Linux-Advocacy Digest #56, Volume #28 Fri, 28 Jul 00 09:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. ("David Brown")
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Dale Lakes)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (John Sanders)
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel (mlw)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (mlw)
Re: Staroffice for linux Thai Version ("Anders Gulden Olstad")
Re: Speaking of Basic.... (John Sanders)
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... (John Sanders)
Re: Does VB and SQL work under linux? (Christopher Browne)
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. (Damien)
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one of
Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality (Clell A. Harmon)
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. (Damien)
Re: Slipping away into time. (Jonathan Fosburgh)
DMCA was(Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.) (Damien)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:09:43 +0200
T. Max Devlin wrote in message ...
>Said David Brown in alt.destroy.microsoft;
> [...]
>>I personally think Linux is competing fairly, but some people might well
be
>>of the opinion that giving away software is unfair.
>
>There are a very large and often vocal number of people who seem to
>think that profiteering is necessary for prosper. They base this, I
>think, on a simple assumption that the rise in aggregation of
>incorporate power is a *cause* of the current, though potentially
>dubious, conditions of prosperity which many believe to exist.
>
>The fact that this condition of prosperity is supposed to exist is
>because the 16 corporations which control 90% of the world's media
>report this to be the case. While occasional skeptics, or even cynics,
>or possibly liberals, point out that 80% of the growth in economy in the
>1980s rewarded the 10% of the population who were already most wealthy,
>and that for the "common man", the last twenty years have been an
>exciting time, but a fiscal deadwater. The average worker in the U.S.
>is far *less* able to access capital then they were in the earlier parts
>of the "Information Age".
If you want to get news from a more independant source, try
www.theregister.co.uk . They are British hacks (in the journalistic sense),
and given that they seem to offend just about everybody with their sarcastic
wit and openness with facts others would rather have hiden, I believe they
are neither sponsered by nor scared of any of your mega-corps.
Have a look at http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/12135.html . This is
a report of the G8 summit where it was decided that since the world's
poorest countries have such large debts, the richer countries should give
them computers and internet access so that they can buy more things from us
with money they don't have.
>
>No, giving away *anything*, even money, isn't "not fair" to anybody. As
>long as you aren't using it as a ruse for monopolization, restraint of
>trade, manipulative marketing, and profiteering.
>
>>But, since there have
>>been free systems around for longer than Linux has been popular, and they
>>are still around, and (in the case of FreeBSD) are more mature and stable
>>than Linux, there must be other reasons for Linux's popularity. Being
free
>>(both in terms of beer and speech) is a big help to counter MS's illegal
>>tactics, but it is not enough on its own. I am not asking for a list of
>>advantages - we all know what they are - I am just pointing out that Linux
>>has had to have a number of very significant benifits to be able to
compete
>>fairly with Windoze.
>
>Ooh, cool. Real anti-FUD. I guess the "interchangeable" nature of
>window managers would be top of the list. Lots of advanced details in
>those window managers, I hope, but I haven't had the opportunity to
>explore them, myself. I hope others can suggest a few.
>
I hope others can't suggest any others, at least not here and now - asking
for a list of Linux's advantages over Windoze is like going to a
pyromaniac's conference and asking for a light.
> [...]
>>BG believes he is acting morally - that is, he feels that he is doing the
>>right thing. But he also believes he is acting ethically - that is, he
>>feels that he is doing what society believes is the right thing (if I have
>>understood your definitions correctly). He must now admit that MS's
actions
>>have been judged illegal (although he still claims that in fact they are
>>innocent), but he does not see, and probably never will, that they are
>>considered unethical. The point is, even if he were to conceed to the DoJ
>>and accept the breakup, he would be acknowledging illegal activity, but
not
>>unethical activity and certainly not immoral activity.
>
>I concur. So the debate moves on, to "If BG wasn't there, could
>Microsoft be competitive?"
>
OK. Are the other top brass at MS as bad as BG? Steve Balmer is almost as
ambitious and ruthless, but is a lot more realistic and less insane than BG.
What does anybody else think?
> [...]
>>I see your point. Single-minded stubornness has its benifits, but I think
>>we can progress intellectually by persuing other lines.
>>
>>Try posting your Halloween stuff on a new thread for a new topic.
>
>Yea, I guess, I should, huh? But I just ain't the kind of person who
>can break continuity. I'd prefer if other's quoted a new thread header,
>actually.
>
I've noticed. Breaking up is hard to do, eh?
------------------------------
From: Dale Lakes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:20:10 GMT
==============168C0D0FA1FB0CA42835AC82
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Christopher Smith wrote:
>
> If you want to support a claim Win95 is poorly engineered, you either have
> to provide some examples of a "better engineered" product that provides the
> same services whilst operating under the same restrictions or, at the very
> least, give a credible explanation of how it could be done.
So you're saying that if I decide to build a bridge out of potato chips but the
first vehicle that drives over it plummets to oblivion, then it is still a good
bridge because it is within my design limitations?
That's madness.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Zealot | "The only intuitive user interface is
Linux Advocate | the nipple. Everything else is learned."
AIX Whore | --Bruce Ediger
--------------------------------------------------------------
==============168C0D0FA1FB0CA42835AC82
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Christopher Smith wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<br>If you want to support a claim Win95 is poorly engineered, you either
have
<br>to provide some examples of a "better engineered" product that provides
the
<br>same services whilst operating under the same restrictions or, at the
very
<br>least, give a credible explanation of how it could be done.</blockquote>
So you're saying that if I decide to build a bridge out of potato chips
but the first vehicle that drives over it plummets to oblivion, then it
is still a good bridge because it is within my design limitations?
<p>That's madness.
<br>
<pre>--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Zealot | "The only intuitive
user interface is
Linux Advocate | the
nipple. Everything else is learned."
AIX
Whore
| --Bruce
Ediger
--------------------------------------------------------------</pre>
</html>
==============168C0D0FA1FB0CA42835AC82==
------------------------------
From: John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 05:09:09 -0500
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> On 1 Jul 2000 04:06:11 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >: Steve Mading wrote:
> >True, I forgot that some of the things I take for granted in UNIX don't
> >exist on Windows, like the ability to map which key will be the interrupt
> >key, if you don't like ctrl-c for that.
>
> It work's for terminnals, but it does'nt work with X.
>
> >
> >--
> >-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
What's an xterm timie? Does an xterm run on X?
You know, your BS used to irritate me, but now I'm kinda glad to see
your posts. I think you are a shining example of the type of M$ zealot
that hangs out here. I think you represent the level of intelligence,
education and sophistication of that whole group.
--
John W. Sanders
===============
"there" in or at a place.
"their" of or relating to them.
"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 07:35:29 -0400
"Serge J.Luca" wrote:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/solutions/ecommerce/lycoscs.htm
While this is all well and good, it may explain why Lycos does not do
their own websearch. Lycos farms out its web search to AFAIK two
companies, one which uses Solaris, the other which uses FreeBSD.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
Nepotism proves the foolishness of at least two people.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 07:52:09 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said mlw in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
> >Actually, most high end DBMS systems circumvent the file system by
> >accessing the lowlevel block device directly. Also, they usually
> >allocate a huge amount of RAM and manage the memory internally.
>
> Pardon me, but I'm skeptical of your information. I'm not a programmer,
> and have little knowledge of low level block device direct access. But
> I am familiar with "high end DBMS systems", including Oracle, which I'd
> have to say is 'the stuff', at least in the industry today. And I think
> you're full of shit.
>
One of the first things a SQL admin does for performance is put the DB
on a raw device. Look at Oracle. MSSQL allocates one big contiguous
blob.
As for the memory management, that is harder to prove, you will just
need to use monitoring tools on your platform if you doubt me.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
Nepotism proves the foolishness of at least two people.
------------------------------
From: "Anders Gulden Olstad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Staroffice for linux Thai Version
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:34:51 +0200
Rabinder Srikijjaporn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Sir,
> Is there Staroffice for Linux Thai version?
> Regards
Huh, me?
Take a look at SUN's StarOffice web.
http://www.sun.com/staroffice
--
Sing While You May!
------------------------------
From: John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Speaking of Basic....
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 06:53:31 -0500
OSguy wrote:
>
> Anyone know where I can find the original Dartmouth Basic Specs? <and please
> don't tell me to look in the MS stuff....Dartmouth Basic existed before MS had
> an operating system>.
>
Please don't hold me responsible for you going off and doing this!
--
John W. Sanders
===============
"there" in or at a place.
"their" of or relating to them.
"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
From: John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 07:10:50 -0500
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:07:16 -0500, John Sanders wrote:
> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> >
> >> Exactly. This is precisely the one legit use of goto I've seen in high
> >> level code. For example, you use on error goto in basic as a way of
> >> handling exceptions.
> > Doesn't this reduce your interrupt to essentially a
> > polled interrupt? I mean, doesn't the "on error goto"
> > line have to be reached befor the interrupt is serviced?
>
> No, IIRC. You can make an on error goto statement at the start of
> your sub, and then if there's an error later on, it jumps. So
> it goes like this:
>
> on error goto foo
> ...
> rem doing this will cause a jump to label foo
> very-bad-thing-that-causes-an-error
>
> of course, all disclaimers regarding me not having touched that
> god forsaken language for over 10 years apply ...
>
> --
> Donovan
OK. I think I remember that. But this 'error goto' is used like when
you are getting ready to do some math, especially division, which might
generate an error. What about system interrupts? Let's say a DMA
channel interrupt or a hardware device interrupt. Are those handled by
BASIC in any way?
--
John W. Sanders
===============
"there" in or at a place.
"their" of or relating to them.
"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Does VB and SQL work under linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:22:59 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when David M. Cook would say:
>On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:36:19 GMT, YAWN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>i am thinking of putting Linux on my laptop (32MB RAM, P200, 2.0GB),
>>and i am wondering if i can run Visual Basics and SQL in Linux. the
>
>I was sure I saw a Gnu project to do a VB clone somewhere (kinda nutty,
>huh).
There are at least 3-4 distinct implementations of VB "clones."
None of which are likely to interoperate with VB ".ocx" files, nor
with ActiveX controls, nor with MS Office ("Visual BASIC for Office
Applications") or other such, so there's likely little point in
comparing apples with oranges. The "value" of VB is in that it
allows building GUI apps that may integrate with MS Access; the
UNIX-based BASICs don't do that.
>But right now, no, you can't run VB natively on Linux. And you're right,
>32MB is not enough memory for vmware.
>
>There are many SQL databases for Linux. Postgresql is a reasonably complete
>implementation. However, if you mean *Microsoft* SQL in particular, the
>answer is no.
Whatever "Microsoft SQL" means. Presumably that means "some language
that they _call_ SQL, but which is pretty deviant from the ANSI
standards." Alternatively it might mean "Either FoxBase, Access, or
Microsoft's version of Sybase SQL Server."
>If you're interested in programming in general, you'll find Linux a good
>learning environment.
More language implementations, available freely, than you can shake
a stick at; more programming tools too.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/>
"sic transit discus mundi"
-- From the System Administrator's Guide, by Lars Wirzenius
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: 28 Jul 2000 12:45:22 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 07:10:50 -0500, John Sanders wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
> OK. I think I remember that. But this 'error goto' is used like when
>you are getting ready to do some math, especially division, which might
>generate an error. What about system interrupts? Let's say a DMA
>channel interrupt or a hardware device interrupt. Are those handled by
>BASIC in any way?
No idea to be honest. Why would you need this ? I don't believe anyone is
writing device drivers in basic today ( though it's possible that they
were in the days of microcomputer basic )
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 28 Jul 2000 12:49:20 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:41:04 +0200, in alt.destroy.microsoft
David Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
| Damien wrote in message ...
[snip]
| I can imagine, as I tried myself. Thank you so much for finding this for
| me - I can now go and get some more memory, knowing that it will help.
You're welcome.
[snip]
Thank you.
[snip]
| >Yeah, QNX is impressive that way. The single biggest obsticle to
| >creating a similar Linux distro is the X window system. You'll find
| >at least ten different mini-distros, most fitting on a floppy disk,
| >with amazing capabilities. Most of them are text mode only, but I
| >have found at least on exception: mu-Linux
| >http://sunsite.auc.dk/mulinux/. Checkout the screen shot:
| >http://www.tmn.com/Community/callaham/muscreen.gif Even here though, X
| >has to be on a second floppy.
|
| That is certainly very compact for an X system.
|
| I remember hearing about a group making a new GUI for Linux which used the
| framebuffer for video access. I thought it sounded like a great idea, until
| I heard what API they were implementing - Wince.
Are you serious? WinCE? I would think they would use the GTK API, so
as to have all the gnome apps available, or at least easy to port.
(Either that or QT).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clell A. Harmon)
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another
one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:48:52 GMT
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:49:06 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >Wrong fucking wrong. THE MAJORITY of women do not have brains
>> >>
>> >
>> >That's NOT what I said, and you know it.
>> >
>> >
>> >> No wonder you can't get laid.
>> >
>> >my gf says otherwise.
>> >hehehehehehe
>>
>> Yeah, she says 'No'.
>
>To YOU...
Is THAT what she told you? Tsk, tsk. Why do women lie like
that? Didn't you wonder why she was so relaxed the next day? You
haven't been doing the job boy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 28 Jul 2000 12:56:00 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 05:11:52 -0400, in alt.destroy.microsoft
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Said Damien in alt.destroy.microsoft;
| >On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:51:23 -0400, in alt.destroy.microsoft
| > T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >
| >| True, but that's simply why you can't run X comfortably on a 486. Or,
| >| for those who are used to real software on a decent system, any
| >| low-level Pentium, or at least for me.
| >
| >Try a less bloated window manager, like fvwm.
|
| But I want a big window manager, with lots and lots of functions *and*
| features, and pretty graphics. So...?
fvwm will give you most of the features of Windows, and some that
windows doesn't have. But you sound like you want to run
enlightenment. Well then you'll need more hardware. I want to run
Quake, but until I get a more powerful machine, I'm out of luck
| >You can run X over the internet now. Any re-designed X would have the
| >same features and problems as X, especially if it tried to support the
| >literal hordes of X client software.
|
| Boy, if I were a troll, you'd be easy meat, you know that? I new
| somebody would snap at that "run X over the Internet thing." I'm not
| saying its not likely, I'm just saying its not common, OK?
I do it all the time. Usually it's only one or two remote X clients.
Thin-client computing is not in yet.
| >Of course it would. If everyone else was still running DOS on 486's
| >Linux users would be running Linux, but all there apps would be
| >ncurses based or something like that and everybody would be wishing
| >they could buy one of those $10,000 Sun workstations or SGI's to do
| >all that cool muti-media stuff.
|
| And there wouldn't be a groundswell behind Linux. I never said it would
| dry up and blow away. If X isn't on Linux, than Windows and trade
| secret software can't be replaced by publicly available GPL science and
| useful art. So give me a break, and spare me the purist diatribe.
You need X to get people from Windows to Linux, but you only need
ncurses to get people from DOS to Linux. And if windows was light and
fluffy, XFree86 would have to be too, and they could probably do it.
| >| And that's going to require some serious big apps, though they should
| >| run light and nibble regardless.
| >
| >Or the same tools we have glued together with duct-tape like Tcl/Tk to
| >make them easy to use and show all those pretty pictures.
|
| No, its going to take real middleware. Not scripting languages
| pretending to be programming languages pretending to be middleware
| pretending to be applications.
That's not the Unix way.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Slipping away into time.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonathan Fosburgh)
Date: 28 Jul 2000 08:01:54 +0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Pulsford) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
>> The problem with FreeBSD is they have the fast kernel but, they rely
>> on GNU licensed software for
>> just about everything else. It's practically Linux with a FreeBSD
>> kernel and a slightly different install
>> mechanism.
>
>FreeBSD is not just a kernel. Linux is just a kernel. GNU is just an
>organisation with a licence the purpose of which is to keep open source
>software open sourced. GPLed software is not Linux (except for the
>kernel of course). GPLed software may written for and compiled on many
>different systems. I've even seen GPLed windows software. It's not
>FreeBSD's fault if many open source developers for unix-like operating
>systems decide to release their software with a GNU licence. And so
>what in any case, that's not a problem.
>
It should be noted that there are people working on writing BSD licensed
software to replace some of the GPL'd code in the base system. In
particular, I know of a version of grep in the FreeBSD ports collection
(called freegrep) that will hopefully one day replace the version of grep
(which I assume is GNU grep) in the base system. I am not sure what other
projects are out there.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: DMCA was(Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 28 Jul 2000 13:05:14 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:53:52 +0200, in alt.destroy.microsoft
David Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
| >I know its late to say this, but I am truly entirely unfamiliar with the
| >acronym "DCMA", though I've been able to get by on context to this
| >point. What the hell is it?
|
| "Digitial Copyright for the Millenium Act". Surely you must have heard of
| it? There are many features of it, but one of the most debated is that if a
| copyright owner puts some encryption on some data to protect their
| copyright, then they have lots more rights to the data. They suddenly not
| only own the data, but have a free reign to restrict your use of that data
| in any way they want. The big case at the moment is with DVDs, which are
| encrypted. The encryption is designed with two purposes - it allows the
| huge media companies to control the regions in which discs are played to
| ensure that they can charge as much as the market will bear (most DVD
| players can be adapted to get round these restrictions),
Most? Where do you buy DVD players? I've heard of *two* that were
able to get around region encoding, and they aren't available anymore.
| and it allows the media companies to control the DVD players
| (software and hardware) and charge royalties for them. The claim is
| that it is to hinder pirating, but pirates simply copy the whole
| disk, encryption and all.
If they can afford the several thousand dollar machine to burn DVD's
and the fifty dollar blanks. Decryption actually does make piracy
possible via compressed video files. But it's still not very
practical.
| Since there was no player available for Linux, a Norwegian guy broke the
| encryption and wrote a player for Linux, which was then widely
| distributed.
To add to the confusion, he wrote the player for Windows, but was
doing it for Linux. Something about Linux not being able to read the
disk.
| The mediaocracy went bananas, because they were no longer in control. All
| the guy wanted to do was play DVDs which he had legally bought, on the OS of
| his choice.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
