Linux-Advocacy Digest #40, Volume #30 Sat, 4 Nov 00 15:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Once agian: Obscurity != security (Was: Tuff Competition for LINUX! (Perry Pip)
Re: Windows 2000 magazine admits Open Source software is more secure. (Perry Pip)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (Bob Hauck)
Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Re: I think I'm in love..... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Once agian: Obscurity != security (Was: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Re: I think I'm in love..... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Les Mikesell")
Re: I think I'm in love..... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Once agian: Obscurity != security (Was: Tuff Competition for LINUX! ("Les
Mikesell")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? ("Les Mikesell")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Linux is great ("Les Mikesell")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (joseph)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Once agian: Obscurity != security (Was: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Date: 4 Nov 2000 19:42:23 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 11:35:43 -0800,
Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:vxUM5.14454$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:zYLM5.121755$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Earlier, you claimed that they said "they are at least 6 months ahead
>of
>> > the
>> > > other Linux/BSD sites in closing security holes." You lied about
>this.
>> >
>> > You may try the "sutpidity" defense. You are stupily loyal to Linux.
>> >
>> > Anyone with half a brain knows OpenBSD is trashing the open by default
>> Linux
>> > distros.
>>
>> Not only did they not mention Linux like you claimed they did, they also
>did
>> not claim to be 6 months ahead of ANYone. But you knew that. You just
>> decided to lie about it.
>
>I backed up everything I said ... and more. With quotes.
No you did not. you made far fetched out of context interpretations.
>
>And they are 6 months ahead of fixing the many holes that appear in
>Linux/Unix etc.
>
Lies.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 magazine admits Open Source software is more secure.
Date: 4 Nov 2000 19:42:45 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000 23:06:17 -0600,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Aaron Ginn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Okay Chad, answer me this. How would someone view the source code over
>> a remote connection without first downloading the code? According to
>> Balmer, "... the hackers did see some of our source code." If the
>> intruders had to download the code before viewing it, I'd say that
>> constitutes theft of code, wouldn't you?
>
>My understanding is that they used Windows Terminal Services.
You mean your imagination. Or do you have some proof.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 19:43:42 GMT
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 09:28:21 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Do you consider google, deja, or sourceforge to be
>> real servers?
>
>Sort of. There isn't much dynamic content involved.
There's no dynamic content on Google or Deja?
>Just a lot of text searching. No transactions.
I'm pretty sure that text searching is considered dynamic content by
most people.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [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: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 19:44:13 -0000
On Sat, 04 Nov 2000 03:17:55 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Bruce Schuck wrote:
>>
>> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>> > >
>> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
>> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > > wrote
>> > > on Thu, 02 Nov 2000 09:54:52 -0500
>> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > > >Christopher Smith wrote:
[deletia]
>>
>> Here a few CERT advisories that point out buffer overflow attacks on
>> Unix/Linux.
>>
>> http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-99-08-cmsd.html
>>
>> http://www.cert.org/vul_notes/VN-2000-01.html
>
>And yet, Linux and Unix are STILL more secure than M$ Operating Shitstems.
>
>why is that?
Good policy is always a more effective security measure.
[deletia]
--
You can never tell which way the train went by looking at the tracks.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 19:45:45 -0000
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000 22:25:21 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Bruce Schuck wrote:
>> >
>> > "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:QXpM5.12759$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > >
>> > > "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > news:WimM5.120952$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > The OpenBSD people claim they are usually 6 months ahead of
>Linux/Unix
>> > in
>> > > > fixing exploits.
>> > > >
>> > > > Go ahead and sleep through those 6 months of "open" vulnerabilities.
>> > >
>> > > Why don't you ask them how many years they are ahead of anything
>> > > from Microsoft?
>> >
>> > What percentage of the market does the secure open source project
>(OpenBSD)
>> > hold compared to the insecure one (Linux) ?
>>
>> And this is your argument that closed-source Microsoft code is more
>secure?
>
>I was arguing that every Linux and Unix is 6 months behind OpenBSD and
>inherently not secure.
No, there are Linuxen that are more security centric.
There are also Linuxen that don't enable potentially
broken versions of bind by default, much in the same
fashion that OpenBSD operates.
--
The first requisite for immortality is death.
-- Stanislaw Lem
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I think I'm in love.....
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 19:49:39 +0000
Terry Porter wrote:
> Eww, nasty, sounds like something Windows would do :(
And yet KDE 2.0 did it.
> This is not the prob it may seem, as most Linux boxes are on 24/24.
I don't leave my machine on for that long.
> "Works" is a interesting phrase when used by our Wintroll comunity.
Well, "works" according to the Linux community is stuck with one font?
Stuck with no antialiasing (by default)? Stuck with no driver for my sound
card? Stuck with no driver for my scanner? And until recently (i.e. LM
7.2), no working USB ZIP and Voodoo 5500 driver?
This is your concept of "works" is it?
Ah yes, but Windows 98 SE is unstable. That's enough to condemn it, is it?
I'd rather have a marginally unstable system than one that _doesn't_ do
what I want.
> So what ?
So KDE 2.0 has been released and as usual the users are Beta testing it.
Just like commercial software.
> Wasnt Win2k also released recently ?
Service pack 1 is out already
> Linux was **NEVER** claimed to be a replacement for Windows.
> Again Goodwin had his facts badly distorted by the Wintroll FUD machine.
And yet other threads in COLA keep on harping about how Linux is ready to
replace Windows.
> Linux offers advantages, Windows has never had, and will never have.
> Windows remains a poor subset of Linux, in terms of capability and
> stability.
Which Windows are we talking about here?
I'd agree Windows 98 SE and Millenium are hardly stable but Windows 2000?
> Just waiting for Goodwin to get a clue ..
Merely repeating it doesn't make it true.
--
Pete Goodwin
Just waiting for Linux to get there...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Once agian: Obscurity != security (Was: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 19:49:18 -0000
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 11:35:43 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:vxUM5.14454$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:zYLM5.121755$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Earlier, you claimed that they said "they are at least 6 months ahead
>of
>> > the
>> > > other Linux/BSD sites in closing security holes." You lied about
>this.
>> >
>> > You may try the "sutpidity" defense. You are stupily loyal to Linux.
>> >
>> > Anyone with half a brain knows OpenBSD is trashing the open by default
>> Linux
>> > distros.
>>
>> Not only did they not mention Linux like you claimed they did, they also
>did
>> not claim to be 6 months ahead of ANYone. But you knew that. You just
>> decided to lie about it.
>
>I backed up everything I said ... and more. With quotes.
>
>Your Penguinista blinders prevent you from seeing the obvious.
No, we're just aware of what's out there and the fact that
there is no single Linux Corp or free software equivalent.
Attempting to paint all of Linux with one single brushstroke
is absurd.
You're the one with the blinders.
[deletia]
--
An apple a day makes 365 apples a year.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I think I'm in love.....
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 19:53:22 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What sound card?
>
> If you go into a CompUSA, all you will see is products by Creative
> Labs and Aureal. Except for a few embedded chipsets, there really
> isn't that much diversity in consumer level PC sound to confound one.
There are alternatives.
ESS make sound chips. They replaced Aureal in the MX series, the MX400 is
an ESS chip.
Crystal/Cirrus make sound chips. Take a look a Turtle Beach/Voyetra Montego.
Analog Devices make AC'97 codecs (as do ESS and Crystal for that matter).
They're already on a number of 815 mobo's. It's a product called SoundMAX.
Yamaha make sound cards.
Aureal have disappeared in all but name. They're being bought by Creative
(something I believe shareholders weren't happy with).
--
Pete Goodwin
Just waiting for Linux to get there...
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.linux.sucks
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 19:53:30 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Can you please inform me what you can do in Vi that you can't in Word.
> >Or even what you can do much more easily in Vi than in Word.
>
> "anything complex" probably would fit the bill.
>
> However, I will leave the details to the vi users.
One I use fairly often: you have a list of names in
Last, First form but you want First Last.
:%s/\(.*\), \(.*\)/\2 \1/
and you have it. And since regular expressions work
in most of the unix tools there is nothing extra to
learn or look up.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I think I'm in love.....
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 19:57:35 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Why are you rebooting all the time?
>
> Get it up and LEAVE IT UP. It's not fucking crash-happy windows, you
> know.
Two reasons.
It's a home PC. I don't leave it switched on all the time.
It's a dual boot machine. I prefer to use Windows because it has more of
what I want on it.
> > Perhaps I should use Windows, after all it works!
>
> for about 6 hours
I rarely reboot my Windows 98 SE at work. That stays up for about nine
hours, then I switch it off to go home. We have a server running Windows 98
SE which is up for weeks before it gets rebooted for whatever reason.
You want to say that Windows 98 SE crashes every time after six hours,
that's your privilege, however it is simply not true.
> What are you doing wrong?
How the hell should I know?
--
Pete Goodwin
Just waiting for Linux to get there...
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Once agian: Obscurity != security (Was: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 19:56:27 GMT
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:IwZM5.122712$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Not only did they not mention Linux like you claimed they did, they also
> did
> > not claim to be 6 months ahead of ANYone. But you knew that. You just
> > decided to lie about it.
>
> I backed up everything I said ... and more. With quotes.
Really??? Where was Linux mentioned in anything you
quoted? Where is the unbiased source for the quotes?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.linux.sucks
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 21:43:57 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 14:04:10 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> >"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> [deletia]
> >
> >To do what?
> >If you are talking about email.
> >I just open Outlook (from the quick launch menu bar, really conveniant),
and
> >it automatically connects to my mail servers and download all my mail for
> >me.
>
> ...after your done figuring out how to do all of that. Some
> features of outhouse (like automagic spam filtering & message
> archiving) don't present the user with a really simply method
> of enabling or configuring things.
>
> Someone willing to RTFM for outhouse could do the same for any
> other mailreader that you might claim has a more complicated
> interface.
Really?
I get spam, I go to message> block sender, get asked if I want to block this
sender, and the sender is permanently banned. Same goes for killfile, btw.
What do you mean about message archiving?
> >> if they ship with the system, but, ah, won't go to the web to further
> >> cripple the Windoze experience.
> >
> >Actually, I wasn't talking about themes, I was talking about litestep
(just
> >one example, there is one more, I think) it gives windows a whole new
look.
>
> This is one examle where you end up with a windowmanager more
> primitive than any of the predominant ones on Linux as well
> as having your desktop disabled.
You comlain about lack of alternatives, I show you that there are, and then
you complain about the quality of them?
Litestep is opensource project, don't like it? Make your own.
You may also want to note that it's skinnable, meaning that there are a lot
of skins out there.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[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: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 21:52:53 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 09:12:35 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"Stefan Ohlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Bruce Schuck wrote:
> >> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >>>And all the other Unix/Linux exploits that let one take root.
> >> >>Yes, yes...against improperly managed systems.
> >> >Nope. All Unix/Linux systems have vulnerabilities.
> >> >Especially buffer overflow vulnerabilities that Aaron claims were
taken
> >out
> >> >of Unix 12 years ago.
> >> >
> >> Potenitally, yes. But provided you run an up to date system, those are
> >> most likely plugged.
> >
> >Ditto for Win2K.
>
> ...assuming you aren't accepting email attachements from anyone.
Only if:
You are stupid enough to run as administrator
You are stupid enough to ignore the very clear warning message that Outlook
gives you *by default*.
The OS cannot be blamed for the user incomacity.
The same can happen on any system, with any email program that support
attachments
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 21:56:11 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 09:25:15 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >IIS works just fine. And fast too. Kicks Linux and Solaris ass
>
> Not lately.
>
> These days is half as fast or slower on better hardware.
According to who? Serving what?
What hardware? Whose benchmarks? What specs?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[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: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 21:58:43 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 13:56:59 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> >"Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> >> > And thus, you touch upon the ENTIRE problem of the windows
paradigm...
> >> > that each type of file is ONLY to be used by one specific executable,
> >> > and no other.
> >>
> >> This is an area where the flexibility of OS/2 particularly shines. You
> >can
> >> have several different programs associated with the file type and
select
> >among
> >> them by right-clicking the object in question. You can make the
default
> >> something safe, like a Notepad type of app. For objects that you know
are
> >> safe, you can change just their defaults to use a different app and
this
> >> information is stored in the extended attributes of that particular
file.
> >
> >Here is a tip, Windows can do the *same*
>
> Since when?
Since win95, I think. Maybe before.
> Windows can only deal with file "types", not individual files.
Please read what Aaron said above:
"each TYPE of file is"
"several different programs associated with the file TYPE"
Besice, IIRC, windows 2000 can do it for individual file types as well, on
NTFS partition.
Maybe NT can do it as well.
Check here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/ntfs5.htm
Note: I'm not certain about this, as even if this is possible, this is
rarely, if ever, used feature.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft?
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 20:02:36 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 04 Nov 2000 08:09:36 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Bruce Schuck wrote:
> >
> [deletia]
> >> > >
> >> > > When Linux starts supplying drivers for even 1/100th of the
hardware
> >> windows
> >> > > supports I'll be amazed.
>
> In what area exactly does Linux support only one device out of
> 100 when compared to WinDOS. Please provide actual details.
And don't forget to count the dozen or so other platforms that
Linux supports and their associated devices. I don't see much
Windows support for the Sparc where Linux is running happily.
Les Mikesell
[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
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 19:46:35 GMT
Bruce Schuck writes:
>>> Didn't Microsoft write OS/2 for IBM?
>> Which version are you referring to?
> All the versions up to 1.1 with Presentation Manager.
There had been only two versions up to 1.1, namely 1.0 and 1.1,
and there were separate IBM and MS releases of OS/2, with IBM's
version targeting IBM hardware and MS's version targeting
non-IBM hardware. It was a joint development effort at that
time.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux is great
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 20:08:57 GMT
"James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3a046629$0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > 18: and I don't ever want to be able to use my data on another system or
> on a
> > future version of my software
>
> Give us some examples. I had no problem going from MSOffice97 to
Office2k.
Try Office95 to 97. By the way, why are you in such a hurry to dump
your old versions and jump to the new ones. Did you have some problems
from this vendor's products along the way?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 12:11:51 -0500
From: joseph <[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!
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> The OS cannot be blamed for the user incomacity.
Of course we should blame the OS and people do blame the OS.
There are disciplines in computer science dedicated to human centered computing
and ways to reduce errors and reliance on humans for safety and security.
> The same can happen on any system, with any email program that support
> attachments
Oh No. In fact MS boasts about about windows integration - this integration
creates security risks. A knife blade cuts both ways.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
