Linux-Advocacy Digest #663, Volume #26 Wed, 24 May 00 12:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Not so fast... (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (Paul Voller)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
(=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (JEDIDIAH)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Geoff Lane)
Re: Linux vs. Solaris Intel ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Vetle Roeim)
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Windows by Day, Linux by Night (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save
It?) ("Christopher Smith")
Font deuglification ?? ("Steve Budak")
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Font deuglification ?? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (JEDIDIAH)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: Not so fast...
Date: 24 May 2000 14:32:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As one would expect, there are many people in this group who refuse
> to believe any sort of viruses or trojans could be created for
> Linux. While it is true that the current fad of .vbs based viruses
> only targets Windows there are a number of ways a viruses writer
> could target Linux.
However, most of the attacks either too slow or too tricky (for the
clueless) to cause the massive spreading observed with the likes of
ILOVEYOU. Without auto-execute, the delay between someone getting an
incoming virus and that virus being propagated on outwards will be
sufficiently long that it will get found and stamped out before it
becomes a major problem.
[ I've snipped his explanatory paragraphs ]
> These faults are not unique to Linux but do prove the point that
> Linux (and every other OS ever made) is open to viruses. A recent
> CNN article said Linux is safe because it is open source and
> promotes competition. The above points, in some cases, take
> advantage of the open source code. History also disputes this
> claim. There have been glaring bugs in the past, which by this
> argument should have been impossible.
Open Source doesn't guarantee quality. It does guarantee that anyone
who wants to examine (and modify) the source can do so. It just so
happens that part of the community cares about quality and spends its
time hunting down security holes, bugs and other problems, so exploits
will get found and patched up. Some of us even read patches before
applying them, and won't run random binaries off the net at all...
OSS is a step up on commercial because there are more people who can
spot problems with it, and able problem-spotters tend to be people who
want to fix problems. Sensibly exploiting a buffer-overrun attack is
a lot of work, putting it out of the league of your average script
kiddie. Introducing attacks into open source is much harder (well, it
is harder to keep them in there long enough for you to make use of the
hole opened up by the attack.)
Methinks you are looking like a FUDster, Jeff...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 24 May 2000 09:47:01 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Darren Winsper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm not interested in spending hours rooting around
>> in a mailing list archive, though.
>
>How hard can it be to do a simple search?
Pretty bad. Try to find exactly what has to be done to make any
version of 2.2.x interoperate correctly with other systems using
NFS. If you have a specific problem, try to find a way to tell
when it has been fixed. Note that it may be different for different
versions, and in some cases you need to know about the bugs in the
other systems as well. All large systems have bugs and working
around them is a large part of the job for the people who have to
keep them running. The openness of Linux is a plus in this area,
but the lack of a central and official repository for bug tracking
and status is a big minus.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Paul Voller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:59:22 +0100
Just type control-panel and you will be able to set up the printer in
Linux. The problem that you have, of "stair-stepping" text is easily
remedied in the control panel.
You have to be running X though.
Hope this helps! And good luck in getting it to print Postscript :-)
P.
===
Paul Voller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mullitt.freeserve.co.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 16:58:00 +0200
tinman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not to mention "Deutschelander" isn't a word....('
But "Deutschlaender Wuerstchen" is a brand of wiener. Right back to the
topic of Germer ;-)
Lars T.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ?
Date: 24 May 2000 10:09:18 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Full Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 23 May 2000 19:00:21 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>In short, Windows 9x is a disaster.
>>
>
>Win9x is what the consumers wanted. Even today people are still
>waiting for Win ME cause they want something that does what DOS did 20
>years ago. That's why Linux is in the toilet while Win 9x resides in
>the penthouse.
Hmmm, Linux runs multitasking/multiuser programs written 20 years
ago - I have some of my own that are 15 years old now and all it
takes is a recompile. And, they run just the same on a Sparc
as under x86.
Plus, Linux can run real DOS or the free emulator better than win9x
if that is what you want.
>Microsoft are smart in way you people will never understand.
If taking your money makes them smart, then I guess they are smart.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
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
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:26:16 GMT
On 24 May 2000 05:40:13 GMT, Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.misc Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: The problem with ./configure;make;make install is that it has no
>: dependency checking for upgrades and removals. I can't check what program
>
>Eh? Some of us do make file lists for the software we install, you know!
>I have no problems with dependencies.
>
>(check out man find .. -cnewer, and mkpkg).
Given the non-package specific dependency checking tools already in
Linux, one would think that you could build a dependency database
quite independent of rpm or deb.
--
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] (JEDIDIAH)
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
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:27:51 GMT
On Wed, 24 May 2000 13:00:00 GMT, David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) writes:
>
>' It was the Tue, 23 May 2000 08:59:59 GMT...
>' ...and David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>' > The right is non-exlusive. That means everyone can get that right. I
>' > think TrollTech is just trying to prevent forking of the Qt library
>' > here.
>'
>' Exactly that is which is bad IMHO. Real software freedom has always
>' been the freedom to fork.
>
>That's a good point. But what is the value in real forking? Do you
>really want to have ten different major versions of GTK+ floating
>around? Or even two? If an application says it uses GTK+ ver x.y,
YES.
It allows for other platforms to be supported.
[deletia]
This isn't just some Linux versus Windows battle.
--
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] (Geoff Lane)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:57:33 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Full Name) writes:
> Any serious administrator who reads this thread would have to discard
> Linux as a bad joke.
Err, if this is the only source the administrator has for Linux info they
are clearly soon to be fired.
As to reporting bugs. All the various distributions have well known
addresses listed in their docs to which bug reports can be sent. If you are
doing it yourself from raw sources, then you shouldn't need to be told where
to report bugs - hint: the author's address is usually plain to see in the
sources.
--
/\ Geoff. Lane. /\ Manchester Computing /\ Manchester /\ M13 9PL /\ England /\
DANGER! DANGER! Computer Store Ahead, Hide Wallet.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux vs. Solaris Intel
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:18:07 GMT
Solaris X86 suports ZIP (as in NOTHING) for hardware compared to Linux.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can anyone comment on linux vs. solaris intel?
>
> I've only used it from a users point of view (such as now), and have
> noticed a few things (like the X server seem a bit slow) but they
don't
> really say much.
>
> Can anyone do a better comparison?
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold weather is
> because
> of all the fish in the atmosphere?
> -The Hackenthorpe Book Of Lies
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Vetle Roeim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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
Date: 24 May 2000 17:34:02 +0200
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wed, 24 May 2000 13:00:00 GMT, David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) writes:
> >
> >' It was the Tue, 23 May 2000 08:59:59 GMT...
> >' ...and David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >' > The right is non-exlusive. That means everyone can get that right. I
> >' > think TrollTech is just trying to prevent forking of the Qt library
> >' > here.
> >'
> >' Exactly that is which is bad IMHO. Real software freedom has always
> >' been the freedom to fork.
> >
> >That's a good point. But what is the value in real forking? Do you
> >really want to have ten different major versions of GTK+ floating
> >around? Or even two? If an application says it uses GTK+ ver x.y,
>
> YES.
>
> It allows for other platforms to be supported.
strange. linux has not been forked, and it has support for many
platforms.
vr
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: 24 May 2000 10:35:46 -0500
In article <8gf3m9$q1h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Note in the above URL under resolution it says: "To resolve this
>>problem, the application has to be modified to ..." So MS is clearly
>>blaming the problem on the Application, not the OS . Here is another
>>example:
>
>
>It is an application problem. An application needs to have
>the authority to open and close registry keys. In the case
>above, the system's memory is being used up because of an
>infinite number of requests are being created. The application
>is doing this, and therefore, it is the application that
>is causing the problem. If the application were written to
>properly handle the opening and closing of keys, there would
>be no problems.
Reasonable operating systems provide a method to limit the
resources consumed by any application to a point where it
cannot crash the system.
>It would be similar to an application under Linux opening an
>*.rc configuration file in an infinite number of spawned vi
>processes (if I understand that article correctly). Using up
>every single bit of RAM on _any_ system can render it useless.
Yes, that can happen if your process limits allow it. But, you
can control it at the OS level if you want.
>In every case, there is an explanation for these occurrences.
Yes, that the operating system does not provide sufficient
control over applications.
>But you and others seem to claim that WindowsNT BSODs for no
>reason whatsoever. So, how can you say that, and then post
>these explainations of said BSODs? I really don't understand
>what your point is. Would you like me to dig up Linux's bug
>history, so that I can claim that it crashes too? I won't
>because again, that would prove nothing.
If you look at the history of unix and the reasons resource
limits were added, you will see that win2k needs them for
the same reasons that were well known long ago.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Windows by Day, Linux by Night
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:43:43 GMT
On Wed, 24 May 2000 08:37:49 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>2:1 wrote:
>>
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >
>> > mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > > Simone Paddock
[deletia]
>It looks like everyone missed the point of the original post. If you
>had read the article, you would have seen that this book is aimed at
>those of us who are forced to use Windows for various reasons, but
>prefer Linux when we can use it. Myself, I hate using Windows, but for
No. He got the point. He got the point better than you did.
It is far more likely that someone who's prefered OS Linux
is in some way a 'refugee' from DOS or Win/DOS.
Also, given the way many of us interact with our systems we're
probably much more likely to have an intimate understanding of
Windows than any other class of user.
>certain things (in my case, multi-trac recording software) I am forced
>to use it. I know a bit about tuning it, but not enough to truly be
>comfortable with using it for something I consider to be very
>important. I realize that no book will completely cover my fears, but
>at least I might learn a little more about why Windows is puking up the
>last three days work I did, or maybe I'll even be able to prevent it
>from puking at all.
...sounds like a book better directed at the masses who
think they actually want to run Windows and might have
problems with it from time to time.
BTW, anyone know where I can get docs on the *.ICL format?
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary
Split Save It?)
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 01:54:42 +1000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:mRPW4.10707$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Christopher Smith writes:
>
> > We sic Tholen onto you.
>
> Who is "we"?
We is us.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Steve Budak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Steve Budak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Font deuglification ??
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 01:45:21 +1000
Howdy, I can't seem to find the howto for font deuglification in RedHat
Linux 6.2
I know I have it (or have seen it somewhere) but can't find it for the life
of me.
Anybody know a site where it might be located ?
I need to get the fonts to look a little better in Netscape and the like.
Thanks.
--
Cheers
Steve
" Linux ???........Because I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a
frontal lobotomy."
Windows 95/NT - 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch
to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor,
written by a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
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
Date: 24 May 2000 10:42:45 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.misc Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>: The problem with ./configure;make;make install is that it has no
>>: dependency checking for upgrades and removals. I can't check what program
>>
>>Eh? Some of us do make file lists for the software we install, you know!
>>I have no problems with dependencies.
>>
>>(check out man find .. -cnewer, and mkpkg).
>
> Given the non-package specific dependency checking tools already in
> Linux, one would think that you could build a dependency database
> quite independent of rpm or deb.
But there is no reason to expect it to be any better. Is there a tool
that tells you when the last program that uses a shared library
has been removed?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Font deuglification ??
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:55:28 GMT
On Thu, 25 May 2000 01:45:21 +1000, Steve Budak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Howdy, I can't seem to find the howto for font deuglification in RedHat
>Linux 6.2
>I know I have it (or have seen it somewhere) but can't find it for the life
>of me.
>Anybody know a site where it might be located ?
>I need to get the fonts to look a little better in Netscape and the like.
>Thanks.
http://www.google.com/search?q=font+de+uglification+howto&meta=lr%3D%26hl%3Den
--
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] (JEDIDIAH)
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
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:57:23 GMT
On 24 May 2000 17:34:02 +0200, Vetle Roeim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Wed, 24 May 2000 13:00:00 GMT, David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) writes:
>> >
>> >' It was the Tue, 23 May 2000 08:59:59 GMT...
>> >' ...and David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >' > The right is non-exlusive. That means everyone can get that right. I
>> >' > think TrollTech is just trying to prevent forking of the Qt library
>> >' > here.
>> >'
>> >' Exactly that is which is bad IMHO. Real software freedom has always
>> >' been the freedom to fork.
>> >
>> >That's a good point. But what is the value in real forking? Do you
>> >really want to have ten different major versions of GTK+ floating
>> >around? Or even two? If an application says it uses GTK+ ver x.y,
>>
>> YES.
>>
>> It allows for other platforms to be supported.
>
>strange. linux has not been forked, and it has support for many
>platforms.
Actually, Linux was forked several times in the process
of moving to new platforms and continues to be. Linus
himself even considers this a 'good thing'.
--
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] (JEDIDIAH)
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
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 16:01:17 GMT
On 24 May 2000 10:42:45 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>In comp.os.linux.misc Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>: The problem with ./configure;make;make install is that it has no
>>>: dependency checking for upgrades and removals. I can't check what program
>>>
>>>Eh? Some of us do make file lists for the software we install, you know!
>>>I have no problems with dependencies.
>>>
>>>(check out man find .. -cnewer, and mkpkg).
>>
>> Given the non-package specific dependency checking tools already in
>> Linux, one would think that you could build a dependency database
>> quite independent of rpm or deb.
>
>But there is no reason to expect it to be any better. Is there a tool
>that tells you when the last program that uses a shared library
>has been removed?
Sure there is. It could query the actual state of the system
rather than just keeping track of what packages had been
manipulated.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
