Linux-Advocacy Digest #78, Volume #29 Tue, 12 Sep 00 20:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Windows+Linux=True (Gary Hallock)
Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: How low can they go...? (Matt Kennel)
Re: How low can they go...? (Matt Kennel)
Re: [Q] linux on mac?
Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they go...?) (Chris
Kelly)
Re: How low can they go...? (Matt Kennel)
Re: How low can they go...?
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: Media Player in Linux? (Bob Hauck)
Re: How low can they go...? (Matt Kennel)
Re: ZDNet reviews W2K server; I think you'll be surprised.... (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? ("Simon Cooke")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:42:53 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, 07 Sep 2000 17:29:46 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 07 Sep 2000 02:48:26 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, 06 Sep 2000 21:57:23 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> >> >> >Rick wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >> ***WE*** do not.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Oh, really. Then why do American high school students' science and math
> >> >> >scores ABSOLUTELY SUCK compared to the rest of the industrialized world,
> >> >> >including such backwards places as Russia.
> >> >>
> >> >> I thought we'd already discussed this.
> >> >>
> >> >> If you want to make meaningful comparisons between the performance of
> >> >> American and Russian *high schools*, you obviously need to control
> >> >> for the ability of the incoming students.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Since said *ability* of American students is significantly held down
> >> >in junior high, the comparisons are meaningless.
> >>
> >> European schools tend to demand more out of their students.
> >>
> >> What might pass for mediocre in Spain might reflect the top
> >> 10 (students, not percent) in an American public high school.
> >>
> >> Although, Russia versus America comparisons are not reliable.
> >> Besides exposing students to serious science and mathematics
> >> at earlier ages, Russia also has institutionalized corruption.
> >> Russian standardized test scores shouldn't be taken seriously.
> >
> >What about Russian students taking American SAT tests?
>
> The variation would likely be similar for both groups.
> The differences between the Americans and Russians in
> the higher percentiles would likely correlate quite closely
> in the American students with those that were privately
> schooled or attended some sort of public "membership school".
>
> Given Russian graft, I am not sure the median for Russians
> would be higher than for Americans. I could very well see
> institutionalized graft undermining overal student performance
> for Russians. The mediocre and stupid simply didn't have as
> much of a motivation to keep up with the curriculum.
>
> I would expect students from a Western European nation without
> institutionalized corruption and with higher student expectations
> to best both Russia and the US in terms of median performance on
> standardized tests.
>
> What Russia's system bought for it's students IMO was the potential to
> actually be exposed to useful information in a normal school rather
> than such a situation being more a factor of whether or not their
> parents had the money for some expensive private school (like in the
> US) or were affluent enough to live in the right suburb.
Actually, the Russian system is based on this simple premise:
Since the Communist "classless society" is actually MUCH more
strictly hierarchal than western capitalist societies, highly educated
"underlings" are no threat to the power of those at the top.... So,
they did everything possible to educate the masses....secure in the
knowledge that even the genuises will be successfully suppressed by
the rest of the politico-economic system.
Here in the united states, where the class structure is VERY fluid,
well-educated genuises at the bottom are a considerable threat to those
at that top...because those genuises can EASILY rise up and usurp the
current "kings of the hill"...thus, the US public schools have evolved
to a point where the primary goal is to produce half-educated droids
who cannot maximize the potential of their intellectual ability.
--
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.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:44:44 -0400
neJ wrote:
>
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2000 15:57:57 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Windows in any form could quite easily be replaced for client hosts by any
> >of a number of operating system, including unix.
>
> Then why hasn't it?
Actually, EVERYTHING you now see on the internet was FIRST developed on
Unix.
--
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.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:02:06 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux=True
Ingemar Lundin wrote:
> aaa...c'mon! command line interfaces is much harder to learn than a GUI
> based one...
>
Are you sure about that? That applies to everyone? It probably depends on
whether the left or right half of your brain is dominant. Some people have a
much easier time with visual clues (GUI), some with verbal clues (command
line).
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:55:17 -0400
Jim Richardson wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Sep 2000 01:44:48 -0500,
> Erik Funkenbusch, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
> >
> >> The fact is that Microsoft's worst fears are being realized as we
> >> speak. Linux is growing and thriving and being joined by other UNIX
> >> flavors. Compaq's IPAQ can run Linux, AOL now offers most of it's
> >> features to Linux users, and many OEMs are now offering "TuxTops" and
> >> "TuxStations" (Linux enabled laptops and workstations).
> >
> >Yet despite all this, Linux is somehow not "competition" to Microsoft in the
> >eyes of Judge Jackson.
>
> Wasn't the whole M$ trial about what was happening a couple of years ago and
> further?
YES!
--
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] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 23:09:31 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 00:42:57 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:How is it, thought that Sierra considers themselves Microsoft's
:competitors? I mean, if there's one market that's relatively free of
:Microsoft's *direct* attacks, its games. Sure, they screw over game
:manufacturers as a "partner", but as a competitor, they suck as much at
:making games as they do at making any other software (which in my
:opinion, obviously, is a lot.)
In my brief experience Microsoft makes better products when there is a
persistently competitive market and they engage in few tricks. Those
are 1) games 2) mice.
The biggest problem is that Microsoft has a horrid eye and stomach for
deep architecture, but they have delusions of superiority here ever
since they were lucky enough to get the PC-DOS contract.
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 23:12:06 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 06:50:48 GMT, Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:
:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
:news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> Microsoft had an unfair advantage by way of copyright.
:
:Uhuh... right...
:
:> They controlled an essential facility. That isn't success
:> by being 'better' but success by natural monopoly.
:
:Look! Over there! It's Linux! Oh and there! Solaris! and Beos! Obviously,
:Microsoft is not a natural monopoly, as there are other operating systems
:produced by other vendors, and given enough time/patience you can write one
:*YOURSELF*.
Just as anybody could have taken some wires, amplifiers and relays and
hooked up a phone system in New Jersey; after all it was 1890's technology.
:Simon
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: [Q] linux on mac?
Date: 12 Sep 2000 19:13:48 -0400
Rich C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>Perhaps the hardest thing would be converting that cyclops mouse to
>something with 2 or 3 buttons. You need to middle click to paste in many
>Linux apps. You can simulate a third button with 2 buttons, but how do you
>simulate a third button with only one?
How do you simulate a second button with only one?
--
Microsoft. How do you want to lose your data today?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Kelly)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they go...?)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 23:13:58 GMT
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:44:44 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>neJ wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2000 15:57:57 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Windows in any form could quite easily be replaced for client hosts by any
>> >of a number of operating system, including unix.
>>
>> Then why hasn't it?
>
>Actually, EVERYTHING you now see on the internet was FIRST developed on
>Unix.
Yep, and it shows:
http://www.tolstoy.com/web.html
=====
http://www.lonewacko.com
The Lone Wacko Wilderness Guide
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 23:17:02 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 14:50:06 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:
:If componentized software is such good 'design', how come there still
:isn't a system-wide spell checker for any common operating system? If
:componentized design is a good thing, why do fewer applications use the
:'common dialogs' than not? If componentized design is a good thing, why
:can't I only use the components of Outlook that are useful to me?
Because Microsoft decided to ship applications instead of easily
programmable libraries. If it were the second, then some technically
adept users (aka programmers) could put together new mail programs
with different interfaces.
That's a business choice, not a technical problem.
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 16:10:10 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> If I wanted live information, I'd pay a service to provide it reliably.
> And in a format that is operationally functional. People use Quicken to
> balance their checkbooks; all that other fluff is simply justification
> for badly designed.
Then there is also the security issue, if the application is a hybrid local
and on-line which is the way things seem to be going, who can verify that
the your private finances remain private? As for on-line up to date
information provided by Quicken, have they forgotten about disconnected
computer handling sensitive information. For a family their personal
finances *are* sensitive information.
------------------------------
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, 12 Sep 2000 14:32:06 -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]...
> > > "T. Max Devlin" escribió:
> > > >
> > > > Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> > > > >"T. Max Devlin" escribió:
> >
> > > > >> Thus leaving entirely unsettled the question of whether TT
> > > > >> would sue anyone trying to clone QT, which would be based on
> > > > >> copyright infringement charges.
> > > > >
> > > > >What do you expect a company will do if they see someone
> > > > >infringing their copyright?
> > > >
> > > > Are you saying the Harmony project would have infringed their
copyright?
> > >
> > > I am saying that if they had, TT would have sued them.
> >
> > Assuming for a moment that the Harmony project and some other
development
> > team released a library that was a drop in replacement for Qt. Let's
for
> > sake of this message call the replacement library Ht. What I mean by a
drop
> > in replacement is that any any software the requires Qt to compile,
link,
> > and run; could, without and change to its source code, compile cleanly
> > against Ht, link against Ht, and then run. Would *you* in that case
> > consider Ht to be an infringement on Qt?
>
> It depends on how Ht was developed. I am not into the business of
> redefining what is a copyright infringement.
Thank you, for admitting that a drop in replacement for Qt *is* possible.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Media Player in Linux?
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 22:43:41 GMT
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 16:43:09 GMT, gena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Does anybody knows if there is a plug in for Linux to play Media Player
>files?
You mean Microsoft Windows Media Player (TM)? Probably not.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 23:19:58 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000 09:19:24 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:I guess your forgeting that the higher court agreed that it was ok to
:integrate the browser, which is the precise moment the the judge in
:collusion with the DOJ decided that they had better radically "expand" the
:charges (mid trial), which by the way is precisely why MS will walk away on
:appeal.
why does 'integrated' necessarily imply 'inseparable'?
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: ZDNet reviews W2K server; I think you'll be surprised....
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:48:37 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Bob Lyday in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 13:11:48 -0700, Bob Lyday wrote:
>> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> >>>
>> >> I agree. A lot of the usenet loudmouths here do absolutely nothing for
>> >> the Linux community. We even have some advocacy jerks here ( like Devlin )
>> >> who exclusively use Win9x.
>> >>
>> >What does he advocate? Windows?
>>
>> Nope. He's a vocal UNIX/Linux/anti-microsoft zealot.
>>
>So what's the matter with that? Let him use any OS he chooses. He's
>on your side after all. Since he uses Windows all the time, it's no
>wonder he hates it so much. This has been my observation -- the most
>vocal MS haters are often Windows users. After all, they have to put
>up with it.
>
>I suppose it is rather silly, though. If you are going to advocate
>for *nix, why not use it, or at least plan to use it in the future?
>Seems like a waste of energy...
I do use it; I use it all the time. I'm not just *guessing* that
Microsoft software is crap, you know; this is real life.
About four years ago, the world of network management software was swept
by a huge wave of attempts by Microsoft to monopolize. Buying into the
lies, FUD, and crapware, every major vendor prepared an NT
implementation of their products. It was considered an absolute
requirement that anyone who wanted to maintain a market would have to at
least pay lip service to the delusion that the entire world would soon
be migrating away from 'proprietary' Unix, to the 'standard' server OS;
NT. It took years, and millions of wasted dollars, and thousands of
unhappy customers, before most people (besides yours truly, at least,
though I wasn't the only one by far) could even begin to admit that NT
simply cannot compete, when it comes to the requirements for
performance, scalability, and reliability necessary to use NT in place
of Unix. I've used Solaris and HP-UX almost routinely for about six
years, now, and generally know more about the real world of Unix systems
than most 'programmer-cum-admin' people whom I teach, though I'm not a
'Unix expert', by a long shot. Most vendors still support an NT
version; almost all are rather surprisingly quick to point out that it
is not considered sufficient for any 'real work', though plenty of
customers who have bought into One Microsoft Way would like to think
otherwise.
I'm on the customer's side; this isn't a 'holy war', its just plain
business sense. Sure, I have to use NT for office stuff, whether I like
it or not, just like millions of others do; because Microsoft has been
breaking the law for more than a decade, with that particular goal in
mind. *I'm* certainly not going to recommend that anyone *else* pay for
Microsoft's crimes. Just because MS software is crap, and anyone with
more than half a brain should, and does, avoid using it like the plague,
doesn't mean we're always free to do so.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 16:50:30 -0700
"Matt Kennel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 14:50:06 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :
> :If componentized software is such good 'design', how come there still
> :isn't a system-wide spell checker for any common operating system? If
> :componentized design is a good thing, why do fewer applications use the
> :'common dialogs' than not? If componentized design is a good thing, why
> :can't I only use the components of Outlook that are useful to me?
>
> Because Microsoft decided to ship applications instead of easily
> programmable libraries. If it were the second, then some technically
> adept users (aka programmers) could put together new mail programs
> with different interfaces.
>
> That's a business choice, not a technical problem.
Look at MAPI. Next question?
Si
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
