Linux-Advocacy Digest #574, Volume #27 Mon, 10 Jul 00 18:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: License? (abraxas)
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK (Mig)
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK (Mig)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Boot stops when trying to mount partitions. ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK (Mig)
M-systems DiskOnChip Linux Drivers conflict with GPL? (Richard Chapman)
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Re: Linux Hardware Compatibility Lists - Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Why use Linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Hardware: ideal budget Linux box? (Re: I'm Ready! I'm ready! I'm (Aaron
Kulkis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: License?
Date: 10 Jul 2000 21:32:07 GMT
darkstar51 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a Red Hat CD. Can I install it on company computers. Is there
> any License Agreement that I might violate? The Network Manager keeps
> swearing you have to have a license.
>
Your "network manager" is full of shit.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:34:44 +0200
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jul 2000 23:16:28 +0200, Mig wrote:
> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> >heard. And both groups are technical oriented people.
>
> A lot of peopple on the user lists are not very technical at all. They
> certainly don't exclude non-techies.
>
> >What KDE and GNOME needs is a group of nontechies that has some
> >demands that must be met and some kind of veto before a new version
> >is released.
>
> I don't think that's a good idea. non techies don't know very much about
> software design. What's really needed is a dialogue between non techies and
> techies.
Non techies not knowing much about software design is the point. Why should
they? The problem is in user interface design and consistency of that
design.
I find it pretty amazing that you do not believe that end-users should
have influence on software design. After all they should/could be the vast
majority of users.
Its even good practice to involve end-users in analyses and design of
applications.. simply put any good software design makes the software adapt
to its users needs and not the other way around. If the users are only
techies then there are no problems.... but if the intention is to have
average people to use Linux/KDE/Gnome/whatever then they have to be heard
if you want to have succes.
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:36:06 +0200
Matthias Warkus wrote:
> It was the Sun, 9 Jul 2000 23:16:28 +0200...
> ...and Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What KDE and GNOME needs is a group of nontechies that has some
> > demands that must be met and some kind of veto before a new version
> > is released. This is the only way to ensure end-user friendlyness and to
> > have other people like interfaceexperts and graphical artists to
> > participate in the developemnt. I dont think this is going to happen some
> > day soon
>
> It has already happened. You haven't heard of the GNOME UI Improvement
> Project, have you?
Nope.. but i will take a look. Its good to have end-user involvment in UI
related projects. Thanks for that info
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:32:13 -0400
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aaron Kulkis) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >so, what's your fucking point, moron?
>
> Ah the insults. Keep 'em coming. It serves to demonstrate the validity of
> my arguments. If you don't like what you hear, yell at the poster! Yes!
> That'll work!
write like a fucking moron, and I'll call you a fucking moron.
If you wish to be referred to by more..exemplary terms,
then improve your comprehension of the world.
Until then, don't complain about the terms that are used to
describe your behavior, when, in fact, those terms are accurate.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
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.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Boot stops when trying to mount partitions.
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 15:35:57 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> (I probably should not have
> changed mtab).
No, you shouldn't have.
> So I rebooted violently pressing the reboot button. Now
> it starts to boot up and stops after mounting root system. Then it does
> nothing. I cannot boot with a boot floppy disc because it has been
> damaged.
If it mounts the root system, you may be in like Flynn. Can you get a
virtual terminal? Can you boot from an installation CD? Can you boot
"linux 1" from LILO?
Good luck,
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:35:47 -0400
Steve Mading wrote:
>
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : What's my point?
>
> : Linux lags behind Windows,
>
> So can I assume from this statement that Windows for Sparc came out
> before Linux for Sparc, as an example? No? Didn't think so.
>
> : That's my point.
>
> : What's yours? If you can't even be civil about it, then just go away.
>
> We aren't being civil because you are making sweeping generalizations
> from your arguments. So far all the arguments you have given could
> only be used to support the statement "third-party hardware support
> for Linux on the Intel PC platform lags behind Windows". Remove any
> of those qualifiers and the statement can no longer be supported by
> your arguments. Generalizing it to just "Linux lags behind Windows"
> is going to piss people off because it ignores the fact that Windows
> can't do non-Intel archetectures. It also ignores the fact that
> hardware support isn't the only kind of way an OS can lag behind
> another. There are a good many ways Windows lags behind Linux that
> have nothing to do with hardware support - for example, Beowulf.
>
> If you'd stop making the sweeping generalization, I'd stop arguing
> the point (I can't speak for everyone else though). Just today
> I wasted a few hours trying to get someone's modem to work in
> Linux only to discover that it was a Winmodem. (Which it never
> said anywhere in the documentation - we need truth in advertising
> for computer hardware, but that's a seperate issue.) But anyway,
Maybe an interface definition should be REQUIRED, the same was as
the food industry is required to have content and nutrition labelling.
This would have the added bonus of making Gates' strategy of
hardware protocol Non-Disclosure Agreements a violation of
the Hardware Interface Disclosure law...
heh heh heh
> I know that hardware gets supported under Windows first. I blame
> the vendors though, not the Linux OS. Who's "fault" it is doesn't
> change the fact that the support does lag, though. On that point
> you are right, but stop drawing sweeping generalizations from it,
> and stop deluding yourself into thinking this is a reflection on
> the two OS's themselves - it is simply a side-effect of the size
> of their marketshares. There is no technical lack in Linux that
> causes this situation - it is purely an economical decision on the
> part of the hardware vendors.
>
> --
> -- ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
> Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
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.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:36:24 -0400
Steve Mading wrote:
>
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : What's my point?
>
> : Linux lags behind Windows,
>
> So can I assume from this statement that Windows for Sparc came out
> before Linux for Sparc, as an example? No? Didn't think so.
>
> : That's my point.
>
> : What's yours? If you can't even be civil about it, then just go away.
>
> We aren't being civil because you are making sweeping generalizations
> from your arguments. So far all the arguments you have given could
> only be used to support the statement "third-party hardware support
> for Linux on the Intel PC platform lags behind Windows". Remove any
> of those qualifiers and the statement can no longer be supported by
> your arguments. Generalizing it to just "Linux lags behind Windows"
> is going to piss people off because it ignores the fact that Windows
> can't do non-Intel archetectures. It also ignores the fact that
> hardware support isn't the only kind of way an OS can lag behind
> another. There are a good many ways Windows lags behind Linux that
> have nothing to do with hardware support - for example, Beowulf.
>
> If you'd stop making the sweeping generalization, I'd stop arguing
> the point (I can't speak for everyone else though). Just today
> I wasted a few hours trying to get someone's modem to work in
> Linux only to discover that it was a Winmodem. (Which it never
Tell me, did you "Win" with the winmodem?
A) Yes
B) No
If the answer is B, then it is a LOSEmodem.
> said anywhere in the documentation - we need truth in advertising
> for computer hardware, but that's a seperate issue.) But anyway,
> I know that hardware gets supported under Windows first. I blame
> the vendors though, not the Linux OS. Who's "fault" it is doesn't
> change the fact that the support does lag, though. On that point
> you are right, but stop drawing sweeping generalizations from it,
> and stop deluding yourself into thinking this is a reflection on
> the two OS's themselves - it is simply a side-effect of the size
> of their marketshares. There is no technical lack in Linux that
> causes this situation - it is purely an economical decision on the
> part of the hardware vendors.
>
> --
> -- ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Steven L. Mading at BioMagResBank (BMRB). UW-Madison
> Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
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.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:37:54 -0400
Face it Pete....
YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON!
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cihl) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >Kernel 2.4. Try the development kernels, i've heard good reports.
> >Something tells me, however, that you're not actually trying to get it
> >to work either.
>
> Oh dear...
>
> >You searched the Sane-webpage for a particular scanner Sane didn't
> >support yet. This is the one you chose, because it is a commonly used
> >one from a known brand.
>
> ...not true...
>
> >Your fault. You didn't check the HCL.
> >
> >Oh wait, i'll bet you don't even HAVE this card at all. You just
> >figured XFree86 wouldn't support this new one, so you chose this
> >particular card to troll here again.
>
> ...not true...
>
> >[Sigh]
> >*Windows* doesn't support hardware, *manufacturers* of hardware
> >support *Windows*.
>
> ...splitting hairs... and wait for it...
>
> >And another thing, Pete:
> >
> >Your BRAIN doesn't support INTELLIGENCE! COLA doesn't support your
> >PRESENCE! GO AWAY!
>
> The final resort of the feeble mind. If it doesn't agree with you, SHOUT
> YOUR FOUL MOUTH OF AT IT IN THE HOPE IT'LL GO AWAY.
>
> Reasoned discourse doesn't even get a look in here. I'm coming to expect
> this of certain Linux types here. But wait, I thought Cihl was one of the
> more reasonable types here. Boy am I disappointed.
>
> Pete
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
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.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:42:05 +0200
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> I don't think that will ever happen at all.
>
> What IS happening is that companies are forming QA teams to hammer on
> free software, and report wishes.
>
> Just look at the KDE bug database and look for "QA".
Thats not it. One thing is QA and another is implementing new ideas and
listening to its users. I do not believe that top-down control does it.. at
least if you want to have succes
> But veto? The day someone can veto software I write for free, is the day
> I open a nudie bar and declare computers anathema.
Fine.. but its about project politics. Lets say the KDE team agreed that
such a user team should be created (it has allready for graphic artists
with vetos) and that they should be as important as the devel teams. If
your software didnt meet the standards then it wouldnt be included in the
project. Simple and it would give you the oppurtunity og open a nudie bar
;-) (if its a good one with nice girls then count on me visiting it)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Chapman)
Subject: M-systems DiskOnChip Linux Drivers conflict with GPL?
Date: 10 Jul 2000 21:04:21 GMT
I hope someone can clarify this for me. Suppose I want to sell
a box with Linux and and M-systems DiskOnChip flash chip on it.
Suppose I want to use M-systems Linux drivers in that product.
Now, M-systems doesn't provide the full source code for their
Linux drivers, only a .o file for a big chunk of it. Now, I understand
that there is the "Linus exception" to GPL that says that device
drivers that are dynamically loadable as modules can be distributed
with Linux without the source code without violating the license
agreement for Linux. However, the M-systems driver appears not
to be a module, but statically built into the kernel. So, my question is,
are they in violation of the Linux or GPL license agreements?
If the answer to that is no, I perceive that I am not violating any
license agreements: M-systems, Linux's, or GPL, if I sell my box
described above. Correct?
Thanks,
Richard Chapman
Associate Professor
Computer Science and Software Engineering
Auburn University
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:44:09 GMT
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:34:44 +0200, Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Jul 2000 23:16:28 +0200, Mig wrote:
>> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> >heard. And both groups are technical oriented people.
>>
>> A lot of peopple on the user lists are not very technical at all. They
>> certainly don't exclude non-techies.
>>
>> >What KDE and GNOME needs is a group of nontechies that has some
>> >demands that must be met and some kind of veto before a new version
>> >is released.
>>
>> I don't think that's a good idea. non techies don't know very much about
>> software design. What's really needed is a dialogue between non techies and
>> techies.
>
>Non techies not knowing much about software design is the point. Why should
>they? The problem is in user interface design and consistency of that
>design.
They tend to ask for absurd things and then bitch and moan when
those of us with some technical aptitude in the subject in question
look at them as if they just got in from Mars.
>
>I find it pretty amazing that you do not believe that end-users should
>have influence on software design. After all they should/could be the vast
>majority of users.
Quite a few of them have no clue what it is that they really
want and are prone to repeating marketing babble. Also, quite
a few of them have remarkably different needs than even other
novice end users to the point where a general purpose machine
really isn't suitable for them no matter how much you try to
shoehorn them or the system to accomodate each other.
>Its even good practice to involve end-users in analyses and design of
>applications.. simply put any good software design makes the software adapt
>to its users needs and not the other way around. If the users are only
>techies then there are no problems.... but if the intention is to have
>average people to use Linux/KDE/Gnome/whatever then they have to be heard
>if you want to have succes.
>
IOW: one size does NOT fit all.
The ideal situation is an end user that has become enlightened
and knows what they want and is capable of expressing it in
reasonable engineering terms.
--
Free Software: While some whine that it is not really 'free',
others are freely exploiting it's potential to make them money
with or without releasing the source to their own software.
Naysayers are more their own enemy than potentially viral licences.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:45:59 GMT
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:36:24 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Steve Mading wrote:
>>
>> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>> If you'd stop making the sweeping generalization, I'd stop arguing
>> the point (I can't speak for everyone else though). Just today
>> I wasted a few hours trying to get someone's modem to work in
>> Linux only to discover that it was a Winmodem. (Which it never
>
>
>Tell me, did you "Win" with the winmodem?
>A) Yes
>B) No
>
>
>If the answer is B, then it is a LOSEmodem.
I think the term UNmodem works much better...
[deletia]
--
Free Software: While some whine that it is not really 'free',
others are freely exploiting it's potential to make them money
with or without releasing the source to their own software.
Naysayers are more their own enemy than potentially viral licences.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Hardware Compatibility Lists - Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:45:35 -0400
Ray Chason wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >The vast majority of people, unfortunately, buy or have bought
> >pre-loads which are notorious for including Win hardware to keep the
> >price low. Some models even have proprietary chasis which makes
> >substituting replacement hardware difficult.
>
> Proprietary chassis *cough*Compaq*cough* are a cut corner, Linux
> or no. If your floppy disk fails, would you rather replace it with
> the $30 model from Best Buy or the God-only-knows-how-expensive
> model that you have to mail order direct from Compaq and wait six
> weeks to get?
Back in 1994, the VAR where I worked at a daughterboard die on
a Leading Edge 80386 machine.
So, I called them up to find out how much a replacement would cost.
$400 for a damn 16MHz 80386 daughter board!
Instead, we decided to go elsewhere and purchase
1. A new chassis
2. An AT-standard off-the-shelf Pentium motherboard w/CPU
and saved about $150 in the process.
>
> >But MY devices also work on the iMac.
> >Not under Linux USB though.
>
> Patience. 2.4.0 is on its way, and the beta kernel has USB support.
> I found it prone to crash under heavy load, and so I've gone back
> to 2.2.16; but even that can be patched for USB. See
> http://www.linux-usb.org/ .
>
> What USB devices do you have?
>
> >What about the millions of folks who already have a system and want to
> >try Linux?
>
> A battle we probably can't win in the short term. Winmodems are
LOSEmodems
> especially thorny, given the unpublished interfaces and the patents
> on modem protocols. Winprinters are probably a different issue.
LOSEprinters.
>
> --
> --------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
> PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
> Delenda est Windoze
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
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.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why use Linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:48:38 GMT
That IS unusual. I work with AS/400's all the time (on the hardware
end) and they are extremely reliable. Very seldom do they crash and in
fact one of the biggest problems they do have is that they seem to
never be powered down. On an older AS/400 that has been powered up for
ages, powering it off can cause all kinds of problems like disk
stiction, power supply problems, blowers siezing and so forth.
Just goes to show that a crap programmer can bring any system to it's
knees.
DP
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 15:06:43 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Paul E. Larson" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan
>Rebbechi) wrote:
>> >On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 15:40:17 GMT, Paul E. Larson wrote:
>> >
>> >>To bad you and many others filto realize that uptime counts are virtually
>> >>meaningless! The main machine at my place of employment has a MAXIMUM up time
>> >>of 7 days. Every 7 days we IPL the machine regardless of anything. What does
>> >>that fact tell you?
>> >
>> >One of the following:
>> >(a) The admins enjoy rebooting for the hell of it
>> >(b) The machine requires regular reboots
>> >
>>
>> Neither.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> --
>>
>> "Mr. Rusk you not wearing your tie."
>
>
>I remember the last company I worked for was told by IBM that the AS/400
>we were running had such hacked up programs on it that we really should
>IPL every weekend and let the file-system be re-initialized (I don't
>know why, I wasn't the AS/400 expert, I just know that was the advice
>IBM gave us). I don't know if your place was told the same sort of
>thing or not, but I know what a pain that was if anyone wanted to work
>on the weekend. Of course, that machine was hacked every which way.
>The users wanted something, there was no testing or thought out
>response, just implement it and hope it doesn't break something else.
>It ran that way for years, just keep fiddling with it. That was a
>constant pain in the butt.
>
>It was the only AS/400 I've ever seen that would actually crash every
>once in a while. But it had been just completely hosed by the sloppy
>programming practices (know this from the guy that came in to try to
>"clean up" the code). It just goes to show you that even a fully stable
>platform can go to crap if you let some idiot program the hell out of
>things he shouldn't be touching.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: Hardware: ideal budget Linux box? (Re: I'm Ready! I'm ready! I'm
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:48:19 -0400
Laura Goodwin wrote:
>
> Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
> > > If this is Mandrake 7.1, run Drakconf, then click the big
> > > 'change X resolution' button. Hit 'cancel' from the first
> > > screen and you'll get a menu offering 'change monitor' among
> > > other things. If you pick 'Unlisted' you can enter your own
> > > numbers.
> >
> > Make sure you have your monitor's timing specs on hand when you do this.
>
> BTDT, but although Drakconf is cool and seems to work, and I can get my
> vid and resolutions OK, my problem child is my oddball Komodo monitor.
These things happen when you try to plug a lizard into the video port.
:-)
>
> --
> Laura Goodwin - Field Researcher for the Institute for the Very
> Seriously Scientific Study of Human Sexuality and Bar and
> Grill...*Specials Daily!*
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
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.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
