Linux-Advocacy Digest #751, Volume #29 Thu, 19 Oct 00 20:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: who's WHINING dipshit! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: who's WHINING dipshit! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
RE: Why Linux is great. ("Idoia Sainz")
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
RE: Why Linux is great. ("Idoia Sainz")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
RE: Why Linux is great. ("Idoia Sainz")
RE: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE ("Idoia Sainz")
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
BMJ encourages use of free software in medicine ("Douglas Carnall")
Re: Why Linux is great. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ("Nik Simpson")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (.)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: who's WHINING dipshit!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:55:46 GMT
Exactly....
Typical Linonut semantics again..When will they ever learn..
claire
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:06:46 GMT, Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>In article <8snp6v$1grh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:00:59 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>> >> I never had any problems with my Voodoo3, or Voodoo2, or Intel
>740,
>> >> or S3Virge, or Matrox G400.
>>
>> > Is the Matrox G400 FINALLY fully supported under Linux, or is it
>still
>> > single head only support?
>>
>> Its not "linux" that supports video cards, brainiac. Its the X-
>server.
>> You're probably referring to XFree86, and yes it does.
>>
>> Though AccelleratedX has for a bit longer.
>>
>> Funny, you seem to have claimed repeatedly that you have lots of
>experience
>> running linux. Even someone with very limited experience would have
>> known that linux doesnt support ANY sort of video hardware directly,
>and
>> that all of that happens inside the X-server.
>>
>> I suspect that youve been lying quite alot, claire.
>
>To people that care about video card compatibility X is Linux. What
>comes in the box at the store or the ISO image they download is all
>linux to most folks. You'd probably be first in line to say that
>Notepad.exe is Windows. What I like is how when people
>criticize "Linux" in this regard, the Penguinista's turn coat and say
>things like "but that's not Linux". Without X and all the things that
>technically aren't linux you'd have a machine that cannot boot since
>LILO isn't techically Linux either :-)
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: who's WHINING dipshit!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:57:17 GMT
You're an asshole....
claire
On 19 Oct 2000 22:38:02 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In article <8snp6v$1grh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> > On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:00:59 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>>
>>> >> I never had any problems with my Voodoo3, or Voodoo2, or Intel
>> 740,
>>> >> or S3Virge, or Matrox G400.
>>>
>>> > Is the Matrox G400 FINALLY fully supported under Linux, or is it
>> still
>>> > single head only support?
>>>
>>> Its not "linux" that supports video cards, brainiac. Its the X-
>> server.
>>> You're probably referring to XFree86, and yes it does.
>>>
>>> Though AccelleratedX has for a bit longer.
>>>
>>> Funny, you seem to have claimed repeatedly that you have lots of
>> experience
>>> running linux. Even someone with very limited experience would have
>>> known that linux doesnt support ANY sort of video hardware directly,
>> and
>>> that all of that happens inside the X-server.
>>>
>>> I suspect that youve been lying quite alot, claire.
>
>> To people that care about video card compatibility X is Linux.
>
>They are quite simply incorrect. You can redefine terms all you like, and
>it will never, ever make you correct.
>
>> What
>> comes in the box at the store or the ISO image they download is all
>> linux to most folks.
>
>"claire" put herself apart from "most folks" by listing a fairly impressive
>(though a lie) list of linuces shed had experience with.
>
>> You'd probably be first in line to say that
>> Notepad.exe is Windows.
>
>No, because I know that it isnt.
>
>> What I like is how when people
>> criticize "Linux" in this regard, the Penguinista's turn coat and say
>> things like "but that's not Linux".
>
>Correclty of course.
>
>> Without X and all the things that
>> technically aren't linux you'd have a machine that cannot boot since
>> LILO isn't techically Linux either :-)
>
>You can boot linux without LILO, you diminutive-brained maroon.
>
>XFree86 is an X-Server that works on a ton of unix and unix-like operating
>systems. It is developed independantly of linux and what linux is doing.
>If theres a problem with a video driver, it has everything to so with the
>good people over there at XFree, and nothing to do with anyone working on
>the linux kernel or filesystem. This is the correct viewpoint, yours is
>absolutely wrong.
>
>
>
>
>-----.
------------------------------
From: "Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Why Linux is great.
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:57:25 GMT
> Computing Skills:
> Linux, like Windows will install with little or no computer skills for
> "most" machines. Windows, like Linux will be more difficult if a driver
> that is required for installation is not supported. At issue: Try
> installing Windows 98SE with a VooDoo3 card, on that same machine
> install a Haupague TV card. You must crawl around the web and find a FAQ
> that indicates that the VooDoo3 does not support the older version of
> DirectDraw that comes with the TV card, and that you have to acquire the
> new version for it to run.
> I find little difference between this process in Windows than the
> equivalent in Linux. The only difference is the information is easier to
> find for Linux because it is on public groups.
> Time left to learn:
> I have yet to see an "average" user not spend a day or two playing with
> a new machine.
I agree, but I think OS's if are to be used by a lot of people should
tend
to be easier to use, install and the so ... they should in fact be like they
were
not there at all, don't you agree ?
> BTW "too much facts" should be written as "Too many facts" (grammar),
Okay, I accept the correction as English is not my native language, I
hope
you won't use it as any kind of argument like ... Windows users have not
brain or the so.
> I disagree (here are some observations, they are factual) I sit across
> from the IT guys. In a company of about 20 people, they have to
> reinstall either MS Windows or MS Office (or both) about once a week
> because word, excel, or other program crashes Windows, and people can't
> do their work. I used to be a Windows developer, I still do some
> consulting in that area, it isn't stable.
I can't believe about installing every week and I honestly think you are
not being honest at this point. Wouldn't you be able to last a Windows
installation for more than a week ? I think yes ... if you give a pencil to
a stupid he can kill some one.
> > Well, this depends a lot on what you are developing, for some things
> > GNU/Linux would be fine for me, obviously not for developing Windows
> > applications ... that like it or not, has the bigger market share
nowadays.
> This is the paradox, isn't it? There may be a market for SWB (shrink
> wrapped boxes), but unless you have a specific type of company, you
> can't make money doing it. Game geeks are lean mean companies. Run of
> the mill software companies making $100 SWB are having real problems
> these days. While Windows is a HUGE market, it is one that is full and
> commodity driven, you either have to have something quite unique, or be
> a behemoth like MS (and even that does not always help).
Good argumentation, but still unproven, if so, why are there so many
TV channels always selling you the same under different envelope ?
> I have a Windows box to test software on my desk. I am always rebooting
> it. My Linux box has uptimes measured in months. The desktop does not
> mean crap if you can't use the system. Which would you rather have, a
> new corvette with no motor, or a Camaro that runs great?
Not the case, Windows (even 98) is not as unusable, and you know.
> NT Workstation and 2000 Pro are NOT rock solid. They are better than
> Windows, but I assure you they are not nearly as stable as Linux. Just
> the fact that the GUI operates in kernel space means it can't be as
> stable.
I know they are not as stable as Linux, I said for daily use switching on
them every day. And what about GGI or framebuffer ? Or the Tux web
server ? Aren't they kernel space ?
> You have no right to think this. You have no knowledge about my motives.
> I have no love for Microsoft, true, but you don't know why I have my
> opinions, whether or not they are "blind" as you say. My opinions are
> quite rational and arrived at from experience.
Accepted correction.
> All servers require knowledge. Point and puke, or text based, it makes
> no difference. You need to know the technologies to ensure your server
> is correct, regardless of the UI.
Agree.
> This is a common statement amongst Windows proponents, and as far as I
> have seen false. No "average" windows user sets up their machine, it
> either works out of the box (or from IT) or it goes back to be fixed.
I do set up it.
> The "average" Windows user does not know or care about what they use.
> Put a properly setup Linux box in front of them, and it will do
> everything that they need.
No, there are no consistency between applications, there are no universal
copy and paste (big invention). People like a common interface (to the point
is possible) in their applications ... which carries us to GNOME or KDE,
why the success ? Consistency is one of the points, centralization is
another
and copy paste another. Why does GNOME documentation about objects
point to OLE Microsoft specification ? Well, Windows has some nice
things too.
> My cousin's highschool kids use his Linux box to do school reports
> because the Windows box "loses their work." (It crashed on them twice in
> two years, but they learned quickly.)
Well, you pointed that servers needed knowledge, now I point that
working with computers need backups ... I assure you that ext2
filesystems and even ReiserFS ones has crashed here some times
too, and if times>1 then backup needed for the case.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:53:43 GMT
>
> At least they can detect RAM in every PC out there. Linux
> can't seem to do this on even a small number of them.
>
Well first of all, that is an unfair statment.
In the free software community it takes a while to get things working
right (many versions/people). The problem is the popularity of Linux
(all flavors) was under-estimated. Remember
that only recently has Linux used loadable device drivers. Most of the
stuff is hard coded into the kernel (meaning its faster than any
Windows 9X/NT/2k counterpart and more intergrated into the system) I
am not going to say that either is better than the other. Linux is
unarguably faster, but Windows is unarguably more compatible (and more
people write drivers for Windows). If you check out the latest
versions of KNOME and KDE you'd be suprized how good it looks! Looks
BETTER than windows in my opionion, and you can use a simple interface
like QT to program for it! (C++) The truth is that Linux is a very good
system, and has many features that Windows does not have. It is true
that in the past Linux was very incompatible, however, over time, this
has change, and Linux has become very viable (however it was only able
to detect 4MB of the 16MB VRAM in my Riva TNT [RH ver6.2] =< ) However
the graphics were still wonderful for a Linux Machine! And Linux has
full OpenGL support. Please don't bad mouth Linux, it is a great
operating system, and was developed by a great many programmers all
collaborating and giving there skills. At least the linux programmers
can develop stable versions before release (something Microsoft has
never been able to do with Windows because of market pressure). Odd
versions are unstable with even releases being the betas.
I have a question in this reply however. Has Microsoft eliminated the
need for real-mode assembly in the new versions of its OSes (NT,9X,2k),
or does it still have a 640K (LOL) boundary. Honestly the solution (if
required) would be to eliminate DOS all together, and make an
emulator. DOS programs should not be running native on Windows
9X/NT/2k if it wants to be called a true operating system (my opinion)
Well please feel free to respond to this, its not a flame just a
suggesto-question. Sorry for any off-topic cross posts. =(
-Andres-
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Why Linux is great.
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:59:17 GMT
> OI USE YOUR BRAIN!
> You can't be accused of trolling if you advocate something on its own
> advocacy group. The group is here for people to advocate linux.
How do you know I am not using it ?
> > > A typical Linux distribution, out of the box, has 95% of anything
anyone
> > > (that's ANYONE!) would want to do with a computer.
> >
> > Again 0 facts in here.
>
> No, 1 fact here, the fact being stated above.
How do you know what "people" do need ?
> Word prettier than TeX? You must be joking. It is a fact that it is more
> cometant at producing high quality text. For instance, it uses
> ligatures, such as ffl, ffi, ff, fi, fl, word does not. It also does
> other things that word does not. Th see a list of it's features, read
> the book.
Word does things TeX does not. Anyway I said LyX was big
for some things (scientific texts as an example), and I know it is the
most featured system around.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:05:03 GMT
It figures.
They always seem to know each other :(
claire
On 19 Oct 2000 22:40:19 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Strange, my girlfriend (who is in a MUCH better position to evaluate)
>> disagrees with your assessment.
>
>Funny. Ive been told that you're a homosexual.
>
>
>
>
>-----.
------------------------------
From: "Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Why Linux is great.
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:06:20 GMT
> > > I have a friend that is self employed as a word processor, she uses
> > > Linux, as she puts it, her "time is worth money."
> >
> > Again her opinion is not relevant as an objetive fact, indeed I do
> > use Word 2000 to write texts, even when I have Staroffice,
> > abiword and LyX perfectly usable at my computer.
>
> And how is this more objective than her use of Linux? And why would
> you leave your data at the mercy of Microsoft?
Just said it to let you see her wasn't at all (the same that mine). Why
should one leave self data at the mercy of whoever ?
> But your opinion sucks!
May be at this case, again it is an opinion ;-), and haven't ever
seen one sucking anything.
> Multiple desktops out of the box?
One of the things I have never used at X11 environment. There
are tools around to do it ... would you accept the Microsoft
monopoly to include them ? Anyway, I think (opinion) most users
won't need them. I think desktops are an invention born given the
difficulty in exchanging applications without a task bar. Neither OS/2
nor Windows nor iceWM need to do heavy use of multiple desktops.
> Our hatred of Microsoft is not blind; we hate MS with full cognizance
> of its attempts at vendorlock, proprietary formats, and intimidation.
Okay, one of the worse thing a company can do is trying to sell and
to win competitors ... odd world, when recently GNOME was
bashing KDE team ;) (and they are both non companies).
> Such as look at dancing paperclips?
Such as typing URL's at browser, such as copy paste and full
inter application consistency, such as saving a full web page, as
some examples.
------------------------------
From: "Idoia Sainz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:21:16 GMT
To an office or workstation job, Windows 2000 has no
advantage over Windows 2000. To a home user Windows
98 would be better ... Windows 2000 shouldn't exist.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:26:01 GMT
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:21:16 GMT, Idoia Sainz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> To an office or workstation job, Windows 2000 has no
>advantage over Windows 2000. To a home user Windows
>98 would be better ... Windows 2000 shouldn't exist.
huh?
------------------------------
From: "Douglas Carnall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: BMJ encourages use of free software in medicine
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:26:08 +0100
This article:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/321/7267/976
argues for free software development methods to be widely adopted in
medicine. As well as recognising the usual plus points of enhanced
reliability and security, I argue that the approach has the
potential to reduce the substantial transaction costs in the
commissioning of systems, and has a better fit with the intellectual
heritage of medicine which emphasises open peer review.
--
Douglas Carnall
a humble geek
http://www.carnall.demon.co.uk/
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux is great.
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 19:35:43 -0400
"Colin R. Day" wrote:
>
> Idoia Sainz wrote:
>
> >
> > > A typical Linux distribution, out of the box, has 95% of anything anyone
> > > (that's ANYONE!) would want to do with a computer.
> >
> > Again 0 facts in here.
> >
>
> Wrong.
>
> >
> > > I have a friend that is self employed as a word processor, she uses
> > > Linux, as she puts it, her "time is worth money."
> >
> > Again her opinion is not relevant as an objetive fact, indeed I do
> > use Word 2000 to write texts, even when I have Staroffice,
> > abiword and LyX perfectly usable at my computer.
>
> And how is this more objective than her use of Linux? And why would
> you leave your data at the mercy of Microsoft?
>
> > I find it more
> > featured, faster and prettier. Again it is an opinion.
> >
>
> But your opinion sucks!
>
> >
> > Again you personal opinion, let's parse it. Cool and eye candy, well,
> > I have nothing against that (what are trying GNOME, KDE and all
> > the window managers around ?); what's more, I feel Windows interface
> > is the best one around, faster and very featured (all in this world is
> > improvable).
>
> Multiple desktops out of the box?
>
> > Unstability is a disturbing issue, but when talking about
> > home or workstation machines NT Workstation, 2000 Professional
> > are rock solid, and even Windows 98 is fine for that in some cases.
> > In my opinion Windows NT/2000 Server is not mature as a server
> > product.
> >
> > > If what you want to
> > > accomplish can be done with Linux, you will find that it will be more
> > > reliable and more economically viable than ANY Windows solution.
> >
> > I agree that if something can be done with Linux it can be done
> > more reliable and in some cases with less money.
> >
> > All of your great Linux defense ends in a blind hate to Microsoft
>
> Our hatred of Microsoft is not blind; we hate MS with full cognizance
> of its attempts at vendorlock, proprietary formats, and intimidation.
You forgot racketeering.
>
> >
> > and Windows, and in the conclussion that Linux makes a good and
> > economic server for a lot of things, given that you have some one
> > that knows how to manage it. On the other side, at the desktop it
> > can be used too (and being done by some people) given you like
> > computers, you have the time to spend on it and you want to do
> > some kind of things less productive than you would do in Windows.
>
> Such as look at dancing paperclips?
>
> Colin Day
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "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"
I: 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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 19:43:30 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8snu1l$r7l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
<snip>
> I have a question in this reply however. Has Microsoft eliminated the
> need for real-mode assembly in the new versions of its OSes (NT,9X,2k),
> or does it still have a 640K (LOL) boundary.
NT/W2K has NEVER had this limit, nor has it ever aloud the execution of real
mode code in user applications. To lesser extent the same is true of W98/ME.
>Honestly the solution (if
> required) would be to eliminate DOS all together, and make an
> emulator. DOS programs should not be running native on Windows
> 9X/NT/2k if it wants to be called a true operating system (my opinion)
Microsoft agrees with you.
--
Nik Simpson
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: 19 Oct 2000 23:54:50 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It figures.
> They always seem to know each other :(
Thats some argument youve got there. Care to fib a little more
about your linux experience?
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 19:41:04 -0400
"." wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Strange, my girlfriend (who is in a MUCH better position to evaluate)
> > disagrees with your assessment.
>
> Funny. Ive been told that you're a homosexual.
>
Your source is unreliable.
> -----.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "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"
I: 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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
