Linux-Advocacy Digest #562, Volume #28 Tue, 22 Aug 00 13:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: DOWNLOAD YOUR FREE TRIAL VERSION OF POSTAGENT!! 6919 ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: When it's time to not be nice... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic
Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux growth stagnating)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (Bob Hauck)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: What dist is easyLinux based on? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Eric Bennett)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re:
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 12:09:33 -0400
Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Wrong. The individuals named (other than Petrich) all engage in
> > hit-and-run campaigns consisting of meaningless red-herrings and
> > out and out lies against me. I decided that rather than answer the
> > charges from these assholes individually, a blanket pre-dismissal of
> > their lies would be a better strategy.
>
> "hit-and-run campaigns consisting of meaningless red-herrings"
>
> Hey, check your reader, this c.o.l.a! Hit-n-run campaigns and twisted
> tortured arguments over red-herrings are common grist for this place,
> but you don't see anyone else with a 29 line sig trying to stop
> arguments before they begin, do you? Where are these people who are
> hounding you in every NG, including this one? Answer: they aren't
> here. I've never seen them. At least in c.o.l.a. your sig isn't even
> needed right now, but in the meantime you are creating brand new
> enemies. Your "pre-dismissal" isn't one since I've never heard the
> other side of the story anyway. For everyone in c.o.l.a, your sig *is*
> *utterly* *pointless*.
>
> >
> > My .sig has SIGNIFICANTLY reduced the volume of such activity against me,
> > which is exactly what I designed it to do.
>
> No, what its done is create a brand new problem that has lead to a
> number of flame threads in c.o.l.a about your sig. Considering the
> number of *plonk*s I've seen, from people not in your sig, you are
> increasingly not particularly well liked here, and have accumulated far
> more enemies than your sig could possibly handle. Are you going to add
> a section to your sig for everyone who is nagging you about it? Does
> that help your cause, by having so many readers stop reading your
> posts? If I had an agenda I wanted to espouse, the first thing I
> wouldn't do is start pissing off complete strangers with an aggravating
> sig, before ever having the chance at advocating my beliefs to them.
> What you're doing is just plain *stupid*.
>
> >[snip abomination]
>
> -----= 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! =-----
Here's an idea:
When you see:
---
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
STOP READING.
Now, is that so fucking hard?
--
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 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:
comp.os.geos.programmer,comp.os.inferno,comp.os.lantastic,comp.os.linux.alpha
Subject: Re: DOWNLOAD YOUR FREE TRIAL VERSION OF POSTAGENT!! 6919
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 12:11:39 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> What if you could reach a world-wide audience in an instant? You can with PostAgent!
>
> Turn your computer into a large scale Usenet news posting machine and Nuke the
>Competition with PostAgent!!
>
> Use it to maximize the exposure of your ideas or products on the newsgroups!!!
>
> Download your FREE trial version of PostAgent NOW and start promoting your business
>on the net.
>
>
>
> PLEASE VISIT http://www.postagent.com/default.asp?fromAgentID=2084 for more
>information.
>
> fykdhmwxocwlmdygibtjrylkrvikziugsrmgrxnbzkhmsjhdzyhugorjrbdvemnqzibiniohifivehurxhw
Why the fuck would unix users want to run LoseDows software????
--
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 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: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:17:16 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bullshit. I didn't say that. Go read the damn thread.
> Whenever Nathaniel Lee said I was saying that, I said "no
> I am not saying that, I am saying this other thing".
cancel control messages can sure be handy.
> Here's what I want to say: You don't like the direction linux is going?
> Work and fix it. It doesn't make any difference if you have contributed
> in the past or not, really, you still need to work and fix it.
No body has to work to fix any of this, if it was not broken by others
first. In that case we were talking about somthing that is correct the way
it is. You seemed to take the position that hey we can break anything we
like and if you want it fixed, the way it was, then fix it back into working
order again and don't bother me with your concerns.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: When it's time to not be nice... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and
Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux growth stagnating)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:02:52 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Oh, I see where this is coming from. I indeed believe people who
> actually
> write the code are to be considered with deference by those who only use
> the software. If you don't like it, fine by me.
Well then your have a problem there. How can you know for certain when you
are dealing with a programmer and when you are dealing with only a user of
the software? I for one have been a programmer going back decades and I
have been a contributer to the Linux code base since near its beginning.
I don't subscribe to you view of programmers being lords and the users being
peasents. All users, in time will tend to contribute in their own way and
besides all programmers are users too. Just because some have not reconized
for their contribution to the codebase and the community, does not mean that
they have not contributed to the betterment of the both. If there is a
diconomy forming in the Linux community between contributers and just users,
it is attitudes like yours that fosters it growth.
I take the opposie view, I help and encourage neophytes to their efforts to
join the Linux community. I try to encourage neophytes who have valuable
skills for the community to contribute. I suppose when I see an untried
neophyte I see a lord in the making while all you see is another peasent
ready for the dole of benefiting from the work of the lords.
> I can't even recall the reply, however, I get 500 emails a day, more or
> less.
> If you have an issue with something I say in a newsgroup, speak it out
> in the newsgroup. Or even post the email. I don't care. I don't even
> think
> that, had I told you to go fuck yourself on email (which I probably did
> not)
> that would show a general contempt for the linux users, only for you.
I have alread described enough of the email and its reply that posting the
original would add nothing new to the discussion. By the way, If you don't
recall the email from me or your reply, how come you have just used the same
to words again here? I never did tell *anyone* what your wording was and
yet you have just used it. Only you and myself, and maybe a postmaster in
between, knew what you said. Yet here it is again embeded in yout last
sentence.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 16:48:41 GMT
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 15:08:58 +1000, Christopher Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:50:51 +1000, Christopher Smith
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Nothing in the OS could have stopped those thing you're talking about
>> >not do what they did.
>> Except that none of my *nix mailers will execute a shell script when I
>> click on it.
>Neither will outlook. You have to specifically tell it to.
>
>Plus, there's nothing _stopping_ your *nix mailers from running a script by
>piping it to the shell - it'd get the same dumb people .vbs attachments do.
If, if, if. But nobody else does it quite the way MS does it and
there's a reason for that. Maybe MS needs to change the message to "I
am about to run a program and IT MIGHT WIPE OUT YOUR SYSTEM". Or maybe
they could skip the warning messages and just handle known file types
by running one of a list of known viewers, and only offer to save the
rest to disk or open in an editor. Which is what *nix mailers
typically do.
>> You're right, the OS can't stop this. But then, it *is*
>> a poor design from a security point of view to have applications behave
>> the way Outlook does.
>
>It's a convenience thing.
Yes, I know that. Not much convenience compared with doing it the
right way, and a big down-side risk.
>risk, hence the warning and request for specific permission before it
>actually _does_ something.
"Do you really want to open this attachment?" What does that really
mean? Are we going to run it, open it in a viewer, what?
You are right, though, that part of this is user education. Windows
users do have a habit of mailing executables around to each other,
stupid stuff like the "frog in a blender" animation, little games, etc.
This is just asking for trojans. Users need to be educated to the
risks. Maybe ILoveYou and friends are performing that task.
>> >Given a video card costs about $10, and the VGA driver is about as
>> >solid as they get, I'd say this particular weakness is very, very
>> >theoretical.
>>
>> It is quite a bit less theoretical for embedded systems.
>
>Whoa. Who said anything about embedded systems ?
I did. My point being that there *are* disadvantages to forcing the
use of a GUI. On huge systems you may not notice, but in lots of
situations you do. Embedded stuff is just one of the more obvious
cases, even at the "high end" where MS and it's analyst friends tell us
that NT is going to capture 30% of the market in two years.
>I find it hard to believe that embedded NT features a GUI. I also
>find it hard to believe that the GUI is particularly hard to remove.
It is optional, sort of. It can run headless but still needs to have
much of the GUI code along for the ride. The reason is that many
services and such insist on popping up notification boxes.
<http://www.cetj.com/archives/9909/f3.shtml>:
"Headless support - This enables Windows NT to be used in devices that
boot and run without a mouse, keyboard, or display device. Many
embedded systems do not expose either a traditional user interface
(e.g., Windows- based or DOS-based PC) or, in many instances, any local
user interface whatsoever. Windows NT requires a display driver to
interface between the graphics sub-system and the video hardware. All
currently available video display drivers assume and rely on the
existence of underlying video hardware. Microsoft has included a NULL
video driver component that frees the need for video hardware."
IOW, to run headless, we simply load a dummy video driver but still
have all of the other code. 12 MB minimum footprint without
networking, 16 MB with. Doesn't include any services (e.g. a web
server). Even 12 MB is _much_ fatter than Linux or *BSD _with_
networking (which fit on one or two floppies).
I read a more detailed article about this in one of those old-fashioned
paper magazines, don't know if it is on the web.
>> The problem with welding the GUI on and "integrating" everything they
>> way MS is doing it is that you reduce the flexibility of the system.
>
>It's only welded and integrated from a product description point of view.
In theory, yes. In practice, it is pretty hard to get rid of. There
seem to be a lot of incidental dependencies. You can blame non-MS
programmers if you'd like, but that doesn't fix the situation.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 12:58:43 -0400
"Chad Irby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > No they are a private company holding a monopoly over their market.
> > They are a monopoly in the legal sense because if I decided to sell
> > power in their government granted market territory, I would be
> > legaly prosecuted, and sued out of business.
>
> Nope.
>
> That all changed a few years ago. Now, you can sell electrical power
> anywhere you want, and in many places, you can even force the power
> companies to let you use their lines for that purpose.
Nope, just talked to an engineer at my local rural electric service a month
ago whos line (and service area) ends at the edge of my property. They still
cannot run a line to my house by law. I must pay 12 cents per kw/hr instead
of 4 cents because of it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What dist is easyLinux based on?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 14:44:43 +0100
Ross Levis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> did eloquently scribble:
> Most "other" distributions are based on one of the major ones (rg .RH SuSE).
> Does anyone know what easyLinux is compatible with. I presume SuSE but what
> version? I want to be able to install updated applications directly from
> the authors.
I doubt it's SuSE. SuSE has a very specific license restriction on its
YaST/YaST2/SuSEConfig which forbids charging for copies of CDs that contain
those things.
Mandrake, Definite Linux and many others are based on Red Hat (or started
out that way)
Stormix, Corel and others are based on Debian...
Never heard of easyLinux though.
--
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
| |can't move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|Consider how lucky you are that life has been |
| in |good to you so far... |
| Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 13:02:48 -0400
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> ZnU wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > ZnU wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "ZnU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > The "losers" under a Bush administration will be just about
> > > > > > everyone. Bush's proposed tax cut eliminates all chance of
paying
> > > > > > off the national debt, yet it only gives $43/year back to the
> > > > > > average american family. Where does the rest go? You guessed it:
> > > > > > the top 2% or so of the economic scale.
> > > > >
> > > > > The president doesn't create the budget, he only has the power to
> > > > > approve it in it's entirety or return it to congress, now who has
> > > > > really been creating the budget deficit for the past 20 years? And
> > > > > who in the past four has managed to turn it (the deficit) around?
> > > >
> > > > If the Republicans did all the work to balance the budget, why are
they
> > > > trying to damn hard to unbalance it?
> > >
> > > Are you, ZnU, smoking large amounts of crack before writing to USENET?
> >
> > Are you really denying this? In just the last few months the Republicans
> > have tried to pass two tax cuts that would eliminate or significantly
> > reduce the surplus, and Bush wants to take things even farther.
>
> A surplus is merely another name for OVER-TAXATION.
OVER-TAXATION's just another name for --- nothin left to lose.
------------------------------
From: Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 13:08:48 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ZnU wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > ZnU wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "ZnU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > The "losers" under a Bush administration will be just about
> > > > > > everyone. Bush's proposed tax cut eliminates all chance of
> > > > > > paying
> > > > > > off the national debt, yet it only gives $43/year back to the
> > > > > > average american family. Where does the rest go? You guessed
> > > > > > it:
> > > > > > the top 2% or so of the economic scale.
> > > > >
> > > > > The president doesn't create the budget, he only has the power to
> > > > > approve it in it's entirety or return it to congress, now who has
> > > > > really been creating the budget deficit for the past 20 years?
> > > > > And
> > > > > who in the past four has managed to turn it (the deficit) around?
> > > >
> > > > If the Republicans did all the work to balance the budget, why are
> > > > they
> > > > trying to damn hard to unbalance it?
> > >
> > > Are you, ZnU, smoking large amounts of crack before writing to
> > > USENET?
> >
> > Are you really denying this? In just the last few months the
> > Republicans
> > have tried to pass two tax cuts that would eliminate or significantly
> > reduce the surplus, and Bush wants to take things even farther.
>
> A surplus is merely another name for OVER-TAXATION.
Then is a deficit merely another name for under-taxation?
--
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:48:26 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
> >
> > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I'm game, but be specific, or go fuck yourself.
> >
> > Thank you, you have proven my point for me in this issue.
>
> Whatever. It's a situation where anything I said would be
> used against me, right? Fuck yourself is adequate, then.
You proved the point reguarding your attitude by using what now appears to
be your favorite vulgarity.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:45:06 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Mind you, I would apply just as esily those paragraphs to me as to
> anyone
> else: I HAVE been provided a OS for free, now I use it or I don't. I
> improve it or I don't. I influence its development or I don't. And
> that's
> all there is.
Do you mean that your developmental efforts were worthless? Linux is free
in that we can do as we please with a copy of it. We can install it on as
many system as we please, we can give away as many copies as we please, we
don't *have to* pay a monetary price for it. However, through our efforts
we have earned the Linux OS, so Linux is not a gift to the plebs as your
statement implies.
> > > I must have missed it. No big deal anyway, since the argument died
> > > already.
> In the middle, I had reached an agreement with him to let the thread
> die.
> If the goal was to make me shut up about it, it was already done, thus
> it made no difference. No big deal.
As you know that thread did not die at that point after all, it continued on
for a little but more so your comment cited here was contemporaneous with
the discussion, which did die latter that same day.
The goal was never to make you "shut up", although I do feel that was your
goal with us. The goal on my side of the discussion and at least for my
part. Was to try to convince you to see reason, in that we had honet
concerns for the future of Linux, that we have a valid stake in the future
of Linux, that not all badly implemented ideas are worth fixing sometime it
is so badly conceived that it better to abandon it than wast time fixing it.
I also had the goals of fostering the acceptance in the value of the
flexibility unix and respect for the human over the hardware.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:49:45 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
> >
> > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > I'm game, but be specific, or go fuck yourself.
> >
> > Now what did I say the earn a reply with that tone from him?
>
> Y9ou said something like that I disrespected the linux user base, or
> some such. Can't tell, because you sniped it.
Why it that a problem? Can't you read back the thread?
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says
Linux growth stagnating
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:00:32 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> not change much -- although Doom 4 apparently made some mods to
> the driver, resulting in some minor incompatibilities with the
> linuxxdoom that I have. (Note that the WAD given away didn't have
> weapons #6 (I forget what they call it, but it throws out whitish-blue
> projectiles) and #7 (The Big F[...] Gun). I suspect a few textures
> were also missing, as well -- and I think some monsters, too.)
>
> (I don't have Doom 5 -- aka "Final Doom". Not sure if I want to get
> it or not; Doom 1-3 are relatively easy, but Doom 4 is extremely
> difficult.)
Take a look at "boom" by team TNT, there is a Dos version of it and it has
been ported to Linux. Most of the problems you cite from the latter
episodes of doom are because they may be using extensions that were coded
for boom. Some of the latter doom retail WADs were developed by team TNT.
#6 = plasma rifle ?
#7 = BFG 9000 ?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
