Linux-Advocacy Digest #272, Volume #26 Wed, 26 Apr 00 14:13:43 EDT
Contents:
Re: MS caught breaking web sites (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability (Bob Hauck)
Re: which OS is best? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: How does WINE work? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Government to break up Microsoft ("Christopher Smith")
Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat (Salvador Peralta)
Re: which OS is best? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat (abraxas)
Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Where is PostScript support?? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (Leslie
Mikesell)
Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat (Greg Horne)
Re: i cant blieve you people!! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Help convert a weary Linux wanna be ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Elian (Ari Asikainen)
RedHat 6.2 not recognizing 384MB RAM ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: SeaDragon openly confesses he's an IDIOT (Was: Re: "Technical" vs.
"Non-technical"... (Terry Porter)
Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability ("Eddie Dubourg")
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (Terry
Porter)
Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS caught breaking web sites
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:41:23 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Cary O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8e0222$l2q$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8dvs60$1np$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >In comp.os.linux.security The Ghost In The Machine
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> Linux makes a good server OS, but the desktop convenience isn't
> > >> quite there yet. (To be fair, I haven't evaluated KDE and Gnome
> > >> recently; I'm an old Unix-head and use fvwm (not fvwm2-95) as a
> > >> window manager, :-) and I'm not up on BeOS -- which sounds like
the
> > >> hottest thing since the Amiga, from a multimedia standpoint.)
> > >
> > >my girlfriend has, unlike me, a dual OS setup and she actually uses
the
> > >linux desktop with the 'old' KDE 1.2.x the most.
> > >
> > >If set up properly, it _can_ be done. also, the children of her
sister (9
> > >and 7 iirc) only use linux under kde here. ok, more for the fun but
they
> > >_are_ using it.
> > >
> >
> > Linux is *GREAT* for families with small children. My 6 and 9 year
> > olds have no trouble at all typing their name and password into the
> > xdm login box. And once they are logged in, they can only mess
> > themselves up. I put netscape, applixware, xpaint, and logo into
the
> > root menu and they are good to go. Diald handles the internet
access.
> > And if they abuse the privilege, zap goes the password.
> >
> > Plus I am comfortable with the kids doing whatever they want with
the
> > same machine I do real live paying work on. Plus I can use cron to
> > email stock quotes to my cell phone.
> >
>
> i feel sorry for these kids... no games, forced to type arcane
commands in
> mixed case and rewarded by having a non-crashing machine that
faithfully
> returns a constant stream of error messages. I'm sure they suddenly
lite up
> when they hit startx and suddenly discover they can actually use the
> computer productively and easily.
Either read what he writes if you did not, or ask if you don't know what
he writes about :-).
If you use xdm (I rather use kdm, but that's another story), you have no
need for startx.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:00:09 GMT
On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:03:24 +0200, JC Nieukoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote the same post 6 times:
>I don't see how he is supposed to do this since the password was
>undocumented. That makes it a backdoor and a security issue.
We heard you the first time. Newsreader trouble?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 10:09:08 -0500
On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 16:25:21 +0200, Sascha Bohnenkamp
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Helix-modified-Gnome isn't all bad, but it's still a far cry from the
>> ease-of-use of Windows/MacOS's GUI.
>
>like ...
>
>§1 'if it does not work -> reboot'
>§2 'if it does not work after several reboots -> reinstall'
>very nice, indeed
Details, please.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: How does WINE work?
Date: 26 Apr 2000 10:08:53 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Stuart Krivis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Same with WinE. The calls are a bit muckier, in that X and
>>Win32 are very different environments (I think OS/2 and Win32
>>are a bit closer, although not having used OS/2, I can't say
>>for sure).
>>
>>Threading is a problem. :-)
>>
>>(OS/2 also had the advantage of having a Windows version
>>specifically for it -- or perhaps a patch; I don't remember now.)
>
>They actually licensed the code and modified it a bit, then compiled it with
>their own compiler. It ran better than MS's Windows 3.1 :-)
>
>The really neat thing was the version of OS/2 that was designed for use with
>your own copy of Windows.
>
>Win 3.1 is a DPMI server, as is OS/2 in "DOS" mode. So, they loaded the
>Windows kernel and patched it in memory to become a DPMI client like all
>other apps. It solved the problem and avoided modifying MS code permanently
>on the HD.
And as I recall, Microsoft predictably made a stealth patch to
their released Windows code that caused the OS/2 patch to fail.
They never missed a chance to make the competition look bad.
Never mind the fact that they had already essentially forced
the hardware vendor to sell you the copy and had their money,
they weren't about to let you use it any way that didn't follow
their plan.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 01:19:03 +1000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8e1q5m$n8l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> If, like me, you are concerned about the fact Microsoft has frozen
> progress in every software industry segment they have entered, here's
> good news:
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2076-2000Apr23.html
>
> Office will be broken up into a separate company. This company will
> be free to port Office to Linux, BeOS, PalmOS etc. Office, together
^^^^^^
Office on Palm ? That'd be interesting....
> with business applications written in Java will make all these
> alternative platforms viable.
*IF* Office got ported. What reason would this newly founded company have
to expend significant amounts of money porting Office to sell to such tiny
markets ?
> Microsoft will no longer be able to leverage their monopoly in desktop
> operating systems to foreclose competition in productivity software.
Microsoft acquired their commanding position in productivity software by
having the best software available.
> Neither will they be able to leverage their monopoly in productivity
> software to try and gain unfair advantage over competing platforms
> (like they are doing with PocketPC vs Palm today.)
>From where I'm standing, PocketPC and Palm aim at different markets.
[chomp]
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 08:17:09 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Mark S. Bilk" wrote:
> Chad, we're really not interested in the excuses you make
> to your wife in bed.
Ouch!
As for IBM...
This is the reality facing IBM...
They have spent the last 40 years building an empire based on
proprietary technologies, and tying "business partners" to those
technologies. Their wholesale move to support Linux on their servers
was born of desperation to retain some semblance of a rapidly declining
market share. But that kind of shift in thinking cannot succeed
overnight. Their corporate culture, particularly the culture among
their salesforce (at least the ones I talk to), and the culture they
have created among their business partners is workiing against them.
Many of their own salespeople FUD linux in favor of more expensive
alternatives, because they make more money selling more expensive
hardware, and because they don't really understand linux or open source.
We switched at work from using primarily AS/400 and IBM proprietary
languages (RPG) and languages developed by IBM's partners (LANSA) for
web application development to Perl (primarily) and C++ running on 3
different linux boxes, and found our development time cut by 80-90% or
more in terms of man-hours (no exaggeration). Throw in the cost of
hardware, $40-70000 plus for an mid-range IBM mainframe plus the service
agreement, plus bandwidth versus $1000-$1500 per annum (total) for the
hardware lease, tech support, and bandwidth, and you see the ROI and TCO
for linux is a small fraction of that for traditional IBM solutions.
Moreover, the celeron pc's that we are using to run Linux serve scripts
faster than our mainframe running similar applications using a 4gl. And
while you can develop similar functionality with comparable or less
overhead using rpg/cl for your cgi's, when you develop ap's in rpg, you
have to start from scratch building functionalities that are already
written as Perl mods.
I met the VP of Linux development for Lotus corp a few weeks ago, and he
had absolutely no interest in leveraging the tools and developer talent
that are available on Linux. All he wanted was a cheaper platform to
run his company's product relatively unchanged.
It must be humbling for a man whose company sells 5 and 6 figure
licenses for Lotus to work with a product that runs better on PC
architecture than his does on a mainframe, and then deal with the fact
that the strengths of Lotus as groupware / intranet server / mail server
are all handled better by a product that is available for free and runs
better on cheaper hardware.
--
Salvador Peralta
http://www.la-online.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: 26 Apr 2000 10:14:14 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Sascha Bohnenkamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Helix-modified-Gnome isn't all bad, but it's still a far cry from the
>> ease-of-use of Windows/MacOS's GUI.
>
>like ...
>
>§1 'if it does not work -> reboot'
>
>§2 'if it does not work after several reboots -> reinstall'
>
>very nice, indeed
Or, there's the *real* native windows interface: regedit.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat
Date: 26 Apr 2000 15:26:33 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Mark S. Bilk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8e6r7g$lqd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <ISBN4.438$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/newsbursts/0,7407,2487559,00.html
>> >"IBM Corp. (NYSE: IBM), the No. 1 computer maker in the world, filed with
>> >regulators to sell about $14.37 million worth of shares in Red Hat Inc.
>> >(Nasdaq: RHAT), a Linux software operating system distributor. IBM filed
> on
>> >March 23 to sell 250,000 shares it acquired through a private purchase
> from the
>> >company about 13 months ago, according to a filing with the Securities
> and
>> >Exchange Commission made available on Wednesday. A spokesman for Armonk,
>> >N.Y.-based IBM was not immediately available for comment. IBM sold
> another
>> >150,000 shares earlier this month worth an estimated $8.5 million, the
> filing
>> >showed."
>>
>> So, this means that IBM exerts less (or no) control
>> over Red Hat. Why is that a bad thing? Other investors
> It's not a bad thing at all. All it means is that we'll
> finally be spared from the evangelical rantings of people
> such as yourself very soon now.
>> bought that stock; Red Hat still has its capital.
>>
>> The local Costco has as big a display of Red Hat boxes
>> as it does of Microsoft Windows.
> Costco does not have the corporate prescence of IBM, nor
> do they have the high-quality hardware to offer that IBM
> does. All they have are generic prefabbed PCs, which are
> generally of a lesser quality.
>> >Well, it was fun while it lasted. The fad's over, time to pull out.
>> >
>> >-Chad
>>
>> Chad, we're really not interested in the excuses you make
>> to your wife in bed.
> I think Chad was referring to people like you, who need to
> pull their heads out of a certain oriface.
> --
This is a public service announcement:
Steve here actually doesnt know what hes talking about. His real world
experience in computer matters is questionable at best, and it is very
likely that the sum total of his knowledge of such things is pulled from
utopian university laboratories and trade magazines. It is probably
in everyones best interest to simply ignore him.
Thank you.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat
Date: 26 Apr 2000 10:20:00 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Greg Horne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>IBM has a long history of making bad business decisions. Remember OS/2 and the lack
>of support for home users in the 1990's?
Oh, you mean that decision not to make any attempt to force even
their own hardware divisions to preload it? IBM would have known
from old experience that such things are illegal.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Where is PostScript support??
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:36:15 GMT
"Tim Cain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Bart Oldeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> write a (La)TeX file containing the text and structure.
>> produce EPS graphics using xfig/gnuplot/another package.
>> run "(la)tex" on the (La)TeX file.
>> preview with xdvi
>> convert to PostScript with dvips.
>> preview ps/eps files with gv or ghostview.
>> send to the printer.
>I can just see John Doe sitting down at his 386/66,
>and going throught the 7 (SEVEN! Count em!) steps
>you've outlined in the slim volume above.
OK. Now, here is a Windows machine, a bit of text on dead trees, and
a few diagrams on dead paper format. And here is also an original HP LaserJet.
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to get the text into the
computer, render the diagrams in EPS, combine the text with the EPS diagrams,
preview it, and, once satisfied, print it to the printer --- in less than
7 steps.
Or, to be more precise --- why not do it in less than 5 steps? Because
the current xdvi will happily display the EPS graphics just as nicely
as gv will (as they are both using the same backend to do so), so the
"preview with gv" step is unnecessary --- which in turn means that the
"convert to PS" step can be done transparently by lpd rather than
explicitly by the user. So the actual steps are
>> write a (La)TeX file containing the text and structure.
>> produce EPS graphics using xfig/gnuplot/another package.
>> run "(la)tex" on the (La)TeX file.
>> preview with xdvi
>> send dvi file to the printer.
And of course, you might want to do all this in Xemacs, which will give you
lovely pull-down and pop-up menues to do the last 3 steps.
Bernie
--
Ah well! I am their leader, I really had to follow them!
A.A. Ledru-Rollin
French politician
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:36:16 GMT
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>You couldn't do it on a PC running Linux though, as it has basically no
>>support for a serial console. This is a hardware issue not a software one.
>>You __could__ do it on a Alpha running Windows.
Of course, it should be mentioned that you still __can__ do it on an Alpha
running Linux, whereas an Alpha running Windows (are there any left?) would
now be an unsupported system. It should also be noted that you __couldn't__
do it on a PC running Windows, either.
Just completing the list for the missing combinations --- Nessie's selection
was a bit biased....
Bernie
--
Wherever books will be burned, men also, in the end, are burned
Heinrich Heine
German poet, 1797-1856
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Date: 26 Apr 2000 10:30:10 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Did you even bother to try giving it another superblock using the -b flag with
>>e2fsck? I know I've salvaged filesystems on Solaris boxes in the past doing
>>this when a disk was dying... gave a chance to save the data before the disk
>>ate it completely.
>
>The problem is, I didn't/don't have a bootable disk with e2fsck. Maybe
>I should make one in the future, but in this case I didn't. Obviously I
>couldn't use the copy on the hard drive. :-)
What did you boot to install the thing in the first place, and why
can't you repeat with the 'upgrade' option to see if it finds
your partitions?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Greg Horne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:40:55 GMT
No, I was referring to their decision to abandon the home user market with respect to
OS/2. Preloaded software should always be the consumer's choice regardless of the
creator of such software.
Leslie Mikesell wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Greg Horne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >IBM has a long history of making bad business decisions. Remember OS/2 and the lack
> >of support for home users in the 1990's?
>
> Oh, you mean that decision not to make any attempt to force even
> their own hardware divisions to preload it? IBM would have known
> from old experience that such things are illegal.
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: i cant blieve you people!!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26 Apr 2000 15:45:49 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
|
|Tandis wrote:
||
|| In article <8e378b$5jv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, steve jobsniak
|| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|| >i cant believe you peolpe... micorsoft is going down, taking
|| the rest of
|| >the tech stocks down alogn with it, and you folks are
|| >*happy*!!! will you only be happy when the entire stock market
|| >crashess, taking the economy, your job, and preciuos apple with
|| it???
|| >of course you'll change you're minds then, but why not change
|| your mind
|| >now WHILE YOU CAN STILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE and keep it from
|| happening?
|| >
||
|| Maybe Microsoft shouldn't have broken the law...
|
|Repeatedly....and arrogantly...
|
|(of course, Billy Boy perjuring himself didn't help, either).
Billy Boy's perjury was the small end of the stick. The trial
was an endless stream of MS executives telling bald faced lies
and even daring to manufacture (then doctor) evidence. So many
MS witnesses were caught lying that the real wonder is that
Judge Jackson hasn't brought any perjury and/or contempt charges
against the individuals involved.
regards,
Guido
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Help convert a weary Linux wanna be
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:49:02 GMT
Months ago I attempted a redhat 5.0 install with disastrous results.
yesterday I attempted a stormix install. Actually had it up and
running. I was thinking," this is cool". Now it didn't matter too much
to me that my sound card wasn't working (diamond mx300) or that I
couldn't get my modem to work (U.S. Robotics 56 k fax voice) I was
just happy to be using something not of the empire.
When I got out of Linux to go back to windows it overrode my bootmagic
and gave me one boot choice. Linux. I had to use my rescue disk to get
back to windows.
Now when I try to boot into Linux, I can type in the login name but
when I attempt the password, all I get is a blinkin' cursor.
Hellp. please
------------------------------
From: Ari Asikainen <[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: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:58:15 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) scripsit:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Ari Asikainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on comp.os.linux.advocacy:
>
>> I can confirm that Linus Thorvalds is a big fan of the Amish people.
> ^^^^^^^^^
>Who is he? Anyone I've heard of?
Typical American ignorance. I bet you've heard of Bill Kates, haven't
you?
--
Ari
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RedHat 6.2 not recognizing 384MB RAM
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:49:56 GMT
My Linux box will not recognize the 384MB of RAM I have installed,
despite the fact that when the box is powered it, it scans and shows
384MB. Under Linux, 'dmesg', 'top', and 'free' all show just 64MB. I
have one 128MB SDRAM DIMM and one 256MB SDRAM DIMM installed (I
originally had just the 128MB DIMM, but I put in the additional 256MB
DIMM). From what I can tell, the BIOS seems to recognize the memory
fine, but Linux does not.
Any ideas of what the problem could be, and esp. how to fix it? Thanks!
--john
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: SeaDragon openly confesses he's an IDIOT (Was: Re: "Technical" vs.
"Non-technical"...
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 27 Apr 2000 00:00:56 +0800
On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 03:36:19 GMT, s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 17:21:19 -0500, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>Gee, you know, it sounds almost just like the linvocates who say the same
>>thing about WindowsNT and having to reboot every day, etc.
>
>Indeed.
>
>For those who've just joined us, a summary:
This summary provided by our newest anonymous Wintroll, so you can guess
what to laff at!
>
>If you install Linux and it doesn't crash who are a Really Smart,
>31337 h@x0r who nobody can look down upon.
Who ?
>
>If you install Linux and it crashes then it is the fault of the
>operator. [1]
Especially if its a Wintroll.
>
>If you install Windows and it crashes, then it is the fault of the OS.
Not always, sometimes its an act of God.
>
>If you install Windows and it doesn't crash, then you are a liar. [2]
Or a Wintroll.
>
>[1] Actually, they're right about that one. It is the operators fault
>for choosing to run Linux instead of a stable OS.
How would you know, your a Wintroll.
>
>[2] Funny who the COLA'ers who post their Linux uptime in their sigs
>usually have uptimes less than two weeks
This COLA poster is running Redhat4.2 (Aug97), and has no UPS, with the machine
situated in a semi rural area of Perth Western Australia. The uptimes
coincide with power failures.
11:18pm up 5 days, 22:55, 1 user, load average: 0.02, 0.02, 0.00
70 processes: 69 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states: 2.7% user, 0.9% system, 3.5% nice, 96.5% idle
> while my Windows machine has
>been up for five months without logging out (and who knows how long
>since a reboot).
Oh we *do* believe you, really ...
How sad no Windows poster has ever been able to automate this simple uptime
process into their sig ?
This Wintroll hopes to turn that pathetic fact into a *feature*.
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 5 days 22 hours 35 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Eddie Dubourg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 17:04:22 +0100
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >|
> >|Not -any- idiot. IIRC, Jim Seymour wrote some years
> >|back about walking into a number of Unix shops that
> >|left the root password set to the installation default.
> >|
> >|Anyone could login as root (it might not have been Jim
> >|Seymour who wrote this; it was some time ago)
> >|
> > Actually, aren't most distributions of Linux set to put the default
> >password of root to nothing? In other words, what's the difference? If
you
> >are too foolish to change the password, you get what you sow.
>
> I can't speak for any other distros (nor can I speak *for* RedHat),
> but RedHat requires the installer to type in some sort of a root password.
> At least as of 6.0 (maybe 5.0!), and I doubt they've changed it in 6.2.
>
> I don't know if it will accept carriage return (an empty password)
> or not.
>
> Of course, this is the main system password; I'm not sure what the
> piranha password issue is, not having 6.2 installed.
>
I've used RedHat since v4.0, they all required you to type in a root
password (non zero length, but other than than anything goes), but RedHat as
of 6.1 still allowed you at the Lilo prompt to type "linux 1" and enter
single user mode as root - my prime reason to switch to Debian, which if you
try this insists on the root password (which makes it hard to restore a
system if you've forgotten the root password, but I'd rather have this
possibility than finding my system deleted.....)
As far as I'm aware, this backdoor is of similar significance to most of the
other, more publicised, backdoors on a certain commercial operating system,
it will let you get access to a very limited subset of functionality, and is
by and large irrelevant, except as a "Your O/S is a bug-ridden piece of
shite" comment on advocacy groups.
E
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 27 Apr 2000 00:29:07 +0800
On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 03:44:04 GMT, s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 02:30:38 +0000, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>sea_Dragon wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>
>>> I have been compiling and installing new Linux kernels for 6.5 years and
>>> know what I am doing. I gave the correct root drive. I added the new
>>> kernel to MILO, and kept the old one, and neither would boot with the
>>
>>Isn't that LILO? Could explain the problem.
>>
>><snip>
>
>Oh dear. You must be ---***___EXTREMELEY___***-- new to Linux.
>
>IMHO, anyone posting on comp.os.linux.advocacy who doesn't what MILO is
>needs to be beaten with a cluestick. Badly.
No, it's you who needs a clue. I have no idea what MILO is, other than a popular
chockolate drink.
I run Redhat4.2 circa 1997, I don't recall ever using MILO.
However I do recall using remote gui, multiuser, and having a stable and
free system.
However being a buzz_word_Wintroll, I imagine those things are not as important
as knowing what MILO is to you ?
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 5 days 23 hours 35 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 16:42:31 GMT
On 26 Apr 2000 10:20:00 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Greg Horne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>IBM has a long history of making bad business decisions. Remember OS/2 and the lack
>>of support for home users in the 1990's?
>
>Oh, you mean that decision not to make any attempt to force even
>their own hardware divisions to preload it? IBM would have known
>from old experience that such things are illegal.
They didn't even offer it.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
