Linux-Advocacy Digest #293, Volume #28 Mon, 7 Aug 00 22:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Gary Hallock)
Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish.....
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish..... (Black Dragon)
Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish.....
Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish.....
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish.....
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Gary Hallock)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Gary Hallock)
Watch them squirm and slither ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (Courageous)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Gary Hallock)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (Courageous)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:02:09 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> Christ. I'm getting a headache.
>
> No, I don't want to know the syntax of chmod. I want to know the
> *representation of the bits* as affected by chmod.
>
> Permissions, Gary. Post the permissions as they are displayed to a user
> of Unix examining permissions of a file who wanted to examine the sticky
> bit and the suid bit. A rudimentary description of their
> representation, or perhaps even a representation of what they "look"
> like would enable me to get an answer to the question "what are they?"
> that makes sense to me and is not confused with "how do I change them"
> or "what do they do".
This has already been explained to you, but ok, here it is again.
ls -l hello
-rwxrwxr-x 1 hallock hallock 11692 Jun 12 23:41 hello
# set the sticky bit
chmod +t hello
ls -l hello
-rwxrwxr-t 1 hallock hallock 11692 Jun 12 23:41 hello
#set the suid bit
chmod +s hello
ls -l hello
-rwsrwsr-t 1 hallock hallock 11692 Jun 12 23:41 hello
This of course tells you nothing about what they are, it is just the way ls displays
them. You would see a different represention of the bits using the stat() C
function. Is that enough or would you also like to know what a top quark tastes
like? Asking what the bits look like is akin to asking what a quark tastes like.
>
>
> I recognize that the question "what are they?" is somewhat ambiguous,
> and that you are, indeed, trying to explain them in your own fashion.
> I'll also agree that, as has happened in the past, I'm harrying you less
> for the information itself (which I could dig up myself, with less
> effort than I've expended trying to get the answer given to me, if it
> were important) than to while away the hours and try to encourage clear
> and convenient communication. You don't seem to understand that without
> being able to know what "bits" you're talking about, the (for the fourth
> time, well known and understood) fact that chmod is the command used in
> Unix to set these bits, along with all of the other 'permissions', is
> not informational. You seem to be having difficulty understanding the
> concept of *associating* something conceptually to begin with, if you'll
> forgive me for saying so. I know what the bits are, now I'm trying to
> associate them with what chmod does. Get it?
I have no problem with concept of *associating* something conceptually. You seem to
have that problem.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish.....
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:06:52 GMT
On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:57:44 GMT, Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> >Yeah, Staples is the place everyone goes for their software... right.
>>
>> Normal people do.
>
>The vast majority of "normal" people and nerds, when going to buy
>software, go to (get this) _Computer and/or software_ stores.
>Stores like CompUSA/ComputerCity, Fry's Electronics, Egghead, Etc. Very
>few go to Staples... besides every staples that I've ever been to has a
>software section that is pitiful.
You have been sucked in asshole, because I ALSO looked at the local
CompUSA in Rutland (and you can check with them) and the story was
much the same.
I am so glad I left that part out, because I knew the typical Linux
asshole would surface. You are that asshole Mike, and you took the
bait hook line and sinker.
Maybe you should look at Popiels "Pocket Fisherman" it might help
you....
>> Yea and if you try to use anything BUT a SCSI scanner on Linux it
>> dies. Same goes for high end sound cards, high end video cards and USB
>> devices.
>
>Hmm, my SBLive works great under Linux. I don't own a scanner, but do
>know a few people that use USB scanners under Linux. I personally
>would prefer a SCSI one myself since they've been around longest and I
>find SCSI much more stable and robust anyway.
You have Livewire running under Linux?
FUCKING LIAR YOU ARE MIKE!!!!!!
>> Shit same goes for everyday soundcards... Talk to Pete Goodwin about
>> that one.
>
>I don't believe much of what good old Pete says... I've used about 10
>different soundcards myself under linux and haven't had any problem
>getting them to work.
Cause you are an asshole and can't face the truth....
>> Who the hell needs 15 different editors? Or 10 dialup programs? Or 5
>> different ways to change your monitor resolution (none of which work
>> BTW).
>
>You see, most people that use Linux (and sometimes other Unices) like
>something called choice. Different people have different tastes and
>have different levels of productivity with different
>commands/apps/programs. I actually use both Solaris and Linux
>everyday.. and I use Solaris more (mainly due to it being what I admin
>most at work), but I choose to also use Linux.
Choice between a bunch of ner-do-well shit *nix systems....
So how many *nix systems ore on the DESKTOP these days Mike?
>> A collection of raw sewerage is Linux.....
>
>What are you, speaking in Yodaese now? :P
????????????????????????????????????????????????????
>> Windows 2k is more of a biz server application....But I suspect you
>> knew that already.....Try the same thing under 98SE and see what
>> happens.....
>
>I don't like being forced to pay for a bugfix for my OS thanks. 2k has
>been touted as MS' new flagship OS that is supposed to PnP as well as
>9x... it doesn't. It's supposed to install and work simply out of the
>box.. it doesn't. It's the sewage (not sewerage) as far as I'm
>concerned.
Of course not. You get your jollies compiling kernels and reading
documentation...There IS a place for your type though...
Ever see "One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest"?
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:08:30 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Well, I did: you are confusing the suid bit and the sticky bit.
>Of course you are confusing them because they are not the same
>thing, and if someone told you they were the same thing, he was
>wrong, too.
I'm so glad there's so many people who can be so illuminating and so
useless at the same time. [oops, forgot the 'sarcasm' tags]
>> >Go to the nearest unixy system, and do a man chmod, please!
>>
>> Sorry, I've already done that at least seven dozen times in my career,
>
>Ok, you would also have to read the docs, and have enough background
>to understand them. Since you have not understood them, I must guess
>you failed in one of those two.
I know that it only proves that I am of limited capabilities and
patience, and not even terribly even tempered at the moment, but I've
gotta say it.
I am so SICK of some of you people and your silly and rather pathetic
*bullshit*. You may all feel quite comfortable and secure thinking that
this repeated pattern of "Max says something clueless, and takes twenty
posts before he'll stop defending it" is an accurate perception, but the
fact is that I ask question and state opinions in other settings as
well, and have found no group of people so eager to ridicule and slow to
catch on or even try to grasp any novel consideration as I have here in
COLA.
Being a huge fan of Linux, I'm not terribly content with that, so I'm
afraid you've bought yourself a whole heap of Max on this group. I have
no reluctance to hound to extinction those who resolutely refuse to
allow reasoned, even civil, conversation, whether they're experts on
something or not, and whether they are in an advocacy group or not. I'm
here to advocate reason and the *honest*, courteous, and free flow of
information from anyone who has it to anyone who doesn't. If that means
bearding the lion in his den, and pointedly trying to influence the
actions of others through persuasion and argument in the one situation
least conducive to gentle and informative discourse, the Usenet
comp.*.advocacy groups, then so be it.
# chmod 777 foofile;ls -l
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root other 0 Aug 7 20:22 foofile
# chmod +s foofile;ls -l
-rwsrwsrwx 1 root other 0 Aug 7 20:22 foofile
^ ^
^--^--------- "setuid bit" (Execute permission with setuid set)
# chmod -s foofile;ls -l
-rwxrwxrwx 1 root other 0 Aug 7 20:22 foofile
# chmod +t foofile;ls -l
-rwxrwxrwt 1 root other 0 Aug 7 20:22 foofile
^
^------------------ "sticky bit" (Capital 'T' when execute
not already set)
# chmod +s foofile;ls -l
-rwsrwsrwt 1 root other 0 Aug 7 20:22 foofile
# chmod 666 foofile
# chmod +t foofile;ls -l
-rw-rw-rwT 1 root other 0 Aug 7 20:22 foofile
The sticky bit is presented in place of the "world execute" permission,
represented with a 'T' (if world doesn't have execute permissions) or a
't' (if world does have execute permissions). The setuid bit being set
changes the owner and group execute permissions to 's' instead of 'x'.
The world execute permission is unchanged by setting the setuid bit
(other than the use of 't' or 'T'.)
Apparently, having a Master's Degree in Computer Science does not
guarantee that someone knows the difference between a setuid and a
sticky bit. While the engineer who first explained this to me
(unrefuted by years of work after that, for the simple reason that the
issue doesn't come up all that often, and when it does it involves
either the sticky bit, or the setuid bit, not both) did express some
reservations of expertise. IIRC, in response to the question "what's
the 's' for?", the response was "I *think* that's the sticky bit, or
something like that."
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== 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: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:11:03 GMT
Jesus and I thought you assholes were Linux programmers.....
Shit, I learned about the sticky bit in AIX SYS ADMIN course 101 from
IBM...
Great course BTW...
Email me for the number as I can't quote it off the top of my head
right now.
Maybe ya'll should go back to school....
Claire
On Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:02:09 -0400, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>> Christ. I'm getting a headache.
>>
>> No, I don't want to know the syntax of chmod. I want to know the
>> *representation of the bits* as affected by chmod.
>>
>> Permissions, Gary. Post the permissions as they are displayed to a user
>> of Unix examining permissions of a file who wanted to examine the sticky
>> bit and the suid bit. A rudimentary description of their
>> representation, or perhaps even a representation of what they "look"
>> like would enable me to get an answer to the question "what are they?"
>> that makes sense to me and is not confused with "how do I change them"
>> or "what do they do".
>
>This has already been explained to you, but ok, here it is again.
>
>ls -l hello
>-rwxrwxr-x 1 hallock hallock 11692 Jun 12 23:41 hello
>
># set the sticky bit
>chmod +t hello
>ls -l hello
>-rwxrwxr-t 1 hallock hallock 11692 Jun 12 23:41 hello
>
>#set the suid bit
>chmod +s hello
>ls -l hello
>-rwsrwsr-t 1 hallock hallock 11692 Jun 12 23:41 hello
>
>This of course tells you nothing about what they are, it is just the way ls displays
>them. You would see a different represention of the bits using the stat() C
>function. Is that enough or would you also like to know what a top quark tastes
>like? Asking what the bits look like is akin to asking what a quark tastes like.
>
>>
>>
>> I recognize that the question "what are they?" is somewhat ambiguous,
>> and that you are, indeed, trying to explain them in your own fashion.
>> I'll also agree that, as has happened in the past, I'm harrying you less
>> for the information itself (which I could dig up myself, with less
>> effort than I've expended trying to get the answer given to me, if it
>> were important) than to while away the hours and try to encourage clear
>> and convenient communication. You don't seem to understand that without
>> being able to know what "bits" you're talking about, the (for the fourth
>> time, well known and understood) fact that chmod is the command used in
>> Unix to set these bits, along with all of the other 'permissions', is
>> not informational. You seem to be having difficulty understanding the
>> concept of *associating* something conceptually to begin with, if you'll
>> forgive me for saying so. I know what the bits are, now I'm trying to
>> associate them with what chmod does. Get it?
>
>I have no problem with concept of *associating* something conceptually. You seem to
>have that problem.
>
>Gary
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:11:27 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said void in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 18:46:31 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>In the six years that I have been working with Unix workstations
>>regularly (if not routinely), I have on occasion heard people refer to
>>what I assumed was supposed to be the suid as "the sticky bit". How do
>>they differ?
>
>What, you're too good to read the copious manual references I provided?
I'm too bored to read copious manual references, regardless of who
supplied them. Try to be more concise in pointing to the information
you wish to provide. Better yet, just provide it. I realize this opens
you to potential problems should you be unable to figure out what
information is useful in clearing up the confusion, but I suggest you
need to take your chances, or move on to a discussion which you find
worth the effort to *contribute* to.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== 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] (Black Dragon)
Subject: Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish.....
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:10:22 GMT
On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:46:47 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `[EMAIL PROTECTED]' said:
>WTF are you talking about?
You, Simon.
--
Black Dragon
"Trying to make the Internet a better place, one Linux box at a time."
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish.....
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:12:08 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You are Steve/Simon777/deadpenguin/Susie Wong/Claire Lynn/etc. We know it
and you know we know it. Your finger prints are all over the headers and
contents of your original article of this thread. The statements you made
to Black Dragon includes phrases that a so typical of you, that if there was
any doubt that Claire is just another of your identities you have
eliminated that doubt.
I have let the insulting and offensive terminology "nerd" when you used it
in the first article in this thread. But now you have reused it in your
reply to me, directed as an insult to a group that by your usage shows that
you intended to include me as well. I don't want a full repeat of the
"geek" incident. However, I do request an apology from you for myself and
the rest of the members of the group you were maligning.
P.S. You response to me here does prove that you did not kill file me after
all.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Yet another idiot......
>
> What is it with this group?
>
> Are they all so afraid of the truth?
>
> What a bunch of nerds....
>
> Claire
>
>
> On Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:27:33 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Read it and weep Linux Nerds....
> >>
> >> Do yourself a favor and try Windows 2k or SE or ME because Linux is
> >> for the nerds.
> >
> >Hello Simon, just how many aliases are you now up to?
> >
> >Deadpenguin by any other name would post the same.
> >
> >
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish.....
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:23:36 GMT
What the hell are you talking about?
Fingerprints?
Headers?\
Is this some kind of a Neo-Nazi group?
I'm beginning to think you Linux users are even crazier than I thought
you were...
Claire
On Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:12:08 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You are Steve/Simon777/deadpenguin/Susie Wong/Claire Lynn/etc. We know it
>and you know we know it. Your finger prints are all over the headers and
>contents of your original article of this thread. The statements you made
>to Black Dragon includes phrases that a so typical of you, that if there was
>any doubt that Claire is just another of your identities you have
>eliminated that doubt.
>
>I have let the insulting and offensive terminology "nerd" when you used it
>in the first article in this thread. But now you have reused it in your
>reply to me, directed as an insult to a group that by your usage shows that
>you intended to include me as well. I don't want a full repeat of the
>"geek" incident. However, I do request an apology from you for myself and
>the rest of the members of the group you were maligning.
>
>P.S. You response to me here does prove that you did not kill file me after
>all.
>
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Yet another idiot......
>>
>> What is it with this group?
>>
>> Are they all so afraid of the truth?
>>
>> What a bunch of nerds....
>>
>> Claire
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:27:33 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Read it and weep Linux Nerds....
>> >>
>> >> Do yourself a favor and try Windows 2k or SE or ME because Linux is
>> >> for the nerds.
>> >
>> >Hello Simon, just how many aliases are you now up to?
>> >
>> >Deadpenguin by any other name would post the same.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows ME $59.99..Good Bye Linux. .Thanks for the fish.....
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:23:58 GMT
WTF is simon?
Claire
On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:10:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Black Dragon) wrote:
>
>On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:46:47 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `[EMAIL PROTECTED]' said:
>
>>WTF are you talking about?
>
>You, Simon.
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:20:26 -0700
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > kevhsu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Really?
> > > > > Show me an NT box with 80 GB/sec bandwidth
> > > >
> > > > Um, show me *any* box with 80 GB/sec bandwidth.
> > > >
> > > > > Show me an NT box with 700 GB/sec bandwidth.
> > > >
> > > > Um, show me *any* box with 700 GB/sec bandwidth.
> > >
> > > Read it and weep: http://www.sgi.com/origin/3000/3800.html
> > >
> > > 716 GB/sec system bandwidth
> >
> > do you even have the slightest clue what they mean when they say "system
> > bandwidth?"
>
> As a Purdue University-educated engineer, what the hell do you think?
Apparently not. But there there... maybe you should stick to making boilers.
The Origin 3800 system utilizes up to 512 CPUs, with 6.4GB/s maximum
"aggregated" bandwidth per CPU, according to the whitepapers and datasheets
available on the same site. The "716GB/s system bandwidth" accounts for the
entire cluster of CPUs, which are acting as a localized cluster system
utilizing their metamemory crossbar, R-Brick and C-Brick technologies as
coordination.
Basically, it's a cluster in a box. It's the same as building your own 19"
rack mount cluster using NT boxes. And the 716Gb/s -- NOTE- Giga*BIT*, not
byte -- figure is purely a marketing one.
So that's 80GB/s on the Origin 3800..; with 16 x 32processor clusters.
Which, funnily enough, if you divide 80 by 16... you get about 5GB; which is
close to the 6.4Gb aggregate speed. That's 3.2GB to the memory store from
the coordinating controller, and 1.6Gb to each of two processors.
So... in terms of getting data to the processor, that's about 1.6Gb per
processor. Nice.
But nowhere near that ludicrous benchmarketing-conjured figure you quoted.
Simon
Simon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:24:35 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jesus and I thought you assholes were Linux programmers.....
>
> Shit, I learned about the sticky bit in AIX SYS ADMIN course 101 from
> IBM...
>
I have to assume your comments were directed at Max, not me, even though you replied to
my post. And no, Max is definitely not a Linux programmer.
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:28:21 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>
> That is patently, even ludicrously, untrue. As is the illusion that
> Roberto presented. I am gracious and courteous in response to people
> who are gracious and courteous in response. Those that provide
> information, like Roberto, might get insulted should they not be
> gracious and courteous as well as informative. Those that don't, like
> Christopher Smith, are gratuitously ridiculed as trolls.
>
Not true. You are anything but gracious and courteous and you have
insulted me many times, which is why I started being so abrupt with you.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Watch them squirm and slither
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:29:47 GMT
Typical Linoasshole reaction.....
Post a fact (Windows ME is going at $59.99) and they all try and
squirm together to try and attempt damage control.
Just like cockroaches.
The roaches can deny all they want but the truth is obvious.....
LINUX CANNOT GAIN DESKTOP MARKET SHARE EVEN WHEN IT IS GIVEN AWAY!!!!
TRUTH IS NOBODY WANTS IT.......
PROVE IT WRONG...LINSUX...ASSHOLES>>>>>>>>
Claire
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:31:46 GMT
Yes they were Gary...
Sorry I didn't get the original message.
You explained things quite well, and the post was NOT directed at
you...
SORRY...
Claire....
On Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:24:35 -0400, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Jesus and I thought you assholes were Linux programmers.....
>>
>> Shit, I learned about the sticky bit in AIX SYS ADMIN course 101 from
>> IBM...
>>
>
>I have to assume your comments were directed at Max, not me, even though you replied
>to
>my post. And no, Max is definitely not a Linux programmer.
>
>Gary
------------------------------
From: Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:39:35 GMT
> Fixed version:
>
> void f ( char** str, int nchars )
> {
> *str = (char*) malloc ( nchars * sizeof(char) );
> }
>
> void g ()
> {
> char* str = NULL;
> f ( &str, 6);
> strcpy ( str, "nancy" );
> }
>
> Of course, you really want to change f to return a pointer, making the
> address-of operation in g unnecessary, and thus allowing for more optimization
> (and making it more readable).
>
> You really want to say 80% of applicants don't see these things? Yikes! And
> I thought it was just our first years ;-)
You answered exactly correctly on all accounts and score in the
top 20% of all candidates. You would, on these grounds, bizarre
employment history, bad personal hygeine, or bizarre gentalia
growing from your forehead withstanding :), be given an immediate
hire by me.
To answer your question, the reason that there is a constraint on
the parameter passing for f() was to demonstrate that the applicant
understands pointers as opposed to uses them by rote. It is my
experience that someone who cannot combine pass by reference with
a pointer does, in fact, not really understand a pointer.
Hence the question.
You would have gotten extra credit if you had checked to see if
malloc actually worked... :)
C//
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:39:00 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> I'm too bored to read copious manual references, regardless of who
> supplied them. Try to be more concise in pointing to the information
> you wish to provide. Better yet, just provide it. I realize this opens
> you to potential problems should you be unable to figure out what
> information is useful in clearing up the confusion, but I suggest you
> need to take your chances, or move on to a discussion which you find
> worth the effort to *contribute* to.
>
What you seem to fail to understand is that this very fact, that you are too
bored to even spend 60 seconds typing man chmod and reading the result,
makes other people too bored to reply. You have always been very open
about your total contempt for reading manuals or doing anything to learn on
your own (perhaps for fear of being contaminated by engineers). How can
you expect any helpful response to such posts?
Gary
------------------------------
From: Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:42:25 GMT
> Who knows how this one will blow up?
Who knows indeed? Bizarre behavior will generally
follow. A good analysis.
C//
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
