Linux-Advocacy Digest #914, Volume #29 Sun, 29 Oct 00 11:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux or Solaris (JoeX1029)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (2:1)
Re: Why Tim is great (was: Linux) (2:1)
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Peter da Silva)
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Peter da Silva)
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Peter da Silva)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (John Brogan)
history of software engineering (was: Re: Ms employees begging for food) (Jonathan
Thornburg)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Can Linux "cut and paste" ? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Nik Simpson")
Re: An entire morning wasted on a Linux install. (2:1)
Re: Hullo, Claire, James? Here's another dork for you ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Can Linux "cut and paste" ? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Red Hat is as bad as Microsoft (.)
I wouldn't want to be the poor Bastard..... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: Linux or Solaris
Date: 29 Oct 2000 14:20:40 GMT
>Say what? Are you talking about solaris on x86 or what? It performs great
>on
>single user CPU boxes just fine... we run it on boxes ranging from Sparc 5s,
>10s, 20s, to Ultra 1s, 2s, 60s, 80s and a Sun Blade 1000. Most are single
>CPU
>(and a chunk are multi-proc).
>Solaris performs great on all boxes.
My bad i didn't specify, yeah x86. Solaris may perform *awesome* on SPARC
(which it does) but is noticeably slower on x86. Sorry for the confusion.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 16:24:41 +0000
Relax wrote:
>
> "2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > [x86 fairly slow context switching]
>
> > (another reason why W2K can't make a
> > great server--poor hardware)
>
> >, whereas (again, IIRC) SPARCS are much
> > faster.
>
> Apparently, people testing database speed found otherwise. Currently, the
> fastest 64 CPU, $48M SPARC based computer holds the 9th rank while an Intel
I was talking about context switching speed. Not outright integer speed.
> based computer, for 1/4 of that price, goes more than three times faster.
> Incidentally, Intel based computers running Windows 2000 currently hold the
> top four positions. Even if the benchmark is crap etc etc, CPU context
> switch doesn't seems to have such a dramatic effect on final server
> performances.
If you have 10,000 users on at once context switch speed becomes one of
the most importent things.
You have not read the post. i was talking about context swithcing spped,
not datadase access speed. The two are different, and if you claim to
know anything about computers, you should realise that.
-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]>
Subject: Re: Why Tim is great (was: Linux)
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 16:36:32 +0000
Jacques Guy wrote:
>
> Tim Palmer rote:
> >
> > mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This guy just cracks me up! He's even started to count wrong.
It's good to have him back
-Ed
>
> Tymmb! Yewre baqk! Hitz grate too hlaf ue bcsak!
> Weedad oneley thatts ewpid Klare Lin hoo bightz
> att evri trole bate annd hit wuz BOW-ryng. Butt
> won thyng, thoe: fikx thyss "wrote" inn yoore
> poustz, lyek ey dyd ynn mien, sea: "rote". Thnax Timm,
> butt downt goe yett... heer *smoooooch* ewe kann
> goe nough, oled pall, half a plai wytth Jaimz thu
> Zuid-Afrikaner butt [indeed!] bee karefooll: hiz
> yntoo spangkyng -- sough wotchyer but.
>
> PS. Sorry, I didn't manage to misspell quite
> everything. These spelling matches with Tim are
> exhausting.
--
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] (Peter da Silva)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: 29 Oct 2000 14:37:13 GMT
> > enough to keep people from deciding to install W2K to replace their
> > NT4.0 installation and then complain that it doesn't interoperate.
> I would have thought that such behaviour was grounds for immediate
> dismissal.
That would certainly depend on what the individual was supposed to be doing
in the organization. If their job requires some specific application that
only works on NT4, maybe. If they have trouble running HR's timecard-hack-
of-the-week, and are willing to use someone else's workstation to fill in
their timecard, then my response is that "HR and IT are service organisations,
and their job is keeping people productive, not getting in their way".
In the latter case I'd classify it with firing someone for having a potted
plant or coffee maker in their cubicle because it bothers the janitors.
--
`-_-' In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
'U` "Milloin halasit viimeksi suttasi?"
Disclaimer: WWFD?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter da Silva)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: 29 Oct 2000 14:43:02 GMT
In article <8tanet$j42$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, UNIX was more like an accident.
[...]
This timeline is sufficiently close to reality to be convincing, without
actually being accurate. See Peter Salus' book for a better description,
especially of the early years.
--
`-_-' In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
'U` "Milloin halasit viimeksi suttasi?"
Disclaimer: WWFD?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter da Silva)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: 29 Oct 2000 14:53:56 GMT
If Microsoft gets broken up, and this is done right, it will unleash a
massive flood of innovation that the Microsoft "Windows Everywhere"
mantra has kept bottled up for a decade. The resulting companies will
be immensely more profitable, in sum, than Microsoft is now.
This whould be obvious to any Microsoft employee who bothers to think about
it... just about every one I've spoken to has had SOME story of some product
they worked on being limited to support the "Windows Everywhere" worldview,
though of course many of them either don't recognise the limitation as a
problem, or are unwilling to say so where they might be quoted.
--
`-_-' In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
'U` "Milloin halasit viimeksi suttasi?"
Disclaimer: WWFD?
------------------------------
From: John Brogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 15:12:28 +0000
Christopher Smith wrote:
> "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:2vIK5.1201$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
>
> [chomp]
>
> > You overestimate Microsoft's integrity. Either that, or you underestimate
> > their arrogance.
> >
> > "At least one version of SmartDrive was sent to beta sites containing code
> > that explicitly checked for DR DOS (via INT 21h function 4452h -- a
> > hexadecimal code that stands for "DR"). See supra 252. With the detection
> > code in place, SmartDrive displayed a "fatal error" message: "Invalid
> device
> > interface. Unable to load." Importantly, this version of SmartDrive would
> > have worked with DR DOS but for Microsoft's decision to "detect" DR DOS
> 6.0
> > and "refuse to load." "
>
> Refuse to load smartdrive, not Windows. You'll probably find smartdrive
> wouldn't load on _any_ non-MS-DOS (or a derivative thereof).
>
> There's a fairly substantial difference between detecting a non-MS-DOS and
> detecting DR-DOS.
>
Yes, I agree. I presume, then, that you will be shocked to learn they actually
detected for DR DOS specifically. They used a technique they obtained from DRI
themselves (an MS programmer called DRI and basically misrepresented himself in
order to get this knowledge from them).
NOTICE TO BULK EMAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47,
Chapter 5, Subchapter II, 227, any and all nonsolicited
commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a
download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US.
E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly
prohibited under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are
subject to charge of up to $1,500 per incident or treble actual
costs, whichever is greater.
By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it
is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment. By
Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section is
punishable by law.
For a complete summary of this Legislation see:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:SN01618:@@@D
Chairman Reed Hundt: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Commissioner James Quello: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Commissioner Susan Ness: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
jwb
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonathan Thornburg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: history of software engineering (was: Re: Ms employees begging for food)
Date: 29 Oct 2000 16:17:27 +0100
In article <nVQK5.329$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Caveman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Software engineering is an established science which has existed for over
====
>two decades, [[...]]
===========
It's existed for a _lot_ over two decades. My copy of "The Mythical
Man-Month" is at home, but I recall its copyright as around 1972. It
was describing an already-well-established field, with many published
results from the 1960s.
--
-- Jonathan Thornburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.thp.univie.ac.at/~jthorn/home.html
Universitaet Wien (Vienna, Austria) / Institut fuer Theoretische Physik
Q: Only 7 countries have the death penalty for children. Which are they?
A: Congo, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan[*], Saudi Arabia, United States, Yemen
[*] Pakistan moved to end this in July 2000. -- Amnesty International,
http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aipub/2000/AMR/25113900.htm
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 15:24:55 GMT
In article <58rft8.4oe.ln@gd2zzx>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <8tdjgk$to2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Corporations get very nervous about backports.
> > Users probably won't care.
> >
> >> For that matter, just ship 2.4-pre-something and call it good.
> >
> > Corporations get REALLY nervous about betas shipped as production.
>
> I normally really enjoy your posts Rex but I think you are wrong
> with respect to the 2.4 release. Microsoft releases are always
> beta (if not alpha). They just give them an official release name.
I think that's the point. Linux 2.4 is already significantly better
than any version of Windows AND better than any previous version of
Linux. It's ready for release as a 2.4.1 product now!
Yes, there will be certain configurations that don't work as well
as others, but that's where the Open Source development process
kicks in. The various vendors will submit corrections and fixes
that can be incorporated into 2.4.2-2.4.13 that increase reliability,
improve performance, and eventually make Linux more reliable than
ANY othe operating system INCLUDING UNIX.
> We don't want this to happen to Linux. Linus decides when a new
> version is released.
This is understood, but Linus is no longer acting consistent with
his own policies. In the past, the policy was "Release early and
often". Furthermore, the market has always pushed him. Walnut
Creek was pushing Slackware 1.1 while Linus was still calling Linux
"Beta". Red Hat pushed the release of 2.0, taking a so-called Beta
and including it with a 4.x release. The fact is that if Linus is
left to his own to declare it ready, we could wait another year.
> and I hope he never gives in to pressure from
> commercial organisations. 2.4.0-beta-x does appear to me to be
> very stable but it is Linus' decision when to officially release
> it.
I've been working for almost 6 years to get Linux accepted for
commercial use. I've worked with 8,000 publishers, several insurance
companies, banks, brokerages, and businesss managers.
The biggest fear, for all of them, was that because there was no one
accountable (in a financial sense) for the timely delivery of upgrades
and fixes, that they would be exposed to unreasonable risk. At least
with Microsoft, they could either Sue, or shut off the purse (refuse
upgrades.
Finally, last year, almost exactly a year ago, with the public
offerings of Red Hat and Linux Care, CEOs began to think of Linux
as "One of the Family". But if the commercial providers have no
voice in the release of Linux, and can be bankrupted because Linus
would rather drink beer than release production (referring to the
many pictures of Linus drinking or drunk), then those same CEOs
will go back to thinking that Linux is "Unfit for consumption,
and will return to the Microsoft Monopoly.
There may be pressure from the UNIX community to hold-up Linux
in hopes that users will switch from Linux to UNIX. Unfortunately,
there is currently no equivalent to Linux, other than perhaps FreeBSD,
and Jordan Hubbard is as unmanagable as Linus is.
Other commercial versions of Linux, such as Solaris, AIX, or HP_UX
would be rejected by the other vendors and we'd go back to code forks.
Linus never asked for the position he now holds, he was drafted. A
group of people on a usenet group were looking for a version of UNIX
that could be installed on a PC that would produce a machine costing
less than $1000 U.S. for use as a server/workstation. The goal was
to create an "Internet Workstation" that had all the features of the
Internet. The candidates that came up were:
BSD, which was still constrained by AT&T software patents.
GNU, which was still very rough and barely moving.
Minux, which had limitations on the memory model and memory management.
Linux, which was very primitive (0.11) but with support from the GNU
and BSD community could be transformed into full features UNIX
system.
Linus has been given equity interests in a number of companies, along
with corporate support from several more. These were intented to be
incentives for early and reliable releases. Unfortunately, these may
also have resulted in pressure to receive "preferential treatement.
The Intel versions are very stable. In the past, that would have
been enough. But is he holding things up for the Transmeta port?
There are some packages that break (VMWare), but can only be fixed
when the 2.4 kernel is published as "official" (so that they can
make appropriate fixes in their production versions.
You would think that the infusion of over $1 Billion into the Linux
market in 5 IPOs, 30 corporate adoptions of Linux, and nearly 30%
of the server market would put a bit of pressure on Linus to deliver
the product as soon as it was ready.
Those involved with the product were figuring it would be out in
time for the San Jose Linux Expo, or at least in time for the Atlanta
show two weeks ago. But now, with no official release planned for
any time in the near future, the big sellers this Christmas will
be the Compaq/Microsoft MSN Companion, and Microsoft powered PCs.
Linux has already missed the "Back to School" rush, appears to
be missing the Christmas season, and if Linus continues to drag
his feet into next year, the tax season. This will effectively
stall Linux for almost an entire year, with interest rates going
up, stock prices on Linux-friendly stocks falling, and corporate
consumers looking to avoid getting burned again.
Linus has the power to say "go to press", and if he did so today,
he could still capture a huge segment of the market, capture some
corporate sales, and STILL have the flexibility to tweak and tune
in future releases.
Unfortunately, most of the big corporate interests are holding out
for the 2.4 kernel because they do feel that 2.4.b9 is "good enough".
Here is a history of the various releases:
http://www.memalpha.cx/Linux/Kernel/
Notice that the 2.0 prereleases were only 3 weeks (1.3.100-2.0.pre13).
The 2.0 prereleases were again only about 3 weeks (2.1.132-2.2.0-pre8)
Now with 2.4 we have 3 months (3/15/2000 for 2.3.99-pre1 to May 23 for
pre8). THEN we have TEST releases (May 25 - to Jul 13) and suddenly
everything is STILL on hold with release 2.4.0-test9 in OCTOBER.
So suddenly we have a beta cycle that has gone from 3 WEEKS to over
6 MONTHS. Quite simply, somebody changed the rules. Either Linus
has "sold out" and is protecting economic interests by putting the
market on hold until everything is ported to a generous benefactor
(transmeta?), or the job has just gotten too big for him to handle
and he needs to expand his support team.
One of the advantages of Open Source is "Release Early and Often".
Unless there are MAJOR bugs, a release is published a quickly as
possible.
The 2.4.0-test4 release had only a 173k patch. This is usually
an indication of stability. There comes a time when you have to stop
adding "nice to have" features and go to press. Vendors expect
to wait 2 years for major upgrade to windows. On the flip side,
they assume that there will be a newer and better version of
Linux out every few weeks. The best will be incorporated into
the major distributions (Red Hat, Caldera, SuSE, TurboLinux et al).
Taken from:
http://www.linux-history.org/kernel/
V2.4-test1
Also this version has an even minor number it is not the first stable
version of the new kernel. It looks like
Linus switched to a "redmond"-style versioning system.
This Kernel was released on May 25th, 2000.
--
Rex Ballard - VP I/T Architecture
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 9%/month! (recalibrated 10/23/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Can Linux "cut and paste" ?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 15:33:53 GMT
Is there anything special in Xfree setup that must be done for the
ThinkPad 765L?
THat is the machine it doesn't work on.
I'll try your suggestions later.
claire
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 19:48:10 -0400, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I write a text article using kedit and I want to cut and paste it
>> into a web page currently displayed by Netscape. I highlight the text,
>> select copy or cut and then put my mouse over the box displayed by
>> Netscape where I want to paste the text. Only problem is the Paste
>> selection in the menu is greyed out.
>>
>> Thinking this is a Netscape problem, I use the kde browser and go to
>> the same website and try it again.
>>
>> Same results.
>
>Standard way on Unix. Select with left button. Paste with middle
>button.
>
>Gary
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 10:44:00 -0500
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:vXMK5.116670$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > There has been much talk about hidden ports in
> > the back end of all windows products in the last
> > year.
>
>
> What a bunch of morons you Linux advocates are.
>
Its not fair or even helpful to tar all LINUX advocates with the same brush
used on Charlie who is clearly delusional.
--
Nik Simpson
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An entire morning wasted on a Linux install.
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 17:43:13 +0000
Bas van der Meer wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > what I do in the BIOS. Ok so I follow the somewhat screwed up
> > directions and make a boot diskette. Still the CDROM doesn't get
> > recognized despite trying every *.img file on the CD. Ok so now I
>
> Ah, you have a cd with *.img files on it! That's not how it should be.
> Don't copy a *.img file on a CD as a file but use the *.img file as an
> image to burn a cd from.
>
> <snip>
You've got the wrong end of the stick. *.iso are usually CD images.
*.img are usually floppy images. Copy it directly on to the floppy, then
boot the floppy.
-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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Hullo, Claire, James? Here's another dork for you
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 15:53:04 GMT
Actually you've got me wrong on that count. I find it hysterical that
MS gets hacked. Sorry, I don't sing the MS line, never have. I use the
OS because it works for me. I play Flight Simulator because I like it.
Those are the only MS programs on my machines.
I also agree with MS pulling dirty tricks especially with Digital
Research and Stac, and I lived through the campaign to destroy OS/2.
claire
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 00:47:11 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Windows is SOOOOO GOOOOD Claire_Lynn that
>they stole the whole W2K code base.
>
>It's good to the last byte.
>
>And it makes a wonderful communist operating system.
>
>
>Charlie
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I know that. No OS is immune and there will always be somebody who can
>> come up with a better mouse, despite state of the art mousetraps.
>>
>> claire
>>
>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 19:43:48 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
>>
>> >On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 16:51:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>You post an entire YEARS worth of security problems with Windows.
>> >>
>> >>I post ONE WEEKS worth with Linux, and my list is still longer than
>> >>yours.
>> >
>> >If you were to subscribe to BugTraq for a period of time, you would
>> >quickly discover that Windows does not have significantly fewer
>> >security problems than Linux. To think otherwise is to stick one's
>> >head in the sand.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Can Linux "cut and paste" ?
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 17:03:12 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I write a text article using kedit and I want to cut and paste it
> into a web page currently displayed by Netscape. I highlight the text,
> select copy or cut and then put my mouse over the box displayed by
> Netscape where I want to paste the text. Only problem is the Paste
> selection in the menu is greyed out.
>
> Thinking this is a Netscape problem, I use the kde browser and go to
> the same website and try it again.
>
> Same results.
>
> This works perfectly under Windows on the same site.
>
> What am I doing wrong here?
>
> FWIW I am running SuSE 6.4.
> claire
I have the same trouble. Best solution is to just write the webpage in
kedit, or webmaker (if you have it).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Why Red Hat is as bad as Microsoft
Date: 29 Oct 2000 16:00:16 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Red Hat Linux is one of the distributions (perhaps the only distribution)
> referred to in the following e-mail message:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2000/msg00003.html
> Red Hat Managers, being aware of their responsibility to RHAT
> shareholders and the need to pull in some money for them, decided
> not to wait for GCC 3.0, and shipped Red Hat 7 NOW with a DEVELOPMENT
> version of GCC 3.0 as the default compiler (a CVS snapshot for crying
> out loud!). The reason for doing this instead of using an older,
> stable version of GCC, such as egcs-2.91.66 (the version of GCC
> installed on the computer I'm posting from), was that the new version
> of GCC generates faster code, and Red Hat Managers thought they could
> be "competitive" against a little-known commercial Linux-i386 C/C++
> compiler. A stable version of the C/C++ compiler is also included,
> and is used to compile the kernel. Its name is "kgcc". Red Hat does
> not tell you that you're getting a development compiler (they call it
> a "new" compiler instead). They might have used the beta compiler to
> compile the applications that come with the system. Several Red
> Hat employees that happen to be non-Managers were opposed to
> the idea of releasing with a CVS snapshot for a C/C++ compiler. But
> since they are not Managers, they're not allowed to make any of
> the decisions.
Absolutely correct. Redhat linux is, next to Mandrake (which isnt
actually linux at all) the biggest piece of shit unix-look-alike that
there is.
This is the SECOND time they did this with gcc...Remember 5.0?
Really, there are three Linuxes worth mentioning at all:
SuSe (so much like FreeBSD now its frightening)
Debian
Slackware
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: I wouldn't want to be the poor Bastard.....
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 16:03:45 GMT
who executed the attachment that contained the QAZ trojan. He's
probably cleaning every bathroom in MS University with his toothbrush
right now.
BTW one of the traits of that Trojan is that it travels across the
network looking for machines to infect.
The major AntiViral scanner software wasn't updated to catch it until
July sometime and the Trojan was born sometime in June. Firewall
software like ZoneAlarm and Norton etc will catch it only because they
catch programs trying to dial out, or make outbound connections to the
Network/internet.
When you are asked "Would you like notepad.exe to be allowed to
connect to the internet?" a red flag should go up :)
That's how my client found it and it had spread to all 4 or 5 of his
networked machines. I could only imagine how many machines in
Microsoft are infected. Oh well, they know all about Notepad.exe.
claire
claire
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
