Linux-Advocacy Digest #70, Volume #28 Fri, 28 Jul 00 20:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Will Linux Dominate the Desktop Future? ("Keith T. Williams")
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one of
Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept? (Gary Hallock)
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept? (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (phil hunt)
Re: Jacques Gye is a WHALE-FUCKING PIRVERT! (was: Re: Windows98)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Austin Ziegler)
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Re: I had a reality check today :( (Jim Richardson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Keith T. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will Linux Dominate the Desktop Future?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:16:30 -0400
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Keith T. Williams in alt.destroy.microsoft;
> [...]
> >Not where I come from. Either form would be correct in normal usage
> >to set the condition. After all, was is the singular past indicative
(1st &[...]
>
> Well, yes, of *course*, but that certainly depends on the local idiom,
> doesn't it? It is pure vernacular, certainly not a part of the
> classical English language.
Since it was in England, I would think so.
>
> >plural past indicative of be.
> >ie, I was reading this, he was reading this, we were reading this. but
then
> >we got bored and gave up.
>
> My language counselor (who is my "sister in-common-law", who is an
> English teacher, and just bought a house with my brother, a Science
> teacher, and I'm so proud of both of them...) points out that the word
> "got" should be eviscerated from the language, and I agree. I got to.
> She's got more educations then me.
>
Sorry Max, but I think that your sister by-whatever-means is a language
snob...
English was never better off than when, unlike most countries, the upper
(i.e. ruling) class didn't speak it, and schools didn't teach it. This
allowed it to
drop the dross which so inflicts other languages such as different words for
each past, present and future verb. Unlike French for example, (which was
the language of the ruling class in England). English learned to take the
best
and most useful pieces from every language in the world and become the most
flexible and useful natural (as opposed to man-made) language available.
Yes,
it is a highly frustrating language to learn because of this but IM(not
so)HO, it is
the best.
Get it?
Got it!
Good.
Keith.
ps, she gots more edumacation than me two.
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> -- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
> of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
> Research assistance gladly accepted. --
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one of
Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: 28 Jul 2000 19:13:37 -0400
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>> >Or do you vote for the candidate who presents the clearest reason
>> >for YOU to vote for him or her?
>>
>> It doesn't matter who I vote for. If the candidate I vote for
>> starts passing fucked-up laws, my only option is to wait for the
>> next election and vote for another candidate that will do the same
>> god damn thing without even attempting to reverse the laws that
>> the previous candidate passed. Before you suggest that I run for
>> office myself, know that running for office is only a viable option
>> for extremely charismatic people with lots of money to spend on
>> a campaign.
>> When U.S. free software programmers start getting sued for infringing
>> software patents, there will be no hope at all for them. And they
>> WILL start getting sued, because voting, which you claim gives us
>> all this control over the government, doesn't give us enough control
>> to do anything at all about software patents. We (the _real_ we, not
>> "we" as in the U.S. Government that claims to represent us) have
>> to wait for the lawsuits to start flying and hope that lawyers are
>> enough for those programmers who can afford them.
>>
>> Sounds to me like your representative republic is 4 wolves deciding
>> what 12 wolves and 240 sheep will have for dinner.
>
>Note if we returned to a Constitutional Senate
I don't understand your use of the word "note" here...
>(where the state legislators elect the Senators, not the common people,
>which merely turns the Senate into a 2nd House of Representatives
>full of political careerits.)
...but you seem to be suggesting that there is a major, positive
difference between being controlled by someone you vote for and
being controlled by someone that somebody else votes for. As
I have already pointed out, your only options if the politician
fucks you are to wait for the next election and vote for the other
politician (who is no better), or to whine to the current politician.
>> BTW, you still haven't answered my post regarding how voting
>> for government officials couldn't stop the DMCA and UCITA from
>> becoming law. You know it'll take more than voting for politicians
>> to repeal them.
Regardless of who elects the Senate, the point above, which you
didn't respond to (and therefore I'll assume that you agree that
the ability to vote gives you no control over the government), is
still valid. Citizens of a republic have so little control over the
elected politicians that it doesn't make much of a difference who
they vote for. It seems that the only thing you get for voting at
all is a chance to take time off from your regular job to do jury
duty for $5 per day.
>> >> And now -- here are the good folks on Kulkis' enemies list!
>> >> It's become all too clear why he has enemies: he's an obnox-
>> >> ious, spamming, blowhard, paranoid, Right-wing jerk.
>> >
>> >Wrong. I'm a libertarian. I find right-wingers (Fascists) as
>> >repugnant as left-wingers (Communists).
>>
>> I find repugnant anyone who thinks that a maximum wage would cause
>> the minimum wage to rise.
>
>There is no connection between the two.
This year's Libertarian Party presidential candidate wants a maximum wage
that is mathematically tied to the minimum wage. Supposedly, the maximum
wage would cause the Senators, Representatives, and the President to
take a huge pay cut, which would cause them to raise the minimum wage to
get their pay back.
--
Guns don't kill people, cops do!
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:22:58 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>
> >> >Or do you vote for the candidate who presents the clearest reason
> >> >for YOU to vote for him or her?
> >>
> >> It doesn't matter who I vote for. If the candidate I vote for
> >> starts passing fucked-up laws, my only option is to wait for the
> >> next election and vote for another candidate that will do the same
> >> god damn thing without even attempting to reverse the laws that
> >> the previous candidate passed. Before you suggest that I run for
> >> office myself, know that running for office is only a viable option
> >> for extremely charismatic people with lots of money to spend on
> >> a campaign.
>
> >> When U.S. free software programmers start getting sued for infringing
> >> software patents, there will be no hope at all for them. And they
> >> WILL start getting sued, because voting, which you claim gives us
> >> all this control over the government, doesn't give us enough control
> >> to do anything at all about software patents. We (the _real_ we, not
> >> "we" as in the U.S. Government that claims to represent us) have
> >> to wait for the lawsuits to start flying and hope that lawyers are
> >> enough for those programmers who can afford them.
> >>
> >> Sounds to me like your representative republic is 4 wolves deciding
> >> what 12 wolves and 240 sheep will have for dinner.
> >
> >Note if we returned to a Constitutional Senate
>
> I don't understand your use of the word "note" here...
>
> >(where the state legislators elect the Senators, not the common people,
> >which merely turns the Senate into a 2nd House of Representatives
> >full of political careerits.)
>
> ...but you seem to be suggesting that there is a major, positive
> difference between being controlled by someone you vote for and
> being controlled by someone that somebody else votes for. As
> I have already pointed out, your only options if the politician
> fucks you are to wait for the next election and vote for the other
> politician (who is no better), or to whine to the current politician.
>
> >> BTW, you still haven't answered my post regarding how voting
> >> for government officials couldn't stop the DMCA and UCITA from
> >> becoming law. You know it'll take more than voting for politicians
> >> to repeal them.
>
> Regardless of who elects the Senate, the point above, which you
> didn't respond to (and therefore I'll assume that you agree that
> the ability to vote gives you no control over the government), is
> still valid. Citizens of a republic have so little control over the
> elected politicians that it doesn't make much of a difference who
> they vote for. It seems that the only thing you get for voting at
> all is a chance to take time off from your regular job to do jury
> duty for $5 per day.
>
> >> >> And now -- here are the good folks on Kulkis' enemies list!
> >> >> It's become all too clear why he has enemies: he's an obnox-
> >> >> ious, spamming, blowhard, paranoid, Right-wing jerk.
> >> >
> >> >Wrong. I'm a libertarian. I find right-wingers (Fascists) as
> >> >repugnant as left-wingers (Communists).
> >>
> >> I find repugnant anyone who thinks that a maximum wage would cause
> >> the minimum wage to rise.
> >
> >There is no connection between the two.
>
> This year's Libertarian Party presidential candidate wants a maximum wage
> that is mathematically tied to the minimum wage. Supposedly, the maximum
> wage would cause the Senators, Representatives, and the President to
> take a huge pay cut, which would cause them to raise the minimum wage to
> get their pay back.
Introducing rampant inflation in the process.......
>
> --
> Guns don't kill people, cops do!
--
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.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:24:51 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If it's there, and been there for a year, then why
> can't someone use it. If it can be used, merely point
> out how it can be accomplished.
>
> IOW: cite an example.
>
I really don't know why you keep complaining about this. Here is my understanding
of the situation:
1. Xdnd did not exist at the time KDE 1 was developed, so of course Xdnd could not
have been put in KDE 1 at the start.
2 When Xdnd was finalized, KDE 2 was in the works.
3. A tradeoff had to be made. Rework KDE 1 to incorporate Xdnd and delay KDE2 or
put all effort into getting KDE2 out the door. Personally I think the right
decision was made.
4. Beta versions of KDE2 with Xdnd have been available for quite some time.
5. KDE2 is due out shortly - in a few weeks is my understanding.
You could complain that it is taking too long for KDE2 to be done. But this is a
massive effort and is free open source. You could always volunteer to help.
Gary
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:38:17 -0300
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
>
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:48:04 -0300, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
> >>
> >> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:05:15 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> ...depends on what sort of network effects are involved.
> >> >> KDE has been dragging their feet getting Xdnd support in,
> >> >> so that is one network effect to deal with already.
> >> >
> >> >And you say *I* misrepresent stuff. Amazing.
> >> >You know, Jedi, every time you say this kind of crap, I will
> >> >post to correct you.
> >> >
> >> >* There are already three KDE beta releases that use Xdnd.
> >> >
> >> >* There has not been a release that used anything else for over a year.
> >> >
> >> >* There has been ongoing work on Xdnd and not on the other protocol
> >> > for over a year.
> >>
> >> Then I should be able to grab a year old copy of Redhat or Suse
> >> and use KDE and GNOME components as if they came from one desktop.
> >
> >What is the connection between that and what I said?
>
> If it's there, and been there for a year, then why
> can't someone use it. If it can be used, merely point
> out how it can be accomplished.
Allow me to quote the post you are replying to:
> >Well, you can use cvs, get the version from july 1999 (KDE2 branch),
> >and compile it.
There you have it. Maybe you can't use it because:
a) You don't know how to use CVS.
b) You don't know how to compile stuff.
c) You don't actually want to use it.
d) Plain old laziness.
Other than that, I have no idea why you say I didn't say how it
can be accomplished, because I did.
If you want a simpler way to use it, try something newer, like, say
KDE 2.0 beta 2.
> IOW: cite an example.
Done, twice.
BTW: For anyone reading this, it should be obvious that there was no
clear connection between "There has been ongoing work on Xdnd and not
on the other protocol for over a year." and "Then I should be able
to grab a year old copy of Redhat or Suse and use KDE and GNOME
components as if they came from one desktop."
Why? because having Xdnd in common is not enough to "use [KDE and GNOME]
as if they came from one desktop", and, obviously, because things are
not necessarily usable the moment they start being worked on.
My personal bet is that you are either drunk, or just out to bash KDE
as usual.
[snip things quoted above]
> >> Those that actually use KDE around here seem to have a different
> >> impression of the situation than you do.
> >
> >Who would "those" be, and where have they expressed that "impression"?
> >Care to quote?
>
> Try a search on dejanews for me, KDE and Xdnd.
You refer to yourself as "those"? Weird. And you use KDE? Congrats!
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (phil hunt)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:16:54 +0100
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:54:09 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Programming is hard," said Barbie.
:-)
Did they eventually take out the "Maths is hard" comment?
--
***** Phil Hunt *****
The RIAA have banned Napster -- so boycott the music industry!
Don't buy any CDs during August (especially on Tuesday 1st August).
Spread the word: put this message in your sig, tell all your friends.
See website <http://boycott-riaa.com/>.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Jacques Gye is a WHALE-FUCKING PIRVERT! (was: Re: Windows98)
Date: 28 Jul 2000 19:38:34 -0400
Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>>
>
>Eye luvv ewe, Tymm! *smooch* *smooch*
>
>(A parte: isn't he ever right, folks?)
I've never seen him be right once.
--
Delete all files?
<Y>es, <S>ure, <A>bsolutely, <W>hy not :
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:44:27 -0400
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>> Said Florian Weimer in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>>> There are many broken incarnations of make(1) out there. No surprise
>>>> that sometimes, developers say "we don't care about that, take GNU
>>>> make instead, it works".
>>> And its free. Where's the surprise? I would think "it works and its
>>> free" would be enough to convince anybody to use something, wouldn't
>>> you?
>> Nope, because it also has the negative side of "it's not included with
>> the system." Because it's not included with the system, and because it
>> can't be bought from a large vendor, it can't be supported -- and
>> there's no one to lay the blame upon if it does cause failures.
>> Not that *I* consider such a reason good enough, but I've seen such
>> reasoning stop the use of GPLed software dead.
> It's not included? You don't get GNU make in a typical Linux distro?
> That sounds outrageous to me.
I suggest that you retake that reading comprehension course, or get
your money back. Florian said "there are many broken incarnations of
make(1) out there." At this point, it should be reasonably obvious --
and it's *painfully* obvious by the next sentence -- that he's not
talking about Linux, which provides GNU make as its default
implementation.
Companies may avoid GNU make because it doesn't come by default with
their non-Linux system. You know, the other operating systems that more
than 90% of the world runs on for critical applications.
[snip typical Maxine stupidity]
-f
--
austin ziegler * fant0me(at)the(dash)wire(d0t)c0m * Ni bhionn an rath ach
ICQ#25o49818 (H) * aziegler(at)s0lect(d0t)c0m * mar a mbionn an smacht
ICQ#21o88733 (W) * fant0me526(at)yah00(d0t)c0m * (There is no Luck
AIM Fant0me526 *-s/0/o/g--------&&--------s/o/0/g-* without Discipline)
Toronto.ON.ca * I speak for myself alone *-----------------------
PGP *** 7FDA ECE7 6C30 2356 17D3 17A1 C030 F921 82EF E7F8 *** 6.5.1
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:52:34 -0300
"Aaron R. Kulkis" escribió:
>
> Loren Petrich wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >> >AFDC
> > >> >Social Security
> > >> >WIC
> > >> >HUD
> > >> >Dairy price supports
> > >> >Food Stamps
> > [Me:]
> > >> I'm sure that the real reason Mr. Kulkis objects is a lack of
> > >> virility in this stuff.
> >
> > >The above programs constitute SLAVERY...as the productive
> > >people in society are forced to support the lazy and
> > >unproductive.
> >
> > So the government is the big exploiter of labor and your elderly
> > relatives bloodsucking parasites?
> >
>
> YEP.
Let's see if you believe that in 50 years.
> I would much rather take care of my grandmother myself,
> than to send my money off to washington, where they take 20%
> off the top in the process of sending the money back.
And what if you had not been born? Should your mother keep on
working until she died? Or should those who don't have children
start saving?
And how could they save if they have to live AND pay for their
elders at the same time?
And what happens if you die? Should your mother be killed,
or left to die by her own means?
You know, there's alot of dubious math in your politics.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:50:43 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:24:51 -0400, Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> If it's there, and been there for a year, then why
>> can't someone use it. If it can be used, merely point
>> out how it can be accomplished.
>>
>> IOW: cite an example.
>>
>
>I really don't know why you keep complaining about this. Here is my understanding
As the components ship today, they aren't interoperable.
"wait for the next major version is not compelling"
The components should be more modular than that.
Either way, it's still a fact to be disclosed.
>
>1. Xdnd did not exist at the time KDE 1 was developed, so of course Xdnd could not
>have been put in KDE 1 at the start.
>2 When Xdnd was finalized, KDE 2 was in the works.
>3. A tradeoff had to be made. Rework KDE 1 to incorporate Xdnd and delay KDE2 or
>put all effort into getting KDE2 out the door. Personally I think the right
>decision was made.
>4. Beta versions of KDE2 with Xdnd have been available for quite some time.
>5. KDE2 is due out shortly - in a few weeks is my understanding.
>
>You could complain that it is taking too long for KDE2 to be done. But this is a
>massive effort and is free open source. You could always volunteer to help.
I don't contribute to proprietary vendorlock.
--
Unless you've got the engineering process to match a DEC,
you won't produce a VMS.
You'll just end up with the likes of NT.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:55:47 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:38:17 -0300, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
>>
>> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:48:04 -0300, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:05:15 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
[deletia]
>> >> >* There has been ongoing work on Xdnd and not on the other protocol
>> >> > for over a year.
>> >>
>> >> Then I should be able to grab a year old copy of Redhat or Suse
>> >> and use KDE and GNOME components as if they came from one desktop.
>> >
>> >What is the connection between that and what I said?
>>
>> If it's there, and been there for a year, then why
>> can't someone use it. If it can be used, merely point
>> out how it can be accomplished.
>
>Allow me to quote the post you are replying to:
>
>> >Well, you can use cvs, get the version from july 1999 (KDE2 branch),
>> >and compile it.
>
>There you have it. Maybe you can't use it because:
>
>a) You don't know how to use CVS.
>b) You don't know how to compile stuff.
>c) You don't actually want to use it.
>d) Plain old laziness.
It's an end user desktop.
d) is actually a quite compelling complaint actually.
For similar reasons, I didn't get quite so excited
when people pointed out the apparent lack of USB
support in Linux.
The "unstable tree" is more of a 'coming attraction'.
Your need to berate me for not being willing to
download the "unstable tree" from CVS merely
reinforces this.
>
>Other than that, I have no idea why you say I didn't say how it
>can be accomplished, because I did.
>
>If you want a simpler way to use it, try something newer, like, say
>KDE 2.0 beta 2.
>
>> IOW: cite an example.
>
>Done, twice.
Done never actually.
[deletia]
When I state that GNOME has Motif legacy support, I can
actually give the end user an example that they can walk
through themselves.
--
Unless you've got the engineering process to match a DEC,
you won't produce a VMS.
You'll just end up with the likes of NT.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:58:07 GMT
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:44:27 -0400, Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>> Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>>> Said Florian Weimer in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>>>> There are many broken incarnations of make(1) out there. No surprise
>>>>> that sometimes, developers say "we don't care about that, take GNU
>>>>> make instead, it works".
>>>> And its free. Where's the surprise? I would think "it works and its
>>>> free" would be enough to convince anybody to use something, wouldn't
>>>> you?
>>> Nope, because it also has the negative side of "it's not included with
>>> the system." Because it's not included with the system, and because it
>>> can't be bought from a large vendor, it can't be supported -- and
>>> there's no one to lay the blame upon if it does cause failures.
>
>>> Not that *I* consider such a reason good enough, but I've seen such
>>> reasoning stop the use of GPLed software dead.
>> It's not included? You don't get GNU make in a typical Linux distro?
>> That sounds outrageous to me.
>
>I suggest that you retake that reading comprehension course, or get
>your money back. Florian said "there are many broken incarnations of
>make(1) out there." At this point, it should be reasonably obvious --
>and it's *painfully* obvious by the next sentence -- that he's not
>talking about Linux, which provides GNU make as its default
>implementation.
>
>Companies may avoid GNU make because it doesn't come by default with
>their non-Linux system. You know, the other operating systems that more
>than 90% of the world runs on for critical applications.
...actually it's more like "the other 60%".
>
>[snip typical Maxine stupidity]
That's not even getting into IT departments that as their
first act with a new commercial unix installation, install
GNU utilities.
--
Unless you've got the engineering process to match a DEC,
you won't produce a VMS.
You'll just end up with the likes of NT.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:49:18 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 07:06:21 -0500,
Erik Funkenbusch, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>"Jim Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Well, Unix doesn't have full remote administration anyways. There are
>often
>> >tasks which need to be carried out on the console, usually in something
>like
>> >single-user mode. Also consider a kernel recompile which causes the
>kernel
>> >to panic or simply hangs upon reboot. You have to go to the console for
>> >that.
>>
>> *BZZT*
>> Under linux at least, a serial port can be your "console" so you can
>compile,
>> boot, tinker and play all you want at the other end of that serial line,
>> wherever in the world you want that to be.
>
>Serial ports don't have more than a few hundred feet of distance on them at
>best. I suppose if you attach hardware that converts it to ethernet with a
>terminal server of some sort it could work, but then you're off into 3rd
>party solutions, which similar solutions exist for NT.
Or you could use that arcane device, the modem, remember them?
>
>> >I liken X to the windows GDI, or the OS/2 GPI. That's not quite correct
>> >though, since X also includes some things from the windows USER. No, X
>> >doesn't include your wigits, and it doesn't include your window managers.
>> >But it does include the basic GUI functionality.
>>
>> And don't forget network transparancy.
>
>Irrelevant to this portion of the discussion.
>
>
>
>
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
