Linux-Advocacy Digest #406, Volume #27 Fri, 30 Jun 00 21:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: I hope you trolls are happy... (David Steinberg)
Re: C# is a copy of java (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: C# is a copy of java (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Uptime 6 months and counting. (DanH)
Re: Trying Linux yet again.... (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Uptime 6 months and counting.
C#, Db, (was Re: Oracle) (Christopher Browne)
Re: If Linux is desktop ready ...
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(John Wiltshire)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(John Wiltshire)
Re: Corel Does Nothing To Help The Linux Cause ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(John Wiltshire)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:33:42 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Windows has just as many inconsistencies, holes and mish-mashes. You
> just don't notice them as much because your used to them.
More, in fact. Like the fact that command lines are parsed by
the application, not the shell. So, pattern matching, etc.
is applied inconsistantly.
>
> Perry
>
> In article <8j9l2q$pvj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In article <8j9fq5$lg8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > I'm looking at it as
> > > > an alternative to Windows.
> > >
> > > That's nice but don't expect Linux to be like Windows. It isn't.
> >
> > Oh I can see that. I can see the inconsistancies, the holes and
> > mish-mash of ideas. This is the system that is trumpeted here as the
> > downfall of Windows. Yet I can't even do something as simple as an
> > Upgrade with one distro.
> >
> > Linux (+KDE or +Gnome) is nothing like Windows. Windows I can expect
> > things to work together. Linux doesn't even do that! I tried drag and
> > drop between KDE's Window Manager and KDE's Explorer - blimey! -
> doesn't
> > work! And that's just one of the holes I've found so far.
> >
> > --
> > ---
> > Pete
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
> >
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: I hope you trolls are happy...
Date: 1 Jul 2000 00:34:24 GMT
: On 30 Jun 2000 18:44:10 GMT, Brian Langenberger
: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >I went out and bought a nice Logitech PS2/USB one, plugged it in,
: >adjusted a couple of config files and had no trouble since.
He bought the hardware, used available software, and and found that it
supported the hardware. The software supports the hardware. Period.
Jeff Szarka ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: No... There is where you are wrong. You're not susposed to edit any
: config files. As far as I'm concerned, Linux does not support wheel
: mice unless they just work.
Now, because truth seems to get in the way of your FUD, you wish to
re-define support?
Would you care to use the language we know as English, or would you kindly
just piss off?
You CANNOT redefine every fscking word in the language to suit your own
purposes! You cannot say that, if you have to edit a configuration file,
it's unsupported. You cannot say that you're "not supposed" to edit any
config files. You ARE supposed to edit config files...that's how you
do configuration!
If you cannot operate one of the MANY text editors available for Linux,
please just use Windows. Stop pretending that your own ineptitude is a
failing of Linux.
: Windows has been doing this for many years now.
Windows has also been mangling registries, causing BSOD's, and rotting
filesystems for many years now. Linux != Windows. Deal.
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:36:10 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pedro Iglesias wrote:
>
> > I don't know what they meant when they siad C# is not meant to
> > be a competition to Java
>
> I suppose that they mean that will not support non-Windows
> platforms.
Of course not. That would violate the rules of customer lock-in.
Remember the internal memos in the J++ suit (which Microsquish LOST)???
I quote "Java must be destroyed because it allows corporations to
migrate to competing platforms"
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:36:25 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Marc Schlensog wrote:
>
> Uhm, I´m totally clueless:
> What is C#????
J++ renamed.
>
> Marc
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: DanH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Uptime 6 months and counting.
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:39:47 -0500
In article <8jjdc0$igk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> The is a follow and expansion up to my initial posting to this thread.
<...snip...>
> My original posting has recieved two flames by email from a couple of
> winvocates that prowl COLA. Their emails were worded differently, but
> delivered about the same message. The have accused me of fabricating my
> uptime report. They knew it was a lie because the knew that Linux is
> not stable enough to run this long. I was chided for wasting network
> bandwidth with my lies. I replied to both of them with the have
> message, "Jealous?".
>
> I have also been the got the pleseant experience of a minor email
> bombing by another winvocate that prowls through COLA. As I said it was
> a minor attack, with only 17 copies of the same message. What an anemic
> attack, I guess his copy of Windows (according to the header lines) must
> have crashed before he finished his attack. ;-)
>
> What I find interesting, is that the winvocates are so public in their
> replies to just about everything else, but the initial posting of this
> thread drew only private reactions from them. I wonder if they were
> just trying to beFUDdle me into silence.
My desktop box at work:
uptime
8:35pm up 345 days, 10:54, 3 users, load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00
It's doing seti@home right now and has been for most of a year. It's also
my desktop and used and abused daily. Right now it's got X, 18 desktops,
6 xterms, netscape twice, XCMail, Code Crusader, pan, fetchmail, nfs client
and various and assundry normal day-to-day operation programs and
daemons running.
When netscape crashes, kill netscape, not the box.
DanH
--
UNIX - Not just for vestal virgins anymore
Linux - Choice of a GNU generation
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Trying Linux yet again....
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:44:23 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jeff Szarka wrote:
>
> I first started with Mandrake 7.0 but X simply wouldn't work. It
> locked up and put strange colored dots all over my screen. Asking
> around IRC I was told I shouldn't be surpised an old distro doesn't
> work with all my hardware. I can accept that. Of course, a Geforce SDR
> was out before Mandrake 7 I bet but... Fine... I'll get Mandrake 7.1
>
> This one X problem is about all I ran into. NIC worked, SCSI worked,
> USB mouse. Now with Mandrake 7.1 my NIC is broken, my USB mouse no
> longer works and my sound is broken. I've posted a message to
> alt.os.mandrake outlining my specfic problems.
>
> Every time I've tried to install Linux someone says either my
> distribution is to old / not popular enough or they say I never asked
> for help setting it up. Here's your chance to help.
>
> My hardware is very basic, P3-550, SB Live, 3com NIC, Adaptec SCSI, HP
> printer, Geforce SDR. This is all VERY common hardware and it SHOULD
> work fine.
I know this might sound silly, but you KNOW that Microsoft coerces
vendors
into trading advanced information for video card drivers in secrecy.
Why
did you spend money on a video card if you didn't know if whether or not
there are Linux drivers for it yet?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Uptime 6 months and counting.
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 17:35:45 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
John Culleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Around here we brake for thunderstorms ;-) and hardware upgrades
> happen now and then. But basically we let the system hum along
> 24x7.
Around here we laugh at thunderstorms but it is the lightning that is the
problem. ;-) As well as the earthquakes. Ever want to see if how your
hardware can handle shock and vibration and power spikes just set it is in
this side of the country as wait for the next big one.
> Now here's a question for all the MSWindows lurkers (yes, I know
> you are there.) Is there an equivalent MSWindows command to
> "uptime" (displays days, hours mins since last boot)?
I have the Windows 95 version of top, it came as a part of the kernel toys
or the power user toys addons which I downloaded from Microsoft's internet
servers. The interesting thing about this program is that they do describe
it as being patterned after the unix top command. It provides information
on the processes running some what like unix's top; HOWEVER, (and this is
the interesting part) it does not provide any of the summary information
that we get from a unix top. Which means aboung other things like memory
usage and availability, it does not show the uptime information. I wonder
why?
Sorry for butting in, since I know that your question was not directed to
me. ;-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: C#, Db, (was Re: Oracle)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2000 00:53:42 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Craig Kelley would say:
>Aravind Sadagopan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Charlie Ebert wrote:
>> True.. With the C# and .Net series coming, I see an absolute microsoft
>> rule
>> Somebody STOP IT
>
>Well, nobody else is offering an upgrade for the mess that is C/C++.
>
>What we need is 'D' -- not another version of C.
What we need is for the language designers to step back and consider
whether or not it makes sense to continue to slavishly create language
after language that derive features from BCPL and Simula, or whether
it might be a wiser move to look further afield.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/languages.html>
"If someone criticises your attitude towards an operating system and
your only answer is ``get laid,'' this indicates that you have either
got a major case of Reality Distortion Syndrome or that you are a
troll..." -- mawa
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: If Linux is desktop ready ...
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2000 01:00:28 GMT
On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:08:25 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Pedro Iglesias wrote:
>>
>> ... then tell me why the Hell a home user should to care about compiling
>> sources ? If he/she gets binaries, what the Hell open source is useful to ?
>
>
>The mere fact that I know that I *CAN* read the code, if I so choose,
>means that others already have. => Security that bugs are more
>likely to be fixed.
It doesn't matter either way. At it's most rudimentary level, source
with a working makefile provide a facility to deliver a cross platform solution
that also maximizes application performance. What a makefile spits out when it
dies is no more relevant to the novice end user than what InstallShield won't
spit out when it dies.
Source allows the application to better adapt to the system that it's
running on and perhaps run on another target binary platform than it might
otherwise do. A good example of this would be Internet Exploder for Solaris.
>
>
>
>> If he/she learns the ./configure;make;make install procedure, why the Hell
>> should he/she know that awk 1.0.4 prevents gtk from compiling correctly ?
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2000 01:08:50 GMT
On 30 Jun 2000 12:26:36 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote in comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> ...as if the two are effectively any different.
>>
>>They are very different. Document centric means you open a document
>>and edit it, not caring what applications control which parts.
>
>What does make this decision as you move the document to different
>machines? If some machine has a different app for a particular
>part of the data, is it used instead of the one that only
>existed on the originating machine?
It should be. Depends if anything else is the handler for
Excel.Workseet (or whatever you embedded).
>>Depends on how smooth you want it to look. Given OLE at the moment,
>>editing an Excel sheet in word changes the Word menus to Excel menus,
>>toolbars can be placed in the original window and so on. Basically it
>>appears to the user that Word itself knows how to edit the object when
>>it is really Excel running behind the scenes.
>
>What happens if you don't have excel, have a different version
>than the last person that touched the document, or have some
>other spreadsheet program?
I would hope it would still work. Different versions definitely work
if the file format hasn't changed. Different programs will work if
the other program registers for all document types it handles.
If you don't have Excel then you can't edit - you can only view.
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2000 01:09:12 GMT
On 30 Jun 2000 12:02:58 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote in comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>I think all Winprinters are parallel at the moment. They are pretty
>>ordinary anyhow given that their whole purpose is to cut as many costs
>>as they can. I'm only trying to illustrate the point that drivers can
>>have value - mjcr seems to think otherwise and is using one case to
>>prove his generalisation that all work should be done in hardware and
>>not software. He just hasn't learned yet that one or two cases don't
>>make me wrong and he's avoiding the cases that make him wrong (video
>>cards).
>
>Having an open, documented interface has value to the customer
>too. In programming terms, and interface is like a contract.
>Being able to read a contract you are accepting is worth something
>even if you don't plan any changes.
Agreed.
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corel Does Nothing To Help The Linux Cause
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 21:05:07 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 20:48:29 -0400, Colin R. Day wrote:
>
> >As do we all. But do you expect Davidson to port Reader Rabbit to Linux?
> >Or Mindscape to port Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing?
>
> Nope. But a third party could do it. Who would have expected Activision
> to port a D3d game ( HG2 ) to Linux ? But then it didn't matter because
> Lokisoft did it.
I'm not sure that there would be enough demand for such products
(as opposed to games) in Linux to justify a port.
>
>
> Companies are afraid of doing ports because they are worried about how
> much it might cost, but if someone like Lokisoft comes along and says
> "we can port it for $(X)", it's a much less risky proposition.
>
Perhaps, but I haven't heard of that kind of educational software being
ported.
>
> >Getting applications and users is a chicken-or-egg problem, and
> >Wine is one way to attack it.
>
> Not a very good way though.
>
At present, no. But what about the long term?
>
> --
> Donovan
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2000 01:11:58 GMT
On 29 Jun 2000 18:24:25 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
wrote in comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
>On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:44:42 GMT, John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Ditto mine. Funny that when you have a G3. ;-) MS have always
>> follwed Apple's successes. In fact MS always follow anyone's success.
>> That's why they are successful themselves - they wait and see what
>> others do then copy or buy it. I figure they are hoping GPL loses in
>> court sometime so they can start MS/Linux. (That was a gratuitous
>> troll).
>
>Even if the GPL was struck down in court, I doubt it would be in such a
>way that people could do whatever they want with 'former GPL' code.
>Instead, everyone would likely just lose the right to use the code at
>all.
>
>Yes, I do know it was a jokey troll, but the whole "The GPL is/isn't
>valid" thing will have rather large effects should it get to court. If
>it is upheld by the court, people will have much sharper teeth to bite
>violaters. I doubt it will be completely struck down, since it is a
>distribution license rather than a usage license. People may use GPLed
>software however they like, but code under the GPL must be distributed
>under the terms of the GPL.
If it gets struck down it will be the part that requires people to
enforce the license when transferring their code. All that means is
you will have to get it direct from the copyright holder, but could
cause problems in larger projects.
Personally I hope it gets upheld - while I wouldn't like my code GPL'd
(prefer BSD) I can understand others who do.
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
