Linux-Advocacy Digest #552, Volume #27 Sun, 9 Jul 00 17:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451719.328^-.00000000000006 (tholenbot)
Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux ("Wouter Verhelst")
Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon? (abraxas)
Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Where did all my windows go? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What happens when all the bit twiddlers are gone? (DeAnn Iwan)
Re: What happens when all the bit twiddlers are gone? (DeAnn Iwan)
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451719.328^-.00000000000006 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK (Mig)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Hyman Rosen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 14:03:04 -0500
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
>
> Calling me a "habitual liar" is a bit combatitive, is it not?
>
I wasn't calling you a habitual liar. I was saying that if you are one
of those that goes out of thier way to say false information to try to
prove how great Windows is (which, in some cases you seem to tread the
border on) then you would be a habitual liar. I was implying that you
are treading that line very carefully at the moment. Niether falling
off, nor finding the solid ground. An interesting tactic, and one that
can easily result in the person you are interacting with losing there
cool and blowing thier top. I am trying to avoid this at this point.
> I'm saying "Linux lags behind Windows" because in a lot of areas, it does.
> Now, I believe, the number areas Linux lags behind Windows is greater than
> the number of areas Windows lags behind Windows, so that's how I justify my
> statement.
>
If you had said this before, I probably wouldnt' be this deeply involved
in this discusion. What you have stated here is an opinion, based on
your observations. I truly believe that anyone is entitled to thier
opinions, no matter how much they differ from mine. Just don't try
stating an opinion as a "well known fact", that borders again on
lieing. Perhaps, for you this statement is completely true. But, for
me it is completely false (my opinion). Some people in here have real
difficulty accepting that opinions can be different amongst different
people, which leads to the usual breakdown we see. If this is your
opinion, great. Mine is the oposite. Who is right, neither of us. I'm
right for me, but completely wrong if I try to apply my opinion to your
situation. You are right for you, but completely wrong in my
situation. Stalemate? Probably, as opinions can lead to heated
debates, but no one is going to change their mind unless it can truly be
proven to them that there is a better way of thinking. I try to remain
open to other ideas, but I have found over the years that Windows just
doesn't work for me. It works for countless friends of mine, and that's
great. I help them out when they run into little difficulties here and
there, and I truly do not berate them for using Windows. I get Windows
running for them again, and leave them to their computing. Windows
works for them, Linux works for me, and nobody really tells the other
they are wrong. I would say over the next few years computing will open
up more and alternatives to what is now considered the "norm" will be
more easily accepted. I hope I am right about that, but only time will
tell.
> I hope you will call me an idiot because then I can say "look, he resorts
> to insults again".
This is kind of the attitude I'm sensing in a lot of your writing. You
tend to come across as someone that is coming to COLA just looking for a
fight. Still, I find the discussion more interesting if each side tries
to keep thier cool. This also comes across as another interesting
statement in the fact that you sometimes seem to think that all of the
people supporting Linux are one single entity. Charlie tells you
something and then you say that "Linux people" think whatever thing
Charlie has said. I personally feel Charlie is a bigger problem for
Linux than someone like Simon/Steve/whatever or Tim Palmer. He uses
lies to promote his beliefs, which is no better than what they do for
the Windows team.
> However, you haven't, you have remained polite and an
> interesting discussion is proceeding.
I would agree.
> I have a combative attitute towards anyone who calls me a complete idiot,
> or moron, or shithead, or uses the expression WinDoze, or LoseDOS or
> whatever.
>
> Incidentally, if someone posts incorrect facts about Linux, does it make
> sense to attack? Why not politely point out the errors, you might get a
> more reasonable response, rather than the shouting matches that go on.
I try to politely point out the errors first. Not everyone in here
agrees on that, but the first time someone posts an erroneous statement,
I point out the error politely. If they acknowledge it and move on, I
have no problem with that (that's how we all learn). But, the
four-hundreth time someone says the same lie (Linux only supports
postscript printers comes to mind) I will become extremely combative. I
get sick of seeing lies said over and over again. If it is a new
person, I will be polite, but if it is someone like
Steve/Simon/whatever, I will be combative. BTW, I am also combative
with Charlie at times. I tend to try to promote interesting and factual
discussion on both sides of the Windows/Linux issue. If I see someone
lieing for the Linux side, I will point out their error as quickly as I
would point out a Windows advocate's errors.
>
> Windows NT had support on Alpha and RISC, but it died out. Why? Simply
> because no one was writing any applications for them. A great OS on a
> platform is dead without application developers writing for it (a fate that
> overtook Acorn's Archimedes and Alpha NT).
>
> Where are most of the games writers, the application writers et al - on
> Windows - well, not including the games writers for the consoles. Even
> Oracle has a database on Windows NT.
>
> I stopped qualifying my statements when it became clear nobody else was
> going to qualify theirs. I still see Windows being used when the writer
> really means Windows 98 or Windows 2000. I still see statements like Linux
> is three times faster than Windows whereas in fact it really is Linux in
> three times faster than Windows 2000 in one specific benchmark.
>
See, I don't agree with the tactic of stooping to your rival's tactics.
You do point out errors in Linux advocates statements, why not find your
errors and correct them. The less chance you give a rival to find an
error in your statements, the more of a chance you will have of comming
across in a positive way. Isn't this your ultimate goal (as it should
be for everyone in here)? Also, some of the things you bring up are
errors made repeatedly by the same people. Why not use my tactic and be
combative with the ones that are mistaken, rather than taking it out on
the entire group with your "I'm not going to qualify my statements
because ........ doesn't qualify his" attitude. Qualify your statements
and you will interest more of the people interested in actual
discussions. At least, in my opinion you would.
> I would say, in general, Linux < Windows. In hardware support
Once again, this is arguable unless you say "on the x86 platform. At
the moment Windows is an x86 platform, and the biggest in hardware
support on that platform. When you start talking all platforms, this
point could be argued either way (depending on how far back you want to
talk about WinNT 4.0 on Alpha an PPC could be brought into the
discussion). This is one of those gray areas that I would say could
never be fully qualified in either sides favor.
> in the area
> of desktops, in the variety of applications available for it... the list is
> endless.
This is another area where I would say as long as you are talking about
common consumer desktops and applications, you are probably right. But,
you start talking big business and things get a little more
interesting. Another area where it would never truly be proven right on
either side of the fence.
>
> Linux seems to be gaining in the server market, I also note there are loads
> of Apache web servers out there, rather than IIS.
>
> I also note the perception of the desktop machine is seen to be Intel based
> machine with Windows, with possibly Macintosh next. Linux is not even
> mentioned.
In actuallity I believe that there is some discussion that Linux is
evenly matched in desktop deployments with Macintosh (factoring in all
sectors). In total (including servers and all deployments) Linux may be
ahead of Macs at the moment. I would say it's more even if you are just
talking about desktop consumer market share between the two though.
>
> Pete
I'm kind of curious, as you seem to be one of the few Windows oriented
people to come in here not automatically assuming any Linux user is an
idiot, what your opinions are on some of the other OSes available. Have
you tried any other operating systems on your desktop? If so, which
ones, and what did you think of them?
I've tried FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, BeOS and Macs on the desktop and
personally feel that BeOS was probably the best (from just an operating
system standpoint) of any operating system out there for desktop use.
It has some great features. Of course, as you said previously, without
application support the best dies (as BeOS is currently doing, sad to
say).
Anyway, just curious.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451719.328^-.00000000000006
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 15:24:12 -0400
Consistent with Dave Tholen's recent justification for not replying to
my tag line:
> Irrelevant, Eric. That tag line did not appear in my follow-up.
I am not replying to the rest of his post, because it does not appear in
my follow-up.
--
Prove that African swallows are non-migratory, if you think you can.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Date: 9 Jul 2000 19:24:59 GMT
On 9 Jul 2000 19:05:04 GMT, abraxas wrote:
>Yet part of good security practice is knowing exactly whats nessesary,
>and a PPP connection will hardly attract too terribly many 31337 h@x0rz,
>looking for places from which to flood, dump warez, and various and sundry
>other bandwidth-intensive activities.
You;'d be surprised (-; It's not unusual for kiddies to go after
dialup boxen. If nothing else, you can always use the dialup machine
to launch attacks on other machines and let the owner of the cracked
machine take the fall.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 20:49:31 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Sun, 09 Jul 2000 09:47:27 -0700...
...and Bob Lyday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Programs allegedly not available for Linux]
> > > Um, Yahoo Messenger. Um, ICQ. LOL.
> >
> > Nope. ICQ and Yahoo compatible agents are available.
>
> The Yahoo Messenger is Java Messenger, which sucks. The ICQ is Java
> ICQ, which I know nothing about except that it is not updated much and
> lacks a number of features in the regular version.
Nonsense. We've got dozens of non-official Linux clients for ICQ, Yahoo
Messaging, AIM and such. Some of them are better than their official
counterparts.
You should try GnomeICU one day.
mawa
--
Only the Objectivists have an answer to all our problems, and it's
wrong. -- Hans Huettel
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 19:42:34 GMT
If the lack of a *few* drivers is all that is considered, then W2K lags
behind Win95! Just another silly unthought out troll....
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote:
> Let me see what does Linux not support on my system...
>
> 1. Even though Linux detects my USB ZIP 250 drive, it does not work.
>
> 2. Linux notices my scanner (HP 4200C USB) it leaves it alone; no
drivers.
>
> 3. I switched to a Voodoo 5 5500 card; Linux has no drivers for this.
Even
> though the card is Voodoo 3 compatible, the driver refuses to
install.
>
> So now I have a console only Linux system. End of evaluation.
>
> Windows support all of these products as there are drivers available
for
> them.
>
> Pete
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Wouter Verhelst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.best,alt.linux.sucks,be.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 19:59:05 GMT
"Matthias Warkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in bericht
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[M$ Software for Linux -- of course, if the subject is right ;-]
> The FrontPage extension module for Apache implements FrontPage
> extensions, but that doesn't mean that it has been written by the same
> people who have written FrontPage. (Hint: That module is *not*
> Microsoft software AFAIK.)
You're (almost) right there, except that these FP Extensions were written
under contract for Microsoft.
If a TV Station sends out a TV program made by a TV Producing company that
is not the same company as the TV Station itself, we will still blame the TV
Station if the program sucks.
Because they distribute it.
If M$ is distributing software, one can hold them reliable for what they
distribute -- whether they wrote it or not.
It is also not true that the bug cannot be found unless someone digs into
the code. A knowledge of Un*x systems and the description of the internal
workage of the program suffices to find the bug (everything you need to know
about it is explained on a site that contains no more than about 5-10
printed pages)
--
Greetings,
Wouter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 20:01:23 GMT
And what is the probobility that you are making it all up?
With all due respect you haven't provided one shred of evidence other
than the ability to read an ip address from a post.
How can we be sure it even happened at all?
I could for example read your ip address from the post I am following
up on now and scream all over the place that I was getting hacked from
that ip address.
If it is that serious an issue for you I suggest you contact
Earthlink.
You will however have to provide them with more evidence other than
your word.
My guess is that you are just making the entire issue up, unless
someone else if spoofing my ip address. I don't know, but I doubt that
is the case.
DP
I told you it wasn't me because 1. I don't know how to do it.
2. I have no reason to do it.
On Sun, 9 Jul 2000 11:18:26 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What is the probability of all that comming together the way it did with a
>disinterested third party performing the scan? The probability is very low,
>low enough the I was willing to propose the possibility in public of
>Simon777's involvement. I did ask it as a question since it was not a 100%
>cetain but 99.44% is close enough to question the possibility. What's more,
>if I had a valid email address for Simon or whatever his name is, at the
>time of the original posting, I would have handled this incident through
>email instead of through COLA. However, the games that Simon777 has been
>playing have prevented that. Now of course we know that his email address
>is now mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>> Not terribly good, but not all that bad either. You havent got a leg
>> to stand on, and your apparant network security skills are only hurting
>> your case.
>
>In which way are my skills hurting me?
>
>> Quite possible. I think you are a paranoid loon.
>
>No, you have your facts wrong again! I am not a loon, I am human. My
>species is homo sapien sapien. I have ten finger with which I use this
>keyboard. If I were a loon my digits would be imbedded into my wings and
>not available for typing.
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Date: 9 Jul 2000 20:06:47 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9 Jul 2000 19:05:04 GMT, abraxas wrote:
>
>>Yet part of good security practice is knowing exactly whats nessesary,
>>and a PPP connection will hardly attract too terribly many 31337 h@x0rz,
>>looking for places from which to flood, dump warez, and various and sundry
>>other bandwidth-intensive activities.
>
> You;'d be surprised (-; It's not unusual for kiddies to go after
> dialup boxen. If nothing else, you can always use the dialup machine
> to launch attacks on other machines and let the owner of the cracked
> machine take the fall.
>
In the "biz", the only time ive seen script kiddies take dialup machines
is for anonymization layering (my term); yet another hop between them
and their target...
And most prefer wingates...
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 20:07:27 GMT
I run ZoneAlarm on my box and the logs don't show anything unusal at
that time. I suppose my ip could have been spoofed as I was on for
most of the day, but I doubt it.
I think he is making the entire tale up.
I get scanned all the time as well as other goings on. That program is
a real eye opener.
DP
On 9 Jul 2000 19:24:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
wrote:
>On 9 Jul 2000 19:05:04 GMT, abraxas wrote:
>
>>Yet part of good security practice is knowing exactly whats nessesary,
>>and a PPP connection will hardly attract too terribly many 31337 h@x0rz,
>>looking for places from which to flood, dump warez, and various and sundry
>>other bandwidth-intensive activities.
>
>You;'d be surprised (-; It's not unusual for kiddies to go after
>dialup boxen. If nothing else, you can always use the dialup machine
>to launch attacks on other machines and let the owner of the cracked
>machine take the fall.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go?
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 20:04:52 GMT
Nothing new said! Still can not justify calling ALL of linux bad because
of ONE application exiting without an error message! Not only that KFM
is a FILE MANAGER NOT a full featured browser! KFM was never advertised
as a full blown browser and the fact that it crashes on some pages is no
surprise! Never mind that KDE (thus KFM) is NOT a Linux specific
desktop! KDE is written to be used on *ALL* Unix and linux. I have seen
the same error that peter was whining about when KFM is run on Solaris.
THis kinda points to a KFM (APPLICATION)specific bug that has NOTHING to
do with Linux.
Any claim that KDE is critical to Linux having a GUI and thus it's OK to
claim that KDE is part of Linux is just plain silly. Linux and Unix have
a variatiy of desktops to choose from. If a *desktop* is not stable,
CHANGE IT! (you can do this without changing the kernel).
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 01:18:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> [ snip ]
>
> I know the advantages of having "choice". That is indeed largely why I
use
> Linux.
>
> However, none of the "choices" comprehensively address usability
issues. And
> that is precisely the problem. If the user has certain functionality
> requirements, and none of the choices meet those requirements,
"choice" doesn't
> help them much. If most choices don't, then it's still problematic,
because the
> user has to spend ages reading drivel like "if only you used Debian
GNU/Linux,
> you'd be so much happier" before they find something that works.
>
> ><snip a bunch of drivel from someone who does not know the difference
> >between a kernel and an interface>
>
> When you have no argument, you can always resort to insults, huh ?
>
> I know the difference perfectly well.
>
> The fact that I'm not a zealot doesn't make me ignorant. I've
contributed
> to the Linux community, and my contributions speak for themselves. I
don't
> need to justify myself with a loud mouth because I'm more than that.
>
> --
> Donovan
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (DeAnn Iwan)
Subject: Re: What happens when all the bit twiddlers are gone?
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 20:27:00 GMT
On Sun, 09 Jul 2000 00:58:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I suspect most in this group have grown up with PC's and all too well
>remember the days of Qemm, Desqview, Qaulitus (sp?) Norton (when it
>was great), PCTools, hacking BIOS code, changing the refresh bit to
>gain a couple of clock cycles and God help us all the miserable Copy
>Protection schemes used by Microprose on F-19 (I might have the wrong
>plane here).
>
>How about the Copy II PC board that did hardware based bit for bit
>copies?
>....
>My point is that these type of people who have been weaned on gui are
>not going to accept cli.
>
>...
Nowadays, computers are powerful enough to offer the best of both
worlds. You can still get a CLUI when you need one---scripts, batch
files, use of "powertools" like AWK, Perl. And you can get a GUI with
an ICON to click to dump you into a word processor with a WYSIWYG
interface. What is upsetting is a GUI without a CLUI. :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (DeAnn Iwan)
Subject: Re: What happens when all the bit twiddlers are gone?
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 20:37:00 GMT
On Sun, 09 Jul 2000 07:34:43 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
....
>So, when people like me retire and move on, everything will be written
>in Java, perl, whatever, and no one will be willing to do the drivers
>and core libraries, all the stuff that makes programs fast and really
>usable.
>
>
I suspect the rush to high level tools (Java instead of C,
for example) are part of the rush to save time and get things out
fast. The same sort of arguement was made for programming in high
level tools like C and fortran instead of assembler. Yes, you can be
more precise and optimized in assembler than in C and in C than in
Java. But it takes longer. Sometimes longer is worth the better.
Often it is not (especially if you want to get paid next month!).
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451719.328^-.00000000000006
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 20:55:01 GMT
Eric Bennett writes:
> Consistent with Dave Tholen's recent justification for not replying to
> my tag line:
>> Irrelevant, Eric. That tag line did not appear in my follow-up.
> I am not replying to the rest of his post, because it does not appear in
> my follow-up.
Illogical, given that the rest of my post was not a tag line, Eric.
Surely you can find a better way to bow out of a discussion than to
demonstrate illogic.
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 22:59:07 +0200
Darren Winsper wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Jul 2000 09:24:46 +0400, Ferdinand V. Mendoza
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Folks, watch out. Dress 10 is Baaaacccckkkkkkhhhhhh!
>
> That's not such a bad thing. Drestin us capable of bringing up valid
> points, even if he is a tad biased (And let's face it, who here
> isn't?).
Give an example :-)
Better one.. give an example of Drestin demonstrating any kind of technical
insight that has nothing to do with names of software/hardware or does not
come from MS marketing department (scay though that press releases are used
by Drestin that way).
Cheers and good luck to you
------------------------------
From: Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 09 Jul 2000 17:07:03 -0400
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "In the US, anyone may start a newspaper" is a separate statement from
> "in the US, anyone can start a newspaper" and the practical difference
> is all-important. One gives lip service to liberty, one is evidence of
> a democratic access to capital.
"Democratic" access to capital sounds an awful lot like people voting
to take for themselves capital that is owned by others. Fortunately,
that is for the most part impermissible in the US. In the US anyone
_can_ start a newspaper. In the beginning, that newspaper will be
printed on your inkjet printer at home, and run off at the copy shop.
That's only fair - what possible justification is there for forcing
anyone else to spend their money on your newspaper?
> Because the people who control the media did not achieve their
> position through popularity, but through capitalization.
Nonsense. Achieving popularity opens access to capital. Access to
capital then helps generate more media products, but that alone is
far from a guarantor of success.
> It definitely sounds to me as if you're successfully wriggling out
> from under any sensible refutation of your contentless argument
> using deception and insinuation, as well as purposefully insulting
> and frustrating phrasing and statements.
I don't think I'm doing that, but you may believe what you wish.
In any business, media or not, someone without initial access to
capital must work his way up from the bottom, undertaking small
projects and growing based upon the success of those. Generally
speaking, there is no conspiracy of elites attempting to suppress
newcomers, especially in the media business which is starved for
exploitable talent.
Someone with initial access to capital has the opportunity to
start higher up, but popular success is still essential - one
can blow enormous amounts of capital on expensive failures.
And no, having such access to capital is not unfair. It simply
means that the owner of that capital has decide to use it as he
sees fit, which is his right as owner.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
