Linux-Advocacy Digest #218, Volume #28 Thu, 3 Aug 00 23:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ???? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Free WebSphere Homepage Builder 4.0 for Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Bennett digest, volume 4 (Tholen) (Marty)
Re: Maximum Linux (Steve Mading)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451760 (Marty)
Re: Linux for Desktop, a missing app... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ???? (Arthur Frain)
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451760 (tholenbot)
Re: KDE2 Yahooo!!! ("Rich C")
Re: C# is a copy of java (Steve Mading)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Sean LeBlanc)
Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ???? ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: C# is a copy of java (Steve Mading)
Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Learn Unix on which Unix Flavour ? (Alan Coopersmith)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: Microsoft
Ruling Too Harsh (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ???? (Matt Gaia)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ????
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:18:14 GMT
In article <8mcnt6$ego$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[crap--]
> The only way they (companies) can defeat Microsoft is with the help of
> mom - Government.
If Sun believes that Microsoft is committing an illegal act that
threatens Sun's bottom line, then Sun owes it to their shareholders to
report those acts to the proper authorities. If somebody committed an
illegal act that harmed Microsoft, what do you think Microsoft's
response would be? You don't have to look very hard to find out; this
week Microsoft called on the government ("mommy" to you) to prosecute
7500 software pirates.
Is this a sign of weakness and incompetence on Microsoft's part, to
depend on the government and the legal system to prevent harm to its
shareholders?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Free WebSphere Homepage Builder 4.0 for Linux
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:30:17 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
OSguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > IBM developerWorks
> > allows you to download WebSphere Homepage Builder for Linux for
free
> > and use it fully for up to 60 days from the time you first install
the
> > program.
>
> Then it isn't free. It is only a trial or demo version. Free !=
Demo.
>
There's another problem; it requires "Wine for WebSphere". I already
broke my original Wine when I installed WordPerfect Office 2000, but
then I broke the "Wine for WordPerfect" when I installed the free Corel
PhotoPaint which loaded "Wine for PhotoPaint". Yeeesh.
When there's a "Wine for every-fscking-thing-under-the-sun" available, I
might give it a try. Until then, its off my radar.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Bennett digest, volume 4 (Tholen)
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:45:33 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Slava Pestov writes:
>
> > Irrelevant, Eric. Meanwhile, I see you still haven't replied to my
> > post with subject 'Re: Bennett digest, volume 3 (Tholen)'. Why is that,
> > Eric?
>
> Maybe because your subject line is irrelevant to the content?
Aren't you certain?
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Maximum Linux
Date: 4 Aug 2000 01:44:05 GMT
billy ball <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 08:38:57 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>My take on it has been that for X that capitalization parrter should be X
:>Windows, X Windows System. When the word window is not part of the name
:>then window should not be capitalized as in "a X terminal window".
:>
: that's X, The X Window System, X11... *not* X Windows..
The reason people (including me) keep saying "X Windows" even
though it is "wrong" is because it's faster and rolls off the
tounge better. It's not my fault that the makers of X failed
to make the official names handy to pronounce. Sure, I could
say "X" but that's a bit too generic and sounds like I'm trying
to be generic on purpose when I say it (like calling it "foo").
"X11" isn't well known enough to be a good name for it either.
Don't get me wrong, I like this, err, thingy. I just really
hate the names I have to choose from to describe it.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451760
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:53:58 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Marty writes:
>
> >> Here's today's Tinman digest. Note how he still doesn't understand
> >> the difference between replying to someone and taking their advice.
>
> > Hypocrite:
> > DT> Witness his continued responses to me, which means that I obviously
> > DT> am worth his time.
>
> Illogical, Marty, given that the above quotation deals with the worth
> of someone's time, not with the advice given by unreasonable people.
You are erroneously presupposing that you are a reasonable person.
> > Has Mark Kelly taken your advice?
>
> Irrelevant, Marty, given that his statement involved what was worth his
> time, and not my advice.
Take that up with whichever personality banging around inside your head
generated this:
DT> I prefer to pay attention to reasonable people.
MK> Thanks for the compliment.
DT> What alleged compliment, Mark? What advice of yours have I
allegedly paid any attention to?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux for Desktop, a missing app...
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:49:37 GMT
I wouldn't hold my breath. IBM's latest offering, "WebSphere Homepage
Builder for Linux" is a Wine app, and you need to install IBM's "Wine
for WebSphere" to run it. If they release a Notes client in the near
future, look for it to include as a prerequisite "Wine for Notes".
I like Wine, I really do, but I've already got three different versions
of it running on this box, I'm not about to try to squeeze another in
here.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: 4 Aug 2000 02:05:16 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Woofbert wrote:
:>
:> The Germans didn't agree with the US analysis of the effectiveness of
:> tanks, and developed a couple of different Panzers ... which are the
:> basis of the current Israeli design. The Sherman, with its flat front
:> end, was years behind German design.
:>
: But from what I have read, the Sherman was more rugged, which is
: important when you're fighting on another continent.
While the Sherman wasn't a great tank, it was an adequete one,
and it was being produced fast, in high-volume. That was its
big advantage. One of the reasons for the bad narrow, high design
was that it was intended to be made on existing automobile
assembly lines in Detroit. Sure, it sucked compared to the tanks
other countries had. But there were an awful lot of them.
------------------------------
From: Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ????
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:21:58 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It costs less, yes it's true. But I'm only buying W2K once, and am all
> set for at least 5 years if not more.
Actually, you may have to buy W2K twice for
each machine because of the way MS writes
its license agreements. You're not a pirate
are you? (new MS definition: a pirate is
someone who has only paid *once* for W2K)
See:
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-2427307.html
Arthur
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451760
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:28:32 -0400
In article <Ikni5.1309$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Once again he ignores all the unresolved issues,
How ironic.
--
What alleged "antispam.ham"? Typical ham specificity problems.
------------------------------
From: "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE2 Yahooo!!!
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:28:23 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8m8gh1$7io$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Well, I was goofing around with KDE2beta3 on a test machine and WOW, now
> its running on my desktop. The KDE2 team is doing a GREAT job.
Based on your comments I downloaded it too.
Installation was relatively straightforward from a basic RH 6.2 system, even
for a GUI-biatch like me. :o) I have kpackage AND gnorpm installed, so when
I upgrade KDE or QT stuff I use gnorpm, and when I mess with gnome libraries
I use kpackage. This system works great, and I never have to revert to "man
rpm."
I found KDE2 a tad slow to start on a P-166 with 64 megs and a Matrox
Mystique PCI video card. Do you have XFree86 4.0 installed? I hear it's much
faster with the standard SVGA driver (which is what the Mystique dictates.)
I might try that too if it's stable enough.
Opera broke when I installed it, but if konqueror proves itself, I won't be
in any hurry to fix it (I think it's just a library pointer.)
> I already
> like the Koffice better than StarOffice or Corel. Much better support
> for Gnome apps.... I'm looking forward to playing and getting to know
> the new features!!!
I couldn't get Koffice to install. Something about conflicting icon files
with kdelib. Will try it again tomorrow. I am also still cleaning out the
old KDE1.1 stuff too.
>
> Konqueror! YES!
Again, it seemed slow loading from my intranet. Opera is fast, but still a
little flaky. Didn't have a chance to configure it for my proxy server yet,
but at least it can read the hosts file properly, which Opera can't.
--
Rich C.
"Because light travels faster than sound, many people appear to be
intelligent, until you hear them speak."
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: 4 Aug 2000 02:31:42 GMT
nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: C is a mid-level language. Pascal is a high level language. As such, C
: will allow you more flexability. The cost is complexity (and enough
: rope to hang yourself if you are not careful.)
I disagree with the implied premise that Pascal is more high-level
than C. Well, Ansi/ISO C at any rate, traditional C is more low-level
I'll admit since it doesn't bother to type-check anything. C has
more high-level constructs than Pascal, in fact, since Pascal can't
do varying arguments, nor does it have enough polymorphism to treat
functions as data (function pointers). C just discovered that some
things actually work better if you *don't* try to abstract them,
because the machine itself can already do some things on it's own.
(For example, there's no need to bother with converting ascii chars
to their ordinal values an back again, since they *are* numbers anyway
in the first place "ord()" and "chr()" are pointless functions in
Pascal that have no reason to exist other than to force programmers to
have to write more verbiage.)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 3 Aug 2000 21:42:11 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Note that this isn't a consumer PC; it's a VCR-like recording device
>>>with no other functionality.
>>
>>Yes, but it points out what we've known all along. The user
>>interface and office apps are the only weak points. Unix
>
>Gee, is that all? A minor little thing like that? :)
>
>That's the entire problem.
But it isn't a problem anymore. The user interface for configuration
changes becomes a non-issue when the box comes pre-loaded. Windows
would never have made it otherwise - it isn't any easier to
install. And Staroffice does more than almost everyone who
buys a commodity box needs.
>>>When do you think Linux will be viable in stores?
>>
>>As soon as someone comes up with a few canned configurations
>>that can be chosen by picking a name and produce a menu
>>with all the common applications available. If StarOffice
>>can be pre-loaded it could be done now. But, if I were
>>building and selling it I would design in the optional
>>2nd drive/dual boot with or without VMWare and make it
>>clear to the customers that they might need to add that
>>component if this is their only computer and they need
>>some specialized software not available yet for Linux.
>
>In other words, it's not ready for prime time yet. The number of
>normal joe-blows who'd do that probably approaches less than 1% of the
>market you're targeting - why save $50 just to have to shell out money
>(and time, and complexity) for another hard drive and VMWare and
>another OS to boot (costing hundreds more)?
Right - I don't think most users would actually ever need to
add the Windows HD, but the offer needs to be there with
a known price so they know what to do if they really
have to run some oddball thing. Remember, they aren't
saving $50 on software, they are saving thousands if they
use any of the other included components.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
From: Sean LeBlanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 02:53:49 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> >Erm, they ARE. All the big boys now seem to offer Linux as an OS
> >that can come with a box when you order it. And last survey I saw
> >on these kinds of things, the only two OS's to gain market share were
> >Windows (NT 4 and/or NT 5, I think) and Linux. I'd say that's shooting up
> >in popularity. Not to mention that every IPO that has any Linux
> >involvement whatsoever has prices going off the map at opening.
>
> C'mon Sean - it's obvious we're talking about desktops here,
> specificly desktop boxes bought by novices.
Well, from what I saw, it wasn't obvious. The discussion was dealing
with end users, and that could just as well include corporate end users.
> And in that market, Linux
> is a nonissue.
Nonissue? What kind of numbers do you have?
> >Linux is here to stay, love it, hate it, or don't care...it won't
> >change that fact. Best to embrace it, and add it to your bag of
> >tricks, just like any other OS or tool. And yes, Windows NT is
> >here to stay, too, at least as long as M$ is supporting it.
>
> Another non-argument.
How is that a non-argument? I'm not arguing with your point,
really...I too believe that Linux is not really ready for the prime
time AS A WORKSTATION, except in very limited capacity in specialized
environments. It doesn't mean that people won't do it, however.
If you don't believe Linux is ready for joe schmoe, fine, don't recommend
it to your non-techie friends - tell them to install Win98/NT 5.0. I use
Windows where I think it's appropriate whenever I can, and I use *nix
where I think it's appropriate...the old adage holds true: when you have
a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail, and I try to avoid that
at all costs.
Cheers,
Sean
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ????
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 20:52:37 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have heard a lot of things about Linux.
Hi, Steve.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: 4 Aug 2000 02:58:17 GMT
nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <8lteof$6lv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: says...
:> > C is a mid-level language. Pascal is a high level language. As such, C
:> > will allow you more flexability. The cost is complexity (and enough
:> > rope to hang yourself if you are not careful.)
:>
:> But at least the rope is there to pull youself back up if you should slip or
:> be shoved off cliff.
:>
:>
:>
: With the right knowledge yes.
: Point being in many languages you won't end up over the cliff in the
: first place.
: You can't over-run an array in BASIC or Pascal. You can in C.
Imagine trying to implement something like C's qsort() in Pascal,
where you can't have open-ended arrays, and you can't pass an array
of unknown types of data.
What I'm trying to say is that while there are some ways Pascal is
more high-level than C, there other ways in which C is more high-level
than Pascal. C is closer to being object-oriented than Pascal is.
In C you can have generic functions that operate on generic data,
like qsort. You can have "container classes" by making libraries
that take a void* as an argument. Generic linked lists, generic
trees, generic growing vectors, and such are all impossible in
Pascal. Sure the C way of being OO-like is prone to mistakes, but
it is something "high level" that Pascal can't even do at all.
: You can write bad data to errent memory locations in most versions of
: BASIC or Pascal. You can in C.
: It's far easier to leak memory in C. (Now fixed in C# using a Java-like
: garbage collection scheme).
Certainly this is true.
: Errors like this can be difficult to troubleshoot at best.
: (I like C/C++ ... I make a living leveraging it. But I'm hard pressed
: to call it a high level language. Mid-level is fine. And exactly what
: I need. )
C is no less high-level than Pascal. That's all I'm trying to say.
I don't consider Pascal to be very high-level either. It imposed too
much rigidity without giving any outs to get around the rigidity where
it got in the way of good coding practice. Pascal is an excellent
language for people who like to copy the same code over and over again
to make routines that differ only in the type of data they operate on.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR
Date: 4 Aug 2000 03:00:22 GMT
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 19:25:32 -0400, Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> The government throw you in jail for tax fraud if you don't pay your
>> federal tax, but Microsoft can't do anything if you opt out of the
>> Microsoft tax ? Subtle difference.
>
>Actually, Microsoft can get the government to go crack your head for
>them. Its called piracy charges....
How can they get you for piracy if you don't use their products ???
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.solaris.x86,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Learn Unix on which Unix Flavour ?
Date: 4 Aug 2000 03:00:41 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards) writes in alt.solaris.x86:
|In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Lew Pitcher wrote:
|>Ed Reppert wrote:
|>>
|>> In article <8m36fh$dtt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan Coopersmith
|>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|>>
|>> > Officially, any OS that gets certified as meeting the standards set
|>> > forth by the Open Group can be called "UNIX(TM)" - currently that list
|>> > includes Solaris, AIX, Tru64 (aka Digital UNIX), IRIX, UnixWare, HP-UX,
|>> > and even IBM OS/390.
|>>
|>> OS/390 is Unix?! When did that happen?
|>
|>IIRC, 1998 or so. It happened when the MVS Unix System Services (USS)
|>subsystem passed the X/Open conformancy tests. IBM made a big thing of
|>it at the time; it officially permitted US Govt. purchasers to
|>purchase MVS under the Posix-compliancy rules.
|
|Posix-compliance and the right to use the Unix(tm) are two
|different things, aren't they?
POSIX compliance is a subset of the standards a system has to meet to
be officially branded Unix(tm).
--
________________________________________________________________________
Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://soar.Berkeley.EDU/~alanc/ aka: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Working for, but definitely not speaking for, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 4 Aug 2000 03:05:50 GMT
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 17:05:43 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On 3 Aug 2000 21:44:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
>wrote:
>>"consider" facts of the case -- or if it is, then Microsoft's defence
>>are incompetent, which isn't really the judge's fault.
>
>Wow, I guess you support the OJ Simpson trial too, eh?
Which one ? In the criminal trial, the jury had to issue a verdict, not
a judge.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: 4 Aug 2000 03:08:13 GMT
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:31:40 -0300, Roberto Alsina wrote:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" escribió:
>
>> I was purchasing stock at the age of 12 with money I earned
>> DELIVERING NEWSPAPERS.
>
>Then why did you have only $100 a month when you were in
>college?
because he was still paying off the debts he incurred as a 12 year old.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Matt Gaia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ????
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 23:07:55 -0400
>Because Linux is a stable ?? Yes, I believe that, but so is W2K.
But when Win 2002 comes out, will MS then say that it is 13 times more
stable than Win 2K?
>It costs less, yes it's true. But I'm only buying W2K once, and am all
>set for at least 5 years if not more.
>Besided, time is money. I will lose more money by screwing around
>with a new system that I don't even know and that may not even support
>the hardware that Windwows does.
See, because people onlu use Linux (unlike M$) *because they want to*.
You average Linux user wants to learn about what makes the system work,
whereas your average Windows user, well... most of us have taken support
calls, haven't we? :)
>What software am I going to run on it ??? All the world class software
>is written for Windows. Hardly anything is ported to Linux.
Oh yes, like the Office Suite. There's a technical marvel. I still smirk
when I remember hearing that there was a flaw in the clipart viewer that
could let someone compromise your system. Once again, damn good piece of
innovation. And name one kind of software ported to Windows that hasn't
been ported to Linux. If you ever have installed Linux, you would know
that there is a *much* greater variety of software, just not your average
"click and drool" kind.
>
>I'm a Windows developer, why should I spend 2 years of my life learning
>how to program a new ssytem, that may eventually die anyway ???
If you spend two years learning a new system, then you should be
stripped of your computer and be force to register as a "Technology
Offender" for the rest of your life.
>
>I can create a great application using Visual Basic or Visual C++ in a
>matter of few days. I'm not sure if that's posible in Linux. I haven't
>heard about any Visual development envir. for Linux ...
Don't need it. Visual Development causes lack of responsibility
for programmers. Lack of responsibility causes bad code. Bad code causes
bad programs. (Do you see where this is going yet?)
>
>The only way they (companies) can defeat Microsoft is with the help of
>mom - Government. That's the only way they can do it, they can't
>succeed on the merit alone.
Well, you can't succeed when you have a company that wants to buy or force
out you and every other small business before gaining any power. I guess
that is why Microsoft has been found *guilty* in court.
>Sun Microsystems goes even so far as to get
>involved European Union. Now that's real abuse of government power.
>Here is the clear indication who is THE LOSER.
Yes, the average consumer who will, if Microsoft had it's way, be forced
to buy all their software from one certain company in Washington.
>
>I can't wait to see your replies
>
Translation: I am a win-troll and get my jollies by it.
Just a side note, but did anyone see at the Republican National
Convention, where the rep from Washington State tried to say that the
government was trying to "limit software innovation coming from our
state"? I felt it was rather amusing too see just how far MS's lobbying
would go.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
