Linux-Advocacy Digest #113, Volume #28 Sun, 30 Jul 00 17:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Arthur Frain)
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown (Jim Richardson)
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! (Mig)
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: God damm Microsoft ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Slipping away into time. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Poor stupid Aaron, pity his woman. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Learn Unix on which Unix Flavour ? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:26:33 -0700
Jim Richardson wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:57:37 -0700,
> Arthur Frain, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
> >Jim Richardson wrote:
> >> You are correct that the first intercon RR was basically a govt project, but
> >> there was at least one that did it without fed funds, Burlington Northern, I
> >> think it is mentioned in "Myth of the Robber Barons"
> >The Burlington Northern (which may have changed names
> >again recently?) was originally the Great Northern
> >Railroad and was built by James J. Hill. It was built
> >later, and went to Seattle and not California. There
> >wasn't any gold in Seattle, and it hadn't just been
> >"liberated" from Mexican control, which seem like
> >good reasons (among lots of others) for the govt to
> >back a RR to CA.
> So that Burlington Northern ran to Seattle and not Calif somehow makes it
> a non-contender in the transcontinental dept?
I think it would have in the 1860's when the Union
Pacific and Central Pacific were built, as the objective
was, among other things, to serve the mines in CA and NV
and to settle CA. There was no compelling interest in going
to Seattle at that time. Hill finished his RR in 1892, took
much longer to do it, and was the second RR to take the
northern route. I read a little more about it and found
even more reason to be impressed with Hill, but he didn't do
it first, as fast, in the right place at the right time,
and faced fewer problems.
> >> Govt runs poorly at best, sometimes (like the micro electronics industry) it
> >> hits a goldmine as it were, most of the time, the funds are spent on massive
> >> boondoggles, vastky outweighing the positive results. If the funds were
> >> collected without theft, then that would be fine, But they aren't.
> >The idea that "govt runs poorly at best" is nonsense,
> >as I've pointed out in other threads. A simple example
> >(and not as trivial as it seems at first look): the
> >University of Wisconsin Badgers (a government backed
> >football team) became the first Big Ten team to win
> >back-to-back Rose Bowl titles by defeating Stanford
> >(a private university team, from a school funded by
> >the profits Leland Stanford made in part from building
> >the first transcontinental RR). It seems government
> >runs football teams very well at best, which is
> >sufficient to refute your claim. Government does lots
> >of other things well, and lots of other things horribly.
> >Just like private enterprise.
> So you pick two different ends of a bell curve, compare them, and
> consider that a valid comparison?
Not sure what you mean by "two different ends" -
UW and Stanford were champions in the Big 10 and
Pac 8 respectively. Regardless, you implied there
was no bell curve ("govt runs poorly at best"). All
I'm suggesting is that there is - that govt, at its
best, does very well indeed.
> How do govt run teams do overall?
Pretty well - I'd guess most of the top 20
ranked teams are public universities. I don't
follow it that closely.
> How about something a little more
> serious than a sport team? like postal service? Ever hear of the American
> Letter company?
How about something a little more serious than
letter delivery (subjectivity should be valid
for either subject)?
College athletics are pretty serious big business,
especially at the national bowl game level. It
seems like a fair comparision, and one with objective
performance criteria. I'll be happy to discuss
letter delivery if you have objective data to
present.
Never heard of the American Letter Company. The USPO
likes to put my mail in somebody else's mailbox, so, no,
I am not fond of them (but they do make a profit). But
my point was not that all government run enterprises
are good; your point seemed to be all government
activities are poorly executed, which simply and
obviously is not true, and requires only a single
counter example to refute. A single example can
disprove 'all X are Y', but can't prove 'all X are Y'.
I can point out a few cases where government run
enterprises are clearly superior to their private
enterprise counterparts, and a lot of cases where
government is at least competent. That only proves
that some goverment activities are well-executed.
> >"Taxation is theft" is a philosophical claim,
> >not a legal one, and it represents a philosophy I
> >don't adhere to or even admire.
> Fortunately, whether you "adhere to or admire" it is of no relevence to
> me.
And shouldn't be, just as the fact that you
hold a particular philosophy is irrelevant
to me.
> Theft is theft, it doesn't matter what the mugger does with the money.
And not paying taxes would be tax evasion.
If by "mugger" you mean government, it in
fact makes a lot of difference to me what
they do with the money, but I'd find the
word 'mugger' an emotional argument, not
a rational one. Taxes aren't against the
law, which is what 'theft' and 'mugger'
seem to imply.
If by "mugger" you mean convicted criminals
like Microsoft, ADM, Lincoln Savings,
or Michael Milliken, I'd still like to see
them forced to pay restitution and damages,
so I guess it matters what the mugger does
with the money in that case too.
Arthur
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 23:59:04 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:11:49 -0400,
Colin R. Day, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > But from what I have read, the Sherman was more rugged, which is
>> > important when you're fighting on another continent.
>>
>> Cost to build is important; the German Tiger tank was a very good
>> tank, but was so expensive to make that it couldn't be made in
>> sufficient quantity. "Better is the enemy of Good, and Best is the
>> enemy of them both." A *very* instructive phrase that! Thanks ACC!
>
>The Tiger was also a gas-guzzler, but perhaps not as bad as
>the Elefant. Of course, immobile tanks are vulnerable, and the
>Germans didn't always have enough fuel.
>
It was also too heavy to pass over most bridges in France, making it a poor
choice for fighting there after D-Day. Helluva nice main gun though.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:20:19 +0200
gLiTcH wrote:
>
>
> Mig wrote:
>
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > Remember how we always laughed at people when they'd stay stupid things
> > > like: "I installed this game and it physically destroyed my hard drive" and
> > > we'd patiently point out that that's impossible and it's probably a fried
> > > partition and/or FAT table and so on...
> > >
> > > well, it turns out that Linux onces again "innovates" - it's now possible to
> > > actually, physically destroy your hard drive using some simple code (link
> > > provided)...
> >
> > Great stuff Drestin... but now tell us why this is Linux specific or dont
> > you think this code or similar code can run on Windows?
> >
> > Hint Drestin, you'll never win the Nobel prise :-)
>
> ^^^^
> you mean for spelling?
Dont worry. Im a non native anglo speaker and dont make my money writing.
------------------------------
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: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:38:08 -0400
Spud wrote:
>
> [snips]
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > > > > > driver not even in the car. Seen the Libertarian poll
> numbers
> > > > > lately there
> > > > > > > chief?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sooooooooooo, truth is determined by how many idiots agree
> with
> > > an
> > > > > idea.
> > > > >
> > > > > I see you agree with the suggestion others have made that
> those
> > > > > supporting the Libertarian position are, in fact, idiots.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmm... wait a sec... didn't you say *you* were such a person?
> :)
> > > >
> > > > So, you are saying that unnecessary government interference in
> > > people's
> > > > businesses and personal lives is a good thing.
> > >
> > > Odd; I don't recall saying anything which could even _potentially_
> be
> > > interpreted that way. However, to answer the question...
> > >
> > > No; _unnecessary_ government involvement in people's businesses
> and
> > > personal lives is not a good thing. However, _necessary_
> involvement
> > > is. What of it?
> >
> > You're against the Libertarians...and they stand against unnecessary
> > government interference in people's lives.
>
> Where did I say I was against the Libertarians? Hint: nowhere. I was
> responding to your comment: "...truth is determined by how many idiots
> agree with an idea." Since you apparently support Libertarianism, and
> presumably wouldn't if you thought it was a false ideology, wouldn't
> that make you one of the "idiots agreeing with the idea"?
>
> It's your choice of phraseology, not your choice of ideology, I was
> poking fun at. :)
So, you are FOR unnecessary governmental intrusion into people's lives.
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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]>
Subject: Re: God damm Microsoft
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:39:19 -0400
Spud wrote:
>
> [snips]
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8lptq6$ti1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <TKZf5.2555$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Outlook uses a common base service of the OS which is being
> patched,
> > which
> > > is why both Outlook and Outlook Express suffer from the same
> problem.
> > > Fixing one, fixes both.
> > >
> > > But, even so. I don't think you HAVE to reboot. MS often says
> you
> > should,
> > > but that's a default response.
> >
> > WOW, that's intuitive! Just how is the common users suposed to know
> when
> > to reboot and when not to? More MS BS.
>
> Common users aren't trying to roll out 50 machines worth of patches at
> a go. :)
>
> Besides, if a single user is doing it on a single system, big deal;
> it's a minute or two, tops.
Yeah, it is a big deal. Rebooting is WASTED TIME.
>
> Oh, and netadmins can actually roll out multiple updates in a batch,
> with a single reboot at the end (if rebooting is necessary at all).
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Slipping away into time.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:42:44 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (sandrews) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If you really write sound/audio drivers, why don`t you use the
> information you have at your disposal and write sound/audio
> drivers for linux. Ah but then you wouldn`t have anything to
> bitch about and you would then be contributing to the open
> source community, can`t have that now could we.
There's no demand for it. Not basic audio drivers, but 3D Positional Audio
drivers. There aren't enough games being ported to the Linux platform as
yet. If game developers started going for Linux in a big way, then things
might change.
--
Pete Goodwin
---
Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:42:15 -0400
fungus wrote:
>
> John Hughes wrote:
> >
> > > Add to this the known fact that Microsoft itself doesn't run
> > > any of their internal databases (hotmail, msn, etc) on Windows
> > > and we're left with what? Hot air about some new definition
> > > of "scalability"....
> > >
> >
> > This isnt a known fact. Can you provide references to your 'facts'.? Or are
> > you a liar.......?
>
> John,
>
> It's been what, a whole week since the last thread about Microsoft
> not using Windows for any of their stuff? Have you forgotton already
> or are you doing this deliberately?
>
> Whatever...I certainly don't mind posting some more proof to the
> Windows advocacy newsgroups, so here we go (again):
>
> MSN
> ---
>
> Click here...it's all the proof you need:
>
> http://msnhomepages.talkcity.com/nix/
>
> - You'll have to use Netscape as IE masks the useful HTTP error
> messages. With Netscape it will say:
>
> ------------------
> Not Found
> The requested URL /nix/ was not found on this server.
>
> Apache/1.3.9 Server at msnhomepages.talkcity.com Port 6010
> ------------------
>
> Note the word "Apache".
*CONFIRMED*
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Poor stupid Aaron, pity his woman.
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:42:49 -0400
"Clell A. Harmon" wrote:
>
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:27:22 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Nah, never touch the stuff.
> >
> >Strange..you write like a crackhead.
>
> I write nothing like you Aaron, there is no reason to be
> insulting.
>
> >why is that?
>
> I have the ability to think, your writings display an amazing
> lack of that ability.
>
> >> I can understand why you would
> >> think I did though, that woman of yours was sucking on the pipe like
> >> to pull the chrome off a trailer hitch. Just kept whining how it was
> >> the only thing that got her through the day, with the tiny little
> >> needle dick waiting for her at home.
> >
> >Did this happen in Iowa?
>
> You know exactly where it happened Aaron. Have some sympathy
> for the poor woman. I mean living with you is bad enough.
Translation: he has no clue where Irina and I are.
hehehheheheh
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:47:59 -0400
"Mark S. Bilk" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Loren Petrich wrote:
> >>
> >>I think that there is a disagreement here as to what is and is
> >>not necessary government intervention.
> >>
> >>And I think that a libertarian ought not to have a career in the
> >>instruments of government coercion.
> >
> >Libertarian philosophy is that the military should be an all-volounteer
> >organization.
> >
> >I'm a volounteer.
> >
> >You could be too, fat boy.
> >
> >J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> > challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> > between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> > Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST asshole.
>
> No, what it demonstrates is that you, Kulkis, are a lying,
> slandering sack of shit, and that you have the beliefs,
> methods, and morals of Joe McCarthy.
>
> Loren Petrich has been posting insightful, useful, and
> accurate information in Usenet for many years. An examina-
> tion of his posts in DejaNews shows that he's a democratic
> Liberal, and maybe a Social Democrat, but certainly not a
> non-democratic Communist.
A rose by any other name is still a rose.
If there *IS* A difference between his 'democratic liberal'
beliefs, or his 'Social Democrat' beliefs, and Communism
why doesn't he tell us what they are?
The fact is...the little closet-dictator doesn't want to
say ANYTHING that would piss of his communist friends.
> Or are these all equivalent
> according to your ultra-Right-wing delusional system, since
> you disdain democracy in favor of unrestricted robbery,
> violence, starvation, and death?
Why won't he answer the question?
>
> The purpose of your .signature, Kulkis, which is illegal
> according to the rules of the Usenet community, is to libel
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Then take me to Usenet court, netcop.
> people over and over again, many thousands of times, in
> every one of the hundreds of spam articles you post every
> day, because you are unable to refute those people in a
> rational discussion.
As if Loren has not been doing the same with his "grove
of birch trees bullshit."
>
> You are a thug and a backstabbing coward.
I stated my observations, and my conclusions. If you disagree,
with my conclusions, then state your reasoning.
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake,alt.os.linux.slackware,alt.os.linux.suse,alt.solaris.x86,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.unix,comp.os.unix.misc,comp.unix.aix,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd,comp.unix.bsd.net
Subject: Re: Learn Unix on which Unix Flavour ?
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:52:32 -0400
"m.hoes" wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> Currently, I am trying to learn Unix on my PC. However, I am not sure which
> Unix flavour I should choose for learning this OS?
It doesnt' matter. All of the essential parts are the same.
Let's rephrase your question.
Currently, I am trying to learn to eat ice cream out of a cone.
However, I am not sure which ice cream flavor I should choose for
for learning this method.
The only thing I would avoid is AIX, since it is unix in name only.
[the configuration in the /etc directory are not only renamed, but
their internal structure is completely incompatible with all other
flavors of Unix].
>
> The main purpose is to learn as much of Unix as possible, without spending
> (too much) money. Although I simply do not have the kind of cash to go buy a
> RS/6000 and get a license for AIX, getting a semi-free thing like Solaris 8
> for i86 (+/- $75 dollar) is no problem either.
Get Linux. For $75, you're going to have an equivalent OS, AND a
ton of applications as well.
>
> I know there is no such thing as a "One Unix", and that there a lot of
> differences between Unix versions, especially when it comes to
> Administration. AIX uses smit, HP-UX (i believe) sysadm, and I wouldnt be
> surprised if RedHat actually came with a script named 'setup' for its
> general administration ;)
> Still I would prefer to get a Unix version which is as 'generic' and
> 'true-to-unix' as possible.
>
> 'User-friendly-ness' is something which is not important. Although a lot of
User-friendliness doesn't exist anywhere....ony familiarity.
> the current linux-distributions come with nifty setup tools like linuxconf,
> they do not actually assist in learning the OS. To illustrate my point: the
> latest RedHat release easily lets you select a printer and everything runs
> ok, but (ages ago) Slackware 3.0 actually forced you to hack the printcap
> file to print even simple ascii files. While not very user-friendly, it DID
> teach me someting about *nix printing mechanisms.
>
> Hardware support is also not important. As long as it runs on Intel it is
> ok, never mind my Voodoo card or USB port.
>
> Good documentation would be nice though ;)
>
> So what to choose? I have been told that Debian Linux and FreeBSD come
> pretty close to 'generic' and true unix implementations? Am I better off
> staying away from SCO Unix cause its so Intel focused its almost got a
> Autoexec.Bat startup file? Leave Solaris alone cause everything you learn on
> Solaris is only valid in the land of the SUN?
>
> Please let me know what you think, point me to web-pages which might assit
> me, or redirect this message to /dev/null.
>
> Any and all suggestions are more than welcome.
>
> Thanks.
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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
******************************
