Linux-Advocacy Digest #583, Volume #27 Tue, 11 Jul 00 02:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Drestin Black")
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Drestin Black")
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Drestin Black")
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Drestin Black")
Re: Why use Linux? (Paul E. Larson)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Drestin Black")
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Drestin Black")
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Drestin Black")
Re: I had a reality check today :( (Tim Palmer)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (Tim Palmer)
Re: A cute linux song (Tim Palmer)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Drestin Black")
Re: Why use Linux? (Paul E. Larson)
Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: To Pete Goodwin: How Linux saved my lunch today! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:27:57 -0500
"Nathaniel Jay Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > I've always maintained what is obvious: Netcraft JUST counts domains and
> > doesn't discriminate between a linux/apache domain of "joesmomma.com" vs
> > W2K/IIS for dell.com - to Netcraft, they mean the same. So, all this
Apache
> > dominates the web is for those that think PURE number counts mean
> > EVERYTHING. Bullshit I say. Someone finally proved it out for me.
> >
> > The companies that matter, those top companies, you know, money making
ones?
> > Companies that are concerned about their image, product, availability,
> > uptime, performance and all that matters cause their name/image on-line
> > matters - they are NOT using apache and MOST DEFINATLEY not using Linux!
> >
> > +===+===+===
> >
> > http://www.entmag.com/displayarticle.asp?searchresult=1&ID=6150095626AM
> >
> > "The dominant position of Microsoft's proprietary IIS in the Fortune 500
> > makes Windows NT a lock for the most used operating system undergirding
the
> > Web servers -- 43 percent. "
> >
> > == and ==
> >
> > http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=2817
> >
> > "According to ENT's survey of Fortune 500 companies and their Web sites,
IIS
> > is the most commonly used Web server, with 41% of the market. In second
> > place is Netscape/iPlanet with 35%. And the supposedly dominant Apache
> > brings up the rear with only 15% of Fortune 500 deployments. Thanks to
the
> > success of IIS, Windows NT/2000 is also the most commonly used operating
> > system on Fortune 500 Web sites: NT is used on 43% of such sites. Sun
> > Microsystems Solaris comes in second with 36%. But the real surprise for
> > those people that religiously follow the Netcraft surveys is that Linux
> > "falls into the noise level," according to ENT, with only 10 companies
in
> > the Fortune 500 using the upstart open source OS to deploy their
production
> > sites. Even IBM AIX and HP/UX have 15 deployments each, and BSD/OS tops
> > Linux with 14. "
>
> Yep, and I'm going to assume that this is done via some magnificent
> survey that does one of two things.
OBVIOUSLY you did not read the articles. How was this done? ENT used
Netcrafts' own "What is running" web feature!
>
> 1) Only asks extremely high up "officials" in Fortune 500 IT departments
> which don't actually have anything to do with the production machines.
> I've seen this happen even in small companies. The IT manager will say
> "We run NT on everything" because they don't realize that there are even
> alternatives available, yet the staff has implemented Linux or BSD to
> actually run the production servers and no one has noticed.
Wrong and you have nothing to support such stupid ideas. An IT manager that
doesn't know what his staff is running on his boxes? Maybe at your company,
not mine.
>
> 2) Only ask companies that are known Windows supporters. This could
> even be done via an on-line query. Line it up to only query the
> companies you want and your all set.
Again, you did NOT read the article and see that they performed their own
independent test by using Netcrafts own tool.
>
>
> Of course, none of this really means that NT is better or worse. It is
> very rare that BIG BUSINESS companies adopt something that isn't firmly
> entrenched. NT/Windows is firmly entrenched (at the moment) and is
> therefore less "risky" from a business standpoint. However, smaller
> businesses that are a little more willing to take a "risk" find out that
> deploying alternatives (like Linux and FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD) is not
> only up-front cost effective, but also more of a solid system in the
> long run.
excuses. excuses...
>
> So, even if this "poll" isn't rigged, pure numbers mean very little
> about technical performance.
I'll remember that next time someone mentions specweb, "pure numbers mean
very little"
<snip>
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:34:54 -0500
ENT used Netcraft's own What is it running engine to query the Fortune 500 -
ironic in a way eh?
"Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:_upa5.3256$by4.1138@client...
>
> "Nathaniel Jay Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Yep, and I'm going to assume that this is done via some magnificent
> > survey that does one of two things.
> >
> I would suspect it was done by querying the web servers at tithe Fortune
500
> companies concerned, it's not hard to do. If you question the results it
> would be easy to try and disprove them.
>
>
> --
> Nik Simpson
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:35:13 -0500
"Nathaniel Jay Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Nik Simpson wrote:
> >
> > "Nathaniel Jay Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Yep, and I'm going to assume that this is done via some magnificent
> > > survey that does one of two things.
> > >
> > I would suspect it was done by querying the web servers at tithe Fortune
500
> > companies concerned, it's not hard to do. If you question the results it
> > would be easy to try and disprove them.
> >
> > --
> > Nik Simpson
>
>
> Well, if you read my post you would see <snip blah blah>
Funny you would take Nik to task for not reading your post when YOU did not
read the ORIGINAL articles before choosing to critisize and charge them with
fraud! How shallow...
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:35:23 -0500
"Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > I've always maintained what is obvious: Netcraft JUST counts domains and
> > doesn't discriminate between a linux/apache domain of "joesmomma.com" vs
> > W2K/IIS for dell.com - to Netcraft, they mean the same. So, all this
Apache
> > dominates the web is for those that think PURE number counts mean
> > EVERYTHING. Bullshit I say. Someone finally proved it out for me.
> >
> > The companies that matter, those top companies, you know, money making
ones?
> > Companies that are concerned about their image, product, availability,
> > uptime, performance and all that matters cause their name/image on-line
> > matters - they are NOT using apache and MOST DEFINATLEY not using Linux!
> >
>
> You're kidding, right?
>
> For 5 of the last 6 years, I have worked on Fortune 50 and a stock
> brokerage. NONE of them puts webservers on LoseDOS Neutered Technology.
Care to name it (them)? And, so what, so for 5 of the last 6 years you
worked in A company that's a fortune 50 company and it doesn't use NT - so
what? Check yourself, do your own netcraft What is it running tests and see
who's lying/wrong? I mean, every company I've worked at for the last 8 years
runs NT without exception - guess using your logic that means I should
conclude that NONE of them puts webservers on free (you get what you pay
for) apache? silly...
only 5/6 years? A fortune 50 and a stock brokerage? Is this supposed to
impress me? I've installed at over 40 of the fortune 500 - ever single one
NT 4 and now W2K. We push the unix boxes out faster than we can deliver new
ones (fortunately it takes fewer new W2K boxes to replace the unix clunkers)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul E. Larson)
Subject: Re: Why use Linux?
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 05:34:33 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bobby D. Bryant"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Paul E. Larson" wrote:
>
>> 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?
>
>It tells me that:
>
>a) your employer doesn't need 7x24 uptime, or
The system is available 24 x 7, except for 4 - 5 hours/week for backups and
reorgs of the disks, but it is rarely used more than 18 x 5.
>b) your employer should be running something more reliable, or
The system is one of the most reliable in existance. The OS is also one of the
most reliable except for the need to a repair program on the dump file that
requires the system to be brought down.
>c) your employer should replace his/her IT staff.
>
Nope, manufacturer's requirements.
Paul
--
"Mr. Rusk you not wearing your tie."
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:37:05 -0500
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 10 Jul 2000 11:12:30 -0500, Drestin Black
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I've always maintained what is obvious: Netcraft JUST counts domains and
> >doesn't discriminate between a linux/apache domain of "joesmomma.com" vs
> >W2K/IIS for dell.com - to Netcraft, they mean the same.
>
> Once more proving that Apache excels at virtual hosting while IIS does
> not.
>
Oh no, that does not logically follow. It may SUGGEST that apache is more
commonly used for bulk hosting but not that apache is better. Remember, when
you wanna make money by hosting a few hundred/thousand tiny sites on a
single box, you wanna also make that box as cheap as possible. A T1, BSD and
Apache and you are an "ISP" - gosh golly - and all 300 "hosts" count on
Netcraft - yipee - those apache numbers sure do impress now! yipee!!
>
> >The companies that matter, those top companies, you know, money making
> >ones?
>
> You mean the high-profile ones that MS helps set up for the publicity
> value?
I love it, as soon as someone shows a company running MS products the
automatic assumption of the linux appologist is that MS probably paid them
to take their products for free and then paid magazine writers to use
Netcraft to determine and publish those results. Even if the article isnt'
100% pro MS. Yea... right... and I've got some swamp land in Florida for ya
too. Interested in another bridge to go with your brooklyn one?
Get with it - these high profile companies have the money and smarts to pick
ANYTHING they want, no matter what MS might wanna sell them. Sun is beating
down their doors, as is HP and IBM and they wanna sell their MUCH higher
profit unix solutions. And they picked MS....
>
>
> >"According to ENT's survey of Fortune 500 companies and their Web
> >sites, IIS is the most commonly used Web server, with 41% of the market.
>
> Oooh, how impartial.
a fact is a fact, no matter who reports it. If you can disprove the fact,
then do so. Otherwise you are just spueing sour grapes.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:40:24 -0500
"Arthur Frain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > I've always maintained what is obvious: Netcraft JUST counts domains and
> > doesn't discriminate between a linux/apache domain of "joesmomma.com" vs
> > W2K/IIS for dell.com - to Netcraft, they mean the same. So, all this
Apache
> > dominates the web is for those that think PURE number counts mean
> > EVERYTHING. Bullshit I say. Someone finally proved it out for me.
>
> > The companies that matter, those top companies, you know, money making
ones?
> > Companies that are concerned about their image, product, availability,
> > uptime, performance and all that matters cause their name/image on-line
> > matters - they are NOT using apache and MOST DEFINATLEY not using Linux!
>
> > +===+===+===
>
> > http://www.entmag.com/displayarticle.asp?searchresult=1&ID=6150095626AM
>
> > "The dominant position of Microsoft's proprietary IIS in the Fortune 500
> > makes Windows NT a lock for the most used operating system undergirding
the
> > Web servers -- 43 percent. "
>
> [snip]
>
> I just knew Drestin or some other Wintroll would jump
> on this the minute I saw it on slashdot. I think it
> brings up several interesting points.
>
> 1. Although Drestin regularly critcizes slashdot for
> its Linux bias, slashdot has obviously been the source
> of links for his last few anti-Linux posts. I get a
> good laugh out of that.
"Linux bias"? There aren't enough letters in those two words to describe the
pure masterabatory worship of linux that slashdot has. Slashdot posted this
bit of old news (I read the original article a week ago and didn't bother
mentioning it, it was not at all suprising to me, I've known this for years
as many of my clients are in that circle). But, hey, why not read slashdot,
it's nice to know how the other 1/18th thinks...
>
<snip>
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:42:19 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8kdc0h$7ki$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> WOW! 2 biased magazine articles! typical Drestin. Never an impatial
> source!
>
Argue the facts - disprove the numbers - THEN you'll have something. The
ultimate source of ALL of this data is Netcraft. The same netcraft you shout
about for apache numbers - same place. So, if you believe there are lies
here, disprove them or do you mean to suggest that you now believe Netcraft
is not impartial and lying? wow...
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: 11 Jul 2000 01:36:30 -0500
On 8 Jul 2000 07:20:33 GMT, Ray Chason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>On 6 Jul 2000 03:40:57 GMT, Ray Chason
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>It won't healp LIE-nux anny. Nobuddy want's to reed HOWTO after HOWTO after HOWTO.
>You alreddy have
>>>>users reeding TOO HOWTO's PLUS the ones they alreddy half toreed to get the rest
>of CommyLie-nux working.
>>>
>>>Can't you set up your Windoze-based newsreader so it doesn't spew these
>>>mile-long lines?
>>
>>Cant you make your Generly Not Usefall (GNU) CommyLie-nux crap to handall long lines
>propperly?
>
>1) My newsreader is of my own design and handles long lines just fine,
> thank you very much...
Proov my point again why do'nt you? In UNIX you half to rite your own programms, and
your another exampel.
>
>2) but others read news in university labs and such, using VT100 terminals
> with no GUI capability.
Today's universitty's have Windows. If all your universitty has are UNIX, then your
universitty is living in a cave.
>
>3) Then there are those who have to use large fonts just to read news at
> all. Some of them are even Windoze users.
>
>4) You could horizontally scroll but that's a PITA.
...only if you use SLRN. In Outlook its easie you just use scroalbar.
>
>5) Hence long-standing rules of netiquette call for lines to wrap in the
> low 70's.
>
>You piss and moan that Linux makes *you* work harder, yet you're perfectly
>willing to make *others* work harder to read your posts. Timmy-boy,
>you're not just a Wintroll. You're also a hypocrite.
That only half to work harder becase they use UNIX and UNIX make's them work
harder. Thats' my
hoal point. UNIX blows. Windo's is miles ahed of UNIX and you peopal are still
acting like UNIX was
stait-of-the-art.
>>>...which is why nearly every Linux newsreader has a decent killfile,
>>>unlike Lookout; why nearly every Linux newsreader honors user-
>>>supplied margins, unlike Lookout; why no self-respecting Linux mail
>>>client goes around spreading viruses, unlike Lookout....
>>>
>>>Oh, but Orifice does have that cute little paper clip. That paper clip
>>>must fascinate you, doesn't it, Timmy-boy?
>
>I see you couldn't address this point.
>
I dont see any point to adress.
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: 11 Jul 2000 01:38:22 -0500
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000 14:54:08 GMT, Jim Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Tue, 4 Jul 2000 11:10:02 GMT, Jim Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>Windo's is weal made.
>>>
>>>Good one Tim. You mean it makes you come out in a rash?
>>>You must admit, this troll does have his moments.
>>
>>I mean its made good, not like LIE-nux that is maid by commy's and
>>their all stoppid hippy's that cant' make a hole OS.
>
>Ah, a response from Tim Palmer. Does this mean I've arrived?
>I'd say that Windows was more of a "hole OS" than Linux. Linux
>holes tend to get plugged very quickly.
...but LIE-nux has more hoals to plug.
>
>jim
>--
>http://madeira.physiol.ucl.ac.uk/people/jim/
> "Revenge is an integral part of forgiving and forgetting" -The BOFH
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.networking,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A cute linux song
Date: 11 Jul 2000 01:40:14 -0500
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000 15:22:13 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Also schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>>
>> Well, he's coming from somewhere in AT&T, which owns the 12.x.x.x
>> domain. According to his nntp-posting-host, that is. It looks like
>> a dialup account. He's either pretty good at forging headers or he's
>> using Earthlink to read Usenet. I would guess the latter.
>
>Yes, this does concur with my own findings. I do believe that his is using
>Earthlink as his news server while he is connecting through AT&T World Net.
>The Path header on his postings seem to confirm that
>newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net was that news server that he posted to.
>The NNTP-Posting-Host header shows that was connected to the net through
>AT&T and his workstation or router had the ip address of 12.79.50.101 which
>corresponds to the host name of 101.new-york-20-25rs.ny.dial-access.att.net.
>Being connected through on ISP and posting through another ISP is not in and
>of itself wrong, but it can be suspicious. I sometimes have to do that
>myself, when my Mindspring's dialup servers are down, I have to connect
>through another ISP which Mindspring owns.
>
>What simon777 is doing wrong that I can not excuse is using a email address
>of [EMAIL PROTECTED] when that is not his account at Eathlink. Of
>course that is in keeping with his use of the X-No-Archive header to burn
>the evidence behind him.
>
>Using a valid appearing and yet invalid email address at Earthlink, can use
>up bandwidth and processor resources at Earthlink and other ISPs to handle
>attempts to delivers to this address and to handle the bounces. This would
>also consume the time of those writing the emails to him. If someone who
>knew nothing about Simon777's aactivities actually did establish an account
>at Earthlink with the name of simon777 they could be flooded with email
>addressed to their account that could be enough to overflow their mailbox.
>On a lark I checked to see if [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a valid email address and
>guess what? Nope it is not.
>
>If this simon777 want to not want to be flooded with the emal that his
>comments could attract, then he should use a obviously phony address like
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] That would be the decent and sensible thing
>to do.
>
>P.S. About your email address, [EMAIL PROTECTED] , is that you way of saying,
>"email yourself"; or "Don't bother me! Tell it to your sysadmin."? ;-)
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:44:04 -0500
"Mathias Grimmberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip crap>
> IOW, totally useless for anything besides advocacy purposes. And of
> course showing it to PHBs.
>
>
> MGri
> --
> Mathias Grimmberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Eat flaming death, evil Micro$oft mongrels!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
gee, now this guy is sure an impartial observer eh? Yea, I'll listen to his
unbiased reviews....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul E. Larson)
Subject: Re: Why use Linux?
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 05:43:28 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 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.
You are close. The system dump file on IBM Mainframes need to be reorganized
every once and awhile or it will cause the system to crash. Hence, every 7
days we bring the mainframe down to what is basically a command prompt and run
the repair, then IPL(warm boot the system) and do a backup and reorganization
of the disks.
Paul
--
"Mr. Rusk you not wearing your tie."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 05:46:50 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 05:05:40 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >Bernie "sitting behind a 14.4k modem line" Meyer
>> 14.4k? Ouch!!!!
>> I thought I was doing bad a 28.8k...
I can do 28.8k, too. Even 33.6 sometimes --- however, those connections
usually don't last for more than an hour, and often last just a few
seconds. In a pay-per-untimed-call scenario, I'll go with slow and steady
does it ;-)
>When I first got a 14.4K modem it felt sooo nice, but you were lucky to get
>a 9600K connection at that time. More often than not the other computers
>were limited to 2400 Kbaud.
I remember paying a *fortune* for my first 14.4k modem, back in 91 or 92.
The Zyxel had just hit the market.... But for downloading SLS, it was
way better than the old 2400. I wonder where that one ended up....
Bernie
--
Anybody that wants the presidency so much that he'll spend two years
organizing and campaigning for it is not to be trusted with the
office
David Broder
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: To Pete Goodwin: How Linux saved my lunch today!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 05:46:52 GMT
Aaron Ginn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>There is no way Windows could have done this. First of all, Linux
>would never render a computer unbootable because I reinstalled a
>driver.
I just ran into a bit of a problem, though. I finally took the plunge and
moved all my machines to the private IP ranges (away from someone else's
ranges that I had been using internally for, uhm, 7 years. Internally,
I stress --- nothing ever got out!). Of course, the process of rebooting
all the machines was kinda tough. Once the first one was rebooted, it
had a different idea what network that piece of cable at its back represented,
and thus didn't want to play with anyone trying to talk to the old address.
As a consequence, one of the machines didn't shut down cleanly. I made sure
the disks were synced, switched it off, rebooted. Everything went fine,
up to (and including) the "remount root fs as r/w". And then nothing.
Absolutely positively nothing. A real hang. Not even CTRL-ALT-DEL would
work, although the keyboard was still fully functional, and any typed
characters showed up on screen.
It turns out that the unclean shutdown had left the mtab lockfile
(/etc/mtab~) in place, and once the root fs is mounted r/w, subsequent
mount commands wnat to write to it. Unfortunately, they don't do
anything clever, just busy-loop waiting for the lock to disappear ---
which obviously it won't, seeing as the process that created it is long
dead and forgotten.
I also recently managed to make a machine temporarily unbootable by upgrading
the kernel (to 2.4test2 --- yes, I *am* testing it now ;-). Got the dreaded
LI1010101....
Reason being that I had hooked up my laptop drive to the machine as hda,
and was booting linux from hdc. Now, to boot into Windows (from the laptop
drive), I'd make hda visible to the BIOS, works. To boot into linux on hdc,
set the type of hda to "NONE", works. Linux ignores the BIOS settings, anyway,
so I could access the data on hda.
But when I reran LILO, it worked out that there were two disks, and the
data it was looking for was on the second, so it would tell the BIOS to go
for disk 0x81. Now, when booting into linux, the BIOS only sees one disk;
As soon as I make the second ("first") disk visible, Windows will boot
from that disk. Uh-oh!
Of course, a little reading ("Hey, in linux, you can usually tell programs
that they may be clever, but not as clever as they think, and make them
believe *you*") revealed the lilo option needed, and a Suse Live CD made
it a breeze to fix.
Of course, most of the above may be construed as "linux lagging behind
Windows" in some way. However, similar failure modes are anything but
uncommon under Windows (been there, done that). The only difference is
that quite often, there is little that can be done in the way of
analyzing and fixing the problem....
Bernie
P.S.: There *must* be something like strace/truss for Consumer Windows.
Surely there must! Any pointers?
--
Thomas --- Jefferson --- still surv--
John Adams
2nd President of the US
Last words, 4 July 1826
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
