloaded with Linux for about
$800. Does anyone know the name of that company? Which other
companies are offering Linux PC for under $1000?
I rarely hear any discussion about X terminal. Can X terminal be
used with Linux server for cost saving for setting up a small computing
environment say for 10 to 20 people? If so, which vendors are
offering X terminals? If not, are there other alternatives?
------------------------------
From: Gerben Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 22:55:16 +0200
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000 20:06:24 GMT, the Gods became angry when Marty spake
thusly:
| Unless I have missed something in the Win32 API, I don't think there's a way
| for a given app to have its own "registry" like this, where they can use the
| same registry API calls on their own file like I can with my own INI files
| in OS/2. Do you (or anyone else) know if this is possible in Win32?
I haven't got the faintest idea. I've always preferred applications which
keep their stuff in their own directories, with their own INI files (PMMail
on OS/2, Opera and Agent on Windows), but pitifully few developers code that
way nowadays. :(
--
Gerben Bergman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Gerben Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 22:55:17 +0200
Swinging his fists at the black helicopters, Lennart Gahm yelled "Re: Become
a Windows Registry Expert!"
| >I've had one .INI-file corruption so serious that I was forced to do a total
| >reinstall -- OS/2 would hang while loading the Workplace Shell, giving me an
| >error dialog without any text on it.
|
| An reinstall is almost unnecicery on OS/2. *.Ini files can be replaced by
| the ones created in the first install. You can use ALT-F1 and use VGA if
| your SVGA device drivers don't work.
Correct, which is what I did -- I restored a backup copy from the <Alt+F1>
menu. The above remark about having to do a reinstall was due to my faulty
memory.
| The standard procedure for most consulantans when windows get corrupted is
| to format and reinstall the crap.
Not necessarily. When the registry gets corrupted on Win9x you can do a
DOS-based registry export and import which will solve a surprising number of
problems, whereas Win2K presents a menu of troubleshoot/recovery options
when you press <F8> during the first part of the boot sequence. I concur
that Win9x's problems are often best solved with a fresh reinstall, though.
--
Gerben Bergman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: MS caught breaking web sites
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 20:59:27 GMT
Okay, let's discuss this.
Robert Moir wrote:
> "wisdom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > WELL WELL WELL!
> >
> > For all of you butt-bumping suckbuddies of Mr. Bill who have
> > been assuring us that there are no network "backdoors" in
> > Windows you, along with your evil master, are fucked now.
> >
> > Microsoft just acknowledged (see attached CBS article) that they
> > installed secret code in Windows to sabotage webservers
> > by allowing "backdoor" unsecured logins for hackers. The
> > code was apparently intended to be used against Netscape
> > based on embedded comments in the file.
>
> Hey Fudster, seen this?
> taken from NT bugtraq
>
HOLD IT RIGHT THERE! He's not a FUDSTER for reporting the truth.
>
> Latest reports say that there is
> NO VULNERABILITY IN DVWSSR.DLL
If there's no GD vulnerabiltiy in the .Dll mentioned, then why are
they telling people to DELETE IT! What are you F'ing saying here!
>
> Yup, that's right, different again from what I said earlier, and even more
> different than what I said yesterday to WSJ.
I don't consider WHITE WASH a GOOD ARGUMENT!
>
> Please accept that I have followed the story published elsewhere and tried
> to keep you abreast of everything I knew. Also appreciate that the amount of
> time given to verify and research the claims made by others has been
> extremely short. I've had probably 30 interviews today by orgs pressing for
> information on the story as the feeding frenzy occurs after the first one
> goes to press (WSJ in this case).
> MS have had people working on this thing like madmen, trying to verify the
> claims and investigate all of the possible pieces of code that may be
> affected. As that research progressed, different observations were made and
> so the story came out in various stages (with varying levels of
> "correctness"). Had they been given a reasonable amount of time to respond,
> nobody would have been in a tizzy about anything (i.e. the press would not
> have cared to run this story anywhere).
> Decide for yourself whether we were better served by (more) immediate
> disclosure or not. I've stood where I stand for a reason, despite the
> loathing of others for my stance...
Oh for christ sakes! If Microsoft and their policies were less crooked then
we would have never had this MESS to begin with.
Your WHITE WASH of the story isn't helping ANYBODY HERE!
>
> In the end, it turns out that unless you actually have permissions for the
> file you are requesting, you'll get an error message when you follow the
> procedures outlined by RFP in his RFP2K02 advisory.
OH crap! Why are they asking people to delete it!
>
> That said, understand that sites that allow connections by Front Page may
> very well provide you with source asp if you request it. BUT THAT WILL
> HAPPEN with or without the .dll. Without proper and full permissions applied
> across virtual servers on a given box, site leakage or manipulation by
> others will always be possible in myriad ways.
I'm not going to say it!
>
> From what I've heard/seen/been told, permissions on the test servers must
> have either been non-existent, incorrectly applied, or permissioned the user
> across multiple virtual sites (i.e. incorrectly applied).
> I had someone claim that they could get into an FP98 site using
> "Netscapeengineersareweenies!" as a userID and no password...making them
> think it was a backdoor userID. Fact is they could get into the same sites
> using "TomDickandHarry" as a userID too. If the permissions aren't set
> correctly, anything is possible.
Yes, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!
I'm beginning to believe Microsoft WILL STUP AT NOTHING!
>
> This info may change again before its finalized. It may well be that there
> is some way to use this .dll in a way that's not intended...it just doesn't
> appear to be this one. On a box where multiple sites have not been
> individually permissions, or permissions are lax or non-existent...anyone
> permissioned to execute the .dll in the first place would have the ability
> to simply open the other sites and manipulate them directly (i.e. no need to
> do this junk with the dvwssr.dll)
> Finally, to my point out the string not being a password. Elias Levy of
> SecurityFocus.com and Mark Edwards of NTSecurity.net have both correctly
> pointed out that using the term password to apply to that string is not
> beyond the realm of understanding. The client component mtd2lv.dll and the
> server component dvwssr.dll both need to know this value, and use it
> correctly, for communications to work. If you try and talk directly to
> dvwssr.dll and don't obfuscate your communication with the correct "key", it
> won't understand you. Of course if you don't already have permissions,
> knowing this value gets you nothing...hence my observation that its not a
> password. Whatever it is, it appears to be meaningless junk text used as
> data.
This day marks an end to trust between most of the nations internet ready
companies and the company known as Microsoft.
You WOULD NEVER have had THIS KIND OF PROBLEM if you USED OPEN SOURCE CODE!
THIS EXAMPLE is but one of MANY WE COULD SITE HERE TODAY which functionally
BURIED the proprietary closed source concept, EXPECIALLY FROM MICROSOFT!
I think you can EXPLAIN until your head falls off.
By this time NEXT WEEK, nobody in corporate America will trust MICROSOFT with
ANYTHING!
I'm SHOCKED. Do you hear me! SHOCKED! OUTRAGED!
LIES, LIES and MORE LIES! I'm SICKENED!
ENOUGH COVERUP ALREADY!
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Joe Kiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MICROSOFT IS FINISHED!!!
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 17:03:28 -0400
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> http://cbsnews.cbs.com/now/story/0,1597,183988-412,00.shtml
>
> Story about how Microsoft made it possible for Redmond and the U.S.
> government to
> spy on everybody who has a MICROSOFT OS!
>
> THEY CAN NOT BE TRUSTED ANYMORE!!
>
> OPEN SOURCE IS THE SAFEST!!!
[snip]
Looks like somebody got too excited. Did you wet your keyboard too?
Anyway, this is old news. The story first broke last July, but nobody
gave a fuck.
--
-Joe Kiser
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.mindspring.com/~joekiser/
"I walk the Earth another day
The wicked one that comes this way
Savior to my own, devil to some.
Mankind falls, something wicked comes."
-Iced Earth, The Coming Curse
------------------------------
From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: 15 Apr 2000 22:10:49 GMT
Gerben Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2000 15:49:10 GMT, jansens_at_ibm_dot_net, the rebel without a
> clue, said:
>
> | > Heh. An OS/2 user gloating over Windows users' fragile registries. Sure
> | > Karel, those OS2.INI and OS2SYS.INI files are rock-solid, aren't they? They
> | > *never* get corrupted or polluted, do they? No need for UniMaint, CHECKINI,
> | > or any of the other .INI-file repair utilities, is there?
> |
> | It is my understanding that the OS/2 *.INI files can withstand a lot more
> | punches than their Windows equivalents.
>
> Translation: I've heard a lot of noise concerning Windows registry problems,
> so OS/2's .INI files *must* be better.
>
Thanks. That's really nice of you, trying to translate my stuff. And
so very altruistic too.
However, IMHO the *correct* translation would have to be: "I know
quite a lot of Windows users suffering from Windows registry problems,
and no Warp users with OS/2 *.INI related head-aches."
> | In any case, I have never ever had a single *.INI related problem; I run
> | checkini.exe about twice a year out of habit and to remove some orphans
> | (more or less like I run the "compress" utility on my Psion diary to make
> | the file somewhat smaller) and that's it.
>
> I've had one .INI-file corruption so serious that I was forced to do a total
> reinstall -- OS/2 would hang while loading the Workplace Shell, giving me an
> error dialog without any text on it. Also, a friend of mine found that he
> had to run UniMaint weekly to keep his system from getting unstable. As for
> registry problems on NT: I've had it blow up on me once, comparable to OS/2,
> while my friend is still to have his first problem.
>
> In short: my experience doesn't support your claim that "the OS/2 *.INI
> files can withstand a lot more punches than their Windows equivalents".
> Anecdotal evidence? Sure, but no more than yours.
>
So, let's sum things up: you've had a problem with OS/2's *.INI's and
one with Windows' registry. I've had no problems with OS/2 and three
friends who have had (regular) problems with Windows registries.
You're waaayyy ahead of me in the problems department. I might as well
give in right now.
> | And even if I were to corrupt the *.INI files, OS/2 can repair them without
> | my help.
>
> Not in my case; OS/2 wouldn't boot, I had no recent backup, I was SOL.
>
> | Besides, calling Windows' registries "fragile" implies that they were whole
> | to begin with. That gives them too much credit IMHO.
>
> Ah, Karel's traditional smart-ass cheap shot at Windows. Does it make you
> feel better about yourself and your use of OS/2?
>
Well, I'll have to give Windows this: In OS/2, one has to corrupt
one's *.INI's oneself; Windows can do it all by itself. At least in
this area, Windows "leads" OS/2.
Feeling better now?
Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
========================================================
"Hi! I'm a signature virus.
Pls put me in yr sigline and help me spread."
========================================================
------------------------------
From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: 15 Apr 2000 22:10:54 GMT
"Tim Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ========================================================
> > "Hi! I'm a signature virus.
> > Pls put me in yr sigline and help me spread."
> > *****Compassion section*****
> > [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] UNTAGline added
> > /////Compassion section/////
> > ========================================================
>
> Thanks, it's gone now. ;-)
>
We please to aim.
Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
========================================================
unrecoverable error in application SIGVIRUS.EXE
WIN.COM not found
please uninstall rogue operating system and comply
========================================================
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
