Linux-Advocacy Digest #507, Volume #29 Sat, 7 Oct 00 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Re: Aaron R. Kulkis [Off-Topic Idiot Tres Grande] (Karl Knechtel)
Everything's an object in OOPLs (Richard)
Re: 2.4! (David E. Fox)
Re: How low can they go...? ("JS/PL")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Mike")
Re: Linux beats Win @$$~! (2:1)
Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for? (2:1)
Re: The Power of the Future! (C Lund)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: Double standard? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years (Jim Richardson)
Re: Linux to equal NT 3.51???? (Jim Richardson)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: SE is simply unstable!!! (Jim Richardson)
Re: To all you WinTrolls (2:1)
Re: How low can they go...? ("JS/PL")
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-) (Bob Hauck)
Re: Maximimun Process Size 555Mb ? (Bob Hauck)
Re: To all you WinTrolls (spicerun)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 19:14:39 GMT
On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 14:13:08 -0400, John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> A DNS Server:
>> [fuzzy:jcostom](03:42pm)
>> /home/jcostom$ uptime
>> 3:42PM up 324 days, 6:54, 1 user, load average: 0.17, 0.11, 0.09
>And the rest of the monkeys reside in device NULL?
No, you pathetic moron. You don't need to log into a mail/dns/etc. server to
use it. The only people who log into such servers are the sysadmin.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Knechtel)
Subject: Re: Aaron R. Kulkis [Off-Topic Idiot Tres Grande]
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 18:42:08 GMT
David T. Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Marty wrote:
: >
: > "David T. Johnson" wrote:
: > >
: > > Aaron R. Kulkis has posted a total of at least 256 unique messages in
: > > comp.os.os2.advocacy during the month of September, 2000 on five related
: > > threads, none of which have anything to do with OS/2, OS/2 advocacy,
: > > computer software, or even computers:
: >
: > The hypocrisy continues! :-)
: The nonsense posts continue!
Precisely.
Karl Knechtel {:>
da728 at torfree dot net
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Everything's an object in OOPLs
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 19:38:58 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> So what does Kay say about the definition of OO ? Does he say that OO
> means "everything is an object ?
I searched for exactly that on the web and the most interesting paper
(aside from the Java page) was the first (it made mention of localization
versus encapsulation). One thing that was repeated in different places
was the 5 characteristics of OO.
Object-Oriented Programming: Regaining the Excitement
-----------------------------------------------------
Andrew P. Black
This paper is based on a speech on the occasion of the ECOOP'98 Conferecne
Banquet.
[...]
Going back to Smalltalk, we find that there are two
key ideas:
that objects localize data structures and the code that operates on them in
the same place
and that objects, as realized in Smalltalk, in the words of Alan Kay again:
... are a recursion on the idea of computer itself.
He writes: "The basic principle of recursive design is to make the parts have
the same power as the whole" rather than dividing
the computer into "lesser stuffs", like Data Structures and procedures, we
should divide it into lots of little computers that
communicate together. This enables us to postpone representation decisions
almost indefinitely (and those are the decisions
that almost always cause of our troubles).
[...]
I propose that we go back to Kay’s 3 basic laws of object-oriented programming:
1.everything is an object
2.object communicate by sending and receiving messages (in term of objects)
3.objects have their own memory (in terms of objects)
http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~black/ECOOP'98.html
Thinking in Java, 1st edition
-----------------------------
Alan Kay summarized five basic characteristics of Smalltalk [...]
These characteristics represent a pure approach to object-oriented programming:
1.Everything is an object.
2.A program is a bunch of objects telling each other what to do by sending
messages.
3.Each object has its own memory made up of other objects.
4.Every object has a type.
5.All objects of a particular type can receive the same messages.
http://www.outlawcafe.org/thinkinginjava/first/Chapter01.html
------------------------------
From: David E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2.4!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 12:47:56 -0700
Todd wrote:
> What good is USB support with the drivers for the devices?
What good is USB?
I don't have any USB devices, so I don't compile support for them in my
kernel. Why should I go out and buy USB replacements for the devices I
already have that work?
By hanging on to older hardware I managed to avoid completely the last
standards craze - i.e., VESA Local Bus. That thing ddn't last very long.
--
========================================================================
David E. Fox Thanks for letting me
[EMAIL PROTECTED] change magnetic patterns
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk.
=======================================================================
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 15:44:18 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> >What's that have to do with the your statement:
> >
> ><quote>
> >"Enough said. You're entirely and completely wrong. WHO has the right
> >to deny anyone access in public forums?"
> ></quote>
>
> Nobody has the right to deny access in a public forum. According to the
> law you cite, the provider or user of an interactive computer service
> cannot be held liable for any *good faith* restriction. You haven't
> been referring to any good faith restrictions; just to a blanket ability
> to redact some particular person's messages because you don't like them.
> That's not going to wash.
Feel free to post in the following public forum
news://sector51.dynip.com
I'm sure the groups haven't been picked up by your own news server yet, but
it's set to allow pulling. Oh - I will delete every single one of your posts
because I want to. Sue me.
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 19:51:15 GMT
"unicat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Of course, If your users LIKE the PC centric model of computing, and you
> don't want to have to rewrite all your business apps into a whole
> new computing paradigm, and you don't want to pay, say, $50/user/month
> in "software rent" to MS, you can always use Linux!
>
> It has free office suites (like Star Office, and KOffice) which will let
> you keep all your data in its CURRENT format, instead of the absurdly
> difficult task of converting ALL your data to XML, and with the WINE
> (www.winehq.com) windows environment it will even let you keep
> running the office suites that you already OWN!
Wine runs Office? Wow, what a claim.
A quick trip to the wine database shows that there isn't much that really
runs under Wine. The highest rating for Office 97 is 3. This rating is
described as "3 -- Sufficient functionality for noncritical work. Occasional
crashes okay, as are weird setup problems, required patches, or missing
major functionality. Alpha quality." Other reviews gave it even lower marks.
The highest review given to Word 2000 is 1: "1 -- Loads without crashing.
Good enough for a screenshot." And the highest review of Office 2000 rates
it 0: "0 -- Totally nonfunctional. Crashes on load."
If I actually run down a list of the software I use every day, I find that
the vast majority of it rates 3 or less under Wine. Hardly inspiring.
And, of course, there's the entire problem of Star Office and compatibility.
It's compatible only in superficial ways. Even moderately complex documents
are beyond Star Office to import without problems, and K Office is far from
ready, as their web page explains (but it's easier to ignore such things,
isn't it?).
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win @$$~!
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 21:00:22 +0100
JoeX1029 wrote:
> I just got Red Hat 5.2 installed on my Dell 133, it is the BEST!! I've had
> this distro since it came out (halloween 98) but have had only the option to
> dual boot because the computer it was formally on (not the Dell) had a real
> small hd so i had to make do with a 175mb install (not much there). No GUI,
> not much of anything. Anyway I installed it on the Dell with the wrkstation
> option. The desktop beats the crap outta win and mac. Even with XF86-3.8 and
> AfterStep1.5. God how i've Linux (the only way i've gotton to use it for 2
> years was via cmd prompt). Just one prob though, I dont have a job (too young)
> and so I have no income, so no net access. Is there any free or cheap net
> access (in IL) for Linux??
>
> LINUX RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!
RH5.2 is a good distro. I still use a modified version of it on my bitsa 133.
Pretty good all round, but I had to upgrade the odd bit here and there as time
went on. Needless to say though, I'm still getting good use out of my 133.
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 21:02:47 +0100
Aaron Ginn wrote:
> I have a real X-Windows implementation in XFree86 instead
> of a slow emulator like Exceed on NT,
Point of pedantry, Exceed is not an X emulation, it is an implementation
of X, though it is a bit slow.
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (C Lund)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 22:25:41 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:03:43 GMT, Tom Elam wrote this reply to Charlie Ebert
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >But that growth spirt in the teenage years is a REAL KILLER!
> ^^^^^
> Why can't your mighty, all-powerul, Linsux box even run a spell-checker?
Isn't there some usenet law stating that all spelling flames *must*
contain at least one spelling error? Does somebody have a quote with a
source?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 13:44:24 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 09:30:49 GMT,
Loren Petrich, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, STATIC66
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Listen close Jackass: Al Gore is more of a RICH oilman then GWB!!!
>> (at least GWB had to go and work)
>
> Pure projection. GWBush has had to be bailed out of every one of his
>business ventures -- it certainly helps to have rich friends.
>
> Al Gore, however, has been much more forward-looking. Though he
>certainly did not invent the Internet, he had been a major sponsor of
>it in the years before it was privatized, and he even wrote a nice
>book, "Earth in the Balance".
>
> Can GWBush point to anything similar? Admittedly, Clinton also loses
>there, it must be said.
>
On the plus side, GWB doesn't own a polluting Zinc mine, which is under
consideration by the state of Tennessee to close down due to toxic runnof that
Gore hasn't cleaned up despite several citations.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Double standard?
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 11:48:09 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 03 Oct 2000 21:28:18 +1000,
Chris Sherlock, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>How about VB scripts inside email programs that execute viruses?
>
>Chris
>
>Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> "Chris Sherlock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > Oh, I don't know about that! GNOME is beginning to really take shape,
>> > but just about everything that you can do in Windows you can do in KDE!
>>
>> Ok, how about create a virtual file system housed inside the shell browser
>> as a plug-in?
I am not sure I understand this, can you describe it for me?
>> How about Shell extension contexts? How about Embedding HTML
>> into the desktop
Check, KDE 2.0 beta5, Gnome, the last version I tried
>> (including Java applets)?
Check, KDE and gnome both, (provided of course you have a java runtime
installed) but also python, perl and any other language you want. All thanks to
the magic numbers
>> How about shell namespace
>> extensions that allow you to create things like the printers or dialup
>> networking folders (Obviously, using the Linux equivelants of these)? How
>> about shortcuts that can be HTTP links?
Sure, KDE and gnome both. No problem.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 12:10:17 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 12:49:25 GMT,
Chad Myers, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>"Matthias Warkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> It was the Mon, 02 Oct 2000 01:00:30 GMT...
>> ...and Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > Well, here's my spin!
>> > > If a couple of guys in some office somewhere can come up with an outlook
>> > > express replacement which
>> > > has the look and feel of outlook express and works better than outlook
>> > > express, then what in the hell are
>> > > you whining about Chad?
>> >
>> > Who's whining? I think it's amusing how, on one hand, the Penguinistas
>> > bash MS for all sorts of things including look-and-feel and functionality
>> > in Windows, yet take every chance to copy it because they can't come
>> > up with anything that's a.) originally and b.) useful.
>>
>> "Hey, let's make cars with square wheels! At least they look
>> original!"
>
>So then you admit that many applications and widgets and all
>sorts of other things are direct copies from Windows? Good, now
>we're finally in agreement!
It looks to me, that much of the windows look and feel is copied from
motif.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Linux to equal NT 3.51????
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 12:09:08 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000 13:14:58 +0200,
Matthias Warkus, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>It was the 1 Oct 2000 15:39:49 -0700...
>....and test@nospam <test@nospam> wrote:
>> I have tried all the file manager on linux. from kde to gnome to
>> ezel and others. They are all still years behind the windows file
>> manager.
>
>I don't believe you. It's hard to imagine anyone who has tried
>KFM/Konqueror, GMC and Nautilus still making such an absurd claim.
>
>Have you really tried the above programs? If yes, what exactly makes
>them so inferior?
One annoyance I have with the windows explorer vs KDE's Konqueror, is that
Konqueror lets you "drill down" the dirtree, just grab a file, and drag it
over a dir, and after a half second, the dir opens and you can drop down
another level. This is a lot more convenient that with windows.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 13:42:25 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2 Oct 2000 19:10:45 -0400,
Loren Petrich, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>STATIC66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 25 Aug 2000 16:55:12 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
>>wrote:
>>>On Fri, 25 Aug 2000 11:30:58 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>>> 2. Defense Expenditures
>>>>Legitimate spending...Constitutionally MANDATED, in fact.
>>>But the constitution doesn't say anything about "how much". For example,
>>>it would be difficult to argue that cutting the defence budget by 90%
>>>is "unconstitutional.
>>90%?? what kind of pinko are you ??
>
> Cry me a river. Mr. Rebbechi is absolutely right. In fact, George
>Washington, in his Farewell Address, warned about such things as deficit
>spending, standing armies, and foreign entanglements.
>
>>Clinton has decimated our military strength and moral (I saw it first
>>hand). it can't take anymore. Make no mistake about it, it protects
>>YOUR freedoms..
>
> I thought that you anti-statists would be jumping for joy at
>seeing a defanged government.
Problem is, he's only defanging the parts pointing outside, whilst he
pushes more laws, more military H/W and more restrictions on the organizations
that point inside the states.
>
>>>>> 3. Social Security
>>>>Unconstitutional. END IT NOW.
>>>Based on what ? Your opinion ? The opinions that count, legal opinions of
>>>those better qualified than yourself seem to contradict this.
>>SOCIALISM
>
> Nowhere does the Constitution mention that word.
Doesn't mention education either, can we dispense with the Dept of education
now?
>>>>> 4. Medicare
>>>>Unconstitutional. END IT NOW.
>>>See above.
>>SOCIALISM
>
> Nowhere does the Constitution mention that word.
>
When has that stopped the statists from inventing powers (banning guns, drugs
etc) ?
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: SE is simply unstable!!!
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 12:13:32 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 15:12:48 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED], in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Windows ME upgrade (upgrades Win98 to Me) $49.95 in Sundays NY Times.
>
>Claire
>
>
>On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 15:02:36 +1000, Chris Sherlock
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Ummm... I don't know if you've compared the prices of Windows ME against
>>Mandrake Linux yet, but the prices are *very* different.
>>
How about comparing a full system, not an upgrade.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To all you WinTrolls
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 21:27:33 +0100
MH wrote:
> "Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Windows 2000 is a great OS, however, it is very top heavy, on a clean
> startup on a
> > machine with 128MB ram, 65MB RAM is already used by Windows, if thats not
> >excessive,
> > I would hate to know what is!
>
> What has this have to do with the price of a Sunday paper? All this talk
> lately about ram consumption. Why? If you don't have 128 mb's of ram in your
> machine by now you don't take c o m p u t e r u s e v e r y s e r i o u s
> l y, DO YOU?
That's utter bullshit. Why the hell should I waste money (which I don't have
too much of to waste) upgrading my computer when it works well as it is. If my
OS took up 65M of ram an a clean boot, I'd be pissed off too. Oh, by the way, i
do take my computer use very seriously, I'm just able to do it in less RAM than
you.
> Look at what the desktop user is getting for that 65mb's. Most of the
> libraries for web browsing are loaded, and the GUI is worlds more
> sophisticated (read productivity).
Real productivity? Are you capable of realising that other people like
different things from you? I do a lot of programming. What use is a big GUI for
me? Hint... NONE AT ALL (I use vi and SVGATextMode). I personally don't like
the windows GUI. The lack of focus-follows-mouse and MDI interfaces really bug
me.
> With Linux on the other hand, every time I want to go online I have to
> launch that horrifically bloated and buggy NN (which takes forever it seems)
> and gobbles up ram like YOU wouldn't believe. NN is the only thing I believe
> that makes the linux box swap. (96mb's of ram)
Jees, you must have a real dinosaur if loading NN takes for ever. It's fine on
my 133.
> The only problem I ever have with Linux is when loading big
> "windows-world" applications. These same applications that are as much a
> part of the computing world right now as bash is to linux.
I have had no real problem running Word Perfect, Star Office, Netscape and even
Office 97 under Linux.
> Linux shines when
> it's doing what it is good at. It's not a windows replacement, nor can it
> compete with windows on the desktop in its current state. Anyone who comes
> in here and say that they are "rid of windows" has either made up their mind
> to make sacrifices in applications, hates MS on pure principle, never really
> needed big windows applications anyway, or is just content to hack with free
> tools and put up with a third rate web experience.
I would say that my 3rd rate web experience (under all OS/Browsers) is caused
by poor website design.
Also, I'm rid of windows for all except a few games. I have had to make no
sacrifices in terms of applications, and as it turned out, no, I never really
did need those big applications anyway. There are many smaller, better
alternatives around. Eg, pico+latex beath the hell out of most word processors.
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 16:33:36 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> Have fun. I don't care what you do on your private news server. You
> don't seem to be aware of the concept of replication as it regards
> Usenet.
I'm well aware.
>Nobody cares about your 'right' to delete posts on your server;
See - it wasn't that hard to admit I am right.
> merely whether they want a down-stream feed from such an 'edited' forum.
> You don't seem to want to regard the concept of a *public* forum, but
> want to take advantage of a *public* system for replicating messages in
> order to make your silly opinions known. Make up your mind. Or just
> shut up and go away; a far more effective solution than setting up a
> news server just so you can delete my posts. <G>
I already did. And your not allowed to post messages there. You and you
alone will have any and all messages deleted, because I can.
news://sector51.dynip.com
It is a public news server, open to everyone on earth (except that I'm
exersizing my right to discriminate against you only).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 20:43:43 GMT
On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 14:13:08 -0400, John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>A transfinite number of monkeys wrote:
>> Hmm.. Since your "evidence" is anecdotal, I'll counter with an anecdote of
>> my own. Here's our mail server at work:
>> [cliff:jcostom](03:57pm)
>> /home/jcostom$ uptime
>> 3:57pm up 103 days, 7:05, 1 user, load average: 0.33, 0.20, 0.21
> ^^^^^^^^^
A mail server is not typically going to have interactive users. POP
logins don't show up in the uptime display. The same applies to web
servers and DNS servers.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Maximimun Process Size 555Mb ?
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 20:43:44 GMT
On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 17:19:10 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>When our squid process bombs ouy (at 555Mb) we see
>"xmalloc: unable to allocate 32768 bytes!".
Depending on what kernel and which patches you are using, you may have
hit a limitation of the way the VM space is allocated between heap,
stack, text, etc.
An advocacy group is probably not a good place to get a helpful answer
to this kind of question. If you work for an ISP, I would have thought
you would know that.
I would have also thought that you could go to www.google.com and
search for "linux heap size". You can even use the "I feel lucky"
button and get a useful answer. If you don't, there's quite a bit more
info.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: spicerun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To all you WinTrolls
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 20:45:54 GMT
Raul Iglesias wrote:
> > When NT crashed, I'd hunt around until I discovered the reason. Usually,
> it
> > was a bad driver or something.
>
> It had obviously to be something, don't you think so ? :-) Funny how
> drivers
> are always guilty, may be it is just because they can't reply.
And if it isn't the drivers, then it is the hardware. It can never be NT
itself (according to 100% of the Wintrolls).
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
