Linux-Advocacy Digest #27, Volume #27 Sun, 11 Jun 00 15:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux newbie requires advice..... (mlw)
Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence (Gary Hallock)
Re: No need to take sides (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Different types of linux (Barry Kauler)
Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (Spidey)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (tinman)
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (Spidey)
Re: No need to take sides ("Robert Moir")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Christopher Smith")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 12:26:16 -0400
Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
<snip>
>> Why should I have to put up with the annoyances of installing
>> windows and keeping it working just to be able to be sure
>> I will be able to read a .doc file?
>I dunno. Maybe you should try to get whoever provides your
>word-processor to support Words format better.
Its an M$ decision to manufacture problems. It is M$ who continues to change
the format for the purpose of forcing upgrades on customers, and to eliminate
competing products.
Only wintrolls have trouble understanding this, and only they defend it.
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 18:25:35 GMT
Tinman writes:
>>>>>>> [oh well, it's hot out there anyway]
>>>>>> Irrelevant.
>>>>> Not to my garden.
>>>> This newsgroup is not your garden.
>>> Irrelevant, the reference is to my garden, not this newsgroup.
>> Illogical, given that the posting is in this newsgroup, not your
>> garden.
> Usenet posts need not be solely self-referential.
But we're talking about the irrelevance of your statement, not
about USENET posts in general.
>>>>>>>> Tinman writes:
>>>>>>> Typical inaccuracy,
>>>>>> Incorrect.
>>>>> On the contrary.
>>>> Is that the best you can do, merely stating contrariness?
>>> Can you do better?
>> I see that you didn't answer the question. No surprise there.
> I see that you didn't answer the question. No surprise there.
Classic evasion.
>>>>>>> It's tinman.
>>>>>> Which is how I spelled it to begin with.
>>>>> Incorrect, you spelled it Tinman,
>>>> Same spelling.
>> Note: no response.
> None required,
On what basis do you make that claim?
> you spell it incorrectly with a capital "t",
On what basis do you make that claim?
> I spell it correctly with a lower case "t."
On what basis do you make that claim?
>>>>> and you did it again above.
>>>> I'm being consistent in my spelling, which is consistent with your
>>>> spelling.
>>> Nope.
>> Incorrect. Compare the spellings.
> I have, thus I recognize your errors.
Incorrect, given that both spellings are the same.
>>> But if you prefer, you made a capitalization error--
>> On what basis do you call it an error?
> On the basis of the knowledge of how it should be done.
But I spelled it the same way.
>>> regardless, it's still incorrect.
>> On your part.
> Incorrect.
An example of pontification.
>>> And you keep repeating this error.
>> You're erroneously presupposing that it is an error.
> Nope.
Prove it.
>>>>>>>>> I'm not falling into another tholenesque spiral this week,
>>>>>>>> What alleged "tholenesque spiral"?
>>>>>>> The tholenesque spiral in which we find ourselves at this very moment.
>>>>>> Incorrect; that would be a "tinmanesque" spiral, given that you
>>>>>> started it.
>>>>> Incorrect on two counts--
>>>> Balderdash, for reasons given below.
>> Note: no response.
> None required, as there is no content in your sentence.
Incorrect, given the content of my sentence.
>>>>> I didn't start this thread,
>>>> Irrelevant, given that I didn't say that you starting this thread.
>>> Typically incomprehensible, "given that I didn't say that you starting
>>> this thread" makes no sense.
>> How ironic, coming from the person who doesn't realize what I didn't
>> say.
> Typically incomprehensible, is English your first language?
Irrelevant. You're just trying to evade the issue.
> What are your others, perhaps we could try them?
Unnecessary.
>>>>> and it is clearly in a tholenesque mode of discourse.
>>>> An example of pontification.
>>> Correct, but uninteresting, since all tholenesque modes of discourse are
>>> examples of pontification.
>> Classic circular reasoning.
> Another feature of all tholenesque modes of discourse.
Illogical, given that you are the one engaging in it, thus it would be
a "tinmanesque" mode of discourse.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux newbie requires advice.....
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 14:29:23 -0400
Tim wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Second: avoid Corel like the plague, flip a coin between the other two.
> >
>
> Why do you say this? I saw Corel at a roadshow and it looked ridiculously easy to
>install
> and pretty slick as well.
It is rediculously easy to install, if, and only if, you have the right
hardware. This means a supported video card. RedHat will default to a
text mode and let you figure it out if it fails to work.
I have tried to install Corel on three machines, one of which installed
correctly. The other two had unsupported video cards and would not
install well enough to work.
RedHat had no problems.
--
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?
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 14:29:23 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
>
>
> Most programmers typically have fixed size buffers all over the place,
> which do not indeed represent fixed sized limits for the function. As I
> said before BUFLEN-type constructs are used all over the place where there
> is no limit. Here is an example:
>
> PROGRAM_STATUS read_in_file(FILE *fd, char **buffer, size_t *size)
> {
> #define BUFLEN 4096
>
> char buf[BUFLEN];
> size_t rt;
>
> if (!fd || !buffer || !size)
> {
> return PROGRAM_E_INVPARM;
> }
>
> *buffer = NULL;
> *size = 0;
>
> while ((rt = fread(&buf[0], 1, BUFLEN, fd)) > 0))
> {
> if ((*buffer = realloc(*buffer, (*size) + rt)) == NULL)
> {
> return PROGRAM_E_INSVIRMEM;
> }
>
> memcpy(*buffer + *size, &buf[0], rt);
>
> *size += rt;
> }
>
> return PROGRAM_S_NORMAL;
> }
Your version has some serious problems. It relies on being able to allocate
space for the buffer. Under other circumstances this might be ok, but for a
debug routine, it may not be. What if there is no more storage available and
that is why this function got called in the first place. And then there is
the fact that it always calls realloc() for every BUFLEN block, even if
there is enough storage already. For some systems, this may not be a
problem - realloc() just returns the old storage. For others, it may force a
malloc() and free() causing performance and potentially storage fragmentation
problems. Then there is the double buffering causing more performance
problems. Of course, there is also the fact that your program reads from a
file while the original one writes to a file. Your program uses a file
pointer while the original used the lower level file descriptor and
write(). And you never free up the storage when done. You didn't document
that it is the callers responsibility to free the storage. It is rare that
I find so many bugs in such a small piece of code.
Gary
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: No need to take sides
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 18:39:04 GMT
Otto wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> : Otto wrote:
> : >
> : > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> : > : Matt Chiglinsky wrote:
> : > : >
> : > : > It's only a computer.
> : > : >
> : > : > That's all I have to say.
> : > :
> : > : That depends. On COLA, whose existence is for the taking of sides for
> : > : Linux, it make sense. Advocating a community developed product, which
> is
> : > : free, makes sense. Advocating a poorly developed, closed source,
> : > : proprietary set of (and I use this term loosely) operating systems,
> from
> : > : the largest software company in the world, with billions for
>
> In certain respect you are right, most of the things what you listed are
> more complicated than just a whatever device. However, for most people it
> makes no difference what actually happens, when they pickup the phone to
> make a phone call. Nor should they be concerned about it, unless they work
> for the phone company. For that matter, computers are handled the same way.
> Success of a product seldom depends on the actual quality of the product in
> question. It depends on usability, price, ease of access to the product,
> pretty much in that order. Anybody, who can provide a product which is
> easier to use, cheaper, and accessible by the masses, than the someone's
> existing product, will be successful. Right or wrong, this is the generic
> sentiment of the masses.
> Anyone who thinks otherwise is either ignorant or kidding themselves.
>
> Otto
Which is why Linux will probably eventually exceed Windows in popularity
among the masses, yet, at the same time, give the programmers and
engineers the flexibility they want.
------------------------------
From: Barry Kauler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Different types of linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 02:38:59 +0800
>
> One problem I had last time I repartitioned a dual-boot system was that
> Windows had a lot of "hidden" files that were not moved by the defragger.
> This made it impossible for me to create new partitions of the size I
> wanted. I think there is a way to move those files under Windows, but you
> should look in to that before you start the partitioning, to save yourself
> some frustration.
>
I tackled this problem, and wrote it up:
http://www.crosswinds.net/~goosee/
Regards,
Barry Kauler
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 20:40:21 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Sun, 11 Jun 2000 17:20:49 GMT...
...and Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I _know_ that:
> a) Some of the programmers in Waldorf, Germany, who work on SAP R/3
> are pretty good, because I've seen some pretty good code here and
> there.
Pedant point: Walldorf (two Ls).
ma"just another Palatine"wa
--
Knockemstiff, Ohio | Bowlegs, Oklahoma | Bugscuffle,
Pee Pee, Ohio | East Due West, South Carolina | Tennessee
Lickskillet, Ohio | Yell, Tennessee |
-- U.S. placenames
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 18:55:24 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3943bda9$1$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >I dunno. Maybe you should try to get whoever provides your
> >word-processor to support Words format better.
>
> Its an M$ decision to manufacture problems. It is M$ who continues to
change
> the format for the purpose of forcing upgrades on customers, and to
eliminate
> competing products.
They seem to have stopped. No doubt you can contrive some sort of
diabolical reason for that.
Yet *still* the open source folks can't seem to handle the Word format.
I really don't think it's Microsoft's fault.
Maybe the format it just too hard. Heaven knows it is complex.
> Only wintrolls have trouble understanding this, and only they defend it.
Well, obviously. The short definition of "wintroll" is "defends Microsoft".
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
From: Spidey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:02:46 GMT
in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], hogu
at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 6/3/00 9:00 AM:
>
>
> On Fri, 2 Jun 2000, Default wrote:
>
>> Having just gotten through reading over 7,000 Linux posts in one sitting,
>> I *still* fail to see the advantages of Linux over Apple's forthcoming OS
>> 'X'.
>>
>> Okay, Steve is still an Assh**e, and Apple Inc., leaves much to be
>> desired. And Apple's present operating system stinks compared to what it
>> replaced (8.6 vs. 9.04). Sort of like Windows 95 vs. 98/2000.
>>
>> And yes, there's PPCLinux for the PowerPC processor (a.k.a. Mac) -- but
>> why???
>>
>> I fail to see why anyone, other those that want to make a living via
>> Linux, would want to be involved in Linux?
>>
>> Disregarding the monetary aspects of this issue, why do those here feel
>> that Linux is better than the other operating systems, and more
>> importantly, why do you feel it will succeed when Apple finally releases
>> 'X'? {And I'm no great fan of Chuckle's forthcoming 'X' either.}
>>
>> Look, I'm *not* trying to start a flame here. I'm merely asking this in
>> light of everything that I've read here about Linux and all its various
>> problems with drivers, fonts, utilities, kernal changes, video cards,
>> mice, etc., etc., etc., and how "forgiving" Windows and the other
>> operating systems are with these items.
>>
>> Care to enlighten me and everyone else who reads this post?
>> I wanted the simplest computer possible -- one that wouldn't break down.
>> I now have a pen and lots of writing paper.
>
> I would like to try Apple/Mac very much, but it's just too expensive. And
> when I don't like it, what do I do with the hardware ?
>
> Further, you make it sound as if Linux has more problems than other OS's.
> But that's because Linux problems are discussed out in the open (i.e. the
> internet), and other OS's problems are discussed between the walls of
> there makers (i.e. Microsoft, Apple/Mac, etc), who would never dare
> to discuss their bugs out in the open, because it probably would mean
> commercial suicide.
>
> Gr. Hogu
>
Actually, apple does talk about bugs in the open:
http://support.info.apple.com/te/te.taf
Their tech support pages are open to all posters.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tinman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 15:04:53 -0400
In article <zQQ05.32764$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Tinman writes:
>
> >>>>>>> [oh well, it's hot out there anyway]
>
> >>>>>> Irrelevant.
>
> >>>>> Not to my garden.
>
> >>>> This newsgroup is not your garden.
>
> >>> Irrelevant, the reference is to my garden, not this newsgroup.
>
> >> Illogical, given that the posting is in this newsgroup, not your
> >> garden.
>
> > Usenet posts need not be solely self-referential.
>
> But we're talking about the irrelevance of your statement, not
> about USENET posts in general.
Illogical. My reference was to my gardening, not to usenet.
> >>>>>>>> Tinman writes:
>
> >>>>>>> Typical inaccuracy,
>
> >>>>>> Incorrect.
>
> >>>>> On the contrary.
>
> >>>> Is that the best you can do, merely stating contrariness?
>
> >>> Can you do better?
>
> >> I see that you didn't answer the question. No surprise there.
>
> > I see that you didn't answer the question. No surprise there.
>
> Classic evasion.
I learned from a master of evasion.
> >>>>>>> It's tinman.
>
> >>>>>> Which is how I spelled it to begin with.
>
> >>>>> Incorrect, you spelled it Tinman,
>
> >>>> Same spelling.
>
> >> Note: no response.
>
> > None required,
>
> On what basis do you make that claim?
Don't you know?
> > you spell it incorrectly with a capital "t",
>
> On what basis do you make that claim?
See your attribution above, you use a capital "t," which is incorrect.
> > I spell it correctly with a lower case "t."
>
> On what basis do you make that claim?
See my sig, I use a lower case "t," which is correct.
> >>>>> and you did it again above.
>
> >>>> I'm being consistent in my spelling, which is consistent with your
> >>>> spelling.
>
> >>> Nope.
>
> >> Incorrect. Compare the spellings.
>
> > I have, thus I recognize your errors.
>
> Incorrect, given that both spellings are the same.
Illogical, they are distinguishable, and thus not identical.
> >>> But if you prefer, you made a capitalization error--
>
> >> On what basis do you call it an error?
>
> > On the basis of the knowledge of how it should be done.
>
> But I spelled it the same way.
Incorrect and irrelevant, since even if I agreed that the error was not a
spelling error, it is still an error (of capitalization). Regardless of
which tack we take, you have (persisted) in making an error.
> >>> regardless, it's still incorrect.
>
> >> On your part.
>
> > Incorrect.
>
> An example of pontification.
Also incorrect.
> >>> And you keep repeating this error.
>
> >> You're erroneously presupposing that it is an error.
>
> > Nope.
>
> Prove it.
I already have.
> >>>>>>>>> I'm not falling into another tholenesque spiral this week,
>
> >>>>>>>> What alleged "tholenesque spiral"?
>
> >>>>>>> The tholenesque spiral in which we find ourselves at this very moment.
>
> >>>>>> Incorrect; that would be a "tinmanesque" spiral, given that you
> >>>>>> started it.
>
> >>>>> Incorrect on two counts--
>
> >>>> Balderdash, for reasons given below.
>
> >> Note: no response.
>
> > None required, as there is no content in your sentence.
>
> Incorrect, given the content of my sentence.
What alleged "content"?
> >>>>> I didn't start this thread,
>
> >>>> Irrelevant, given that I didn't say that you starting this thread.
>
> >>> Typically incomprehensible, "given that I didn't say that you starting
> >>> this thread" makes no sense.
>
> >> How ironic, coming from the person who doesn't realize what I didn't
> >> say.
>
> > Typically incomprehensible, is English your first language?
>
> Irrelevant. You're just trying to evade the issue.
Not at all, I am pointing out your lack of control of the English language
and seeking information as to others of which you might have better
control.
> > What are your others, perhaps we could try them?
>
> Unnecessary.
Incorrect. You've demonstrated a lack of control of the English language.
>
> >>>>> and it is clearly in a tholenesque mode of discourse.
>
> >>>> An example of pontification.
>
> >>> Correct, but uninteresting, since all tholenesque modes of discourse are
> >>> examples of pontification.
>
> >> Classic circular reasoning.
>
> > Another feature of all tholenesque modes of discourse.
>
> Illogical, given that you are the one engaging in it, thus it would be
> a "tinmanesque" mode of discourse.
Incorrect, this is not my normal mode of discourse. I have adapted to your
native mode for the purposes of my entertainment.
--
______
tinman
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
From: Spidey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:06:03 GMT
in article 8has46$[EMAIL PROTECTED], bo@p at bo@p wrote on 6/3/00 8:02 AM:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>>
>> Having just gotten through reading over 7,000 Linux posts in one sitting,
>> I *still* fail to see the advantages of Linux over Apple's forthcoming OS
>> 'X'.
>>
>
> will Mac OSX be free sourced? will it run of something other than
> the mac??
>
>
>
Yes, it is entirely open with the exception of the GUI.
Rumour has it that an Intel port is in the works.
http://www.publicsource.apple.com/
------------------------------
From: "Robert Moir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: No need to take sides
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 20:13:26 +0100
"Matt Templeton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Matt Chiglinsky wrote:
>
> > It's only a computer.
> >
> > That's all I have to say.
>
> You're right, it is only a computer. But I want _MY_ computer to do what
> _I_ want the way _I_ want it to. I can do this with Linux but NOT with
> MS software,.
Then go ahead and do it, and stop missing his point...
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 05:10:09 +1000
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:wgR05.5192$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3943bda9$1$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > >I dunno. Maybe you should try to get whoever provides your
> > >word-processor to support Words format better.
> >
> > Its an M$ decision to manufacture problems. It is M$ who continues to
> change
> > the format for the purpose of forcing upgrades on customers, and to
> eliminate
> > competing products.
>
> They seem to have stopped. No doubt you can contrive some sort of
> diabolical reason for that.
>
> Yet *still* the open source folks can't seem to handle the Word format.
>
> I really don't think it's Microsoft's fault.
>
> Maybe the format it just too hard. Heaven knows it is complex.
>
> > Only wintrolls have trouble understanding this, and only they defend it.
>
> Well, obviously. The short definition of "wintroll" is "defends
Microsoft".
No, that's wrong. The short (and long, ie only) definition of "wintroll" is
"doesn't hate Microsoft". :D
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
