Linux-Advocacy Digest #632, Volume #26 Mon, 22 May 00 04:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Best Intranet Server + platform ("Mike Purdie")
Re: But.... didn't they say it wasn't Outlook's fault?
Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks (Christopher Browne)
Re: The Path Dependence (Loren Petrich)
Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: ILOVEYOU virus for Linux (attached)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Tired of spam! (Steven Smolinski)
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux (David M. Cook)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (David Steuber)
rhapsody (Thomas Phipps)
Re: What is the BSA? ("EIEIO ERROR")
Re: Microsoft: STAY THE FUCK OFF THE NET!!!
Re: Off-topic ? Microsoft (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Mike Purdie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,comp.unix.admin,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.sys.hp.hpux
Subject: Re: Best Intranet Server + platform
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 14:28:55 +1200
There's another thread in this same group(comp.unix.admin) a little while
agon on this same topic. See if you can find it.
I'll repeat what I said in the last one:
Select your application after a thorough analysis of your business
requirements: reliability, servicability, support, cost etc. Then select
your O/S and hardware to suit.
I'd go with the recommendations made here too, although if you buy a Compaq
Alpha platform, consider getting their Unix (Tru64) too. Then download a
copy of Apache and your up and running.
I must admit to being biased towards Tru64, having worked on many different
Unix's , I still like it the best.
Cheers
Mike Purdie
Me, I'd agree with
Ferdinand V. Mendoza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Benjamin wrote:
>
> > Hi !
> >
> > We are setting an Intranet coast to coast (Canada), I would like to know
> > what could be the best UNIX platform
>
> You came here so, Linux!
>
> > to work with and which webserver
> > will the best ???
>
> You came here so, Apache!
>
> >
> >
> > We want 1 main server, with 5 mirrors sites in major cities. They will
> > be connected with Frame Relay at 128 Kbps.
> >
> > Their will be about 1600 users for that intranet, and we want a server
> > that will hold Perl, Java (Servlet) and 20 users downloading the mp3
> > files (about 500 KB) at the same times.
> >
> > Thanks ...
> >
> > BenJ
>
> If you've got a fat budget an alpha can do that nicely.
>
> Ferdinand
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: But.... didn't they say it wasn't Outlook's fault?
Date: 21 May 2000 23:12:10 -0400
Bobby D. Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>Alan Boyd wrote:
>
>> (I hope it was NewSpeak, that's how I remember it.)
>
>Wasn't it "doublespeak"?
The language was called Newspeak (without the capital S). The word
you're thinking of is "doublethink", a Newspeak word that means "to
believe two contradictory ideas simultaneously".
--
Microsoft Windows. Beyond crappy. Beyond belief.
Microsoft Windows. It could be worse, but it'll take time.
Microsoft Windows. The problem for your problem.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 03:26:01 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Jim Ross would say:
>Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8g9a76$2e4m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <8IIV4.159$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Jim Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Thread support seems more mature.
>> >>
>> >> Thread support NEEDS to be. There's no other effective method
>> >> to achieve concurrency under NT. However, this is quite
>> >> disputable.
>> >
>> >There are some nice advantages of theads as they are lightweight.
>> >It doesn't seem like a process can be a perfect substitute.
>>
>> One of the original design goals for unix was that processes
>> should be lightweight enough that you wouldn't think twice
>> about starting one to perform some job for you. It isn't
>> quite as lightweight as threads and sharing variables
>> among processes can be cumbersome, but it works for a lot
>> of things and avoids the kinds of bugs you get from implicit
>> shared memory. Under NT, process creation usually involves
>> dealing with a window context with the GUI in the kernel
>> and can't be considered lightweight.
>
>Hmmm. Thanks very interesting.
If you look at the research work involved in Plan 9, the effective
successor to UNIX in terms of research efforts, they didn't take the
(ever-common) approach of having heavyweight processes and lightweight
threads, but rather provide a more sophisticated "rfork()" that permits
fairly fine control over what process resources are shared and what
are replicated.
See: <http://cm.bell-labs.com/plan9/doc/9.html>
Things have gotten _QUITE_ schizophrenic about threads...
a) Systems based on VMS, where processes are _extremely_ heavyweight,
promote threading because they _HAVE_ to. Ditto for MVS, although
the model there is _rather_ different.
In effect, doing "UNIX style stuff," forking processes, is
prohibitively expensive on such systems.
And thus, those that would see such systems preeminent have a
"political agenda" surrounding threading.
b) On UNIX, user-space threading can, albeit at a cost of stability,
due to the new deadlocks it offers, improve performance by cutting
down on the (not overly huge) cost of fork()ing.
c) Then there's the matter of kernel-controlled threads. They're cool
stuff in that they allow having parts of a single process run on
different CPUs on an SMP box.
Unfortunately, b) and c) conflict in several ways:
1. User space tends to be quite portable as it does not need to have
non-portable kernel support. In contrast, kernel space threading
requires kernel support, and thus is more complex to manage.
2. Doing threading at the user space level is _cheaper_ than kernel
space threading, as it requires no synchronization of user space
with kernel space.
3. I'm not clear on whether the APIs are compatible; if the source code
using the varying approaches is outright different, that will have
Expensive SideEffects.
It may not be obvious whether a particular program would benefit more
from one approach or the other; the question being whether the thread
switching overhead in a kernel-based scheme is outweighed by the ability
to parallelize.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/linux.html>
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they AREN'T after you.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Subject: Re: The Path Dependence
Date: 22 May 2000 03:29:26 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Grant Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[Newsgroups trimmed drastically -- I'm not getting into any of those
> pan-kook flame wars. Posted & e-mailed.]
>Having said all that, you forget that disproving the QWERTY
>and other illustrations does not disprove all examples, such
>as the path dependence in desktop operating systems.
There is plenty of path dependence elsewhere, such as the rise of
Unix and of various Internet standards such as TCP/IP.
It's not for nothing that Linus Torvalds had decided to create a
Unix clone, and not (say) a VMS clone or a MVS clone or whatever.
>It may be that the authors are going by some strict theoretical
>definition of path dependence (third degree path dependence is
>mentioned, whatever that is) and you are losing sight of the forest
>for the trees. The effect of a large installed base of MS Windows
>and applications that use Windows API's has a very large influence
>on people when they buy their next computer or upgrade their OS.
>Any technically equivalent or superior alternative will find
>that the natural market forces will not be as responsive as would
>be expected otherwise.
And it's an influence on the makers of software also -- they will
tend to go to wherever the market is biggest, even if that results in
freezing out higher-quality alternatives.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks
Date: 21 May 2000 22:22:29 -0500
In article <fI0W4.194$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jim Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> If you use low quality hardware on the desktop. Put some more pixels
>> there and X will use them nicely.
>>
>Les, are there some good free fonts I could use that you're using?
Depends on your definition of free, but you might try these:
http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/contrib/noarch/noarch/webfonts-1-3.noarch.html
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: ILOVEYOU virus for Linux (attached)
Date: 21 May 2000 23:35:55 -0400
Rich Cloutier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>cal wrote:
>
>> > This virus works on the honor system. Please delete a
>> > bunch of JPG and MP3 files from your system and
>> > forward this message to all your contacts.
>
>Ha! My trusty antivirus software kicked in when you didn't say,
>
>"Simon Says............"
I'll fix that.
Simon says "This virus works on the honor system. Please delete
a bunch of JPG and MP3 files from your system and forward this
message to all your contacts."
Muahahahaha!
--
Microsoft Windows. Beyond crappy. Beyond belief.
Microsoft Windows. It could be worse, but it'll take time.
Microsoft Windows. The problem for your problem.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 23:36:55 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> WindowsNT Datacenter Server can recognize up to 16 processors.
>
> Exactly how many can Linux handle? The most I've ever heard
> of was 16, and that was with a major kernel renovation.
>
Linux for S/390 handles up to 32 processors. See Chapter 2 of:
http://linux390.marist.edu/download/inst.pdf
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steven Smolinski)
Subject: Re: Tired of spam!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 04:05:59 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...silly ad snipped...]
>P.S. If you know about a software that could help me filter my e-mail
>(by keywords, subject, etc.) could you please let me know?
man procmail
...or go to freshmeat.net and search for procmail. If you're on Windows,
the product you need is at www.suse.com ;-)
Steve
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: 22 May 2000 04:45:43 GMT
On Thu, 18 May 2000 01:12:51 GMT, TheKeyMan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We hired several consultants as well as a manager whose job it was to
>oversee the study and identify, religious affiliations, obvious bias
>and just plain FUD.
Religious affiliations? Is that supposed to be a joke, or is your company
flirting with a religious descrimination lawsuit?
>This failed terribly because nobody seemed interested in using Linux
>which puzzled the staff. They went for Windows every time despite
>having dual boot computers.
Why is this suprising? If I had time invested learning a set of
applications, and those applications did most of what I needed, and further
I had no time to learn the new set of applications because management has
set aside no time for training, why would I choose to use a totally
different environment?
But that's beside the point. Why were you introducing Linux at the
workstation level? It's well-known strengths are at the server level. (Oh,
you had no competent network admins; that makes sense then.)
Dave Cook
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 05:00:02 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David T. Blake) writes:
' David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
'
' > What TrollTech is currently doing with Qt 2.x and higher is a
' > good thing. People who produce GPL software can use Qt without
' > worrying about the QPL.
'
' That is not even close to true. Trolltech has rights to a copy
' of everything that even links with QT. They could EASILY take
' your QT linked code, and fold it into proprietary software.
http://www.trolltech.com/products/download/freelicense/
Show me where in this license TrollTech can take GPL code that links
to Qt and make it proprietary.
' From the QT Free license.
'
' If your program links with QT or is a modification of QT, you
' must supply a copy of your program (including source) to
' Trolltech.
This wording does not exist _anywhere_ in the QPL.
' Think about that for a while. They are granted a copy, with
' full rights to the copy. They are not bound in this copy by
' any license you use. Fair use would allow them to use large
' chunks of it in proprietary closed software.
Fair use is not well defined. What sort of code can they take from
you that wouldn't normaly be considered fair use?
' A license is not free if your modifications of the copyright are
' not as free as the original.
Modifications of the copyright? I don't understand. How, for
example, would GPL'd code be made less free? GPL is a very
restrictive license. Once code is covered by GPL, it can not be
uncovered.
Are you telling me that TrollTech owns copyright of your software
simply because you #include some qt files? I think you are wrong.
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
All bits are significant. Some bits are more significant than others.
-- Charles Babbage Orwell
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Phipps)
Subject: rhapsody
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 05:30:11 GMT
Object Oriented Bohemian Rhapsody
Is this the real world?
Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a LAN-slide
No ESC to reality.
open(2) your files,
Look after your while()s in C;
Its just a cheap toy, but dearer than Symphony(tm)
With it's wheezy cough, noisy beep
Address clash, little sleep
Anything but Windows(tm),
Nothing beats class lib'ries to me,
To me.
Mama,
Just killed a RAM
Got some static on its pins,
Now I don't see the dust bin,
Mama,
'Write' had just been run,
But now I've got to throw it all away
Mama, ooooooh,
Didn't mean to make it fry
If I've no stack to overflow tomorrow,
Carry one, carry one,
'Cause there's nothing like class lib'ries.
Too late,
My time(2) has come
Send lightning down my line
Stop my make(1) before it's time
Goodbye, everybody,
I've got to go,
Gotta leave you all behind and read Knuth.
Mama, ooooooh, (Anything but Windows(tm))
I don't want to *sigh*
I sometimes wish I'd never known Bourne at all.
I see a little silhouetto of a man(1),
Scarramouche, Scarramouche,
Did you run the test script yet?
Thunderbolt and lightning,
Blowing up my modem, me.
Gone away now,
Gone away now,
Gone away now, Windows(tm) froze.
Its worse than crap (oh oh oh oh)
It's just a cheap toy, ev'rybody has three
It's just a cheap toy from a cheap company
Spare us our lifes from this monstrosity!
Wheezy cough, noisy beep, will you let us sleep?
Drink Miller! GNU! We will not let you sleep!
(let us sleep!)
Drink Miller! GNU! We will not let you sleep!
(let us sleep!)
Drink Miller! Will not let you sleep (let us sleep!)
Will not let you sleep (let us sleep!)
Will not let you sleep (let us sleep!)
GNU, GNU, GNU, GNU, GNU, GNU GNU!
Oh Mama mia, mama mia,
Mama mia, let us sleep!
Be-el-ze-Gates has a widget put beside my tree,
my tree,
my tree!
So you think you can force me to use '95?
So you think you can love me and leave me no drives?
Oh, baby,
Can't do this to me baby,
Just gotta c-out, just gotta get write(2) out of here.
Nothing beats class lib'ries,
Anything in C,
Nothing beats class lib'ries,
Nothing beats class lib'ries to me.
this was sent to me by a friend on IRC I thought
it works here to
WhyteWolf
------------------------------
From: "EIEIO ERROR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is the BSA?
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 05:35:26 GMT
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Boy Scouts of America
> Excuse me, but what is the BSA?
>
> Colin Day
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.fan.bill-gates
Subject: Re: Microsoft: STAY THE FUCK OFF THE NET!!!
Date: 22 May 2000 03:11:04 -0400
Roger <roger@.> spewed this unto the Network:
>On 9 May 2000 23:19:41 -0500, someone claiming to be Leslie Mikesell
>wrote:
>
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>
>>The point is that the decision was ill-informed because the mailer
>>does not distinguish between viewing content and executing it.
>>How would it have been better to use the default 'save' and
>>then click on it later?
>I don't understand -- you prefer for the user not to have ability to
>run code at all?
Not from within an e-mail program. "Open It" from an e-mail program
should display the attachment, not run it.
--
Have you re-installed your operating system today?
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Off-topic ? Microsoft
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 07:14:42 GMT
In article <9n%U4.850$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Raul Valero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a doubt. Does anything prevent Microsoft
> selling all of its products to a foreign (non U.S.)
> company and keep on with the monopoly from let's
> say (as example) Spain, Japan, Korea, etc ... ?
First problem. Most foreign countries have already
imposed restrictions much stricter than even the most
severe remedies reccomended by the Department of Justice.
In the People's Republic of China, Linux is the official
operating system.
In Europe, Microsoft's use of nondisclosure agreements to
prevent disclosure of unfavorable comparisons to competitors
was treated as fraud. Also, Microsoft has been subject to
import restrictions and tarriffs. In Germany, many corporations
are beginning to adopt Linux over NT.
In Japan, most of the trade secrets are not honored since these
impact standards regulated by MITI.
Finally, if Microsoft tries to import the product from another
country, they could be subjected to restrictive tarriffs and
import quotas. I'm sure the government would LOVE to levy
a 10-20% import tarriff on all Microsoft software used in the
U.S. This would be money "off the top".
Also, if Microsoft attempted to expatriate, it would be possible
to impose import quotas in order encourage domestic competition.
Microsoft has had a very sweet deal, and the U.S. Government has
bent over backwards, forwards, and sideways to accommodate Microsoft
for almost 20 years, and Microsoft showed it's gratitude by publicly
flaunting it's ability to violate the spirit and intent of every
agreement.
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 1%/week!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
