Linux-Advocacy Digest #476, Volume #26 Fri, 12 May 00 12:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Erik Fuckingliar does it again ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation' (Craig Gullixson)
Re: How to properly process e-mail (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Which Flavour Is Best? (Roberto Alsina)
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped (Stuart R. Fuller)
Re: Need to make UNIX autoresponder (Roberto Ullfig)
Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation' (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Microsoft invents XML! (rj friedman)
Re: Here is the solution ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk (John Hasler)
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk (John Hasler)
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk (John Hasler)
Re: What have you done? (Bart Oldeman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Erik Fuckingliar does it again
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 13:58:55 GMT
In article <391b8b26$4$obot$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 05/11/2000 at 06:47 PM,
> "Erik Fuckingliar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I know of no Microsoft applications that make use of that API other
than
> > through other API's like MAPI.
>
> You know absolutely nothing, you product of a dirty test tube and a
> diseased pig.
Some more quality OS/2 advocacy. Keep up the good work!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Craig Gullixson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation'
Date: 12 May 2000 14:30:33 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gary Connors
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>in article 8etjfd$p1q$[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] at
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 5/5/00 12:42 AM:
>
>
>
>>> I think a variant of Unix running on the VAX -- I don't know if it
>>> was Ultrix, or BSD -- finally figured out that each individual page
>
>Man. Get a clue (I know I'm talking to two authors here). Ultrix runs on
>DEC's. Vax, which was made by digital, ran OpenVMS. Definitly not a Unix.
[The above comment is a little hard to parse, however ...]
There were a number of Unix systems available for the Vax line (as well
as VMS and OpenVMS). If I recall correctly, Digital itself supplied
more than one variety of Unix --- Ultrix and Digital Unix (names may
not be quite correct). One of the offerings was BSD based and another
was based on OSF1. The current offering is True64 which is SUS V2
compliant. I also know that Bell Labs ported one of the Berkley Unix
variants (4.2 ?) to the Vax line way back when.
---Craig
_____________________________________________
Craig A. Gullixson
Senior Research Associate INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
National Solar Observatory/Sac. Peak PHONE: (505) 434-7065
Sunspot, NM 88349 USA FAX: (505) 434-7029
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How to properly process e-mail
Date: 12 May 2000 09:43:50 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram) writes:
>
>
>> How about the responsibility of the MUA writers to make a clear
>> distinction between data and executable content? With such a MUA the
>> user can "open" /any/ attachment without fearing that something might
>> possibly go wrong.
>
> Well, there is that. Though I still think it is stupid to open
>an attachement if you have no idea of what it is. But yes, MUA's should
>work better than MS stuff does. I use Pine for my eMail and this never
>becomes a problem.
Errr, but you can't know what it is until after you open it. If
you already know, why bother looking at it again? Hence the need
for a safe way to view it and for that safe way to be the default.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which Flavour Is Best?
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 15:01:39 GMT
In article <bzLS4.1729$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"none2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8fei5j$4pt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roberto Alsina
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Before you start badmouthing the work of others, you should get
> > informed.
>
> repackaging RPMS and calling mandrake is what i mean.
If you think that's all MandrakeSoft does, you are free to be wrong.
> > a) -O2 has nothing to do with "optimizing for a pentium". That's
-m586
> > and such.
>
> I would like to see an actual improvement of so-called optimized for
the
> pentium. When I tried Mandrake on my system, it performed the same as
RH.
What benchmarks did you run?
> but the way RH does things, its alot smother, Gnome/KDE and
Windowmanagers
> work togther. Pro-KDE Mandrake, its sucks.
That's your personal opinion, and I respect your right to have it.
It is, sadly, a fairly stupid opinion. Red Hat's "KDE workstation"
profile used to set GNOME as the default desktop.
Now, who's pro who?
BTW: I believe that was just a mistake by Red Hat, or rather, crappy
quality control. Now, why are you saying Mandrake is more pro-KDE than
Red Hat is?
> > b) All code you run, runs faster if you optimize it. That's the
point
> > of optimizing, after all. So it's not "just the kernel".
>
> this is mandrake propaganda,
If anything, it's pgcc group's propaganda, or gcc's propaganda, since
the gcc docs say the pentium optimizations produce better pentium code.
Since all development of gcc is done by Cygnus, and Red Hat owns cygnus,
it would be Red Hat propaganda!
> so if Redhat release a Pentium optimised
> distro, would be the same as mandrake?
No, because it wouldn't have the Mandrake installer, and it wouldn't
have the tools Mandrake people wrote.
> so mandrake would be out of
> business if RH released a pentium optimised copy RH?
Probably not.
> > c) Mandrake started as a RH derivative. It still is. It also
contains
> > some software they are developing, like the installer, or
drakconf,
> > and they pay people to work on free software projects.
>
> 95% of mandrakes RPMS are from Redhat.
Really? Lats I checked, Mandrake had about 150 packages Red Hat didn't
include. That would mean Red Hat has ... 2850 packages. They must use
a very good compression algorithm, to fit that in so few CDs.
Or you are making up the numbers, of course.
> "and to show the world that we can make a distro, we'll make an
installer
> program"
Well, that is ONE program they are developing. They are paying for the
development of software that all distributions include, too, just
like Red Hat does.
> >> REDHAT:
> >> 5.0 major upgrade
> >> 5.1,5.2,5.3,5.x minor upgrades
> >> 6.0 major upgrade
> >> 6.1,6.2,6.3,6.4 minor upgrades
> >> 7.0 major upgrade
> >> 7.1,7.2,7.x ....
> >>
> >> MANDRAKE:
> >> 5.0,5.1,5.2,6.0,6.1,6.2,7.0,7.0,7.01,7.02,7.1 minor upgrades
> >
> > So, you are saying that from Mandrake 5.0, which was based on RH
5.0, to
> > Mandrake 7.0, which has roughly the same versions of everything as
RH
> > 6.1, they went without making any major upgrades? That's magic!
>
> I'm saying not even Mandrake 7.0 compares to redhat 6.1 let alone 6.2,
Well, no, you said what is written above. Red Hat 6.1 and Mandrake 7.0,
according to you, share 95% of the RPMs. They have the same versions of
almost all software. What is so much bettero on RH 6.1?
> Mandrake is a mess, and isnt taken seriously at all why?
You mean, not taken seriously BY YOU? I bet Gaël is crying on a
corner because of the mighty opinion of none2 on c.o.l.a.
Come on, get real. They are taken seriously by every site that does
distributions reviews, they are taken seriously by all the people that
use the distro (which are many), and they are taken seriously by people
like me who actually produce the software they distribute.
> Its another RH
> wannabe distro, trying to target workstations, shit i would install
> windows for that, and run a RH server instead...
Why?
> you could always install
> corel linux that intends to copy the windows GUI with a hacked KDE
copy.
Then why not Mandrake?
> >> but even there installer program wasnt that great, so they had to
> > upgrade
> >> to 7.01 and 7.02 came out just as fast, now 7.1 beta is here
already!,
> >> whats type of upgrading is this? cant the mandrake team wait a
while?
> >
> > Why?
> >
> >>do they wanna keep you downloading more ISO images? i think so.
> >
> > Oh, yeah. The secret internet cabal pays them by the megabyte.
>
> so they cant release rpm updates?
Look at the number of rpm's that have been upgraded. It's over 80%.
There's no point on a rpm based upgrade (although of course you can
do one just fine from the CD or downloaded image).
> they wanna go into another beta?
Of course. If they didn't, how could they ever release?
> shit
> didnt they release 7.0 a few months ago? no excuse for hiking up the
> version number.
>From 7.0 to 7.1??? Why not? What should it be called? 7.0.1?
> >> for example RH7.0 will be a major revision, it will incorporate
XFree86
> >> 4.0,
> > Kernel
> >> 2.4.x, possibly gnome and kde2 updates.
> >
> > Check out the Xfree version in the Mandrake beta.
>
> yeah, lets keep copying rawhide, modify it a little and call it our
own.
Oh, shut up. If they had 3.3.6, you would say "they are inflating the
numbers". Since they have 4.0, you say "they took it from rawhide".
Download it and look at the spec files.
> >> Slackware is brilliant example of lets skip versions, what ever
> > happened
> >> to slack 5 and 6...
> >
> > Well, since a version before Slack 7 was slack 96, your argument is
> > kinda confusing.
>
> http://www.slackware.com/faq/do_faq.php3?faq=general#0 same sort of
> tactic mandrake did.
I just said it was confusing. And apparently it is not the same as
Mandrake did. Mandrake just started from a high number.
> >>come to think of it, what ever happened to mandrake
> >> 1-4?
> >
> > They were "Red Hat with KDE" and used the RH version number.
>
> again, KDE wasnt even around at RH4.2 level. it only emerged at 5.x,
so
> that comment doesnt hold an truth to it.
Your ignorance is showing.
> >> mandrake, it blows chunks, if u want a newbie distro, run windows,
> >
> > Windows is a newbie distro of linux? I learn something every day.
>
> Mandrake attempts to be a windows clone, in the same way corel does,
> unfortantely Mandrake does it very badly, broken install, broken
packages,
> its easily the worse distro on the planet.
And you have tried them all, right?
> >> otherwise dont bother with linux...we get so many dumb ass's asking
> >> questions.
> >
> > On the other hand, we also get dumb asses thinking they can ANSWER
> > questions. That's way worse. Most don't even believe they are dumb
> > asses.
>
> well when new users who use windows extensively decide to run mandrake
and
> the install program fucks out, plain and simple mandrake dont do
enough
> testing of there own products, they should have stuck with redhats
install
> so much smother.
I HOPE you meant smoother.
> Why? maybe because they dont release a unfinished
> product, trying to release it fast enough to get the 'version leader'
> title. Redhat for example will not release Rh7.0 for a while yet, lots
of
> testing of 2.4.x and XFree4... mandrake are the version leaders, and
thats
> all they'll lead in.
If that makes you feel better, keep on believing.
> > Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
>
> and Helix GNOME rocks.
I've heard so, yes. Sadly on SuSE 6.3 the installer craps out.
Make sure to try KDE 1.90, which was out yesterday!
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart R. Fuller)
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 15:10:04 GMT
Phillip ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: 2nd of all:
: If something goes wrong - Linux will tell you clearly what the problem is -
: so LISTEN to it
: "general fault error" is just plain Windows crap.
So, how is "segmentation fault" more useful than "general protection fault"?
Stu
------------------------------
From: Roberto Ullfig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: tw.bbs.comp.unix,comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Need to make UNIX autoresponder
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 10:10:42 -0500
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
==============1EA76095C61911FA2D92773E
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I would like to make an autoresponder in Perl on a UNIX server. Any
> ideas tips about doing that? I look forward to hearing from you. Thank
> you.
>
No point in doing duplicate work. Here you go...
--
Roberto Ullfig : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems Administrator
Networking Services and Information Technologies
University of Chicago
==============1EA76095C61911FA2D92773E
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii;
name="autoresponder"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline;
filename="autoresponder"
#!/bin/sh
# forrep 1.3 by Doug Muth ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
# This program may be freely distributed, hacked, whatever...
# I would appreciate a note however if you are changing it or including
# it in some software package so I know where to look for it. :-)
# This program is designed to be used in conjunction with procmail, but
# could always be run from the command line on a specific piece of mail,
# if you so prefer...
# Suggested uses: an autoresponder, a spam rejector, a way to stop harassers,
# a way to generate return receipts to sent e-mail.
# This program accepts RFC 822 mail from stdin, generates a replying
# set of headers, including additional addresses which can be specified
# on the command line, includes any text files, quotes the original e-mail
# with COMPLETE HEADERS, and sends everything to stdout, which can be piped
# into sendmail for transmission.
# Additions to version 1.1: changed the temp file names to the "$$"
# convention; added the '-s' switch.
# Additions to version 1.2: added -S, -m, -b; rewrote some of the calls
# to test to check for the presence of variables
# Additions to version 1.3: added -f; rewrote the routines to parse command
# arguments; got rid of dependence on formail, *YAY*!
# Sample .procmailrc recipe file for calling forrep to block spam:
#
# :0
# * ^From:.*cyberpromo.com
# | $MAILDIR/forrep [-s] [filenames] [recipients] [-b user] \
# [-S subject] [-m]
# Sample .procmailrc as an auto-acknowledger for received e-mail
# :0 c
# * ^TO.*$LOGNAME
# * !^X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# * !^FROM_DAEMON
# | $PMDIR/forrep -s $PMDIR/auto-ack.txt -S \
# "Auto acknowledgement for <$SUBJECT>" -m
# Syntax:
# -s Suppress quoting of the original message, useful for return
# receipt type messages
# -b An e-mail address to BCC the message to
# -S What to change the Subject to
# -m To pipe through sendmail, should be used unless you want
# to pipe the message through something else
# <filename> the name of a file to include
# <recipient> the e-mail address of someone to send the message
# to; if an argument is not found as a file it is assumed to be an
# e-mail address
# this is our original message
ORIG=/tmp/forrep.$$
touch $ORIG
chmod 600 $ORIG
# files included
FILES=/tmp/forrep.files.$$
touch $FILES
chmod 600 $FILES
# file for holding the new message
OUTPUT=/tmp/forrep.output.$$
touch $OUTPUT
chmod 600 $OUTPUT
# temp file for changing headers
TMP=/tmp/forrep.tmp.$$
touch $TMP
chmod 600 $TMP
# who am I? For the X-loop: header
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
# location of sendmail and appropraite parameters
#SENDMAIL="/usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -t"
SENDMAIL="/usr/lib/sendmail -oi -t"
##############
## End of user defined variables
##############
# header of forrep that gets added, please leave this in, I'm vain :-)
VANITY="X-Autoresponder: forrep 1.3 by Doug Muth ([EMAIL PROTECTED])"
# do we want quoting?
QUOTE=1
# the new subject header
SUBJECT=""
# has an error occured when parsing $SUBJECT?
SUB_ERROR=0
# the Bcc: headers
BCC=""
# has an error occured when parsing $BCC
BCC_ERROR=0
# are we using sendmail within forrep?
USE_SENDMAIL=0
# who the e-mail is from
FROM=""
# what we want the From: header to say
SENDER=""
# has an error occured when parsing $SENDER?
SENDER_ERROR=0
# the "Re:" subject
RE_SUBJECT=""
#############
# Start of actual program
#############
# copies the e-mail message into the temp file
cat >$ORIG
while test $# -gt 0
# this handles the parsing of the arguements
do
case "$1" in
-s)
# we want to suppress quoting
QUOTE=0
;;
-S)
# we want a new subject
if test $# -ge 2
then
# set new subject
SUBJECT="$2"
shift
else
# error, no subject specified
SUB_ERROR=1
fi
;;
-b)
# we want to BCC somebody
if test $# -ge 2
then
# add to the recipients
if test "$BCC"
then
BCC="$BCC, $2"
else
BCC=$2
fi
shift
else
# error, no recipient specified
BCC_ERROR=1
fi
;;
-m)
# we are using sendmail internally
USE_SENDMAIL=1
;;
-f)
# we are specifying the sender
if test $# -ge 2
then
# set new subject
SENDER="$2"
SELF="$2"
shift
else
# error, no subject specified
SENDER_ERROR=1
fi
;;
*)
# check if it's a file or e-mail address
if test -r $1
then
cat $1 >>$FILES
elif test "$TO"
# assume this is an e-mail address
then
TO="$TO, $1"
else
TO=$1
fi
;;
esac
shift
done
# generates our new headers
# $OUTPUT will be used as the temp file for $TMP as we do not yet use $OUTPUT
# at this point in the script
cat $ORIG |sed /"^$"/,/\000/d >$OUTPUT
if grep "^From:" $OUTPUT >/dev/null
then
FROM=`grep "^From:" $OUTPUT |cut -c7-`
else
FROM=`grep "^From " $OUTPUT |cut -d' ' -f2`
fi
echo "To: $FROM" >$TMP
if grep "^Subject:" $OUTPUT >/dev/null
then
RE_SUBJECT="Re: "`grep "^Subject:" $OUTPUT |cut -c10-`
echo "Subject: $RE_SUBJECT" >>$TMP
fi
# chops off the trailing space so we can add in new headers easily
sed /"^$"/,/\000/d <$TMP >$OUTPUT
# check for changing the sender
if test "$SENDER"
then
echo "From: $SENDER" >>$OUTPUT
elif test $SENDER_ERROR -eq 1
then
echo "Forrep-warning: you did not specify a recipient after the -f \
parameter" >>$OUTPUT
fi
# add in forrep specific headers
echo "X-Loop: $SELF" >>$OUTPUT
echo "$VANITY" >>$OUTPUT
# add Cc: header
if test "$TO"
then
echo "Cc: $TO" >>$OUTPUT
fi
# check for a new subject
if test "$SUBJECT"
then
# erase current Subject: header
grep -v "^Subject:" $OUTPUT >$TMP
mv $TMP $OUTPUT
echo "Subject: $SUBJECT" >>$OUTPUT
elif test $SUB_ERROR -eq 1
then
echo "Forrep-warning: you did not specify a subject after the -S \
parameter" >>$OUTPUT
fi
# check for any BCCing being done
if test "$BCC"
then
echo "Bcc: $BCC" >>$OUTPUT
elif test $BCC_ERROR -eq 1
then
echo "Forrep-warning: you did not specify a recipient after the -b \
parameter" >>$OUTPUT
fi
# add that empty line back in
echo "" >>$OUTPUT
# output the files
cat $FILES >>$OUTPUT
# quote the e-mail message?
if test $QUOTE = "1"
then
sed s/"^"/">"/ <$ORIG >>$OUTPUT
fi
# let's send our e-mail
if test $USE_SENDMAIL -eq 1
then
cat $OUTPUT |$SENDMAIL
else
# don't use sendmail...
cat $OUTPUT
fi
# cleanup
rm -f $ORIG
rm -f $FILES
rm -f $OUTPUT
rm -f $TMP
# let's get out of here!
==============1EA76095C61911FA2D92773E==
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation'
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 15:13:22 GMT
On Fri, 12 May 2000 01:48:30 -0400, Gary Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>in article 8etjfd$p1q$[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] at
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 5/5/00 12:42 AM:
[deletia]
>>> I think a variant of Unix running on the VAX -- I don't know if it
>>> was Ultrix, or BSD -- finally figured out that each individual page
>
>Man. Get a clue (I know I'm talking to two authors here). Ultrix runs on
He has a clue. You don't. Ultrix was the Unixen that DEC had for
it's machines that ALSO ran VMS.
>DEC's. Vax, which was made by digital, ran OpenVMS. Definitly not a Unix.
>Legendary uptimes. I used to work in a lab a few years back where Vax's
>were used as desktop machines (try writing papers with emacs and Tex!). My
>old account is still active and I logged in about 2 minutes ago and checked
>its uptime. 1251 days, 7 hours, 18 minutes. Get that kind of uptime with
>Linux!
Just remember to keep your licences all paid up. <snicker>
[deletia]
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (rj friedman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft invents XML!
Date: 12 May 2000 15:19:54 GMT
On Thu, 11 May 2000 22:58:30 Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
¯I'll extend the proverbial olive branch once and only once: What is your
¯problem with me? If you can express it in a cohesive thought (lacking your
¯usual baseless insults), I'd sure love to hear it. What did I do to earn such
¯scorn from you? Do you even know why you're so annoyed with me? I gotta say,
¯I don't.
They conditioned the RAT to type - simply amazing. Too bad
they weren't able to do anything about the RAT's ability to
remember his actions.
Here's a hint for you Myrat - go back and look at what the
first "I used to think you were merely a moron, but now I
see you are a RAT," post was in response to.
________________________________________________________
[RJ] OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
rj friedman Team ABW
Taipei, Taiwan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 12 May 2000 15:24:10 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
||
|| Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
|| news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
|| > Or how about this site:
|| >
|| > < http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/4942/index.html>
|| >
|| > Where the author has this list:
||
|| [large list of undocumented functions deleted]
||
|| Noone is arguing that there are not undocumented functions. What we're
|| arguing is that nobody can provide a list of undocumented functions that
|| current Microsoft applications take advantage of. Most (if not all) of
|| those API's are used by the OS itself rather than applications.
|
|We have a utility in OS/2 called EXEHDR. It can show all of the DLLs that get
|dynamically linked to the executable in question as well as which ordinals it
|uses. I have to imagine that something similar exists in the Win32 world.
|This could provide the requested proof.
That's funny Marty, there's no exehdr on my Warp 4 (fixpack 11) system...
BTW, I tend to doubt that there would be info in an exe's header
describing the DLL's which are dynamically linked (meaning at runtime);
statically linked (by the linker at compile/link time) yes, but
dynamically linked... impossible.
Maybe a dictionairy of comp sci terms would help?
regards,
Guido
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 12:49:30 GMT
Gunter Bengel writes:
> And since this is a tax issue they asked at the relevant authority which
> is the "Finanzamt" (tax office). The statute of a church was refused to
> them by said tax office, not by the governement,...
The tax office is not part of the government? Bizarre!
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 14:28:34 GMT
Gunter writes:
> There is no Ministry of Religion here in Germany.
I know that. I was not writing about Germany or any other specific nation.
> An CO$ is allowed to do what they want if they respect german law.
Nor was I writing about the Scientology loons. They are, in and of
themselves, unimportant and uninteresting. The discussion has moved on.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 12:39:31 GMT
I wrote:
> But German politicians have the right to tell their citizens that they
> should not believe in Scientology?
Gerald writes:
> On Fri, 12 May 2000, Christopher Browne wrote:
> ...
> sorry, but your statement reflects the rudimentary information so typical
> of the American press.
First, Christopher Browne did not write that: I did. Second, the statement
is, in context, essentially rhetorical and a response to other statements
in this thread, not to anything I read in "the American press" (I get most
of my actual information about European politics from the BBC).
> ...but if you want church taxes collected for Scientology than why not
> contact the IRS.
What makes you think I want "church taxes" collected for anyone, any time,
anywhere?
> And btw, Scientology's desperate and tasteless propaganda efforts in this
> matter seem to underline what critics accuse them of, but the Catholic
> church is hardly less greedy - only more established.
Did you read my entire article at all?
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: Bart Oldeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What have you done?
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 15:02:15 GMT
On Fri, 12 May 2000, Christopher Browne wrote:
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Steve Harvey would say:
> >In article <RsmS4.15586$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christopher
> >Browne wrote:
> >>There does indeed need to be a file transfer service that doesn't
> >>transfer passwords in clear text; layering FTP atop SSH is a quite
> >>appropriate way to cope with this.
> >
> >There's also a secure copy tool - scp - that is part of ssh, and
> >serves this purpose very nicely.
>
> Unfortunately, it needs to become ubiquitous.
>
> Which requires that it be _free enough_ to become ubiquitous. Which
> it isn't, yet...
>
> <http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-devel-9810/msg00130.html>
It was not in October 1998, indeed. But it is now! Check out
www.openssh.com. I hope it gets ubiquitous soon. OpenSSH is part of Debian
2.2 (potato).
Bart
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
