Linux-Advocacy Digest #927, Volume #27 Mon, 24 Jul 00 22:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Steve)
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :( (Paul Bary)
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :( (Paul Bary)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :( (Steve)
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :( (Steve)
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :( (Steve)
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :( (Steve)
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :( (Steve)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Can we qualify the versions please!!! ("Spud")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:47:27 GMT
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:50:59 GMT, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>As far as ease of set-up the Linux solution and
>Windows solution are on different planets.
>
>I've been reading the Linux How-to's for the past
>day or 2 and I can't imagine anyone other than a
>Linux guru setting this stuff up.
ipchains -A forward -s 10.2.20.0/24 -j MASQ
The IP Masq howto is actually one of the more effective
one's out there. If you couldn't get through it then
the problem likely doesn't lie with it but elsewhere.
>
>The Windows solution?
>
>Windows 98SE:
IOW, it's only been available since 1999. Whereas I've been
using ip masquerading since 1996. While a nice bit of eye
candy in terms of an installation script or gui applet might
be nice: ugly and functional rather trumps merely pretty.
It's also meaningful to note that you can buy small dedicated
boxes to do this sort of thing as well for about $100 and not
needing to worry about depending on Win99 for your household
network connection.
>
>Control panel->Internet Connection Sharing
>->enable.
>
>Connect to the internet with the host computer
>(this is the step I missed) and insert a floppy.
>
>When it is done take the floppy to each computer
>on the network and execute the program.
>
>That's it.
>
>As for a firewall, ZoneAlarm works good and is
>free. Norton Firewall seems a lot nicer and is
Free or Crippleware?
[deletia]
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:49:29 GMT
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:52:24 -0700, Paul Bary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Steve...You think it's bad now...trust me, it has come a long
>way in the last year or so in so far a useability...go back more
>than 2 years and it was really ugly.
This is a facility who's usability hasn't changed much in 4
or 5 years. Mind you, this is the sort of thing that is really
just a matter of the commandline switches for a single utility
and understanding what a network address and netmask mean.
[deletia]
Although, there's probably even a utility that does IPMasquerade
of a limited, canned variety with the click of a switch. There's
really nothing limiting Unix interfaces in that regard.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:50:47 GMT
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:35:47 -0700, dakota
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Just installed Mandrake 7.1 with medium security
>>setting and install option of everything.
>>
>>Port 21 ftp WIDE OPEN.
>>
>>Port 23 telnet WIDE OPEN
>>
>>Port 110 pop3 WIDE OPEN
>>
>>Port 113 ident Wide open....
>>
>>Not to mention all of the other security holes due
>>to inetd running every service known to mankind.
>
>Are you an idiot??? Just because those ports are left open
>doesn't mean its a security risk. There are millions of servers
>out there that leave those ports open and suffer no ill side
>effects. Besides that, you can pipe everyone one of those
>services and more through an encrypted ssh session. Are you
>aware of those things called "firewalls" <snicker>?
Tell that to the poor fool who installs Linux out
of the box and selects medium security and ends up
with a wide open system.
You're the idiot for even asking.
>>
>>Windows 98 se with ICS installed closes all of
>>those ports and several are in stealth mode.
>
>Winshit 98 has a badly broken TCP/IP stack (not to mention the
>plethora of shutdown and APM problems) as does Windows 95/NT/Win
>2000. Nmap can detect them quickly and they are highly
>susceptible to DoS attacks. Try sending an oversized packet to
>Winshit 95, or try sending a malformed ICMP packet to any of the
>above and see what happens. Have you seen the lastest security
>bulletin from Meglasoft? It mentions a problem with Win2000's
>telnet server in which there is a DoS vulnerability but they
>play it down by giving the excuse that you can stop and restart
>the service. You see, the "Microsoft" version of security is
>very flawed and nearly non-existent, as evidenced by the many
>security bulletins they put out on a daily basis. All the
>stealth mode <I'm still laughing at this one> that Microsoft has
>to offer isn't going to protect you from denial of service
>attacks. Can MS products filter by Type of Service or Quality
>of Service, I don't think so. Can MS products do IP
>masquerading or filtering (ipchains in Linux), I don't think so.
Windows has those ports closed by default.
Linux does not.....
>>
>>No wonder the script kiddies seems to love
>>Linsux.....
>>
>
>They like it because its design is extremely flexible. The
>TCP/IP stack isn't flawed, either.
Sure it isn't. The ports are just wide open.
>
>>Typical newbie will install it with defaults and
>>be hacked within a couple of hours.
>>
>
>Linux is NOT meant for the typical winnewbie. It's meant for
>people that have a brain.
Or who want to spend their entire summer reading
how-to's related to security instead of
downloading ZoneAlarm_>clicking setup.exe and
sitting on the beach in East Hampton sipping
drinks with umbrella's in them and looking at half
naked women.
>
>>
>>BTW SuSE 6.4, Install Everything did somewhat
>>better in that only ports 80 and 113 were open.
>>
>
>Your webserver doesn't have to listen on port 80. Have you
>heard of a "proxy server"? Squid comes to mind for Unix, it's
>free and quite versatile. It can also act as an http
>accelerator. What has windows got, MS proxy server
>2.0<snicker>? ipchains can be effectively used to lock down the
>ident service on port 113.
Think deafult setup.
you are obviously a geek who knows these things.
The joker who buys Linux and runs default setup
(like I stated in my original post, but geeks
can't read) will not search this crap out. Nor
should he have to.
>
>>I only checked via www.grc.com which does not
>>check all ports.
>>
>>God only knows what else is wide open.....
>>
>
>Your PC experience, or lack thereof, is showing. All you have
>to do is a "netstat -a" command to see which ports are open
>and/or listening, by they way, you can also issue that command
>verbatim in a Windows dos box to achieve similar results. Or go
>get the source code for satan, santa, or nmap and compile it,
>that way you don't have to rely on a web-based port scanner, as
>an added bonus all of those have an optional GUI front-end and
>they are free. There are lots of security problems that reside
>above port 1024 (isn't that as high as grc goes?) take
>BackOrifice for instance.
Back to your sliderule geek.
You have proved my point with every line you
wrote.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>
>Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
>Up to 100 minutes free!
>http://www.keen.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:51:22 GMT
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:50:59 GMT, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am looking at them as we speak, and my steel
>scale (made by General Instruments BTW) shows 1
>and 1/4 inch thick of mostly out dated
>techno-babble. The assumption of prior experience
>is insulting and just the overall tone of the
>documents (ie:you might try this, or you can try
>that") is foolish. I want answers, cookbook
>instructions, not some hit or miss set of
>instructions that tries, and then fails to
>encompass all of Linux.
>
>I can't imagine anyone normal actually
>understanding this stuff.
You don't need to really.
You can just click the dialogs off and on to turn services off.
[deletia]
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Paul Bary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:42:35 -0700
Steve wrote:
>
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:52:24 -0700, Paul Bary
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Steve...You think it's bad now...trust me, it has come a long
> >way in the last year or so in so far a useability...go back more
> >than 2 years and it was really ugly.
>
> Believe me I know. I go back to some Slackware
> distro that was in a Sams book God knows how many
> years ago:)
>
> Linux has come a lot farther in the same number of
> years than Windows has.
>
> >I enjoy using Linux and have fussed with it on and off for several
> >years. I do find the blind spot that many advocates have about
> >useablity to be if anything, amusing. The Windows world, for all
> >its blemishes is still in a much more advanced state. This being said,
> >I'm sure I'll fail the "true believer" test, be branded a "troll", and
> >be told "well Linux isn't for everyone". Hang around here awhile and
> >you'll soon learn the chorus'.
>
> For those that have the knowledge or the time and
> patience Linux can be an excellent choice.
>
> Despite my sometimes rantings, Linux is a good
> system that just needs a little user friendliness
> incorporated in it.
>
> Steve
>
> >Paul
> >
> >Steve wrote:
> >>
> >> As far as ease of set-up the Linux solution and
> >> Windows solution are on different planets.
> >>
> >> I've been reading the Linux How-to's for the past
> >> day or 2 and I can't imagine anyone other than a
> >> Linux guru setting this stuff up.
> >>
> >> The Windows solution?
> >>
> >> Windows 98SE:
> >>
> >> Control panel->Internet Connection Sharing
> >> ->enable.
> >>
> >> Connect to the internet with the host computer
> >> (this is the step I missed) and insert a floppy.
> >>
> >> When it is done take the floppy to each computer
> >> on the network and execute the program.
> >>
> >> That's it.
> >>
> >> As for a firewall, ZoneAlarm works good and is
> >> free. Norton Firewall seems a lot nicer and is
> >> extremely user friendly. It comes set up already
> >> for Napster/Gnutella and other services that
> >> should be benign but you can customize everything
> >> very easily with the wizards, down to the port,
> >> domain and ip address IF YOU WANT TO. Point is you
> >> don't HAVE TO, it is set up already.
> >>
> >> Now in my particular case I screwed up having
> >> thought I un-installed my virus scanner and also
> >> not being connected to the net when I made the
> >> floppy. I have subsequently fixed those errors and
Look's like we jumped into the pool at the same time...I started with
the same book and distro. After investing several days trying to get
an old PAS16 sound card to work I said the hell with it <G>
You might be interested in a thread posted a little bit after this one
called "No wonder hackers like Linux". Check out the posting from
a person named Dakota for an example of the chorus I referred to. All
you need do is question that Linux in its current state isn't perfect
and you're guaranteed to be verbally assaulted and your intelligence
questioned. I paticularly like when the attacker can't dispute an
assertion, the bring out a laundry list of things they view as bad....
let's see..grass is green...reply, but Windows sucks because... (fill in
the blanks)
Oh well, I suppose it takes all kinds...
Paul
> >> things work fine.
> >>
> >> The Linux solution is most likely just as powerful
> >> but lacks in the ease of use department.
> >>
> >> Steve
> >>
> >> On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:18:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> (Bob Hauck) wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:31:44 -0600, Paul Bary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>yeah I know, I used a linux box as a nat router for awhile. I used
> >> >>pmfirewall as quite honestly, the amount of background work necessary
> >> >>for me to do it manually wasn't worth the effort
> >> >
> >> >What "background work"? I set mine up and it just runs. It does not
> >> >need any tending. Running no services on the box greatly reduces the
> >> >overhead of keeping up with security updates and the like.
> >
------------------------------
From: Paul Bary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:45:08 -0700
oops..I just noticed that the thread I referred to was started by
you so you no doubt are as incredulous as I am about Mr. D's
response...<G>
Paul
Paul Bary wrote:
>
> Steve wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:52:24 -0700, Paul Bary
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >Steve...You think it's bad now...trust me, it has come a long
> > >way in the last year or so in so far a useability...go back more
> > >than 2 years and it was really ugly.
> >
> > Believe me I know. I go back to some Slackware
> > distro that was in a Sams book God knows how many
> > years ago:)
> >
> > Linux has come a lot farther in the same number of
> > years than Windows has.
> >
> > >I enjoy using Linux and have fussed with it on and off for several
> > >years. I do find the blind spot that many advocates have about
> > >useablity to be if anything, amusing. The Windows world, for all
> > >its blemishes is still in a much more advanced state. This being said,
> > >I'm sure I'll fail the "true believer" test, be branded a "troll", and
> > >be told "well Linux isn't for everyone". Hang around here awhile and
> > >you'll soon learn the chorus'.
> >
> > For those that have the knowledge or the time and
> > patience Linux can be an excellent choice.
> >
> > Despite my sometimes rantings, Linux is a good
> > system that just needs a little user friendliness
> > incorporated in it.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > >Paul
> > >
> > >Steve wrote:
> > >>
> > >> As far as ease of set-up the Linux solution and
> > >> Windows solution are on different planets.
> > >>
> > >> I've been reading the Linux How-to's for the past
> > >> day or 2 and I can't imagine anyone other than a
> > >> Linux guru setting this stuff up.
> > >>
> > >> The Windows solution?
> > >>
> > >> Windows 98SE:
> > >>
> > >> Control panel->Internet Connection Sharing
> > >> ->enable.
> > >>
> > >> Connect to the internet with the host computer
> > >> (this is the step I missed) and insert a floppy.
> > >>
> > >> When it is done take the floppy to each computer
> > >> on the network and execute the program.
> > >>
> > >> That's it.
> > >>
> > >> As for a firewall, ZoneAlarm works good and is
> > >> free. Norton Firewall seems a lot nicer and is
> > >> extremely user friendly. It comes set up already
> > >> for Napster/Gnutella and other services that
> > >> should be benign but you can customize everything
> > >> very easily with the wizards, down to the port,
> > >> domain and ip address IF YOU WANT TO. Point is you
> > >> don't HAVE TO, it is set up already.
> > >>
> > >> Now in my particular case I screwed up having
> > >> thought I un-installed my virus scanner and also
> > >> not being connected to the net when I made the
> > >> floppy. I have subsequently fixed those errors and
> Look's like we jumped into the pool at the same time...I started with
> the same book and distro. After investing several days trying to get
> an old PAS16 sound card to work I said the hell with it <G>
>
> You might be interested in a thread posted a little bit after this one
> called "No wonder hackers like Linux". Check out the posting from
> a person named Dakota for an example of the chorus I referred to. All
> you need do is question that Linux in its current state isn't perfect
> and you're guaranteed to be verbally assaulted and your intelligence
> questioned. I paticularly like when the attacker can't dispute an
> assertion, the bring out a laundry list of things they view as bad....
> let's see..grass is green...reply, but Windows sucks because... (fill in
> the blanks)
>
> Oh well, I suppose it takes all kinds...
>
> Paul
> > >> things work fine.
> > >>
> > >> The Linux solution is most likely just as powerful
> > >> but lacks in the ease of use department.
> > >>
> > >> Steve
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:18:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> (Bob Hauck) wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:31:44 -0600, Paul Bary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >>yeah I know, I used a linux box as a nat router for awhile. I used
> > >> >>pmfirewall as quite honestly, the amount of background work necessary
> > >> >>for me to do it manually wasn't worth the effort
> > >> >
> > >> >What "background work"? I set mine up and it just runs. It does not
> > >> >need any tending. Running no services on the box greatly reduces the
> > >> >overhead of keeping up with security updates and the like.
> > >
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:53:28 -0400
Rich Teer wrote:
>
> > what kind of packages? Debian? But that is a version of Linux.
>
> Packages, as in software packages - a way of distributing software.
>
>
> > Otherwise, what package manager in UNIX had the features
> > of RPM?
>
> I don't all the features of RPM, so I don't know. But from what I
> understand, RPM doesn't give you anything that pkgadd and friends don't.
>
But was pkgadd open source? Could Red Hat have used it freely?
I have never heard of pkgadd, so I will some features of RPM.
RPM installs, upgrades, uninstalls, queries and verifies. It also
maintains a database to check for dependencies and conflicts.
It automatically updates /etc/ld.so.conf after installing/upgrading.
That's the basics.
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:56:41 GMT
And I didn't, and you did, mainly because I am
normal and you are not.
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:43:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bob Hauck) wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:50:59 GMT, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>I can't imagine anyone normal actually
>>understanding this stuff.
>
>I can't imagine _you_ understanding it, at least.
------------------------------
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:57:13 GMT
And how is one to know what services to turn off
or leave on?
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:51:22 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:50:59 GMT, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I am looking at them as we speak, and my steel
>>scale (made by General Instruments BTW) shows 1
>>and 1/4 inch thick of mostly out dated
>>techno-babble. The assumption of prior experience
>>is insulting and just the overall tone of the
>>documents (ie:you might try this, or you can try
>>that") is foolish. I want answers, cookbook
>>instructions, not some hit or miss set of
>>instructions that tries, and then fails to
>>encompass all of Linux.
>>
>>I can't imagine anyone normal actually
>>understanding this stuff.
>
> You don't need to really.
>
> You can just click the dialogs off and on to turn services off.
>
>[deletia]
------------------------------
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:57:47 GMT
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:43:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bob Hauck) wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 15:36:37 -0600, Paul Bary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:31:44 -0600, Paul Bary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>
>>> >yeah I know, I used a linux box as a nat router for awhile.
>
>>> What "background work"? I set mine up and it just runs.
>
>>Oh, for starters, reading through the howto which when printed out was a
>>stack of papers 'bout an inch thick...
>
>So you really meant to say "I tried to use...". That's a different
>thing than having to continually tweak it to keep it working. I mean,
>if you _did_ get it to work then all that "stuff" would be past tense
>and you would not gain anything by switching. But hey, if you'd rather
>use something else, that's fine too.
>
>Here's the short version of the HOWTO, btw:
>
>ipchains -A forward -s 192.168.1.0/24 -j MASQ
>for i in /lib/modules/2.2.16/ipv4/ip_masq_*.o; do insmod $i; done
I rest my case.
Another one for the Geek Hall Of Fame....
------------------------------
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:59:53 GMT
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:47:27 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:50:59 GMT, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>As far as ease of set-up the Linux solution and
>>Windows solution are on different planets.
>>
>>I've been reading the Linux How-to's for the past
>>day or 2 and I can't imagine anyone other than a
>>Linux guru setting this stuff up.
>
> ipchains -A forward -s 10.2.20.0/24 -j MASQ
>
> The IP Masq howto is actually one of the more effective
> one's out there. If you couldn't get through it then
> the problem likely doesn't lie with it but elsewhere.
It's like reading greek, or should I say Geek...
>>
>>The Windows solution?
>>
>>Windows 98SE:
>
> IOW, it's only been available since 1999. Whereas I've been
> using ip masquerading since 1996. While a nice bit of eye
> candy in terms of an installation script or gui applet might
> be nice: ugly and functional rather trumps merely pretty.
But it works. And I am talking present not 2 years
ago.
> It's also meaningful to note that you can buy small dedicated
> boxes to do this sort of thing as well for about $100 and not
> needing to worry about depending on Win99 for your household
> network connection.
$160 for a LinkSys unit and I believe it works
under Linux also.
>>
>>Control panel->Internet Connection Sharing
>>->enable.
>>
>>Connect to the internet with the host computer
>>(this is the step I missed) and insert a floppy.
>>
>>When it is done take the floppy to each computer
>>on the network and execute the program.
>>
>>That's it.
>>
>>As for a firewall, ZoneAlarm works good and is
>>free. Norton Firewall seems a lot nicer and is
>
> Free or Crippleware?
Absolutely free. No banners etc. (ZoneAlarm that
is, Norton is commercial, but better IMHO)
>[deletia]
------------------------------
From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 02:00:35 GMT
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:49:29 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:52:24 -0700, Paul Bary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Steve...You think it's bad now...trust me, it has come a long
>>way in the last year or so in so far a useability...go back more
>>than 2 years and it was really ugly.
>
> This is a facility who's usability hasn't changed much in 4
> or 5 years. Mind you, this is the sort of thing that is really
> just a matter of the commandline switches for a single utility
> and understanding what a network address and netmask mean.
Under Windows it's a matter of setup.exe and it
works.
No understanding of anything is needed.
>[deletia]
>
> Although, there's probably even a utility that does IPMasquerade
> of a limited, canned variety with the click of a switch. There's
> really nothing limiting Unix interfaces in that regard.
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:58:29 -0400
Rich Teer wrote:
> On 24 Jul 2000, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> > I guess proprietary Unix vendors have their own package "standards",
> > there are quite a lot of them.
>
> No - SVR4 compliant Unices have one packaging standard: pkgadd and friends.
And why does it require a specific packaging standard? Linux has at least
two package managers (dpkg and rpm), and one can also use tar.gz files.
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: "Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can we qualify the versions please!!!
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:05:15 -0700
[snips]
"Arthur Frain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Not quite; I mentioned a very specific and not usually used method
of
> > checking;
>
> You mentioned "examine" - I fail to see how that's
> "very specific and not usually used".
I said bring the machine up in Safe mode, to see what devices were
installed, and removing them there; safe mode tends to list all the
drivers and devices which have been configured, not just the current
ones.
> > > Why don't I find this surprising?
> >
> > You should; I don't snip to misquote; when I do snip, it's to
remove
> > the stuff I'm not responding to. In this case, it was the part
about
> > "I'd already checked that", since it wasn't relevant to the
question
> > being asked - namely did you check it a _specific way_?
>
> Which specific way is that? You haven't
> specified a specific way specificially,
> other than "examine".
Check back a few posts; yesterday, perhaps the day before. I did, in
fact, mention the details.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
