Linux-Advocacy Digest #406, Volume #28 Mon, 14 Aug 00 19:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Are Linux people illiterate? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Another satisfied Linux user ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Another satisfied Linux user
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Rock and a hard place. ("MH")
Re: Microsoft MCSE
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Pat McCann)
Will MS kill off Compaq and Gateway? (junekis)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay (Mike Marion)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Gary Hallock)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Gary Hallock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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?
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:25:04 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chris Wenham in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>>>>>> "T" == T Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Here's the defenition of pander: One who ministers to the evil
> >> designs and passions of another. "Those wicked panders to
> >> avarice and ambition." --Burke.
>
> > Well, Merrium-Webster says
>
> > 1 a : a go-between in love intrigues b : PIMP 2 : someone who
> > caters to or exploits the weaknesses of others
>
> You looked up the defenition of 'pander' as a /noun/. It's being used
> as a verb, Max.
And the first definition of the verb "to pander" is "to act as a
pander".
> Using Merriam-Webter's defenition of the word as a /verb/ we get:
>
> "to provide gratification for others' desires <films that pander to
> the basest emotions>"
>
> Which means we can /also/ use it in this context instead of
> "Cater". But in the original conversation it wasn't the word "pander"
> that was used inappropriately, but "cater". Here's M-W's defenition
> of that (as a VERB).
[...]
So you're going to ignore the relationship of the noun 'pander' to the
verb 'to pander', and insist that "to pander" can't be used in the way I
described?
I am not concerned with the definition of the word, Chris. I'm only
concerned with the *meaning* of the word, and to say that OEM's "pander
to their customers" is to say that they "provide gratification for their
customers desires", and to say that they "cater to MS" is to say that
they provide MS something it needs (pre-load customers) are quick to
cowtow and genuflect, because they have to be as servants. Since OEMs
pointedly don't provide alternative OSes, it seems like meaningless
posturing to claim they "cater to consumer desires".
If you weren't aware that "cater" and "pander" have a lot of affinity,
then you're still getting caught up. That isn't news to me. But trying
to base an argument on dictionary definitions is a futile effort, to say
the least.
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:25:20 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Nathaniel Jay Lee in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>T. Max Devlin wrote:
>> That's OK. I don't really mind insults hardly at all. Particularly
>> ones like that, which strike me as quite humorous (more condescension,
>> as I chuckle while someone calls me a fuck-wit.) "Thanks for the
>> memories bitch?" I love it. ;-)
>>
>> No, its the ad hominem attacks I can't stand. Insults are no problem.
>>
>> Thanks for your time. Hope it helps. Dipshit. ;-)
>>
>> [I'm laughing with you, Nate, I hope, not at you; honest. I promise.]
>>
>
>Question for the entire group:
>
>Has anyone ever wondered why they make it possible for you to ignore
>someone on usenet, yet they don't make it possible for you to make
>someone ignore you?
That's trivial, Nate. They do. Just stop posting, and I'll have no
trouble ignoring you. Or better yet, get a sense of humor, and stop
posturing.
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Are Linux people illiterate?
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:25:47 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> They're trying it in the US schools with this "invented spelling"
>> bullshit.
>>
>> And look at how stupid these kids are now that they are graduating.
>> ...or should I say...being shoved out the door, as a mass of
>> uneducated boobs.
>
>That sound just like the attempt to elevate gutter talk to the level of a
>language and calling it ebonics. They are now starting to teach it in
>schools as a foreign language in the place of traditional foreign language
>studies.
I doubt you could pack more misrepresentative sentiments into a single
post without mentioning Microsoft.
Does any of this supposition have rational support, or is all just
reports from the birch grove?
--
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]
Subject: Re: Another satisfied Linux user
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:26:06 GMT
Get back to class.
You're wasting the taxpayers money....
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 15:47:30 -0500, "Bobby D. Bryant"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> However:
>>
>> I agree with everything he says as far as Linux is concerned though,
>> and I was wondering what took him so long to get into Linux?
>
>What took you so long to come up with your new bogonym?
>
>
>Bobby Bryant
>Austin, Texas
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Another satisfied Linux user
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:27:19 GMT
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:22:09 -0400, Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 13:12:05 -0400, Milton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"...a lot securer than Windows NT or Windows 2000"
>
>How so?
maturity and open source.
MS has never given a shit about security and they've never understood
the difference between a LAN and a WAN. They think the entire world can
be treated as one happy family on the LAN to be given complete trust.
------------------------------
From: [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?
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:17:35 GMT
In article <NjZk5.18658$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Shocktrooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8mmqh9$aaq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
-- snip --
> > The point is that *IF* a preconfigured box was offered at Retail
> > Outlet USA, and *IF* Joe and Jane could play with it the same way
> > they can play with a Windows box, there is ***ABSOLUTELY NO WAY*
> > that you can guarantee that they will still buy the Windows box.
>
> No,
Glad you agree.
> but the first time they wish to install some software their friend
> has.. they'll probably be mightly pissed.
So? Assuming you're correct, we must stop and reflect that this is a two
way street. Their hypothetical Windows-running friend may be equally
pissed to discover that he cannot install GNOME or GIMP, both of which
his friend can download for free, and *upgrade* for free.
Curtis
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Rock and a hard place.
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:29:52 -0400
> So far I've had to re-install Windows twice. I have had about 3 blue
> screens at startup. All this in about a week and a half. I have all the
> latest drivers, and the machine has a new hard disk. This is just the
> way Windows is.
I don't think this can really be blamed entirely on windows. Blue screen at
startup is not the norm in any sense. I'm not saying your problems aren't
real, or aren't infuriating. Just that your problem is indicative of a
serious configuration problem in need of more investigation. Perhaps
removing and then reinstalling piece by piece would provide a process of
elimination that could identify the culprit.
I run windows because I develop with it. Of course this requires that I have
all the unstable flavors.
Which includes 95b, 98SE, WinMe, Nt4 and W2K. None of these machines has
ever bluescreened on startup. But then I run tried and true, more run of the
mill hardware than you do. But...I don't blue
screen very often at all. And as I said, never on startup. WinMe seems the
most likely to blue screen.
But again, never during startup.
(I Beta tested it and have an advance copy of the RTM code) But I know I've
got crap for a video driver. (#9 Rev 3D) on this PC. That card and it's
driver(s) are notorious for problems on most platforms.
Good luck with it until you find Linux alternatives.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft MCSE
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 14:41:07 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> No kidding. Yet curiously, vb forms 75% of the core training necessary
> to get systems developer certification from micros~1 and the rest of it
> is access, sql, foxpro, and exchange. So according to you, micros~1 is
> offering systems developer certifications for people who aren't really
> systems developers. Well, that's kinda like offering engineering
> certificates to people who aren't really engineers which is rather where
> this conversation began.
It appear that we have come full circle though the Wonderland of MCSE with a
side trip through MCSD. And the result is that the MCSEs are anything but
SEs.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 15:05:28 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Could you give an example of something that "alienates CLI fans" yet is
> hard
> to disable for them?
Bring up Corel again, is a perfect example. It is not the issue that users
that are comfortable with the command line would be bothered. It is an
example of any sysadmin being relgated to being a subordinate OS. That
makes no difference if the users and the sysadmin are users of the CLI or X
or both, the computer should respect the authority humans. The computer may
try to probe the hardware, but if it finds something not right it may ask
the sysadmin for guidence, but no more than that. What every configuration
that the sysadmin establishes must be honor reguardless of the determination
of the computer that it could be invalid.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 15:16:24 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>Obviously my message is going about three feet over everyone's head.
Not my head, I have been fighting this fight in one way or another for
years. Before Linux, before Macs, before OS/2, before Windows, before Dos.
>I know that it's ridiculous sounding, but if
>enough people 'want' something to happen, in Linux it's just a matter of
>time before it *does* happen.
That is a form of mob mentality. I happens all too often.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 15:35:28 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> People can bitch all they want, and the rivers will keep flowing
> downhill :-)
until the U.S. Army corp of engineers build dams, install flow regulators
and pumps to make the water flow to reverse it normal course because enough
moron with influence wanted it that way.
> I have NEVER seen this. Where did you see it?
Take a look in the back posts in alt.linux, take a look at the industry rags
and take a look at a thread in this NG that you were a part of a little
while back.
> Why? ignore them. They did nothing to you. If they want that, then
> someone
> will provide it to them. You want something else, and probably someone
> will provide that something else to you.
>
> Now, preventing them from getting their clone does nothing to advance
> the
> state of the system YOU want. It's just pointless elitism.
It is not elitism any more than you living in a house built by your family
you are comfortable in it. Then outsiders who are not your neighbors come
along and start demanding that you home has to be changed into something you
don't like, just to attract more people to you neighborhood. You can just
ignore them, right? They get their opinion on the news, on the radio, in
the newspaper. They demand changes, changes, soon some of you neighbors try
to be accomodating the join them, then together they pettition at the city
hall. Zoning ordances are passed, your house has to be changed into
something to accomodate them. You protest and are told that if you don't
like the changes you can just move out. In the end, when the new zoning
ordances are in full force nobody likes it. Almost everyone moves out the
neighborhood dies.
> And finally: if you feel you are not being provided what you want,
> get your hands dirty and create it. Free software is not a spectators
> sport.
But we have what we want, we are happy with it. What we don't want it to
have it taken away.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.software.licensing
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
From: Pat McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Aug 2000 15:43:58 -0700
Some people wrote:
>
> >> They do indeed have the right to determine whether you can "use" their
> >> intellectual property, whether you physically distribute it or not.
> >
> >Sure. You need valid licenses to use libraries in order to use
> >programs that depend on them. That doesn't make the program a
> >derived work, or not a work.
>
> Those licenses don't have anything to do with copyright protection from
> the utilizer's point of view. They may from the developer's point of
> view. Only GPL ensures that there aren't two different points of view.
> Copyright law, unfortunately, does not, as currently applied. (By that
> I mean by being considered compatible with secret source software. To
> me, if you're publishing, you're publishing, and if you're not, it isn't
> intellectual property.)
0) Don't you mean "shouldn't" instead of "isn't"? Because it IS.
1) Let's remember what IP we're really talking about here. Namely, a
right to copy and a right to derive and a right to distribute (all
exclusive). Those are what you're really selling, buying, licensing,
etc. (They're not totally independent, of course, but nearly so.) The
law handles each differently in certain ways.
It's probably better to write about copiers, derivers, and distributors
in these kind of discussions, but to consider your argument using
"utilizer" and "developers" (with special, restricted, non-standard
meanings) lets see which rights are being discussed for each.
Is the utilizer only copying? Probably. But he might also be deriving
if, for example, linking (to or from a library or plug-in) is
considered, by some long stretch of reasoning to be the creation of a
derivative work. (That's a whole nother subject. See below.)
How about the developer? He's obviously copying, deriving, and usually
distributing.
Both the GPL and the law have different points of view over these two
classes of licensees. I thought I'd have more to say here, but on
further consideration, I really don't know what you are arguing.
Are you saying that the GPL as a contract with conditions of acceptance
and continuance is going beyond copyright law somehow? I haven't seen
a license that doesn't do the same to some degree. Care to clarify?
Dang. This fell apart, but I hope the beginning had something useful.
------------------------------
From: junekis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.sys.intel,comp.os.windows.advocacy,comp.os.mac.advocacy,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Will MS kill off Compaq and Gateway?
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:05:34 -0400
==============E19395E111F9E458A5EFE8B2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Here's a little speculation for you conspiracy buffs:
Microsoft has been heard saying for the last couple of years that they
are
having trouble coming up with upgrades to Windows that are compelling
enough
to cause people to upgrade - so to protect their revenues, they may have
to come
up with a version that is "rented" instead of purchased - you will write
a monthly
check for, say, $30 to microsoft every month as your "software bill".
In order to enforce this, obviously, the software would have to be
server-centric,
and you would have to kill off all those old desktop systems that are
running perfectly
well with Win 9X.
First, MS starts saying that Windows is going to "evolve" into
next-generation windows
services, which won't reside on the PC, and will be internet-based.
Then all of a sudden, here comes the X-BOX, reported to have a Pent III
CPU, 64MB RAM,
an 8 GB hard drive, and a high speed LAN card. MS "swears" that this is
NOT a PC, and that
they aren't out to compete with PC makers.
That may be half true. What if the X-BOX is intended to be a client
machine for MSN based
server-centric next generation Windows?
Given Microsofts reputation for oft-times smothering its own children,
if I were a PC maker, I would be investing in Linux BIG TIME, so that I
would have
something to sell if and when MS cancels sales of desktop windows in
order to
boost sales of the X-BOX!
Then again, maybe only IBM and Dell will be smart enough to survive a
great Microsoft Backstabbing!
--
++ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | sgi ++
++ John Unekis | 11785 Beltsville Dr #1300 ++
++ Customer Education | Beltsville, MD 20705 ++
++ Customer and Prof. Services | tel# 301.572.3141 ++
==============E19395E111F9E458A5EFE8B2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Here's a little speculation for you conspiracy buffs:
<p>Microsoft has been heard saying for the last couple of years that they
are
<br>having trouble coming up with upgrades to Windows that are compelling
enough
<br>to cause people to upgrade - so to protect their revenues, they may
have to come
<br>up with a version that is "rented" instead of purchased - you
will write a monthly
<br>check for, say, $30 to microsoft every month as your "software bill".
<p>In order to enforce this, obviously, the software would have to be server-centric,
<br>and you would have to kill off all those old desktop systems that are
running perfectly
<br>well with Win 9X.
<p>First, MS starts saying that Windows is going to "evolve" into next-generation
windows
<br>services, which won't reside on the PC, and will be internet-based.
<p>Then all of a sudden, here comes the X-BOX, reported to have a Pent
III CPU, 64MB RAM,
<br>an 8 GB hard drive, and a high speed LAN card. MS "swears" that this
is NOT a PC, and that
<br>they aren't out to compete with PC makers.
<p>That may be half true. What if the X-BOX is intended to be a client
machine for MSN based
<br>server-centric next generation Windows?
<p>Given Microsofts reputation for oft-times smothering its own children,
<br>if I were a PC maker, I would be investing in Linux BIG TIME, so that
I would have
<br>something to sell if and when MS cancels sales of desktop
windows in order to
<br>boost sales of the X-BOX!
<p>Then again, maybe only IBM and Dell will be smart enough to survive
a
<br>great Microsoft Backstabbing!
<br>
<pre>--
++ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
+sgi
+ ++
++ John
+Unekis
+ | 11785 Beltsville Dr #1300 ++
++ Customer
+Education
+| Beltsville, MD
+20705 ++
++ Customer and Prof. Services | tel#
+301.572.3141
+ ++</pre>
</html>
==============E19395E111F9E458A5EFE8B2==
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:36:45 GMT
In article <8mp6v4$msc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-- snip --
> since I disgree with the law in principle and consider most of the
> evidence to be irrelevant, it's hardly surprising I have a different
> opinion to you, no ?
Translation: "Microsoft Is Always Right And Everybody Else Is Always
Wrong."
And Mr. Smith denies being a Microsoft Cheerleader. Preposterous.
Curtis
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:54:27 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> DOS is dead (you must have left school 20 years ago).
> Linux is Unix. So you agree with the point then. When I was at school,
> we used Sun everywhere, but that was becuase Linux did not exist then.
Same here. Well, Linux did exist then, but it wasn't as mature yet..
many of us did use it at home to do programming assignments though.
> they decide to use at work? Why do you think MS tries to give away
> windows machines to universites anytime they can?
Not to mention that it was the growing use of Unix systems at
Universities that helped to push it's widespread use in the firstplace.
Heck... many of the unix advances that are in mainstream use were made
at Universities.. I mean the B in BSD is for Berkeley.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
Q: Where would Microsoft take you today? A: Confutatis maledictis,
flammis acribus addictis... Micro$oft has a TV ad for their Internet
Exploder which uses "Confutatis Maledictis" from Mozart's Requiem. As
the
announcer asks "Where do you want to go today?", the choir sings:
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" which is Latin for
"The
damned and accursed are convicted to the flames of hell."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:54:10 -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:
> Ironically, Gary, your problem all along has been that you simply aren't
> prepared to give me enough information to be useful, let alone even
> imagining giving me more than I can handle. Of course, there's only so
> many hours even in my day, and the number of references is obviously
> severely curtailed, and further restricted by the variety of sources and
> issues I wish to explore.
>
And there are only so many hours in my day and I have better things to do than
teach you.
>
> But you have certainly never even begun to approach giving me more than
> I can "handle", bro.
>
Your posts prove just the opposite.
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:58:37 -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 understand them just fine. I merely didn't have them all memorized.
>
> Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
>
Why don't you install Linux on your machine so you can learn on your own?
Gary
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
