Linux-Advocacy Digest #792, Volume #26 Wed, 31 May 00 17:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (Monkeyboy)
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (tinman)
Re: GNOME.org needs to get their act together... (JEDIDIAH)
Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (tinman)
Re: Stuff you cant do with windows (JEDIDIAH)
Re: The Linux Fortress (Bob Hauck)
Re: Observations of a Lurker (Mig Mig)
Re: What the hell is Linux? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: What the hell is Linux? (David Steinberg)
Re: Observations of a Lurker (JEDIDIAH)
Re: The Linux Fortress (Bob Hauck)
Re: What the hell is Linux? (Lars Gullik Bjønnes)
Re: History revision 1.27a (was Re: There is only one innovation that matters...)
(Shawn Lavin)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Mig Mig)
Re: What the hell is Linux? (Bob Hauck)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Monkeyboy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 20:28:04 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nathaniel Jay Lee
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(deleted)
> Actually, he has stated this many times to management. He has went to
> management over and over and hit them in the head with the proverbial
> baseball bat. I have seen him say right in front of the company owner
> (if not directly to the company owner) that Linux is complete shit and
> we have to use Windows to even think about getting work done. This is
> his main argument. And the only one that he ever seems to bring up. I
> say, if that sort of argument continues to work with management I don't
> want to be here. The fact is, when the guy complains I always do the
> same thing. I ask him what he needs to do (and yes, I am polite to
> him), I show him how to accomplish it with the software already
> installed on his machine, and I ask him if he need something more, or if
> the software will do what he wants. He always tells me that will work
> fine, then runs straight to my boss (the money man) and tells him that
> Linux is a complete pile of shit and we need to have Windows. I'm
> sorry, but I'm not going to convert the goddamn network to Windows. I
> know it, I've done it before, I'm not fucking interested in spending the
> rest of my life supporting something that is basically unsupportable. I
> enjoy administering Linux or other Unix type systems (BSD and Solaris in
> my experience at the moment). There are plenty of ISP jobs for these
> types of systems in my area, it just pisses me off that I have to look
> for another job because one person out of the whole company can't deal
> with a little learning. What a bunch of crap.
Blackmail is one option. Set him up with a 20 dollar prostitute,
preferably on the company's parking lot. Have her approach him. Make
sure that a crack pipe is somewhere in plain sight, when you take your
Polaroid pictures. Keep the sun or other light sources behind you when
you take the pictures and preferably do it through the open car window
(must coordinate with the whore) so as to avoid distracting reflections
and glare. Long distance telephoto lenses are good too but to get the
juicy details there is no substitute for a close-up.
M
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 16:29:18 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting J French from alt.destroy.microsoft; Wed, 31 May 2000 15:26:38
GMT
>
>>
>>I'm just trying to get the facts straight. Can you explain why every
>>time we start talking about DOS's 640K limit, everyone wants to talk
>>about the 8088's 1Meg?
>>
>DOS does not have a 640k limit - its limit is 1mb
Oh, lord, god help me. I'm giving up.
>It is just that the top 360kb was reserved (by the hardware designers)
>to hold the MGA, CGA, VGA memory and the odd pace that could be used
>for specific hardware addons - like paged memory.
>
>The 8088 had an 8 bit data bus, the 8086 had a 16bit data bus, both
>had a 20bit address bus. From the point of view of DOS etc there was
>no real differences - just that potentialy the 8086 could fetch data
>twice as fast as the 8088
>
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tinman)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 16:29:34 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nathaniel Jay Lee
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> tinman wrote:
> >
[snip]
> > What you really need to establish is that you've done
> > everything in your power to accomodate this client.
>
> See, this sounds like a good idea, except for the fact that all of the
> management made a decision to adopt Linux as a standard, everyone needs
> to accept it. Now, they accept that we need a standard, but they think
> Windows should be the standard. I've supported Windows before, and with
> this guy I am being told to support it again. One Windows user=3 hours
> added to my week at a minimum. I was told to develop a standard, I did
> and 16 users are happy with that standard. 1 user isn't happy and all
> the rest are ready to jump ship because of it. I know how to administer
> Windows, I just don't want to do it again. I'm not ready to start
> spending my nights at the office again, and I'll be damned if I give up
> my home life (small as it may be) for some Windows administration
> because one user is a dumbass. Linux allows us to accomplish something
> you can't with Windows, keep the users from destroying thier own
> machine. I will not go back to that shit again. Period.
Say "it's just a job" until you feel better.....('
If the 16 users are happy with linux, what are they telling the boss?
And I'll grant you linux is better at controlling users, but you can lock
down an NT/win2K system (and no, I don't want that job either, I'm
perfectly happy with the work I've got now).
> >
> > *Keep good records at to what you do for him and how much time all of that
> > takes. A good problem tracking system is an excellent way to do this (if
> > you want to jaw about this outside this group, feel free to mail me, this
> > is a pet area of mine--I'll be off line shortly for a few days, but will
> > catch up with you). If he really is a drain on resources, good records
> > will help you establish this as fact. The goal here is to show with good
> > data what it costs the company to accomodate this client.
>
> We've already been through this, the only person that agrees with me
> that we shouldn't have to spend 3 extra hours a week working on one
> system is the money man for the company. Unfortunately, his opinion
> counts with the "real" boss about as much as mine.
So why does the real boss think what he does? I mean, he could be an
idiot, but if he's got 16 users who are happy and one whose not, and he
knows it will cost money and time to transition all of them to Windows,
why would he want to?
[snip]
> >
> > Hopefully, you weren't the only person to hear all of this. If you were,
> > get more folks involved....
>
> Actually, he has stated this many times to management. He has went to
> management over and over and hit them in the head with the proverbial
> baseball bat. I have seen him say right in front of the company owner
> (if not directly to the company owner) that Linux is complete shit and
> we have to use Windows to even think about getting work done. This is
> his main argument. And the only one that he ever seems to bring up. I
> say, if that sort of argument continues to work with management I don't
> want to be here.
So does the main boss think yahl aren't getting any work done now?
> The fact is, when the guy complains I always do the
> same thing. I ask him what he needs to do (and yes, I am polite to
> him), I show him how to accomplish it with the software already
> installed on his machine, and I ask him if he need something more, or if
> the software will do what he wants. He always tells me that will work
> fine, then runs straight to my boss (the money man) and tells him that
> Linux is a complete pile of shit and we need to have Windows. I'm
> sorry, but I'm not going to convert the goddamn network to Windows. I
> know it, I've done it before, I'm not fucking interested in spending the
> rest of my life supporting something that is basically unsupportable. I
> enjoy administering Linux or other Unix type systems (BSD and Solaris in
> my experience at the moment). There are plenty of ISP jobs for these
> types of systems in my area, it just pisses me off that I have to look
> for another job because one person out of the whole company can't deal
> with a little learning. What a bunch of crap.
"It's just a job"
--
______
tinman
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: GNOME.org needs to get their act together...
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 20:42:23 GMT
On 31 May 2000 20:28:00 GMT, abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Streamer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I just downloaded all of the newest gnome packages, and I've been trying
>> to compile the latest gnome (1.2). It is a slow go and very frustrating
>> because it requires so many libraries to compile before you even start
[deletia]
>Hey dingleberry, point lynx at the sh script they provide...
>
>It really is much, much easier.
Or Alternately: Follow the damn directions.
--
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] (tinman)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy
Subject: Re: There is only one innovation that matters...
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 16:45:26 -0400
[groups snipped] In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nathaniel
Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John T Maguire wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 31 May 2000 10:29:58 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > {snip}
> > ...
> > >I remember this. I still have an Apple IIGS with BASIC on it. After
> > >all these years I still enjoy firing it up every once in a while and
> > >playing a game of Bard's Tale II (one specifically for the GS). That
> > >was one hell of a system at the time. It had the option of running at
> > >16MHZ or 8MHZ (wow) and a full 1 MB of memory. I remember being told by
> > >the salesman when we bought the 1MB expansion card (about the size of a
> > >full sized ISA/PCI card today) that we were nuts to buy that much
> > >memory. We would never need it. It had a mouse included with it (the
> > >first consumer PC that did so I believe)
> >
> > Sheesh, the GSII wasn't introduced until 1986, 2 years after the Mac
> > which obviously did ship with a mouse...as did the Amiga, the Atari ST
> > and so on.
> >
> >
> > John T Maguire
> > Mousam River Software: http://www.mousam-river.com/mousam.htm
> > Kennebunkport WebCam Central: http://www.kportmaine.com/WCS/
> >
>
>
> I didn't say I was an authority on all things Apple, but I do remember
> that the Mac wasn't out when we bought our Apple IIgs. It was rumored,
> but you couldn't buy one. For some reason, I'm thinking '82, am I
> completely fucked on this? I do know the salesman thought we were nuts
> to need 1MB of memory. I guess I could open up the case and look at the
> motherboard. I know it has dates on some of the chips.
>
Don't think it was that early. I think the //e came out around 83, and the
GS around '86 (the latter date is supported by the second URL below)
http://www.obsoletecomputermuseum.org/app_iigs.html
http://www.hypermall.com/History/ah10.html#x3
--
______
tinman
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Stuff you cant do with windows
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 20:47:56 GMT
On Wed, 31 May 2000 19:34:25 GMT, Jorge Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Well, sure can't use TV-IN feature.
>> >
>> >> Although, if anything is childish, it's that kind of
>> >> benchmark. Who really cares about 'gaming cards' when
>> >> 'real work' is the topic of discussion?
>>
>> This goes double for using a computer as a TV set.
>
> I do not talk about watching TV at my computer, what I can
>perfectly do with videoforlinux and my AverMedia, I talk about
>taking video/TV images and making them digital, compressing
>with MPEG and recording on a CD ... does it sound childish
Dedicated hardware is much better at this. Otherwise,
you're just indulging in light dabbling. This also
goes for 3D video as well.
[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] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: The Linux Fortress
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 20:46:32 GMT
On Wed, 31 May 2000 18:53:56 GMT, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>hauck[at]codem{dot}com (Bob Hauck) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>Read what I wrote. It is easy to make shares with no password.
>
>Yes but you consciously have to do that, just like entering no password in
>Linux. That's the same kind of hole.
The problem is that many lusers think like you. They think "well, it is
only my PC and I'm only on a modem, so who wants to remember a password"?
They forget that a modem is a network if it is hooked up to an ISP and
that script kiddies have nothing better to do all day than scan whole
blocks of addresses looking for stupidity. The fact that you may be on a
dynamic IP does _not_ mean that you aren't vulnerable!
>I'll take a look - you mention IE which I avoid using. I'll have to see
>what holes exist on a system that doesn't use IE or Outlook.
>A single user desktop unconnected to the network was what I thought I was
>referring to. Any system is safe in that context.
Well, duh. If it isn't hooked up to a network then it is by definition
invulnerable to network attacks. But "network" includes a modem that's
dialed in to the Internet, so you're talking about severely limited
funcitonality in this case.
>A single user workstation connected to the network not using IE or
>Outlook I still believe has no holes.
Getting rid of IE and Outlook does indeed close some holes. But it sure
doesn't fix all problems by any means.
Getting rid of IE and Outlook doesn't fix the holes in Eudora or the
fragmented IP packet problem or the browser reset bug or lots of other
things. Basically, for you to be right that Win9x is "secure", you have
to disable all network services and not install any apps that use the
network.
Just like other operating systems.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Observations of a Lurker
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 22:51:22 +0200
Nico Coetzee wrote:
> 2. I use Netscape for Internet surfing but it does have some problems.
> For one you should turn of JAVA on your first run. The mail client is
> very nice and I prefer it above Outlook Express. Overall I must say my
> Internet experience is faster under Linux then under 95 or NT (haven't
> used 2000 with dial-up yet).
Whats with you people and Netscape under Linux??
I dont get it. It runs perfectly all the time, it never crashes (and i have
5 -6 windows open), it does not crash on Java applets.. it does everything
Netscape for Windows does and i think its even more stable than Netscape on
Windows.
The Java thing was something that belonged to Navigator pre 4.7. Since
version 4.7 i have had no problems with it.
Your problems are probably related that you either use a version prior to
4.7 or you have updated your previous Navigator version - i did that and
had problems. The solution in to remove Netscape - wipe it out - and
install the new version. NO probs after that.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: What the hell is Linux?
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 20:51:05 GMT
On Wed, 31 May 2000 19:01:34 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in
><8h33m0$2tu0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[deletia]
>>There is a point where command line operations have their
>>virtues compared to visual ones. Do you really intend to
>>read all those filenames anyway?
>
>No, but this is a common feature of GUI's in general. How do you display a
>large number of items, the answer is, you don't. Windows does this, KDE
>does not.
Actually, the display of large collections of items isn't horribly
well done under Windows either. Windows doesn't actually do it any
'better'.
--
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] (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: What the hell is Linux?
Date: 31 May 2000 20:55:48 GMT
Pete Goodwin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I'll try that now that I know that's there. But, er, the menu on a KDE
: terminal does not list Edit | Copy, Paste, so naturally 8) I assumed that
: function wasn't there!
Somehow, "assume makes an ass out of u and me" comes to mind. :)
To be fair, it is not at any point revealed to the user that this is the
basic cut-and-paste mechanism of X. And that's bad for learnability. On
the other hand, it is a very good shortcut for speed of use, (compare, for
instance, to highlight, click edit|copy, place cursor, click edit|paste),
which is a very good thing. And, it's universal -- that's extremely good.
Compare the application-dependant shortcuts of Windows...why doesn't the
telnet client support the standard copy and paste shortcuts?
It seems that in X copy-paste is THE exception. As far as I know, every
other mouse or keyboard action is interpreted by a client, whether the WM
or a "regular" client. But it looks like copy-paste is done by the X
server itself (am I correct in this?). Hence, universality and
simplicity, andno way to announce itself to the user.
I think this is a fairly reasonable trade-off, as long as the copy-paste
mechanism is described in documentation, especially the short variety that
a frustrated newbie might turn to first: FAQ's and such.
And, of course, you can always ask in cola (if you've got your flame-proof
suit on). :)
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Observations of a Lurker
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 20:57:16 GMT
On Wed, 31 May 2000 22:51:22 +0200, Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Nico Coetzee wrote:
>> 2. I use Netscape for Internet surfing but it does have some problems.
>> For one you should turn of JAVA on your first run. The mail client is
>> very nice and I prefer it above Outlook Express. Overall I must say my
>> Internet experience is faster under Linux then under 95 or NT (haven't
>> used 2000 with dial-up yet).
>
>Whats with you people and Netscape under Linux??
It's just one of the current fads in anti-linux FUD.
One Lemming picks up on it and it propagates...
[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] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: The Linux Fortress
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 20:58:19 GMT
On Wed, 31 May 2000 19:19:42 GMT, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I had a look at http://www.securityfocus.com. There are a long list of
>vulnerabilities in Microsoft's code. A close look revealed most of them
>aren't in Windows itself but applications.
Yes, just like Linux and BSD and everything else. The vast majority of
security problems are in applications, not the kernel itself or system
libraries (although those do crop up). This is why your statements about
Win9x being "more secure" due to it's limitations struck me as being quite
silly.
This is also why you put your network behind a firewall and run nothing
that you don't absolutely need on that firewall.
>Another look revealed another long list of vulnerabilities - this time in
>Linux!
Yup, most of which apply to any Unix that runs the application in
question. I'm not especially amazed by this. Are you?
Everybody has bugs, the question is how fast and how thoroughly they get
fixed.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes)
Subject: Re: What the hell is Linux?
Date: 31 May 2000 23:00:29 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg) writes:
| It seems that in X copy-paste is THE exception. As far as I know, every
| other mouse or keyboard action is interpreted by a client, whether the WM
| or a "regular" client. But it looks like copy-paste is done by the X
| server itself (am I correct in this?).
No, not really.
The application (a1) must track the selection and put it in a X clipboard.
then other apps (a2) can request that clipboard from X. a1 then gets a
notification that its data has been used and can take action (if
wanted).
(not very precise... I know)
Lgb
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 14:03:44 -0800
From: Shawn Lavin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy
Subject: Re: History revision 1.27a (was Re: There is only one innovation that
matters...)
> : Microsoft lucked into the sweetheart deal of the century: it's
> : verifiable fact. And you were aware that IBM only came to Microsoft in
> : the first place because of family connections (Gates' mother on the same
> : board as the president of IBM, or some such) aren't you?
>
> Huh? This is completely wrong. Bill's mother was a homemaker, and known
> to do bits of charity fund raising here and there. Please tell me where
> you got this information.
Wait a minute !!!
Read Bill Gates own biography and interviews online and you find
that his mother was a teacher, University of Washington Regent
and chairwoman of United Way International (where apocrypha
indicate that she steered the president of IBM her
son's direction) as well as director of First Interstate Bank.
For you to make your 'homemaker... bits of charity' and say that
someone else is 'completely wrong' is very simply either
deceptive or, dare I say it, wrong.
Time to apologize for your remarks.
--
Shawn Lavin
As always, my opinions are my own
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 23:03:33 +0200
Christopher Smith wrote:
>
> "Mig Mig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8h19q0$cnp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > On Mon, 29 May 2000 18:25:57 -0400, Drestin Black
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> No version of any microsoft software has ever been as fast as the
> previous
> > > >> version.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >What?! WHAT?!! are you on drugs??
> > > >
> > > >EVERY version of MS software I can think of is faster than the
> previous. Can
> > > >you name a specific issue of a new version slower than a previous
> version? I
> > > >can't think of a single one!
> > > >
> > >
> > > windoze 3.1 vs. 95 vs. 98 vs. nt vs. W2K.
> > >
> > > All were slower than the prior version.
> >
> > 98 is faster and has less errors than 95... off course still several
> > thousand procent more errors than Linux, MAC, CPM, AmigaOS, ZX81OS etc per
> > thousand code lines.
>
> Proof ?
Hey boy.. i do Windows support for a living.
What about sending out ANSI formatted userid's in DUN ?
What about having to reinstall network ending with the same setup - but now
for misterious resons working?
How about having outlook express not wanting to sendi emails with
attachments?
How about OE not wanting to send emails HTML formatted but wanted to send
those in TXT format? (actually OK but annoying)
How about not being able to install IE5 over IE4 because
its allready there !????
How about IE5 not being able to install/run more than one xxx.ins file per
session?
How about error 10091 and 10045??
I could give you dusins of issues/annoying crap with Windows 98.
Its much better than Windows 95 but its still a very big bitch?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: What the hell is Linux?
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 21:02:10 GMT
On Wed, 31 May 2000 19:01:34 GMT, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>No, but this is a common feature of GUI's in general. How do you display a
>large number of items, the answer is, you don't. Windows does this, KDE
>does not.
Just for fun, you ought to try using Windows Explorer to display a
directory that's remotely connected over the Internet via ISDN. Since it
doesn't seem to believe in incremental display (at least on NT4 SP3) you
get to look at a blank screen for many minutes while it downloads the
directory structure. Yeah, it's real fast after that (having cached
everything) but the 20 minute initial wait sort of negated any benefit.
OTOH, the old File Manager and the command line both work fine in this
situation.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.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
******************************
