Linux-Advocacy Digest #28, Volume #27 Sun, 11 Jun 00 16:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: vote on MS split-up (WhyteWolf)
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (Spidey)
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (Spidey)
Re: vote on MS split-up ("David ..")
Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Jack Troughton)
Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Mayor)
Re: democracy? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (Jim
Richardson)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Mac = Playstation? Unix useless?(was Re: Canada invites Microsoft north) ("Shock
Boy")
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes ("Shock Boy")
RE: Rhinebeck HS LUG ("Jorge Cueto")
RE: The sad Linux story ("Jorge Cueto")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (WhyteWolf)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: vote on MS split-up
Date: 11 Jun 2000 19:00:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rick wrote:
[sniped for her pleasure]
>History and Microsft have proven the market cannot kill M$, even when
>the market is more innovative.
25 year history has proven that ...
10,000 history has proven that tyrants always
fall sooner or later
--
-=-=-=-=-
Honesty is for the most part less profitable than dishonesty.
-- Plato
-=-=-=-=-
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
From: Spidey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:12:54 GMT
in article 8hbonk$[EMAIL PROTECTED], it_is_the_apps_stupied@com at
it_is_the_apps_stupied@com wrote on 6/3/00 4:10 PM:
>
> The choice of the OS is important, but less important than that of
> the applications.
>
> OSX has very very little apps. any OS with little apps will die
> fast. look at BEOS, good OS they say, but very little apps.
>
> it is the applications that matter (one good way to avoid being
> locked into one OS is to write your application in Java).
>
> So, right now, Linux and windows has most applications (windows
> has more of course, that is why is still more popular).
>
> if osx comes with java VM build in, then I can consider using it,
> becuase all my apps that i write are in java these days.
>
Shouldn't be hard for you to port APPS considering OSX will have a full Java
2.0 implementation.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/
And as for having no apps, Adobe, Macromedia, Sun, Epson, palm, Microshit,
HP, IBM, Filemaker, Digidesign, Avid, Canon, Alias/Wavefront, and plenty of
others have already committed to development.
------------------------------
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 19:13:34 GMT
in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], phoenix at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
on 6/3/00 4:30 PM:
> 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.
>>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I've used MacOS before (and still do - my Churches computer runs on
> MacOS ) I find it to be very much less powerful than Linux. Besides
> which , MacOS is ALL
> GRAPHIC, which is okak, if you like graphics. HOwever, with MacOS you
> have just one type
> of desktop. Linux gives you a choice. You can use Fvwm, Fvwm2,
> Fvwm95, ICEwm, BlackBox,
> Sawmill, etc....
> With MacOS, you have no way of entering commands to the system,
> outside
> of using your one-button mouse and clicking the icons. With Linux,
> commands can be entered
> in XTerm or with 2 or 3 buttons on a mouse.
>
> X Windows is still a better product !
MAC OS X will have a command line, if you want it.
------------------------------
From: "David .." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: vote on MS split-up
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 14:04:13 -0500
Rick wrote:
>
[snip]
> ... only becasue the governemnt was able to M$ into court, and the
> resulting very real legal threat to M$'s continued existence .
EXACTLY!! No one else has the power to do anything about M$'s evil
tactics.
M$'s way, or else.
^^^^^^^^ ^^^^
Innovate ^ Destroy
--
Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
ID # 123538
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:21:39 GMT
On Sun, 11 Jun 2000 12:59:09 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hold on sport, maybe so, but what's the point? It is unlikely a point of
>failure. 4K is a pretty good length for debugging info. It does not call
>malloc. It is a debug function, it should be as simple as possible.
What makes you think it is a debug function? If it was a debug function,
it would write directly to stderr. It is a general purpose version of
fprintf which works with a file handle instead of a descriptor. fprintf is
definitely not a debug routine.
>You are missing the big picture in that it is a "debug" function, which
>by necessity, should work under all but the most catastrophic
>circumstances.
But this doesn't work for big buffers - let alone catastrophic
circumstances. I see no evidence that this is a debug function. If you
wanted to debug like this, you would just use fprintf.
>Also, the choice of vsnprintf over vfprintf makes sense if you
>understand how printf works, and assume a file stream used for debugging
>should not be buffered.
I think you need to go back and look at the original code. It didn't use
vfprintf because it was writing to a file handle not a descriptor. You
cannot use vfprintf to write to a file handle, it only works with a
descriptor. Thus, it used vsnprintf, in order to pass it to write(),
which takes a file handle, not a descriptor.
Furthermore, this has nothing to with buffering. stdout is buffereed
indepedently of the stdio library. In fact, if you pass stdout as the file
handle, it will indeed be buffered.
>BTW: I have managed and coded many projects, well over 250k lines.
Such as? What are they? Where can I see your work? I went to
www.mohawksoft.com and saw no evidence of the sophisticated programs you
have developed. Where are they being used?
>I would call this routine badly written. Why would you not read directly
>into buffer? Why do you need to go through the data twice? Why would you
>not make a few function calls to get file position and length and
>reallocate the buffer upfront?
How do you know the size of the file up front? What if you are reading
from a pipe?
>Why would you even consider using a FILE
>* when you want the whole file, an experienced developer would try to
>use mmap.
For starters, you cannot mmap a pipe. Since you are a Unix developer, you
are used to going for the "90% solution" - but the rest of us wants code
which will work for every case, including pipes. True you can attempt to
mmap it, but think of this as the failover function for when mmap fails.
Furthermore is mmap portable? Does it work in VMS? OS/2? Windows? Some old
VAX with an ancient version of Ultrix installed? My code is portable and
will work anywhere ANSI C is present.
Finally, if you need to make internal modifications to work with
the data (which you almost always need to do), you need to make a copy of
it _anyways_. Better now than never.
>In fact, this function is poorly designed to do its job. If its job is
>to manage the memory into which a file will be read (the calls to
>realloc mandate this). It should issue the original malloc call, or call
>mmap and avoid using the heap.
I cannot use the original malloc buffer because I do not know the size of
the what is left to read ahead of time. I get the size as a return value
from fread, and do not know it ahead of time. That could be worked around
with select, granted, but then you run into portability problems.
>What if the called passes a stack based buffer to this function? Talk
>about unexpected results.
As can any function which returns a pointer.
You cannot use the return value for the return pointer; using the return
value for anything but the status is bad manners.
>The example you gave as bad, only cuts off characters on a debug string,
>your's could corrupt the program's heap if used incorrectly.
So could strcpy. Would you fire the author of strcpy?
>In short, if you showed this to me as an example of code you would
>write, I would not hire you.
And miss those lucrative MohwakSoft options. The horror!
Le's get several things straight here.
1. What makes you think I would want to work for you? I wouldn't
even consider working for anything but a Fortune 500 computer company, or
possibly a well funded, high profile startup. What are your annual sales
and profits? How much cash do you have on reserve? Who are your main
investors? What is your compensation? Most importantly, what exciting,
innovative, important projects are you working on? It's an employee's job
market, and first you have to sell the prospective employee; I doubt
anybody reading your ranting and raving on this newsgroup would want to
work for you. How are you as a manager? Do you look out for your
employees? Do you stand up for them? Do you understand what they are
working on? Do you trust them? Or do you micromanage them, and play
politics? In short, what makes you think you are manager which a talented
engineer would want to work for?
2. The code I wrote was written as an example of a specific type of
programming. It was not intended to be production code.
3. Judge me by my real code, not what I write in the newsgroups. I
will be releasing one of my projects as open source imminently, and I'd
love to see what you think of that.
>If I saw this in a production product, I'd fire you.
Nice. Care to disclose your turnover rate?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jack Troughton)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:08:00 GMT
On Sat, 10 Jun 2000 14:21:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> abraxas wrote:
>>>
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > abraxas wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >> > On 06/09/2000 at 08:59 PM,
>>> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) said:
>>> >>
>>> >> >> I dont run windows by the way, or OS2. In case you thought you were
>>> >> >> getting my goat or something. :)
>>> >>
>>> >> > Then there are only 2 possibilities. You are running a MAC which is
>>> >> > nothing more than a glorified Playstation or you are running some form of
>>> >> > unix which makes your machine virtually useless for 99.98% of business
>>> >> > customers.
>>> >>
>>> >> I could be running BeOS, or RISCOS, or Workbench, etc. on a variety of
>>> >> systems, etc.
>>> >>
>>> >> Tell me once again how useful OS/2 is for business customers.
>>>
>>> > Been to any banks lately?
>>>
>>> You may have had a point about 3 years ago. :)
>
>> Surely you've been to a bank since then.
>
>Ive done contract work in banks since then, yes. And as I said, you may
>have had a point three years ago....
>
>Or with banks that havent upgraded anything in three years. I hear theres
>alot of those left. :)
Actually, Canada Trust rolled out a major upgrade to their in-branch
banking services about a year and a half ago. It's implemented
completely under os2.
When I saw the System Proportional font on the terminal that a teller
was using, I said, "Hey! That's warp!"
She didn't really know what it was. We spoke about it for a few
minutes. The salient points were:
a)It was really stable.
b)The new app kicked ass in that it made her job a lot easier.
c)She had no idea you could buy it for home use.
When I told her you could, she said she might look into it; I don't
know if she did or anything, but it was pretty clear that she liked it
quite a bit.
--
==========================================================
* Jack Troughton jake at jakesplace.dhs.org *
* http://jakesplace.dhs.org ftp://jakesplace.dhs.org *
* Montréal PQ Canada news://jakesplace.dhs.org *
==========================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:30:25 GMT
On Sun, 11 Jun 2000 17:20:47 GMT, Christopher Browne
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This seems to me to be much ado about nothing.
>
>In a logging routine, I'd be game to set a limit of 80 characters,
>because I'd really rather be able to read the message on one line.
>
>And if I'm planning to generate messages longer than that, I really
>ought to plan them out so that there's _some_ sort of meaningful
>layout for the hapless reader, that is likely _me_.
I regularly pass long formatted strings to fprintf. I designed a code
generator, and it output some large, canned code, with some variance. It
was much easier to maintain by making a very large string, and then
passing it to fprintf with the variables as arguments.
>So, quite frankly, I disagree with the 4K limit; I'd really rather
>that a debugging routine limit widths to something that is readily
>readable, and a decent lowest common denominator for that is 80 bytes.
If you limit to 80, what do you do when somebody gives it something
bigger?
The proper solution is to figure out how much space it will take up,
allocate a buffer of that size, write the string to do it, and the chop it
up into smaller word boundaries. This fits the requirements of 80
character line widths.
>80 bytes isn't a common limitation _merely_ because punched cards had
>that size; there are _good reasons_ for it, including that it fits
>reasonably well as an inclusion in a document without reformatting.
And if the string I'm passing is a large piece of text (with returns such
that it is _already_ formatted to 80 characters), you won't accept that?
>Whatever.
>
>I'll be contrarian here and suggest that limiting things to sizes that
>are human-readable will commonly be usefully convenient.
As described above, this can be done properly. Merely cutting of after 80
characters is not a solution, as the string can have more than one line.
>Which is why:
>a) C probably needs to die, eventually.
>b) Same for C++.
Whatever.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:39:54 GMT
On Sun, 11 Jun 2000 17:20:49 GMT, Christopher Browne
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Open Source means "wearing the quality evaluation on your sleeve."
>Generalizing about the quality is as stupid as generalizing about the
>quality of "programs that run on Windows," because there are _wide_
>variations in the quality of code that is produced.
You are, obviously, extremely correct. I have publically praised projects
such as Apache, the GNU tools, FreeBSD, the Linux kernel, X, and others as
stellar quality, on par with the best in their segments.
My only point, which has been largely misunderstood by the readership
here, is that not ALL free software is good. As you know, making something
open source does not make all the bugs magically go away. It is _this_
mentality which the zealots hold, that open source can do no wrong as that
any problem is fixed in a few seconds, that I am against.
I may think that some closed source projects (e.g. VMS) to be better than
some open source software (e.g. xauth), but I have never held the notion
that ALL closed source is better than ALL open source. Obviously, anybody
who has ever bought a scanner, and gotten a free copy of "PhotoDeluxe"
knows otherwise.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
From: Mayor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 12:40:43 -0700
In article <tinman-1106001504530001@dsl-64-34-84-
49.telocity.com>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tinman) wrote:
>In article <zQQ05.32764$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Snip]
>> 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.
Posting for entertainment purposes again, tinman? Meanwhile,
where is your logical argument? Why nowhere to be seen!
--
Come and see my new website!
http://home.pacbell.net/rfovell/tireburn2.html
Generously donated and maintained by
THE Robert Fovell of CSMA fame.
>--
>______
>tinman
>
>
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: democracy?
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 23:07:38 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 10 Jun 2000 16:22:21 GMT,
Robert J Carter, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Smitty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Mark Wilden wrote:
>>
>>> Salvador Peralta wrote:
>>> >
>>> > let's remember that the United States is not now, nor has it ever been a
>>> > democracy.
>>>
>>> Yes it is. It's a representative democracy. The people do rule, through
>>> their elected officials (in theory, at least).
>>
>> You are misinformed on that point, Mark. Please refer to the U.S.
>> Constitution and the legal definitions of republic and democracy.
>> Smitty
>>
>>
>
>I think it it YOU who are being misinformed. Saying a republic is
>cannot be a democracy is like saying an orange can't be a fruit. They
>are not mutually exclusive.
>
>--
However, the US, by law, is a Republic, It cannot cease being a Republic
dropping the Constitution, (the document which created it in the first place)
There is nothing that says it must be democratic. Although it allways has been
to a lesser or greater extent. The Constituton requires that the individual
states have a "Republican form of government", and that the whole US guarantee
that. Besides, he didn't say that the republic and democratic forms are
exclusive.
In a democracy, the will of the electors is paramount, in a Republic, even
if the majority wish to do something, the law prevents them. At least in
theory.
In fact, mob rule is all there is, some places dress it up a little better is
all.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 23:24:26 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 12:13:44 -0700,
Peter Ammon, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Starcap'n Ra wrote:
>>
>> Actually, there is rationale *for* command lines. For
>> instance, I can type 'cd /usr/people/kennedy/music/beethoven'
>> on a Unix system *way* faster than I can click on My Computer,
>> wait for the window to come up, click on E:, move the cursor
>> to the scroll bar and scroll down and look for Winnt, click on
>> Winnt, move the cursor to the scroll bar and scroll down and
>> look for Profiles, click on Profiles, click on Kennedy, move
>> the cursor to the scroll bar, scroll down and look for Start
>> Menu, click on Start Menu, click on Programs, click on Winamp,
>> and finally click on Beethoven. Not only that, but it hurts
>> my eyes to do all that perusing the windows looking for the
>> little folders with the tiny print to find the one that I want.
>
>There are much faster ways to navigate the filesystem (at least on Mac
>OS and column browsers) than you describe. For example, on Mac OS with
>the hard drive selected, you can type exactly what you did above if you
>replace / with command-down arrow. But, since the Mac OS selects the
>closest match, you can type "kenn" instead of "kennedy" and have an
>excellent chance of success. You can probably even type "k" and then
>hit the down arrow once or twice.
You do know that bash and other modern shells have command line completion
don't you?
>
>A GUI lets your keyboard become context-sensitive, and this is a very
>powerful tool, indeed.
>
>There is an argument against the command line included as standard on a
>consumer-level OS: it can allow developers to be lazy. For example,
>instead of giving their software a nice graphical installer, they might
>include instructions like "open up Terminal.app and type in untar
>/usr/people/people/downloads/myreallyreallycoolapp.tar.gz" This is a
>bad thing.
>
>The original Mac team was very worried about developers simply porting
>applications from DOS with their horrible interfaces. That's part of
>the reason they released MacWrite and MacPaint: to raise the bar. Apple
>runs the same risk with their Unix compatibility and portability.
>
>That said, if the command line isn't available on OS X, I will be pissed!
>
>-Peter
I need both, not just Gui like the mac, and not just CLi, I want both, and
I will have them... :)
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:43:47 GMT
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> The action of "deleting" it --- no time at all (all it does is to mark it
>> as deleted in memory). Writing it back will take quite some time, but then
>> again, that's *why* you don't actually have to do that. Every now and
>> again, I "resynchronize" my mailbox (i.e. make it write it back), usually
>> just before I go to bed --- so why would I care how long it takes.
I have many not so fond memories of being at a public terminal, needing to
log out to get to class, but being stuck waiting or ELM to exit because
it takes so long to write the mailbox back. Unless you only read mail on
your own computer, the slowness of deleting a message is most definitely
very relevant.
------------------------------
From: "Shock Boy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac = Playstation? Unix useless?(was Re: Canada invites Microsoft north)
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:47:54 GMT
Hey now.. let's not insult the PlaystationII.. we know it has better graphics than the
Mac!
------------------------------
From: "Shock Boy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:48:06 GMT
"Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:VHs05.310$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Cons: They reaassign themselves at the slightest excuse; add a new
> >> drive, and all bets are off as to which of your existing drive letter
> >> assignments will stay the same.
> > Verdict: Stupid 1970s way of doing things that should be ashamed to be
> > still showing itself in the 21st century.
> >
> >The same goes for all the other filesystems in use today.
>
> Per-volume systems do no such thing. If I add another disk to my Mac, each
> formatted partition appears on the desktop and doesn't screw up everything
> else that came before.
>
> Example: Installing a new Hard Disk.
>
> On my Mac: Connect the cables up inside and turn it on (both IDE/SCSI).
> Initialise the disk when asked to do so by the MacOS. Do whatever I want
> with the new disk.
>
> On my PC: Look in manual to discover jumper settings for Master/Slave (IDE
> only; I haven't tried to add a SCSI card to my PC). Connect up cables. Boot
> up. Discover that my CD is now E:, not D: and every damn thing that expects
> it's files to be on a CD now needs to be told differently.
Um.. I'ld point out that on a modern mac with IDE/ATA drives.. you still have
Master/Slave settings.. but just about ANY computer
system shipping in the last 3 ro 4 years use the "cable select" setting..
This has NOTHING to do with Mac versus PC.. it has everything to do with the IDE
architecture, and it's no different than having to
set a SCSI drive number.. say 2 instead of 3.
And, changing drive letters is trivially easy for all except for the floppies ( A: and
B: ).. but I'll let you continue with your
"hard way"..
------------------------------
From: "Jorge Cueto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Rhinebeck HS LUG
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:59:52 GMT
> I'd use neither. Since you've got a lot of old computers 9by the sounds
> of it) you'd be better off making apps that run well in a very low
> resourse WM such as fvwm2.
Well, but wouln't you use at least GTK to develop ?
------------------------------
From: "Jorge Cueto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: The sad Linux story
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:59:53 GMT
> So, what about "Excel" tells me it's a spreadsheet? What about "Outlook"
> tells me it's an email/calendaring/contact package? What about "Access"
> tells me it's a database? What about "FrontPage" tells me it's a website
> authoring tool (sounds more like desktop publishing to me)? What about
> "Acrobat" tells me it's a portable document format reader?
Well, to be honest, FrontPage has a good name for its purposes, hasn't it
?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
