Linux-Advocacy Digest #240, Volume #27 Wed, 21 Jun 00 20:13:07 EDT
Contents:
NFS/Samba Dos to Unix Text Conversion: Who won't, who does, who might
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes ("Shock Boy")
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes ("Shock Boy")
Re: What UNIX is good for. (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server (JEDIDIAH)
Re: The MEDIA this year! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server (Christopher Browne)
Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager (Christopher Browne)
Re: DirectX equivalent (Christopher Browne)
Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server (Christopher Browne)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager (JEDIDIAH)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.smb,mailing.unix.samba,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: NFS/Samba Dos to Unix Text Conversion: Who won't, who does, who might
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:06:01 GMT
Hi Folks,
Our development group wants to generate code from a NT hosted tool,
onto a Solaris box and then compile/edit this code.
The NT <--> Solaris link currently is Solaris v5.6 NFS to Hummingbird
Maestro v6.2
To deal with this, we have to manually run the LF <--> CR/LF conversion
utility.
We are looking for a **transparent** conversion solution.
-->> We do understand the nature of the problem <<-- (no flames)
Hummingbird tech support said they are *not* interested (see below)
###################
# (1) Who won't: Hummingbird
###################
Our current PC-NFS vendor, www.hummingbird.com , responded in case
number "1005325" that they cannot do transparent conversion between DOS
and Unix text . They expressed *no* desire to add that capability.
I was also told that just 20 minutes ago, the very same support
engineer at Hummingbird had just gotten the same request from another
customer !
###################
# (2) Who will: Samba
###################
In this URL, someone purports to know that Samba will be configurable
to do transparent conversion between DOS and Unix text.
http://x76.deja.com/getdoc.xp?
AN=632267096&CONTEXT=961625263.145162289&hitnum=0
Subject: Re: Extra LF
Date: 06/07/2000
Author: Axel Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Vincent Commarieu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi,
>
> When PCs write to the samba share, all the files have an extra line,
in
> between each lines.
>
> Can we change that behaviour?>
> Thanks
>
Hi,
Thanks for your very detailed description of your problem. Samba by
default has no option to change the content of any file that is stored
from a Windoze PC on a Samba share. I assume that you open Windoze
files with an UNIX program i.e. vi.
UNIX uses LF as NewLine character. Windoze uses instead CRLF. If you
want to use a text created under Windoze in UNIX you have to map CRLF
to LF by your own. In the other way round you have to open UNIX
textfiles with Wordpad.
Samba 3.0 (probably available in October 2000) will probably have an
option to do the conversion somehow automatically.
HTH,
Axel Neumann
=================
Related:
(a) This entire thread is "hot", read it all"
http://x76.deja.com/viewthread.xp?
AN=594404759&search=thread&svcclass=dnserver&ST=PS&CONTEXT=961626785.149
749838&HIT_CONTEXT=961626785.149749838&HIT_NUM=5&recnum=%3c003301bf8875
$28e04200$0600a8c0@arnold%3e%
231/1&group=gnu.cvs.help&frpage=getdoc.xp&back=clarinet
(b)
http://x76.deja.com/getdoc.xp?
AN=580964756&search=thread&CONTEXT=961626832.150274095&HIT_CONTEXT=96162
6785.149749838&HIT_NUM=1&hitnum=2
###################
# (3) Who will: MultiNet NFS Server
###################
http://www.support.process.com/documentation/multinet-
docs/admin_guide/Ch19.htm
... excerpt ...
Mapping OpenVMS Text Files to UNIX Text Files
The MultiNet NFS Server attempts to make access to text files as
transparent as possible. Most OpenVMS files containing ASCII text have
RMS record attributes of Variable Length Records with Carriage Return
Carriage Control (VAR-CR). When VAR-CR files are read via the NFS
Server, the NFS Server automatically converts the contents of the file
into the equivalent UNIX byte stream. Because of this conversion, there
are a number of restrictions imposed on VAR-CR files:
... excerpt ...
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:20:59 GMT
"Leslie Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8immc1$23c6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <hVy35.3352$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Shock Boy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> > > Because when you move up to NT or Win2k and can set the drive letters
> >> > > yourself, it becomes just like the Mac system, albeit with only one
> >> letter
> >> > > volume names.
> >> >
> >> > I dare you to change the drive that your system root resides on to a
> >> > different letter.
> >>
> >> What do I win if it works ? :D
> >
> >Yea.. mine is not on C:\ as well :-)
>
> Of course you can install it on a different drive. What happens
> when you move it after the system and apps are installed?
Such as when I installed it on the C:\ drive, and then moved it to the D:\ which is a
different phyiscal HD?
------------------------------
From: "Shock Boy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:21:01 GMT
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Shock Boy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8ijdec$trh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > >
> > > > > "Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:ABJ25.3969$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > My real question is why do we Windows users have to put up with the
> > > old,
> > > > > > outdated, kludgey and quite honestly crap system of identifying
> > > volumes by
> > > > > > drive letter that Windows STILL uses? Legacy apps be damned, the
> > > longer
> > > > > it's
> > > > > > left the way it is, the harder it will be to switch to a vaguely more
> > > > > modern
> > > > > > system.
> > > > >
> > > > > Because when you move up to NT or Win2k and can set the drive letters
> > > > > yourself, it becomes just like the Mac system, albeit with only one
> > > letter
> > > > > volume names.
> > > >
> > > > I dare you to change the drive that your system root resides on to a
> > > > different letter.
> > >
> > > What do I win if it works ? :D
> >
> > Yea.. mine is not on C:\ as well :-)
>
> Of course you can *install* it on any letter, but *moving* it after
> the fact is a different story.
Actually, that's exactly what I did. When I initially setup Win2K.. It was simply to
try it out, and I did not have it on a
dedicated partition. After install, I moved it. Only shortcuts that I myself manually
linked has some problems. Everything
associated with the OS, etc worked like a charm.
> I use NT on a regular basis, and anyone else who does has probably
> experienced the letter-shuffle that goes on with new devices and
> partitions. I discovered this joy when I formatted an 8MB partition
> that NT left at the beginning of the primary IDE drive (why does
> NTSETUP do that when you tell it to use all the space anyway?); it
> became C: and the rest is history.
Well, one of the reasons why I have seen Dell, others do it.. is if you have NTSF with
encryption on, you can place ntsfdos there in
case of dire harddrive problems.
But, if you are talking about drive letters only in NT/Win2K.. the first partition
need not be the C drive.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: What UNIX is good for.
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:21:38 GMT
On 21 Jun 2000 19:10:20 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:31:22 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 19 Jun 2000 06:03:04 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 00:18:06 -0400, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>Tim Palmer wrote:
[deletia]
>>>>Almost any external modem is supported. In fact, all I had to do for mine
>>>>was plug it in and use modemtool to set the symlink for /dev/modem.
>>>
>>>EXTERNAL? Did Linux not suppoart the inntermal modem that came with your PC?
>>
>> Did Windows 3.1?
>
>It supported the modams that came with it preinstalled.
...blazing along at 2400bps...
[deletia]
--
If you know what you want done, it is quite often more useful to
tell the machine what you want it to do rather than merely having
the machine tell you what you are allowed to do.
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:23:18 GMT
On 21 Jun 2000 19:10:10 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:44:23 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 21:53:11 -0400, Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 16:51:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
>>>wrote:
[deletia]
>>>> you just hate it when IE5 hangs and clutters your desktop) and
>>>> there is more than enough eye candy and good fonts for X.
>>>
>>>
>>>That doesn't happen to me. IE is very stable in general but I have had
>>
>> ...the "it never happened to me" Lemming Mantra.
>>
>
>So if you run Windows and it doesn't crash and bern wile your installing
>it and trash your hard
>drive once you get it installed, y'our a "lemming"?
...it is if you try to use it as a excuse for all of the crashes
and PNP failures and registry implosions that have occured to the
rest of us over the years...
>
>>>it crash once or twice over the last year or so (counting the Win2k
>>>beats) I just kill iexplore.exe and that's that. My other IE windows
>>>remian open and I just go back to where ever I was.
>>
>> That I find highly doubtful. Typically when one IE5 window
>> tank they all tank. This can be quite annoying.
>>
>
>More Linnux FUD.
...isn't about time for you to go off of a cliff somewhere?
--
If you know what you want done, it is quite often more useful to
tell the machine what you want it to do rather than merely having
the machine tell you what you are allowed to do.
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The MEDIA this year!
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:31:34 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
No-Spam wrote:
> How can a Wintroll, with a fake name, who never gives sources himself,
> and quotes the same lame Wintroll lies year after year, question
> Charlie ?
Isn't Charlie the fellow who swears Windows has no disk cache?
As most full featured OS's (hardware allowing of course) do
caching, I'd like to see something a little more convincing than
Charlie saying so, as the windows I have here seem to be caching
something. Is there some new spec on what caching is that I've missed?
Anyways, who cares who posts what? I look at the post more than
the poster anyways.
> To all concerned, "Steve/Amy/Keys88/Heather/Simon" etc, is a
unbalanced,
> or paid Microsoft Wintroll, do yourself a favor, and save some
valuable time.
>
> kill file him
Or better yet, pick an incarnation of his and prove him erroneous.
Then you can claim spank at any time given commonly accepted usenet
practices.
Off topic, anybody know how to get KDE's window manager to run
standalone, that somebody with 0 knowledge (me) can manage? One
of the threads here has my curiousity up now, I'll continue reading,
but if anybody knows a shortcut, redhat 6.1, ordinary KDE installation
(?)
(On the other hand, I've seen some interesting behavior just renaming
files randomly :-)
--
I'm one of those 0 knowledge folks yttrx talks about.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:47:08 -0400
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:50:52 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>>Call it whatever you want... it's still a pathetic clone of the
>>Windows 9x style UI that's ugly and slow.
>
> ...which makes it indirectly a poor clone of MacOS.
You said it... not me.
The Windows UI has really moved to a point where it's hard to consider
it a MacOS clone. (The Win2k/ME UI)
So we all agree... KDE is a pathetic clone of Windows.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:52:29 -0400
On 21 Jun 2000 20:51:48 GMT, Brian Langenberger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 02:07:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher
>: Browne) wrote:
>
>:>KDE is _NOT_ a window manager.
>
>: Call it whatever you want... it's still a pathetic clone of the
>: Windows 9x style UI that's ugly and slow.
>
>I agree. The Windows 9x style of UI is ugly and slow.
>Fortunately, KDE doesn't have to look or act like it.
Right... instead of the "Start" menu you have a "KDE" menu in the same
exact location. Instead of the system tray you have a... KDE Tray? In
the same exact location. Instead of a "Quick Launch" you have a place
to quickly launch your programs... I'm not sure what KDE calls it.
Instead of using a web browser style interface to browse local
locations you use... uh... well... a web browser style interface to
browse local locations.
Instead of having a task bar you have a.... bar of... tasks in the
same place.
KDE deviates from the Windows UI about the same amount that Microsoft
deviates themselves with various versions of Windows since 95. KDE is
a pathetic clone.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:59:37 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when [EMAIL PROTECTED] would say:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Except that KDE isn't a window manager.
>
>What window manager runs when the desktop environment 'KDE'
>is in control?
Whichever one you chose to run.
>I'm one of those that thought 'KDE' was a
>window manager. Same with 'Gnome', I now find out that it is
>also a desktop environment as well as an application framework
>for the software developer. What window manager does 'Gnome'
>use?
Again, whichever one you chose to run.
Unlike KDE, which includes, as one of its applications, a window
manager, kwm, GNOME doesn't even _include_ a window manager, which
makes rather mystifying how people can get the mistaken impression
that it is a window manager.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/linux.html>
If there's one thing I can't stand, it's intolerance.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:59:38 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Jeff Szarka would say:
>On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 02:07:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher
>Browne) wrote:
>
>>KDE is _NOT_ a window manager.
>
>Call it whatever you want... it's still a pathetic clone of the
>Windows 9x style UI that's ugly and slow.
That puts it in good company, when:
- Windows 9x is a pathetic clone of Motif that's ugly and slow;
- Windows NT is a pathetic clone of Motif that's ugly and slow.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/linux.html>
If there's one thing I can't stand, it's intolerance.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: DirectX equivalent
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:59:39 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Francis Van Aeken would say:
>JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:39:09 -0300, Francis Van Aeken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Just wondering, is there a DirectX equivalent in Linux?
>> >
>> >If so, what component model does it use? CORBA?
>>
>> Those are orthogonal sorts of things...
>
>DirectX is based on the COM model. One uses DirectX by creating COM
>objects and sending messages to them. The advantage is that the interface
>is language-independent.
>
>A real equivalent of DirectX should not only allow access to the hardware,
>but should follow a component model.
CORBA corresponds, most nearly, to COM; both represent the
"underpinnings" that you'd use to _construct_ a component model.
DirectX is probably most nearly equivalent to KDE's "KParts," or
GNOME's "Bonobo."
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
Rules of the Evil Overlord #4. "Shooting is not too good for my
enemies." <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:59:44 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Darren Winsper would say:
>On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:20:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> What window manager runs when the desktop environment 'KDE'
>> is in control?
>
>Normally KWM, but you can just as easily run any KDE compliant window
>manager. Enlightenment is one example.
Note that you can also, as easily, run any _NON_"KDE-compliant" window
manager. I've run wmx, which doesn't conform to _any_ particular
standard, with both GNOME and KDE apps, without any particular
problems.
Frankly, at this point, there's not _all_ that much of value to being
"*-compliant;" about the only thing you "win" is the ability to embed,
in the respective "panel" schemes, a little icon that lets you monitor
all the active virtual consoles.
>> I'm one of those that thought 'KDE' was a
>> window manager. Same with 'Gnome', I now find out that it is
>> also a desktop environment as well as an application framework
>> for the software developer. What window manager does 'Gnome'
>> use?
>
>It really depends. GNOME was designed not to be tied to a particular
>window manager (OK, neither was KDE strictly speaking, but KWM was
>designed specifically for KDE, so it became the default).
>Enlightenment became the default originally, but I now believe Sawfish
>is the default. It is with Helix GNOME anyway.
Looking back at history, the association of Enlightenment with GNOME
came through Red Hat:
- RHAT was sponsoring GNOME development
- RHAT hired "Rasterman," author of Enlightenment
It should be no surprise that, after those events, the next Red Hat
Linux release included, "by default," both GNOME and Enlightenment.
As well as that Enlightenment included what "GNOME wm hints" GNOME had
defined.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
"A LISP programmer knows the value of everything, but the cost of
nothing." -- Alan Perlis
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 21 Jun 2000 18:51:43 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> What other security is there besides XHost +hostname for limiting who
>>> can redirect your X server or plug into your X server?
>>
>>There are three direct authentication systems: xhost, cookies, and
>>Kerberos.
>>Indirect protection could be developed through the use of a VPN, or for
>>those on a budget, SSL.
>
>Wouldn't it be wonderful if this was easier to set up? Terminal
>Server is a breeze - just install it, and you're then done. Why can't
>Linux be this easy?
Errr, it is. You just install ssh if you don't already have it
installed and it takes care of the xauthority setup and X
redirection for you when you use it for remote connection. And
of course if you are doing something remotely over a
low bandwidth connection that can be done in character mode
you don't need to bother with the GUI at all.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 23:48:33 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote:
> I'm not questioning the multitasking aspect, just what's the point of
> hundreds of processes running when nobody seems to know what they're
> actually doing?
That is a gripe about NT right?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:07:28 GMT
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:52:29 -0400, Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 21 Jun 2000 20:51:48 GMT, Brian Langenberger
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>: On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 02:07:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher
>>: Browne) wrote:
>>
>>:>KDE is _NOT_ a window manager.
>>
>>: Call it whatever you want... it's still a pathetic clone of the
>>: Windows 9x style UI that's ugly and slow.
>>
>>I agree. The Windows 9x style of UI is ugly and slow.
>>Fortunately, KDE doesn't have to look or act like it.
>
>
>Right... instead of the "Start" menu you have a "KDE" menu in the same
Which is not too much different than the root menus that X
has had since before any viable version of Windows even existed.
>exact location. Instead of the system tray you have a... KDE Tray? In
>the same exact location. Instead of a "Quick Launch" you have a place
Which fvwm was doing before Win95 ever shipped. Alternately,
you could think of it as a castrated Dock.
>to quickly launch your programs... I'm not sure what KDE calls it.
>
>Instead of using a web browser style interface to browse local
>locations you use... uh... well... a web browser style interface to
>browse local locations.
>
>Instead of having a task bar you have a.... bar of... tasks in the
>same place.
Which X was doing before since before any viable version of
Windows even existed.
>
>KDE deviates from the Windows UI about the same amount that Microsoft
>deviates themselves with various versions of Windows since 95. KDE is
>a pathetic clone.
>
--
If you know what you want done, it is quite often more useful to
tell the machine what you want it to do rather than merely having
the machine tell you what you are allowed to do.
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
