Linux-Advocacy Digest #903, Volume #26 Mon, 5 Jun 00 10:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux+Java, the best combination of techologies ("1$Worth")
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (EdWIN)
Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ? (mlw)
Re: Linux+Java, the best combination of techologies (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Major linux problem "permissions" (Full Name)
Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ? (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Gregory L. Hansen)
Re: Major linux problem "permissions" (Arjan Drieman)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Gregory L. Hansen)
Re: The sad Linux story (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (EdWIN)
Re: Why UNIX Rocks (Pete Goodwin)
Re: URGENT! Linux vs MS-Exchange as email server (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north ("Come Home")
Re: Why UNIX Rocks (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux, OS of the gods. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ? (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "1$Worth" <"1$Worth"@costreduction.removeplse.screaming.net>
Subject: Re: Linux+Java, the best combination of techologies
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:11:21 +0100
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> "1$Worth"@costreduction.removeplse.screaming.net (1$Worth) wrote in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >And you are correct to be wary. If you've tried Java you'll find it a
> >refreshing change, and your programs may use rich set of standard
> >libraries while remaining totally portable. Try....
>
> It's a change alright. Trying to format strings was a REAL pain with Java.
>
> Pete
Now that's a C programmer forced to do Java comment talking.... :-)
------------------------------
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 12:10:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
herodotus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, EdWIN <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >herodotus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, EdWIN
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >>>herodotus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>Many Windows users show the classical signs of Stockholm
> >>>>Syndrome. They become ardent defenders of their captors. If
> >>>Gates
> >>>>sodomized them, they would thank him for the colonic massage.
> >>>
> >>>These are just the kinds of remarks that turn casual Windows
> >>>users into ardent Mac bashers. Too bad you didn't get the
> >>>intent of the orginal post. :-P
> >>>
> >>Anyone who bases their judgement of OSs on Usenet posts
> deserves
> >>the special capsaican ointment after their next colonic
> >>treatment.
> >
> >What's with this rectal obsession of yours? Get your head out
> >of your...you know.
> >
> Putting my head up my own ass is the only thing that takes my
> mind
> off my pain when I have to use Windows.
Thanks for admitting where you keep your head. So what is so "painful"
about Windows?
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>
--
"Let all who oppose the OverMind feel the Fury of the Swarm!"
-- Infested Kerrigan, aka The Queen of Blades, StarCraft.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 08:24:18 -0400
James wrote:
>
> Given the current rate of Linux and NT development I guess Linux may catch
> up (in terms of usability on the Desktop) in about 2 to 5 years. At that
> stage we should see some desktop users (i.e. the 96% not using Linux)
> migrating to Linux.
>
> Any other guesses?
Define how you mean "catch-up." Linux has better multitasking than
Windows and NT(2k). Linux is capable of scaling from palmtop to high end
server with little or no modification. Linux is much more stable than
any of the Windows variants.
While there is, and rightfully so, a debate about the actual "usability"
of a GUI, both KDE and Gnome present the computer in a fashion that
people have come to expect.
The only think that is "missing" from Linux are the same things that are
missing from Win2k, driver support.
That will take time, that is market presence and proof that "linux"
ports can make money. OEM's need to realize that while Windows may have
a few hundred million users, Linux has 20-30 million users. That's about
10:1 ratio. So if an OEM can get into a Linux market with little or no
competition, that is a better market than Windows. Almost every segment
is fighting tooth and nail for business amongst many competitors. In
simple numbers, if you have a market that is 200 million potential
customers, but you have 19 competitors vs a market that is 20 million,
but no competitors, which would you choose?
Always be first and let your competitors follow you. When they get to
the point where the market is fighting for customers, switch markets.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
Have you noticed the way people's intelligence capabilities decline
sharply the minute they start waving guns around?
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux+Java, the best combination of techologies
Date: 5 Jun 2000 12:47:58 GMT
Timothy Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip!>
: Actually, IBM has had a 1.3 jdk for Linux for some time now.
: It is very good, in my experience.
Really? That's good news! I didn't see it on their web site, though.
Do you have a URL? I'd love to try it out.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Full Name)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Major linux problem "permissions"
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 12:52:18 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To get ASP's to work on IIS you click on the "execute" check box in
the properties dialog for the virtual directory storing the ASP's.
Linux - you get what you pay for.
On Sun, 04 Jun 2000 17:08:24 -0400, post_Reply <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I've designed a few web pages and added some perl scripts, now the
>problem, no one can access the scripts, root can't, users can't. It
>says "permission denied" or something like that. I've tried every way
>possible to fix this, maybe there is a bug with mandrake 6.2 ???
>
>I've set the permission for everyone to excute,read,etc...And the cgi
>is in the right directory.
>
>I never seen anything like this before, I've posted msg. on every
>linux ng, and everyone more or less says the same thing "chmod XXX,
>etc"
>
>Well, I've been over everything, and this is really holding back my
>learning process.
>
>I'm ready to build another linux machine and try again, or maybe just
>D/L a program that will allow me to program in perl on my windows
>machine.
>
>I want to set up a linux web server, I have all the how-to's, book,
>etc. But with all the problems, one has to wonder: there has got to
>be a better way to do this.
>
>I love Linux, but when you are trying to learn something and the OS is
>holding you back, that is not acceptable. With linux there are way to
>many silly undocumented problems specific to one machine, one install,
>or one distro.
>
>I'd love is someone can hold me get past this hurdle so I can continue
>to learn more and more....
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:01:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Mon, 05 Jun 2000 08:24:18 -0400 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>James wrote:
>>
>> Given the current rate of Linux and NT development I guess Linux may catch
>> up (in terms of usability on the Desktop) in about 2 to 5 years. At that
>> stage we should see some desktop users (i.e. the 96% not using Linux)
>> migrating to Linux.
>>
>> Any other guesses?
>
>Define how you mean "catch-up." Linux has better multitasking than
>Windows and NT(2k). Linux is capable of scaling from palmtop to high end
>server with little or no modification. Linux is much more stable than
>any of the Windows variants.
>
>While there is, and rightfully so, a debate about the actual "usability"
>of a GUI, both KDE and Gnome present the computer in a fashion that
>people have come to expect.
>
>The only think that is "missing" from Linux are the same things that are
>missing from Win2k, driver support.
>
>That will take time, that is market presence and proof that "linux"
>ports can make money. OEM's need to realize that while Windows may have
>a few hundred million users, Linux has 20-30 million users. That's about
>10:1 ratio. So if an OEM can get into a Linux market with little or no
>competition, that is a better market than Windows. Almost every segment
>is fighting tooth and nail for business amongst many competitors. In
>simple numbers, if you have a market that is 200 million potential
>customers, but you have 19 competitors vs a market that is 20 million,
>but no competitors, which would you choose?
>
>Always be first and let your competitors follow you. When they get to
>the point where the market is fighting for customers, switch markets.
There's also the little issue of documentation, as I posted previously.
Ideally, the documentation would be clear, concise, consistent, and
cross-referenced.
Because of the state of the art in documentation, that would probably
mean some variant of HTML and/or hyperlinking. Linux doesn't have
that; VMS had that back in 1983! (Back then, of course, it was
merely "See Also", but at least they had that.)
I suspect someone's working on this, but I'm rather curious where.
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: 5 Jun 2000 13:04:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Karel Jansens <jansens_at_ibm_dot_net> wrote:
>Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On 06/04/2000 at 11:59 AM,
>> John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > This is true from a core OS point of view. From a UI point of view
>> > (which is what I was talking about), MacOS has continued to go forward.
>> > OS 7 -> OS 8 -> OS 9 were all pretty decent steps in UI terms even if
>> > the core OS never really changed.
>>
>> If the MAC OS was superior to those available for the Intel platform, it
>> would be dominant. It was rejected by the marketplace.
>>
>That's rather a dangerous statement to make.
>By the same token Win9x would be superior to OS/2 - and that's just
>plain silly.
I suppose it depends on how you define "superior". It's certainly not due
to technical superiority, or the Mac would have been ahead of DOS before
the first clumsy versions of Windows even existed. It's only been since
Win95 that one could make an actual case for a technical edge, and the
battle was lost long before then.
--
If I had a nickel for everytime someone said "If I had a nickel for every
time someone said..."...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arjan Drieman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Major linux problem "permissions"
Date: 5 Jun 2000 13:06:07 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 04 Jun 2000 17:08:24 -0400, post_Reply <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've designed a few web pages and added some perl scripts, now the
>problem, no one can access the scripts, root can't, users can't. It
>says "permission denied" or something like that. I've tried every way
>possible to fix this, maybe there is a bug with mandrake 6.2 ???
No one can access them how? Read them with a text editor, write them,
execute them from a browser, what? What's the script's permissions
set to and who owns the files? What's the directory's permissions
set to and who owns the directory?
Arjan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: 5 Jun 2000 13:06:22 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 04 Jun 2000 20:39:33 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>Look Bob. We have too many doctors in America right now.
>>I'm in favor of sending them back to Canada but they don't want to go
>>back.
>>They don't want to be poor.
>
>This makes no sense at all. By the basic equation of supply and
>demand, if there are too many doctors in the US then they would be
>paid LESS. As they are being paid more, all I can say from an outside
>viewpoint is that the demand for doctors is obviously higher in the
>US.
Now go to the Yellow Pages and compare the number of doctors to the number
of lawyers...
--
If I had a nickel for everytime someone said "If I had a nickel for every
time someone said..."...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: The sad Linux story
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:10:19 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Mon, 05 Jun 2000 06:21:00 GMT <8hfgs3$e2s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> > (2) puting the system disk off-line. This will cause a rather
>> > spectacular crash.
>>
>> What would it do otherwise? Continue running, but doing nothing?
>> What would be the point?
>
>VMS has a considerably more sophisticated scheduler than Linux, and
>processes are scheduled according to which resources are available. If
>the system disk is not available, processes which use it won't be
>scheduled. There is other work to be done also. The point is, the
>system disk will eventually come back. VMS will handle it gracefully
>when it does, but Linux will already have crashed. This is mount
>verification. How well does Linux handle non-system disks which go
>offline?
Not very well, if they're SCSI. I get nervous regarding the bus
resets, which may discard already-scheduled-to-be-written blocks.
At least, that's the idea I get. (I have an old SCSI CD-ROM and it
occasionally has problems reading.)
Of course, Windows 95 probably doesn't do much better, and the
"Win95 Blue Screen Of Death" is a bit more jarring than a
console message.... :-) (Windows NT's BSOD is even more intimidating.)
It tries hard, I'll give it that. :-)
I'm also not quite clear on the robustness of ext2. One issue with
Linux is that it effectively sync()s every so often, limiting the
damage. However, this would be the case for any file system used,
be it as primitive as FAT or as sophisticated as ODS-5 (VMS) or
whatever AIX or VM/CMS uses.
I hope a full-fledged journaling file system becomes the standard
on Linux soon. :-)
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- and no, NTFS does *not* count -- it only metajournals
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 06:12:35 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "David D. Huff Jr."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Funny how you keep finding your way back schmuck.
You must have missed the smiley. Now you're all huffy again.
No surprise there.
>EdWIN wrote:
>
>> In article <8gd076$2kf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) wrote:
>> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> > Bill Altenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > >I wouldn't liken MS to the Nazi era of Germany. I think a
more
>> appropriate
>> > >example would be a state univerisity directly east of
Illinois in
>> Elam's
>> > >territory..
>> >
>> > I'm totally lost.
>>
>> Then you're in the right place! This group was created as a
hang out
>> for "totally lost" people. :-D
>>
>> > --
>> > Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast
Macintosh
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
>> > My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
>> >
>>
>> --
>> "Let all who oppose the OverMind feel the Fury of the Swarm!"
>> -- Infested Kerrigan, aka The Queen of Blades, StarCraft.
>>
>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> Before you buy.
>
>
>
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why UNIX Rocks
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: 5 Jun 2000 08:24:49 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Indeed. I used to work on a VAX 11/750 in '83 or thereabouts
>that had the ultraphenomenal, amazing amount of memory of ....
>8 megs. And we had 6 big Fujitsus, with 400 megs of disk space
>each, for a grand total of 2.4 gigs. We also had, on another
>machine (a PDP 11/34) a Memorex freestanding removable-pack
>disk drive that was the size of a consumer washing machine
>and could hold 300 megs.
VAX 11/750 is getting a little old now. The workstations that came much
later were much smaller and had more memory and disk space.
>I will also note that the operating systems of yesteryear were
>also had a lot less functionality than today's OSes (yes, even NT),
>and were probably not quite as reliable, either.
That's a generalisation, if ever I saw one. Are you including UNIX in your
statement - that started in 1970? VMS was pretty robust.
--
============
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: URGENT! Linux vs MS-Exchange as email server
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: 5 Jun 2000 08:35:02 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (RHL User) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>I have recently learned that my company has been looking at MS-Exchange
>as our company email server. Since I am familiar with Linux I have been
>asking questions about this, namely why pay for MS-Exchange when Linux
>is free. The answer to that is that our IT contractor only knows
>MS-Exchange or Groupwise.
I'm not a fan of MS Exchange, I prefer SMTP, POP type servers. Then I can
use whatever mail client I choose.
In my days at Digital we had the largest Exchange system setup - the whole
company (50,000 of us back then) went to Exchange. That meant setting up NT
domains everywhere. Of course, there were a few bugs in Exchange and I
remember Microsoft working with us to fix them.
Exchange had a few hiccups every now and then - the servers would die. I
saw less of these problems with VAX Mail or SMTP/POP.
--
============
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
From: "Come Home" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 13:27:02 GMT
"John Wiltshire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 04 Jun 2000 13:52:17 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> Umm... I'm in Australia.
>
> Sounds like the US pays doctors better so the doctors move south.
> Doesn't sound like a Canadian problem, but a demand for doctors in the
> US.
>
Yes. That's driven by supply-demand.
US needs more doctors because Americans are less healthy
and demend more for health care services. A recent research
had shown that Canadians are among the healthiest in the world
(ranked #12, US being ranked #20). We Canadians have less
doctors and less medical equipment, but we are still healthier
and live longer than Americans.
> John Wiltshire
>
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why UNIX Rocks
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: 5 Jun 2000 13:04:51 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote in <8hejho$2ff6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Let me get this straight...you like riscos, yet you are whining about
>lack of functioning device drivers, shoddy hardware configurations and
>poor documentation of linux?
>
>You need to go away now.
Naaaah!
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux, OS of the gods.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: 5 Jun 2000 13:08:00 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>I believe that a man who is having trouble installing his first Linux
>distribution
>shouldn't be making these kinds of jackass comments.
I'm not having trouble installing my nth Linux distro. It's installed!
>#2. If your really having all this trouble with your Linux distribution
>I'm going to
>say that either your machine is screwed, your CD has some kind of error,
>or your screwed.
I'm complaining about things I see wrong in Linux. There's no installation
error I can see.
>This is the Advocacy newsgroup for people who advocate Linux.
Yes, and I'm advocating that Linux is not as good as you people are
shouting about it.
--
============
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
Subject: Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: 5 Jun 2000 13:26:18 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Let's examine the facts.
Oh please do. Though your idea of 'facts' is an interesting terminology.
>Linux has a 3 to 1 networking superiority!
Is that why it appears slower than Windows 98 SE?
>Linux does not allow a single process to crash the entire OS!
But a single process can slow the whole machine down.
>Linux is capable or greater memory and disk management!
Is that why the boot partition must be in the first gigabyte of a disk?
>Linux has a faster filing system!
Seems about the same to me.
>Linux has a superior filing system!
How is it superior? Because it hides the fact you have disks in its
inscrutable tree structure?
>Linux has hundreds of applications, databases, development tools, toys,
>business and scientific software,
>and much more all on the disks you buy your distribution on. W2K is
>just an operating system.
Windows 98/2000 has thousands of applications you can buy.
>The KDE which I'm most framiliar with, has the same functionality as the
>W2K desktop with Cut and Paste,
>right and left click capabilities, file managers can be turned into web
>browsers, a built in E-mail client,
>a build in news client,,,, plus more windows tricks like up to 8
>windows desktops in one X sesssion!
KDE is way behind Windows.
>Linux allows users to become Root in order to make changes when
>necessary without forcing them to log off!
This is a big plus?
>No 180 process limit!
Why would I want to run more than a dozen processes?
>Superior support built in for ISDN, DSL, Cable Modems, Regular Modems!
Apart from the last one, I don't use any of these.
>Superior TCP-IP stack!
How is it superior? Does Linux support IPV6 yet?
>Superior gaming capability thru a faster kernel!
ROFL.
>Linux has support for as much hardware as W2K does now!
ROFL. Ah yes, it's support for my ISA bus cards really amazed me!
>Linux has USB support which actually WORKS!
So does Windows 98 SE, Windows 2000.
>Linux has DVD support which actually WORKS!
Really? I thought DVD software was still stuck due to no license as yet.
>Linux is roughly twice as fast as W2k on the same hardware!
Rubbish!
>Any software I write for the GNU will be shared by the WORLD as my
>personal gift!
And you won't get a penny for it, thanks! You'll die of starvation from
this model.
>And I get to share THEIR GREAT software also!
Still won't buy you the food you eat will it?
>Anybody who can even remotely claim that Windows is still in the running
>after having exerienced all
>that I have here,,,, you just have to own stock in the company...
>That's all I can figure...
Then you have an odd way of figuring, but then you make some pretty odd
claims anyway.
>W2K is a dessert compared to my Suse 6.4....
Windows 2000 is a ray of sunshine compared to the dark and dingy depths of
Linux.
============
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
