Linux-Advocacy Digest #198, Volume #26 Thu, 20 Apr 00 18:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: which OS is best? (dakota)
Re: at the risk of ignorance...a little too late for that (Mike Marion)
Linux vs. BSD (Derek Callaway)
Sell Me On Linux (Jason Portell)
Re: Guess How Many Windows Crashes.... (Mig Mig)
Re: Guess How Many Windows Crashes.... (Mig Mig)
Re: simply being open source is no guarantee of security. (Mig Mig)
Re: Unix is dead? (JoeX1029)
Re: Standard desktop... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Sell Me On Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Elian (Damien)
Re: Elian (Cihl)
Re: Guess How Many Windows Crashes.... (abraxas)
Re: Elian (abraxas)
Re: Sell Me On Linux (abraxas)
Re: Linux vs. BSD (abraxas)
Re: Penfield Jackson bitch-slaps Bill Gates (Mike Marion)
Re: Solaris (was Re: Windows 2000 etc.) (Mike Marion)
Re: Elian (Flaagg)
Re: 'To Be Up or Not To Be Up' (Mathias Grimmberger)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
From: dakota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 12:24:00 -0700
>So Windows might be sort of slow but it is getting better,
>although it may have some not so good programs it also has
>some realy good ones and it certainly the best OS.
>Chris Jenkins
Silly wintroll. Macroshit Windoze doesn't get better,
it "innovates" by adding 3rd party bloatware. From what i've
seen it requires constant reboots & reinstalls. Definantly, NOT
the best OS. NT would make a decent desktop OS after about a
million service packs and hotfixes. Maybe you should actually
try using DOS or one of the OS's listed below before formulating
a biased opinion. (note: DOS is that black screen that you
type commands into, go to start and run and type in command).
I like SCO Openserver, NetWare, and SVR4.2 because of their
stability and virtually non-existent downtime, those things must
not have been priorites when Microsoft designed NT and Win9x.
And at home I use Linux and NT.
>P.S. DOS it not the best OS, it has hardly any programs and
>is hard to use.
MS-DOS was the last good thing that Microsoft ever did and
that's not saying much (DR-DOS was much better). Although it
did have stability and ease of use. I used it for RPGII
programming during the day's of the IBM System/36 and never had
a problem with it.
* 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: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: rec.games.roguelike.nethack
Subject: Re: at the risk of ignorance...a little too late for that
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 19:40:28 GMT
Karl Knechtel wrote:
> The whole idea of something being "in your path" is easily one of the three
> least intuitive things about *n?x I've run into (the others being the vi
If it's in your path it'll run... if it's not it won't. How is that not
intuitive? Seems straightforward to me.
> run in the background with. I thought this class of OSes was supposed to
> do PMT; how come if I run netscape without an & from an xterm, the commands
> in the xterm window don't get executed until I quit Netscape, even if I
Because if you don't background a process, then the current process is what will
access input (if it's written to do so). If it didn't work this way you
wouldn't be able to do anything. How would a shell know that the next thing you
type is for the program you just started, or the name of a new program to start
instead?
> minimize it and bring the xterm window into focus? Shouldn't a command
> window always have relatively high priority implicitly, since it's where
> you're running everything from?). Why on EARTH saying the equivalent
You can make any window you want stay "always on top." That's the beauty of
Xwindows.. _you_ have control over it. You can personalize it any way you want.
> (me). I presume there must be some obscure security reason for it.
Actually one reason is because in Unix systems there is a logical layout to the
filesystem. Libararies are stored in specific areas, binaries in others (the
games setup on Linux boxes is a little different, but everything in there is a
game). This is one reason for the path setup in Unix, you add the specific
binary directories you want to run programs from.
Other Oses (like Dos and windows) dump libraries, binaries, etc.. all over the
damn place.
> who aren't running web servers and are the only ones in their family who
> would dare touch a computer would want to run an OS designed for multiple
> users, and why it doesn't bother them that doing everything they want
> basically requires them to have several "accounts" for themselves.
It does _not_ require several accounts for one person.
BTW, part of the reason I use Linux is because it does many things much better
then windows. I have a Linux gateway that was a K6-200, with 64 Meg of RAM
doing a 20Gig (6 4gig disks) RAID-5 array, 2 raid 1 arrays, which would rip cds,
encode mp3s, and burn CDs on the CD-r while still serving my Email, a small web
server, etc... and was a IPMasq gateway/firewall for several machines behind it
connected to a cable modem. I'd like to see you do all that at the same time
with windows... without making a few CD coasters. I've upgraded the box to a
P2-350.. only because I bought a new Athlong 650 for my gaming box and always
move my gaming box hardware to my firewall. The K6 would still be chugging
along just fine if I wanted it to.
> And why so many of them IME have set their id for their user account to
> plain old first-initial-last-name.
Because we want to? Doesn't mean we can't get mail as Firstname_Lastname@box or
any other alias you can think of.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
My pid is Inigo Montoya. You kill -9 my parent process. Prepare to vi.
------------------------------
From: Derek Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux vs. BSD
Date: 20 Apr 2000 19:42:15 GMT
How is Linux better than (Free|Net|Open)BSD?
--
/* Derek Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Programmer: CISC, LLC -- S@IRC */
char *sites[]={"http://www.freezersearch.com/index.cfm?aff=dhc",
"http://www.ciscllc.com","http://www.homeworkhelp.org",0};
------------------------------
From: Jason Portell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Sell Me On Linux
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 19:36:15 GMT
I'm a corporate Network administrator and we are currently exploring
different networking solutions in my company. I don't know very much
about the OS, and I would like to know what is SOOOOO great about Linux.
Thanks,
Jason Portell
NWE Communications
St. Louis, MO
--
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore
is not a single thing, but a habit.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Guess How Many Windows Crashes....
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 21:51:32 +0200
Dan J. Smeski wrote:
> Okay... I agree that Windows 98 is not a great operating system. I NEVER
> said it was better than Linux. I think however that Windows NT is better
> than Linux. I dual boot Corel Linux and NT, and certain web sites take
> FOREVER to render in netscape and under 2 seconds in NT... stuff like that!
Huh.... Thats strange.. try to measure the time it takes a Netscape >= 4.7
against IE 5. I did and was surprised that Navigator was 10-20 % faster
than IE. My guess is that youre trying to view a page with large tables and
a Netscape Comm. prior to 4.7 .. this is slow
> And yes, u will blame it on KDE, well I can blame many things on many
> things, point is.. I want a system that works. I don't want to worry about
> it. My exchange server is up for a year now without a re-boot, while my
> Linux box at home that I use to share internet with goes down every month...
Huhh... on KDE ?? Im using it right now on a P120 - its not a fast loader
compared to f.ex. WindowMaker (which is just a windowmanager) but after its
loaded its more responsive as my PII 350 running NT at work.
That exchange server must be under zero load or else i dont understand it..
our exchange boxes go down easily - thats the reasen we have 8!!
My Linux box has been down .. but not after i discovered that my CPU fan
didnt start every time.. since not a single shutdown due to some error.
Nearly everybody else (except winvocates) here have the same experience so
you're not telling the truth
Dont talk so much BS.. most of us here come from and occasionally stil use
different Micros¨1 Windows enviroments
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Guess How Many Windows Crashes....
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 21:54:01 +0200
abraxas wrote:
> Dan J. Smeski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Your hardware is shit, that's why it crashed. I bet Linux would crash the
> > same way.
>
> You're an MCSE, arent you.
He cant be ... he forgot the part about the "bad sysadmin"
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: simply being open source is no guarantee of security.
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 21:59:32 +0200
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8dn2rt$adr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8dh73f$v45$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Truckasaurus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > "Making source code available to costumers"
> >
> > But what do they do with it? Print it out (on a screen printer) and
> > turn it into clothing? :^)
> >
> > (Sure, I'm making fun of a spelling mistake. But it was such a fun
> > one to make that I couldn't help myself...)
>
> However, it is a rather poignant faux-paus. Linux is similar to the
> emporer's clothing =)
>
> You can see everything, but it still leaves you out in the cold =)
Ahhh.. it depends on the temperature Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: Unix is dead?
Date: 20 Apr 2000 20:03:15 GMT
actually i think i heard somewhere that the Linux kernel was based on the Minix
kernel. Unsure if it really was thats just what i heard. Hopefully unix won't
die:)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Standard desktop...
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 20:14:28 GMT
Are you claiming that Explorer is a USER INTERFACE????? < Snicker >
The only OS's that Explorer (AN APPLICATION) are ported to are OS's that
MS ports them to. The MS Windows (THE USER INTERFACE) is NOT ported to
any other platforms NOT EVEN TO OTHER MS OS'es. KDE (A USER INTERFACE)
can be ported to ANY OS by ANYONE with enough skills. The point is, KDE
(USER INTERFACE) can move faster and farther than can the MS desktop
(USER INTERFACE). Explorer is NOT A DESKTOP (USER INTERFACE)!
In article <8dmbhk$175$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Davorin Mestric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> no, you said your KDE settings could be used on other OS because it
was
> open source. this has nothing to do with being open sourced or not.
>
> you can run Internet Explorer on other OSes, but it is not open
source.
> what is your point again?
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Get real, I was talking about the KDE *USER INTERFACE* being able to
> run
> > on different *OPERATING SYSTEMS*. The Windows98 *USER INTERFACE* can
> > only run on the WINDOWS98 *OPERATING SYSTEM*. In fact the *NONE* of
> MS's
> > *USER INTERFACES* can run on ANY MS *OPERATING SYSTEM* other than
the
> > SINGLE *OPERATING SYSTEM* it was designed for.
>
> not really true. internet explorer is turning into a full user
> interface.
>
> > KDE is a *USER INTERFACE* that CAN run on different *OPERATING
> SYSTEMS*
> > (I have it running on Linux and Solaris) from DIFFERENT COMPANIES
(MS
> > can not even do this with it's own *OPERATING SYSTEMS*) making it
> > possible to give the SAME *USER INTERFACE* across DIFFERENT
*OPERATING
> > SYSTEMS*.
>
> but this has nothing to do with it being open sourced. those things
are
> orthogonal to each other.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sell Me On Linux
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 20:39:47 GMT
Stability, price, flexibility, the ability to use Linux as a router,
server, firewall or desktop. The ability to compile the kernel to
include ONLY the code you need (enhances security). The ability to
change the kernel code to fit YOUR needs. Easy migration to other high
end Unix servers. The ability to serve and integrate into MS, Apple and
Unix networks. Can run a more stable Active directory (Novell). Runs on
more hardware (IBM mainframes, Dec Alphas-64bit, apple hardware, Sun
hardware...) MS is limited to Intel x86 -- MacOS to apple. Stable
command structure (minimal retraining every time a new version is
released). Runs the most common Internet apps (sendmail, Apache...). No
running out of license "seats". Proven remote management. Large number
of file systems supported. Multiple User interfaces, you can pick the on
the fits YOUR needs. Can run with OUT a GUI to save resources.
With the exception of the Novell Active Directory, all of this is
available on a single distribution CD that can be purchased for less
than $40US and installed on as many servers, desktops and workstations
as you want -- WITHOUT BUYING ANY MORE COPIES!
In article <8dnm7e$6gb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jason Portell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm a corporate Network administrator and we are currently exploring
> different networking solutions in my company. I don't know very much
> about the OS, and I would like to know what is SOOOOO great about
Linux.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason Portell
> NWE Communications
> St. Louis, MO
>
> --
> We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore
> is not a single thing, but a habit.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To:
alt.activism,alt.politics.communism,rec.games.video.misc,alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk,alt.fan.karl-malden.nose
Subject: Re: Elian
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 20 Apr 2000 20:50:35 GMT
On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 12:31:30 -0400, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
JungleAcid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On 20 Apr 2000 15:32:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
|
| >In comp.os.linux.advocacy Michiel Buddingh' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >
| >> Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
| >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| >> Bullshit? Linux is one of the best examples of
| >> anarcho-communism
| >
| >This is an oxymoron. It cannot exist.
|
| An oxymoron, by definition, exists by means of rational explanation.
He probably meant it's a contridiction. I'm inclined to agree.
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.activism,alt.politics.communism,rec.games.video.misc,alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk,alt.fan.karl-malden.nose
Subject: Re: Elian
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 21:02:59 GMT
DGITC wrote:
>
> In article <8djqud$l9a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > DGITC wrought:
> >
> > >Today I heard from a friend, who has a cousin who works for Microsoft,
> > >that Microsoft is going to give Elian Gonzalez a free X-Box plus three
> > >games of his choice, but only if Elian says that he'll stay in the US.
> > >
> > >Am I the only one who sees anything wrong with Microsoft doing this to
> > >him? This is nothing other than bribery, and will only make Elian into
> > >a passive, apathetic vegetable; dependant on television. He'll also be
> > >taught that happiness can only be attained by material possessions and
> > >not from a strong bond between father and son.
> > >
> > >Is it truly impossible for someone to be happy under communism. Are we
> > >so caught up in a system of greed that we think it is ok to separate a
> > >boy from his father, because his father lives a simple life, and can't
> > >provide his son with a lot of expensive clothes and toys? Does a child
> > >really need anything more to be happy than food, clothes, shelter, and
> > >the love of his parents? Send Elian Gonzales back to Cuba today.
> >
> > But only if Castro "embraces and extends" Linux.
> >
>
> That's not much of a problem, since the majority of Linux users are
> already Communist.
>
> --
> DGITC
> Delete the NOSPAM to send a reply by email.
Actually, the Linux community has *nothing* to do with
communism!
Communism:
The idea of communism is to have a highly centralized
distribution of means of production. Production is often
accomplished by asking the population (by means of
questionnaires) what they need most. Out of this come plans
for the future of the country's production.
(Five-year plans in the case of the former Soviet Union.
Correct me if i'm wrong)
Conclusion: Doesn't work correctly. Difficult to plan ahead
for a long time. Also difficult to keep people from trying
to gain more wealth than other. Almost uncontrollable
without tight regime.
Linux:
Production means (the source code, if you will) are highly
decentralized. This means everybody can contribute and alter
production in any way they deem necessary, passing these
changes through the proper channels. This in turn creates a
highly automated method of production and evolution.
Distribution is handled in a (mostly) commercial way.
Conclusion: Quick evolution, high quality due to
non-commercial means of production. Distribution channels
are in commercial competition, which again increases
quality. This chapter is not closed, and only the future
will tell what will happen.
Fascism:
All production means are in the hands of big, centralized
corporations. These corporations are supposed to be
monopolies in their particular field of operation, and work
together to fill the needs of the population.
(Italy, late 1930's and early 1940's)
Conclusion: Didn't work. Corporations looked after their own
interests instead of population needs. Product quality
dropped due to lack of competition.
--
% make fire
Don't know how to make fire
% Why not?
No match
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Guess How Many Windows Crashes....
Date: 20 Apr 2000 21:06:59 GMT
Dan J. Smeski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No Way!
I dont believe you.
> I am not MCSE...
I still dont believe you.
> and I know that when you have crappy hardware, you
> get crashes.
Ergo, when you get crashes, you have shitty hardware?
Sounds like MCSE reasoning to me.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To:
alt.activism,alt.politics.communism,rec.games.video.misc,alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk,alt.fan.karl-malden.nose
Subject: Re: Elian
Date: 20 Apr 2000 21:25:41 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Michiel Buddingh' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
> 8dn7ur$k3l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Michiel Buddingh' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> > Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 14:32:46 -0400, DGITC wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >That's not much of a problem, since the majority of Linux users are
>> >> >already Communist.
>> >>
>> >> Bullshit. Go back under your bridge, troll.
>>
>> > Bullshit? Linux is one of the best examples of
>> > anarcho-communism
>>
>> This is an oxymoron. It cannot exist.
> Linux exists.
Either you do not understand what anarchism is, you do not understand what
communism is, you do not understand what linux, is, or some kind of
combination of the preceeding.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Sell Me On Linux
Date: 20 Apr 2000 21:27:24 GMT
Jason Portell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm a corporate Network administrator and we are currently exploring
> different networking solutions in my company. I don't know very much
> about the OS, and I would like to know what is SOOOOO great about Linux.
Why would anyone here want to sell you on linux? What the hell is the
matter with you?
You're a corporate TOOL is what you are. No one needs you running linux.
> Thanks,
> Jason Portell
> NWE Communications
> St. Louis, MO
Oh yeah theres some really impressive communications companies based
in ST. LOUIS alright.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Linux vs. BSD
Date: 20 Apr 2000 21:31:48 GMT
Derek Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How is Linux better than (Free|Net|Open)BSD?
It isnt.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Penfield Jackson bitch-slaps Bill Gates
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 21:42:13 GMT
Paul 'Z' Ewandeİ wrote:
> Windows to Mac, and Sun has an empire ? :)
When it comes to big iron and large mission-critical servers... yes Sun has an
empire.
> That perfectly sums it up. You feel that Windows9x sucks absolutely, I
> disagree, let's just agree to disagree then.
If everyone did that, then COLA and COMNA would be all but dead. :)
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for awhile I was the suspect."
-- Stephen Wright
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Solaris (was Re: Windows 2000 etc.)
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 21:46:21 GMT
abraxas wrote:
> I still wish that linuxconf included the simplicity and *stability* of admintool
> though...:)
Yeah I don't care for linuxconf myself either. I'm a by-hand admin person. We
don't use admintool here anyway (well, I've used it on occasion for serial port
stuff)... we have stuff written for our environment.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
Sorry, please try again. Thank you for taking the Turing test.
------------------------------
From: Flaagg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.activism,alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk,alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.fan.karl-malden.nose,alt.politics.communism,rec.games.video.misc
Subject: Re: Elian
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 21:56:06 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Damien
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says...
>On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 12:31:30 -0400, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
>JungleAcid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>| On 20 Apr 2000 15:32:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
>|
>| >In comp.os.linux.advocacy Michiel Buddingh' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>| >
>| >> Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
>| >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>| >> Bullshit? Linux is one of the best examples of
>| >> anarcho-communism
>| >
>| >This is an oxymoron. It cannot exist.
>|
>| An oxymoron, by definition, exists by means of rational explanation.
>
>He probably meant it's a contridiction. I'm inclined to agree.
Agreement with a contradiction is an oxymoron.
--
Aaron M. Henne -mhm9x2- http://members.home.net/flgz
"You want Usenet Your Way. Well, this ain't Burger King."
- James <I R A Darth Aggie>
------------------------------
From: Mathias Grimmberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 'To Be Up or Not To Be Up'
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 21:23:55 GMT
Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BTW.. since youre german. There was a wonderfull computer magazine called MC
> wich was full of "dirty" tricks and code and intersting scientific
> articles... I havent been able to aquire copies for many years now. Does MC
> still exist?
No. According to the editorial in the issue from June 1994 (the last
one?) that I found in my piles of old mags it was merged with _DOS
International_.
I stopped reading _DOS International_ some time later because it was not
that interesting anymore (hehehe, putting DOS into the name of a
PC/computer mag was kind of dumb anyway). I don't know if this mag still
exists.
I guess we are heading towards a future with no technical computer mags
at all. Only tabloids hyping whatever vendors want to sell today. :-(
MGri
--
Mathias Grimmberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Eat flaming death, evil Micro$oft mongrels!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
