Linux-Advocacy Digest #37, Volume #27 Mon, 12 Jun 00 10:13:04 EDT
Contents:
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: 3 OS's on one machine win98-win2k-linux ("Stephen Kennedy")
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (Spidey)
Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight (Cihl)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (TholenBotPro)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (TholenBotPro)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (TholenBotPro)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (TholenBotPro)
Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight (2:1)
Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Time to prove it's not just words (T. Max Devlin)
RE: 3 OS's on one machine win98-win2k-linux ("Jorge Cueto")
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (Brian
Langenberger)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:12:23 GMT
in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], I R A Darth Aggie at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 6/11/00 9:21 PM:
> On 11 Jun 2000 16:20:51 -0700,
> peter444@- <peter444@->, in
> <8i16sj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> + Yes, I know, I know also that part of its kernel is taken from
> + freeBSD.
> +
> + Your point is?
>
> Just beyond your grasp.
>
> + Just becuase the kernel is from another Unix kernel means nothing.
> + It is only the kernel. The shell is not in the kernel you idiot.
>
> No, it isn't. But unlike the Ghost of MacOS' past, it could be added.
> It's also been in the developer's releases.
>
> + Does OSX come with bash??
>
> We won't know until it ships.
>
> James
Actually, Darwin 1.0 is out right now and available for download. Darwin is
the core OS that X is built upon. It has bash. The compiled download should
work with Intel machines.
http://www.publicsource.apple.com/projects/darwin/
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
From: Spidey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:27:35 GMT
in article 8i2ame$[EMAIL PROTECTED], steve blakeway at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 6/12/00 2:58 AM:
> In article <B5695ACA.1A92Sunday, June 11, 2000 3:06 [EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Spidey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 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/
>
> But, except for the curosity factor, why would anybody running Intel hardware
> choose
> OSX-Intel over FreeBSD?
>
> steve
>
>
I don't know. I'm not even sure how this thread started. I can't see a lot
of Linux/unix users moving over to OSX just for the heck of it. Linux is
still going to be far more customizable. You can't, for instance, change the
new Aqua interface in OS X. I suppose you could run through Darwin and
disable it, but they're not supporting 'skins' and different desktop
environments right out of the box. I think it's worth noting right now that
Mac OS X is a CONSUMER operating system. It's definitely going to be aimed
at the Novice-Intermediate crowd with a strong emphasis on people doing
education and graphics work, where the Mac is still # 1. I think Linux users
should feel happy that one more operating system has broken with the past
and is now embracing unix as its core OS. The OS war is not now between
Unix-like operating systems and Windows. I have a feeling average people are
going to find it hard to justify keeping with a bloated, flaky Windows
system when much more robust options are now available for the consumer
market. The problem with Linux is that, for the novice-intermediate crowd
(the vast majority of computer users), Linux is still way too difficult to
use. True that X-windows bridges this gap, but you really do need a system
administrator on call in case anything goes wrong. I can barely get my dad
to use a mouse, I think he'd faint if he ever saw a command line.
OS X's Unix underpinnings will make it very easy for developers to port
popular software over. And its potential install base should peak the
interest of software makers (we all know Mac users will pay extra for their
goods). I think Linux users and OS X users are a different crowd, but soon
we're going to share something in common, more than just a distaste for
Windows. I'm hoping for a friendly relationship between the two communities.
I run Linux on a G3 Macintosh - it's incredibly fast. It's not going to be
my main OS, but it's here for me to experiment with. I expect a lot of Linux
users will be just as curious about OS X, though they may never completely
switch.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen Kennedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 3 OS's on one machine win98-win2k-linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:51:20 +0100
> Did you even rede the artical? Linux IS having this prolblem. Linux
> is screuing up Win2000. LILO has nothing to do with it. LILO ca'nt
> boot windows 2K and you calnt boot Linux without LILO!
Does win2000 use the same loader as winNT? If so then there is
no problem with LILO loading the NT boot loader. (It's what I do on
this machine) The only trouble I had was with 98 which wanted to
be the first OS on the machine.
Stephen.
------------------------------
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: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:42:41 GMT
in article 8i0tu2$[EMAIL PROTECTED], peter44@- at peter44@- wrote on
6/11/00 4:48 PM:
> Almost everything I write is command line based. If OSX does not
> have a powerfull shell like bash, then forget it, I'll never ever
> look at it, even if it had every GUI application ever written ported to it.
>
> Knowing apple is anti-command line company, this means OSX will likely
> come with no or crippled command line just like their previouse pathatic
> OS's.
>
> Peter
>
For those interested, the following is a list of all the open source
archives you can download from apple - it is all part of Darwin, the core of
OS X. It includes Bash.
http://www.publicsource.apple.com/projects/darwin/projects.html
Project Version Description
AppleTalk 52.1 AppleTalk library
CoreFoundation 163-2 Core Foundation tool kit
CoreOSMakefiles 13.1 Core OS Makefiles
Csu 2 C startup library
IOKitTools 5.1 IOKit Tools
IOKitUser 16-1 IOKit framework
Libc 132.2 C library
Libcompat 14 BSD compatibility library
Libcurses 21 Text-mode display library
Libedit 16 Line editing library
Libinfo 63.1 NetInfo library
Libkvm 14 Kernel virtual memory library
Libm 17.1 Math library
Librpcsvc 10 Remote procedure call library
Libstreams 20 Streams library
Libsystem 33.1 System framework
Libtelnet 1.1 Telnet library
Liby 12 Yacc library
OpenSSL 0.9.4-2 SSL library
Startup 27 System Startup
adv_cmds 28.1 Advanced user commands
apache 1.3.12-640 Apache HTTP server
apache_mod_dav 0.9.13-4 Apache WebDAV module
apache_mod_ssl 2.6.2-2 SSL module for the Apache HTTP Server
architecture 227.1 Architecture-specific headers
at_cmds 30.1 AppleTalk commands
autoconf 2.13-8 GNU source configuration tool
automake 1.4-1 Makefile generator
automount 7 Filesystem automounter
awk 1998.10.20-1.1 AWK programming language interpreter
bash 2.03-10 Bourne-again shell
basic_cmds 26 Basic user commands
bc 1.05-7.1 bc numeric processing language
bind 8.2.1-2 BIND
binutils 4.18-1990707-10.1 GNU Binary Utilities
bison 1.28-5 Bison parser generator
boot 68 Kernel booter
bootp 29.1-1 BOOTP server
bootstrap_cmds 22.1 Developer commands needed to bootstrap the OS
bsdmake 1997.11.10-2 BSD build driver ("make")
buildtools 3.1 Build tools
cc 792-2 C compiler
cctools 318-3 Compiler tools
cvs 1.10-16 Concurrent Versions System
developer_cmds 1998.10.05-14.1 Developer commands
diffstat 1.27-1 diff output histogram filter
diskdev_cmds 94 Disk device commands
doc_cmds 1998.10.05-21.1 Documentation commands
dpkg 4 The `dpkg' package-management tool
dpkg_scriptlib 2 Perl and Python interfaces to dpkg
egcs 814.1-1.1 C++ compiler
emacs 20.3-33 GNU Emacs
enscript 1.6.1-7 Text to PostScript (and other) formatter
extenTools 12 Kernel Extension Tools
fetchmail 5.1.0-2 Mail retrieval and forwarding utility
file_cmds 1998.10.06-42.1 File commands
files 323.2 Miscellaneous system files
flex 2.5.4a-6.1 Fast lexer generator
gawk 3.0.4-7 AWK programming language interpreter
gdb 4.18-1990707-166 The GNU Debugger
gm4 1.4-5 GNU macro processor
gnudiff 2.7-10.1 Diff utilities
gnumake 3.78.1-102.1 GNU build driver
gnutar 1.12-409 GNU tape archive utility
gnuzip 1.2.4-11 GNU Zip compression tool
grep 2.3-5 Get-Regular-Expression-and-Print tool
groff 1.11a-8 Document formatter
headerdoc 2 Documentation generator
hfs 90.1 HFS/HFS+ commands
isoutil 12 ISO CD 9660 mount utility
keymaps 30.1 Key mappings
less 340-3 Text pager
m4 1998.10.06-1.1 Macro preprocessor
mail_cmds 1998.10.07-10.1 Mail commands
misc_cmds 1997.11.10-1.1 Miscellaneous commands
ncftp 2.4.3-6 Better ftp client
netinfo 167 NetInfo directory service
network_cmds 67 Network commands
ntp 4.0.95-7 Network time syncronizer
objc4 191 Objective-C runtime
patch_cmds 2.5-6 Patch file applicator
pb_makefiles 108.2-2.1 ProjectBuilder makefiles
perl 5.6.0-13 Practical Extraction and Reporting Language
ppp 2.3.11-2.1 Point-to-Point Protocol
procmail 3.13.1-1.1 Mail processing program
project_makefiles 122.1-2 Legacy NeXT ProjectBuilder makefiles
(obsolete)
rcs 5.7-9.1 Revision Control System
rsync 2.3.1-5 Remote file syncronizer
sendmail 8.9.1-23 Mail server and tranport agent
shell_cmds 1998.10.09-16 Shell scripting commands
sounds 16 System sounds
sudo 1.6.2p3-1.1 Superuser do
system_cmds 134 System commands
tcl 8.1.1-2.4 Tool Command Language
tcp_wrappers 7.6-4 TCP security wrappers
tcsh 6.08.00-19 TENEX C-Shell
texi2html 1.52-2 Texinfo to HTML converter
text_cmds 1997.11.10-8.1 Text commands
usrtemplate 10.1 Template files
vi 1.79-5 nvi text editor
volfs 23 volfs commands
wget 1.5.3-5 Web document retrieval utility
xnu 68.4-1.1 Darwin kernel
yacc 1998.10.12-4.2 Yet Another Compiler Compiler
zlib 1.1.3-1 Zip library
zsh 3.0.6-25 Z-Shell
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:48:59 GMT
Nico Coetzee wrote:
>
> I don't know if I'm just lucky or what but I have installed about 12
> Linux Workstations the last two weeks. The Package: RedHat 6.2. I had
> *no* hardware problems. Some of the PC's still give trouble under NT -
> especially the Packard Bells (which seems to be designed only with Win9x
> in mind). But even they have no problems.
>
> At home I have the same thing. I don't even bother anymore to check the
> Hardware Specs. The RedHat installer does everything. The only thing
> that takes a while is to pick and choose all the packages you want -
> because there is so many.
>
> So far I can install an average Linux Workstation quicker then a NT
> Workstation (basic OS plus a Office Suite)
>
> The hardware I used was anything from a P166 to PII333 and AMD K6-3.
>
> So... Am I just lucky or what is this about hardware?
>
> O, before I forget - if you want to reply negatively - just keep in mind
> that these are *training* PC's and therefor don't need DVD and all these
> fancy stuff. In fact, I still don't understand why people use
> SoundBlaster Live except if they are in the music industry. I just
> coupled my ESS card to my hi-fi and I think I have pretty good sound.
>
> What is the rest of the groups feeling? Is Linux finally winning with
> hardware?
>
> Cheers all,
>
> Nico
>
> --
> --------------
> The following signature was created automatically under Linux:
> .
> "I said I hope it is a good party," said Galder, loudly.
> "AT THE MOMENT IT IS," said Death levelly. "I THINK IT MIGHT GO
> DOWNHILL VERY QUICKLY AT MIDNIGHT."
> "Why?"
> "THAT'S WHEN THEY THINK I'LL BE TAKING MY MASK OFF."
> -- Terry Pratchett, "The Light Fantastic"
It think it would be a good idea to send this message to the NG's the
newbies come often, like alt.os.linux. It really is no good in
c.o.l.a., only "advocates" for the various systems come here.
------------------------------
From: TholenBotPro <[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, 12 Jun 2000 05:50:42 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > See tinman, Tholen knows how your handle name should be presented
> > > > > better
> > > > > than you do. You really wanted to be known as Tinman, not tinman.
> > > >
> > > > Jumping into discussions again, Marty?
> > >
> > > Don't you know?
> >
> > Irrelevant.
>
> On the contrary, it's quite relevant to tinman's
"tinman". How rich!
> entertainment.
Entertainment is irrelevant. What you can prove is relevant.
> > Meanwhile, you have predictably failed to answer the question.
>
> Incorrect. Meanwhile you have failed to locate my answer to your question.
> How typical.
I see that lacking a logical response, you're resorting to Bennett-esque
illogical redirection arguments. How predictable.
> > > > > Can't argue with "logic" like that.
> > > >
> > > > Incorrect.
> > >
> > > See what I mean?
> >
> > Non sequitur.
>
> See what I mean?
No.
> > > > > You believe the ego of this guy?
> > > >
> > > > What you believe is irrelevant.
> > >
> > > Non sequitur, as I have made no mention about what I believe.
> >
> > Irrelevant.
>
> Glad you agree.
Illogical.
> > > > What you can prove is relevant.
> > >
> > > Prove it, if you think you can.
> >
> > How ironic.
>
> See what I mean?
Taking another stroll down Irrelevancy Lane, Marty?
--
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
-- Dave Tholen
------------------------------
From: TholenBotPro <[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, 12 Jun 2000 05:53:49 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, tholenbot
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> TholenBotPro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Ask Chris Pott, it's his balderdash garden.
> >
> > Typical incorrect illogic, laced with invective. How predictable,
> > coming from you.
>
> Liar.
Incorrect.
> "Illogical, as I only grow Feldercarb in my balderdash garden."
> -Chris Pott
I wonder how the Square Lens Polishing Astrologers Assistants Local No. 246
would react to the information that you're forging posts again, Eric.
--
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
-- Dave Tholen
------------------------------
From: TholenBotPro <[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, 12 Jun 2000 05:54:51 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Eric
Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> TholenBotPro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I see that, having found it hot "out there", you have taken over the
> > > tending of Chris Pott's balderdash garden. How predictable.
> >
> > What alleged "balderdash garden"?
>
> The balderdash garden you admitted to having last summer when you wrote:
>
> "Illogical, as I only grow Feldercarb in my balderdash garden."
> -Chris Pott
Argument by repitition again, Eric? How predictable.
--
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
-- Dave Tholen
------------------------------
From: TholenBotPro <[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, 12 Jun 2000 05:57:29 -0700
In article <5q%05.33439$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Chris Pott writes:
>
> >>>>>>> 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.
>
> >>> Irrelevant, given that the characteristics of said spiral are not
> >>> dependent on whom initiated it.
>
> >> Illogical, given that the said spiral was given a name.
>
> > Incorrect,
>
> Balderdash.
I see that lacking a logical response, you're resorting to Tholenesque context
butchering again. How typical.
> > given that the name is based on the characteristics of said
> > spiral, rather than its instigator.
--
"You're erroneously presuming that I'm being pedantic."
-- Dave Tholen
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 14:18:57 +0100
> It think it would be a good idea to send this message to the NG's the
> newbies come often, like alt.os.linux. It really is no good in
> c.o.l.a., only "advocates" for the various systems come here.
This sounds liek advocacy (ish) to me.
-Ed
--
The day of judgement cometh. Join us O sinful one...
http://fuji.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/cult/index.html
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 08:31:07 -0500
This is killer, the Windows users are losing on the front of the people
without technical knowledge, and now they are attacking the technical
prowess of Linux and it's developers. Awe inspiring isn't it?
OK, show us some code from how great Windows is, oops, can't do that can
you? And just because some idiot programmed something wrong on Linux,
that doesn't mean that all programs on Linux are made that way. As for
the assertion that Linux crashes so often, I have yet to have a Linux
system fully "crash" on me. They have occassionally gotten slow (when I
push the holy living hell out of them) but I have never seen one lock up
or crash. So what the hell are you talking about?
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Time to prove it's not just words
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 09:40:29 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Keith T Williams from alt.destroy.microsoft; Mon, 12 Jun 2000
[...]
>> Having the operating system attempt to implement a security model based
>> on the notion of who "is responsible to the company" is relatively
>> ludicrous, given the typical implementation of software in a modern
>> company. Note 1: the sysadmin is responsible to the company for all
>> files on a system, as that is what a sysadmin is; no-one but the
>> sysadmin is responsible for any files but end-user generated documents.
>> Note 2: application of this Silly Idea, on the rare occasion it is
>> feasible in real life, is not hampered by not gratuitously bolting it on
>> to the bog-standard OS.
>>
>Sorry Max, but you have me confused on this one.
Not surprising, considering how badly put my idea was. Sorry.
I just don't understand why someone who isn't a sysadmin would require a
sysadmin level of control of a system, or why someone who requires
sysadmin level control of a system wouldn't be a sysadmin. IMHO, Yannik
is trying to explain ACLs in a light which makes their use seem trivial,
when in reality such mechanisms (just like permissions in Unix, in this
regard) are worthless in the highly flexible environment he is dealing
with, and can only be adequately implemented in a highly structured
environment using massive organized and procedural administrative
efforts.
I doubt it made much more sense this time, so I'll just drop it, OK?
--
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: "Jorge Cueto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: 3 OS's on one machine win98-win2k-linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:50:04 GMT
> Does win2000 use the same loader as winNT? If so then there is
> no problem with LILO loading the NT boot loader. (It's what I do on
> this machine) The only trouble I had was with 98 which wanted to
> be the first OS on the machine.
I have Win98 at fourth partition after W2K, Solaris and Linux.
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: 12 Jun 2000 14:01:18 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
:> Then that is why Windows is still only being used by
:> the 'bicycle' crowd whereas for real work more mature
:> systems (like Unix even) are used instead.
:>
: What maiks you think that? Windows is everywhere. Version's of it run
: on home PC's and on large
: corparate networks. The fastest sistem on the TPC/C list (the space
: shuttal) runs Windows 2000.
: UNIX is used by a bunch of wining geeks on there old 386's (bycicals)
: because they do'nt think Bill
: Gaits desserves the money they woud halve to spend on a computer that
: can run Windos.
The fastest system on the TPC/C list is weak compared to the sorts of
systems running UNIX, such as Intel's ASCI Red. Here's a quote:
"The system uses two operating systems to make the computer both
familiar to the user (UNIX) and non-intrusive for the scalable
application (Cougar)."
http://www.sandia.gov/ASCI/Red/RedFacts.htm
ASCI Red would be the current top supercomputer in the world
according to:
http://www.top500.org/lists/TOP500List.php3?Y=2000&M=06
Not surprisingly, the number of boxes architecturally *capable*
of running Windows2000 on this list is pretty slim. It's
pretty obvious who the "bicycle" and "space shuttle" are when
it comes to truly monster machines.
Of course, no one uses Windows for this level of number crunching
anyway, but you're the one who brought it up.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
