Linux-Advocacy Digest #882, Volume #27 Sat, 22 Jul 00 23:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why use Linux? ("Spud")
Re: Why use Linux? ("Spud")
Re: Hardware: ideal budget Linux box? (Re: I'm Ready! I'm ready! I'm ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Why use Linux? ("Spud")
Re: Linux ap't vs. Micorosoft (was: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apts (was: If
Micr (Paul E. Larson)
Re: Windows98 ("Spud")
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Leninist USEFUL IDIOT denies reality, attempts a smear campaign ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why use Linux?
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 18:37:07 -0700
[snips]
"sandrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >So which is it? Was the blanket statement about Windows simply wrong?
> > >Or are all the companies and individuals who have, in fact, had
> > >Windows boxes up longer than a month simply lying? All of them?
> >
> > This is one reason I originally kept using the term "Linux", instead of
> > qualifying it by "Linux with KDE" etc. So much nonsense has been written
> > about Windows (which one, eh?) I saw no reason not to.
> >
> > Incidentally, the server is still up, running Windows 98 SE.
> >
> > --
> > Pete Goodwin
> >
> Yea right, lose98 won`t run over 49.5 days as per microsnot.
Don't know about this mythical "lose98" or "microsnot", but Windows 95 and
98, according to Microsoft, did indeed have a related problem; after 49.7
days of continued operation, the machine would hang. Note that fixes are
available for the affected platforms, so it's not really an issue here.
I note, with some amusement, the implications of this. "Microsoft has a
bug! It's bad" - the implication being that some comparable system - eg
Linux - has *no* bugs. I'd be very surprised indeed to discover that Linux,
it all its glory, contains not one, single bug anywhere. Or perhaps the
author is suggesting that Linux, unlike Windows, magically fixes bugs
without the need to ever install patches or updates? Again, I'd be very
surprised.
Yes, Windows 95 and 98 - and even 2K - out of the box have bugs. Last I
heard, so does Linux. And BeOS, and MacOS, and...
So what's your point?
------------------------------
From: "Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why use Linux?
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 18:49:15 -0700
[snips]
"Oldayz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> First of all, let me make sure that I understand the point you stated:
> Win9x may not be god of stability but for the things it was meant for
> it's sufficiently stable.
Not quite; what I'm saying is, it was really intended as a single-user
desktop system, where crashes were at best annoying, not fatal... so it was
designed more for ease-of-use than stability. In those environments, is it
stable enough? Yes. In more critical environments, such as an office, is
it stable enough? Possibly not - but then, why are you running it in that
environment anyway?
> I beg to differ. Here's a story: I run linux/win95 dual boot for about
> a year. 99% of time I'm in linux, but sometimes I would go to win95 and
> play a game or two. It crashes sometimes but it's not a huge deal.
>
> Now, a few days ago I went to a friend of mine who wanted me to explain
> her some web design things. She has one of those e-machines, pII-350ish,
> 128megs of ram, win98. I went there and I used: IE, homesite, dreamweaver,
> photoshop5.5. In a matter of a few hours it crashed ~5 times. One time it
was
> IE, other PS5.5, and the rest I don't remember. I lost all work a few
times
> too. I was _shocked_. My impression before that was that win98 is quite
> a bit slower and bigger but stabler and has more drivers and stuff, but
> it seems that it's ridiculously unstable. My guess is that people in
> general don't multitask much (especially fat programs like photoshop and
> homesite, dreamweaver) and use IE only by itself and use autosave feature
> all the time (if a said program has it).
Again, depends on the use. We have a Win9x box we run a server off... but
the server's only purpose in life is to host a webcam. The box is also used
for games, minor web maintenance, e-mail, and other light-duty stuff.
We also have a Win2K box. Guess which box we run the heavy server off, the
server that actually makes us some money? Guess which box we use to
maintain >1Gb of web content?
Again, let me reiterate; if you're doing typical _home_ use things -
maintaining your 10 page web site, writing letters, doing home accounting,
etc - then the occasional crash isn't a big deal; at most it's annoying,
you're not losing any data likely to cause you financial hardship. If
you're working on sensitive data, anything that will cause you such
hardship, then you're using the wrong tool for the job.
> That's not acceptable. If everyone had a dualboot system to start with,
> linux/kde|gnome and win98, do you really see people using win98?
Absolutely; if nothing else, as a games platform.
> One more story from my work: I had to come over to a coworker's system to
> go to some website and show her something. I looked for Netscape but she
> didn't have it. I started IE and went to the site. Crash. It was NT so IE
> crashed alone and I simply had to restart it. Go to that site again,
Crash!
Yeah, I've run across a couple of sites like that.
Note a couple of thngs here, though...
1) The discussion was about Windows 98.
2) Now you're discussing IE and NT.
3) The main issue with Windows 98 was stability.
4) NT didn't crash when IE went down.
Ahh, notice anything? I do. NT didn't crash. This tells me she was using
the _right_ tool for the job. She's in an office environment, so she's
running NT, where IE crashing doesn't also bring down her other apps and
documents. Again, right in line with what I was saying.
Do, please, keep up with such stories - they just help prove my point.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. 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: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 21:53:26 -0400
Bloody Viking wrote:
>
> Aaron Kulkis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : Maybe the test equipment didn't have sufficient airflow THROUGH
> : the case, and/or around the CPU (ribbon cables dangling right around
> : the CPU can cause overheating problems).
>
> Without sufficient cooling, a CPU will not merely slow down but plain STOP
> instead. I've had it happen with a K-6 and earlier with the Commodore 64.
Duh. He was talking about unexplained crashes.
>
> Overheating will stop a CPU dead in the water. Plain and simple. Do you have a
> clock speed throttle (a potentiometer to control a voltage controlled
> oscillator) on your computer or what? Sure would be funny to have a computer
> with what looks like an aeroplane throttle to control speed so as the room
> gets colder you can rev it up.
voltage controlled oscillator connected to a temp senser
WOULD be neat-o idea.
>
> The CPU speed is determined by the clock oscillator. If the CPU overheats,
> something will have to slow the clock or it will lock up, much like a car
> engine will seize upon severe overheating. (like loss of coolant) If your
> computer has a heat sensor on the CPU and it is hooked to a voltage controlled
> oscillator for the clock, then excess heat will slow down a CPU. Otherwise it
> will either run or lock up until cooled back off. Obviosly, you don't know any
> mechanical engineering and have no expierence with overheating CPUs.
I first dealt with overheating CPU's in 1980. Apple ][+ was
notorious for overheating the 6502 after several hours of continous use.
We found that taking the top off helped things somewhat.
>
> --
> DANGER: Charles Darwin is the lifeguard of the gene pool. Swim at own risk.
--
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: "Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why use Linux?
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 19:01:23 -0700
[snips]
"Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Spud wrote:
> But should a bad app be able to take down the system? I have had
> Netscape crash in Linux, but Linux keeps right on going.
In an ideal world, nothing short of CPU failure should bring down the
system. Microsoft does offer platforms which prevent applications bringing
down the OS; if that's a criteria for your decision to use an OS, why are
you using one of the OSen which _doesn't_ offer that?
"Gee, I need a car that offers me some protection against my being totally
mangled during crashes. This one has air bags, crumple zones and several
other related features. That other one doesn't. I'll take the second one.
Hey, why doesn't this car have the safety features I wanted?"
> > However, time goes on, people _did_ want a stable version of Windows,
> > so they got it; it's called NT. Barring very unusual situations,
> > usually bad drivers or faulty hardware, NT is reasonably stable;
> > enough so that many organizations do use it as their primary or even
> > sole server platform.
> >
> > Comparing Win9x to Linux is absurd; they weren't designed to the same
> > criteria, for the same market, or with the same goals.
>
> Was Win9x designed for anything besides lining Microsoft's pockets?
Absolutely. As an easy-to-use, friendly home-user platform. Compare NT4
and 98; which one plays most games? It ain't NT; it was intended for use in
environments where stability, not playtime, was the key feature. 98 went
the other way. Picking 98 and then complaining it lacks the stability one
needs is silly; if you needed the stability, why didn't you pick NT?
The usual answer is one of two: 1) It doesn't play the games or 2) It costs
more. Both of these show that stability was _not_ the feature sought after;
in one case it was entertainment value, in the other, it was purchase cost.
Fine, those are reasonable bases for making decisions... but if you use them
and decide not to get the more stable platform, don't whine about it not
being stable; you had the choice, you chose not to go that way.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul E. Larson)
Subject: Re: Linux ap't vs. Micorosoft (was: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apts
(was: If Micr
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 02:19:55 GMT
http://www.englishtown.com/default.asp?etag=GOG1X3
http://www.m-w.com/
Use them then post again!
------------------------------
From: "Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 19:25:50 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2000 11:04:26 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >One: never install to C: if you have ANY other partitions
available.
> >When windows dies (and IT WILL), you aren't stuck with having to do
> >ALL of your re-installs all at once .... some of the apps will work
> >if you, say, make a habit of always installing to E:\apps\whatever.
>
> Don't these apps still need to be reinstalled if something happens
> to the Registry?
Depends. In general, if Windows dies - which can happen; I had a
server keel over and die last night, actually... thanks to a faulty
drive. Arrgh! - you probably will have to reinstall your apps. One
of the nice things about MSI, Microsoft's new installer technology, is
that it makes the process ridiculously easy and quick - especially for
clients - and more so when managed by a 2K network.
Example: I drop a bomb on a client PC. Oops. Drop a new client PC
in, with Win2K Pro (or even Win98+2K client tools) installed - which I
can do from a drive image in a matter of a few minutes. Log onto the
server and voila! There's your desktop, just the way you left it.
With your applications ready to use.
In some cases (depending on the application and how it was configured)
on initially running the application there may be a short delay while
things that must run locally are copied over, but usually this is only
a minute or two, and only happens once for a given application.
All told, the process of removing the old machine, dropping in a new
machine and getting the user back to work should be readily
accomplised in under an hour, if you've spent a little time up front
setting things up properly. For that matter, you can reduce that,
too; if you've done the frontwork, your user can move to another
workstation, log on, and get back to work - using their own settings
and suchlike - in a matter of minutes, leaving you to finish the
machine replacement.
In a home-user environment, it's not quite that simple. Then again,
in a home-user environment, it's also not usually that critical.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 22:27:30 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Fri, 21 Jul 2000 22:36:01 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> >
>
> >I'll admit that goto has a purpose..
> >
> >but the original case in point was some C code PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT
> >which had something like 5 goto's in 30 lines.
> >
> >I.e. junior-high programming technique.. IN THE LoseDOS KERNAL!!!!!
>
> what gets me is that a lot of the C bigots blame the ( lack of ) quality
> of MS's code on C++; it never occurs to them that "bad programming" or
> "bad design" might have something to do with it.
>
Very true.
All programmers should learn Pascal...and then, once they have learned
the discipline needed to write in Pascal, NEVER promptly ditch Pascal,
but not the discipline.
> --
> Donovan
--
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 R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Leninist USEFUL IDIOT denies reality, attempts a smear campaign
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 22:37:30 -0400
Loren Petrich wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >LENIN'S USEFUL IDIOT wrote:
>
> >> Nobody else seems to agree with you except for the residents of
> >Spot Loren't insideous habit of mounting a smear campaign against
> >his opponents when he can't debate on rational grounds.
>
> I have tried to reason with you on this issue, Mr. Kulkis, and it
> is you who have been unreasonable.
Let's see...who is more credible:
A: A person who sits back and gobbles up the propaganda, like yourself
or
B: A person who does the research, and visits places himself, like me
>
> >> certain groves of birch trees. A special kind of birch trees, of course :-)
> >And nobody thought Hitler was going to attack all of Europe.
> >So, like, what's your point?
>
> The birch trees I have in mind are John Birch trees :-)
Demonstrating once again that you admit that you are unable to
even compete in this argument without resorting to slander.
>
> True, Adolf Hitler's empire-building was difficult to predict,
> but so was the collapse of Eastern European Communism. Yes, *collapse*.
> And *completely* losing Germany.
>
> >> >You really have no understanding of people who put the goals of
> >> >"The Party" above all else, do you?
> >> From a grove of birch trees it came...
> >LENIN'S USEFUL IDIOT engages in more smear tactics...
>
> However, letting the Ukraine and Belarus go free does not do much
> for the Soviet Communist cause. Russia may be able to bully the former
> Soviet republics of the Caucasus and Central Asia, and also the Baltic
> states. However, the Ukraine and Belarus are tougher nuts to crack.
Belorus is TIGHTLY allied with Russia, and they have been negotiating
UNIFICATIONS.
My sources are Russia Today: http://www.russiatoday.com
and the St. Petersburg Times http://www.sptimes.ru
>
> >> >By the way, where do you think PhoneyFuck Gorbechev is getting all
> >> >of his money from??? Considering that the man doesn't work, how is
> >> >he able to afford a midtown Manhatten apartment??????
> >> He delivers speeches, and collects big fees. He is to be
> >> congratulated for so gracefully ending the Soviet Union's Eastern
> >> European empire.
> >Collect big fees from who? College kids who can barely afford pizza?
> >Not hardly...it's being funneled to him by communit university
> >administrators.
>
> Communist university administrators? Mr. Kulkis, you've been
> living in groves of birch trees for too long.
Demonstrating once again that you admit that you are unable to
even compete in this argument without resorting to slander.
Explain why they impose Leftist speech codes on our campuses.
Explain why speakers who doesn't toe the party-line of political
correctness are hounded off of campuses, and yet when a left-wing
speaker experiences ANY sort of criticism, the critics are hounded
off the campus.
>
> >> Absurd. They'd prefer someone with better credentials, someone
> >> like Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Mr. Gorbachev is *not* highly regarded in
> >> Russia, since he had been unable to reverse its decline. He is much more
> >> highly regarded abroad, and the reason is that different people notice
> >> different things about him.
> >He's the front man for unilateral disarmament.
>
> ROTFL.
>
> But what can you expect from someone whose vision has been
> obstructed by birch trees?
Again, Loren's only tactic is a smear campaign.
>
> --
> Lenin's USEFUL IDIOT #346,562 Happiness is a fast Macintosh
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
> My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
--
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 R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came...
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 22:39:26 -0400
Loren Petrich wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >LENIN'S USEFUL IDIOT wrote:
>
> >> Nobody else seems to agree with you except for the residents of
> >Spot Loren't insideous habit of mounting a smear campaign against
> >his opponents when he can't debate on rational grounds.
>
> I have tried to reason with you on this issue, Mr. Kulkis, and it
> is you who have been unreasonable.
>
> >> certain groves of birch trees. A special kind of birch trees, of course :-)
> >And nobody thought Hitler was going to attack all of Europe.
> >So, like, what's your point?
>
> The birch trees I have in mind are John Birch trees :-)
Are you implying that there is a birchy-man hiding under our collective
beds?
You write like a conspiracy theorist.
>
> True, Adolf Hitler's empire-building was difficult to predict,
> but so was the collapse of Eastern European Communism. Yes, *collapse*.
> And *completely* losing Germany.
>
> >> >You really have no understanding of people who put the goals of
> >> >"The Party" above all else, do you?
> >> From a grove of birch trees it came...
> >LENIN'S USEFUL IDIOT engages in more smear tactics...
>
> However, letting the Ukraine and Belarus go free does not do much
> for the Soviet Communist cause. Russia may be able to bully the former
> Soviet republics of the Caucasus and Central Asia, and also the Baltic
> states. However, the Ukraine and Belarus are tougher nuts to crack.
>
> >> >By the way, where do you think PhoneyFuck Gorbechev is getting all
> >> >of his money from??? Considering that the man doesn't work, how is
> >> >he able to afford a midtown Manhatten apartment??????
> >> He delivers speeches, and collects big fees. He is to be
> >> congratulated for so gracefully ending the Soviet Union's Eastern
> >> European empire.
> >Collect big fees from who? College kids who can barely afford pizza?
> >Not hardly...it's being funneled to him by communit university
> >administrators.
>
> Communist university administrators? Mr. Kulkis, you've been
> living in groves of birch trees for too long.
Are you implying that there is a birchy-man hiding under our collective
beds?
You write like a conspiracy theorist.
>
> >> Absurd. They'd prefer someone with better credentials, someone
> >> like Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Mr. Gorbachev is *not* highly regarded in
> >> Russia, since he had been unable to reverse its decline. He is much more
> >> highly regarded abroad, and the reason is that different people notice
> >> different things about him.
> >He's the front man for unilateral disarmament.
>
> ROTFL.
>
> But what can you expect from someone whose vision has been
> obstructed by birch trees?
Are you implying that there is a birchy-man hiding under our collective
beds?
You write like a conspiracy theorist.
> --
> Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
> My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
--
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 R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 22:43:07 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>
> >> [...]
> >> >Gates and his crew are pathalogical criminals, and should be locked
> >> >up, hanging by their toenails.
> >>
> >> You are *not* good for my attitude, Aaron.
> >
> >Can I interest you in a sniper-grade AR-15....accurate to 1,000 yards...
>
> Goddammit! Stop that!
How about crocadiles!?!?
Remember that scene from "Live and Let Die" ???
--
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
******************************
