Linux-Advocacy Digest #94, Volume #30 Mon, 6 Nov 00 23:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Chad Meyers: Blatent liar ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Bob Hauck)
Re: We will never know what the MS intruder did (Bob Hauck)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! (Reality is a point of view)
Re: Linux and Mac instead of Windows. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (.)
Re: The Sixth Sense (.)
Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion. ("Weevil")
Re: Linux and Mac instead of Windows. ("Les Mikesell")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chad Meyers: Blatent liar
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 19:42:19 -0800
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8u7mca$ccr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <jAIN5.123741$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Bruce Schuck wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Bruce Schuck wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to correct the impression that the list I am
> referring
> > to
> > > > is a
> > > > > > bug list. That list is even longer. No, the list I am
> referrring to
> > is
> > > > the
> > > > > > list of security advisories. That list is very long and
> growing
> > > > everyday.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, I must be missing something. Where is this list of
> hundreds of
> > > > security
> > > > > advisories for Redhat 7.0?
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/rh7-errata-security.html
> > > > >
> > > > > lists a total of 10 security advisories.
> > > >
> > > > In the 30 days RedHat 7.0 has been released.
> > >
> > > Oh, so you admit your were wrong. Just to remind you, here is what
> you
> > > said:
> > >
> > > > The list for 7.0 is very long, and is growing every day.
> >
> > I concede. I was bouncing around all the Linux security lists and saw
> so
> > many.
> >
> > But you must admit, 10 in 30 days extrapolates to 120 a year. I admit
> that
> > the list for 7.0 might not grow that long because 7.1 will come out in
> a few
> > months, and everyone will have to upgrade, and then 7.2 in a couple
> more
> > months, and more upgrading ...
> >
>
> Yeah, at least we Linux users can find out what bugs are in our software
As I said, that isn't the bug list. The numbers above are the security
advisories. I can't believe how many there are in 6.0, 6.1, 6.2 and 7.0.
And then when you go back to the 5's. Wow.
How does anybody get any work done with Linux? Do you have any time left
after downloading all the security fixes, compiling them and installing
them?
> but those poor Windows users have no idea what horors MS is hiding from
> them because MS does not publish it's bug list!
It's called the knowledge base. It has all the issues. It's searchable.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 03:41:05 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Les Mikesell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 05 Nov 2000 06:45:41 GMT
<pm7N5.13148$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:uR3N5.123123$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> I never argued Access is a replacment for a full blown RDBMS. But it is a
>> great tool for developing small to medium systems and a great tool for
>> learning an RDBMS for very little money.
>
>Learning? Or vendor lock? In what way does it teach or encourage
>you to write standard DBMS code?
Easy. It teaches or encourages you to write MS-DBMS code, and
everyone knows that MS is a de-facto standard.
Or else.
:-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random monopolistic behavior here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 03:44:18 GMT
On 6 Nov 2000 11:15:26 -0600, Relax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Great. Anyway, fork() immediately followed by an exec() in the child branch
>is not a very efficient way to start a new process, because the duplicated
>address space will be thrown away almost instantly.
Yes, but in a multi-process server you don't do the exec(). Therefore
your statement that multi-process servers are "slooowwww" is only true
on NT.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: We will never know what the MS intruder did
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 03:44:31 GMT
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000 03:52:55 GMT, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How then, do all these exploits reach the light of day?
Sometimes someone audits the code, finds a hole and posts it to
Bugtraq before it was ever actively exploited. A number of recent
advisories have come about exactly that way, where somebody took "grep"
to the source tree of some app to find known bad practices.
Just in case you are wondering, this is a good thing even though it
generates more advisories.
>What about the plethora of privilege-escalation (aka root gaining) exploits
>on Linux?
What about the ones on NT?
>They seem to be doing a better job as a privilege-escalation exploit on
>Windows 2000 has not been seen in some time, if at all, whereas it's a
>weekly, if not daily occurrence with Linux.
You obviously aren't keeping up on the advisories for your favorite
product.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 19:47:31 -0800
"Glenn McGregor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:laIN5.639$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Actually ctrl-Z is the SUB character, not EOF.
>
> I believe it was to be used for an indication of an alternate
> character set, ie; substitute.
>
> The closest current EOF character in ASCII is FS, the file separator
> character.
Ctrl Z in VMS is Exit
>From the VMS EDT Manual:
To exit from EDT, press CTRL-Z to return to line mode, if you are not
already there. Then use one of the following commands to exit:
EXIT
Writes a new file with the same name as the input file, but with a
higher version number, and returns you to the DCL prompt.
QUIT
Discards your changes and returns you to DCL command level.
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 19:50:45 -0800
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Seán Ó Donnchadha" wrote:
> >
> > "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > "Now that computing is astoundingly inexpensive and computers
inhabit
> > >every part of our lives, we stand at the brink of another revolution.
This
> > >one will involve unprecedentedly inexpensive communication; all the
> > >computers will join together to communicate with us and for us.
> > >Interconnected globally, they will form a network, which is being
called the
> > >information highway. A direct precursor is the present Internet, which
is a
> > >group of computers joined and exchanging information using current
> > >technology."
> > > "The reach and use of the new network, its promise and perils, is
the
> > >subject of this book."
> > >
> > >Apparently, Gates didn't realize that the Internet *IS* the information
> > >highway.
> > >
> >
> > Yep, this would be consistent with the account of a veteran MS
> > engineer in a book he co-wrote called _Barbarians_Led_By_Bill_Gates_.
> >
> > >
> > >But as was said earlier in this thread, that's most likely because
> > >Microsoft had nothing to do with it.
> > >
> >
> > I think you're wrong here. Based on what I gathered from the book
> > mentioned above, MS was looking beyond the Internet because (at that
> > time) it made a terrible platform for realtime interactive digital
> > media, which is what MS thought the information highway was all about.
> > In fact, MS internally called the Internet "low bandwidth". They
> > totally failed to foresee the impact of e-commerce, which is what made
> > the Internet take off despite its general crappiness in terms of QoS.
>
> Which indicates just how fucking CLUELESS Gates really is about
> networking in general
>
> The internet is low bandwidth--therefore, internet bandwidth will
> never improve...let's build a WHOLE NEW NETWORK rather then just
> upgrade the bandwidth of an existing structure.
Go back to sleep Aaron. You are so clueless.
I guess Bill was right, since the Internet 2 project is doing exactly that.
What a visionary!
I'll quote from http://www.internet2.edu/
Internet2, led by over 180 U.S. universities working in partnership with
industry and government, is developing and deploying advanced network
applications and technologies, accelerating the creation of tomorrow's
Internet.
Applications
Advanced network applications allow people to collaborate and access
information in ways not possible using today's Internet.
etc etc.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Reality is a point of view)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 04:00:30 GMT
+---- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (Tue, 7 Nov 2000 03:20:18 +0000
+(UTC)):
| OK. But isn't it a rather curious model to have code in HTML pages?
Yes, over time it makes life difficult for both HTML and code
writers.
"Here is the latest page."
"My HTML editor doesn't like it."
"The embedded code got munged, again, try this."
"What is this thing? I'll delete it."
"The embedded code got munged, again, try this."
"I moved this table and it broke."
"The embedded code got munged, again, try this."
| Shouldn't it be that code MAKES should be making HTML and that pieces
| of HTML would be embedded in program source code?
Same problem, other end, _lousy solution_.
"I want this over there."
"OK, I'll edit it and rebuild."
"Wait, put it over there."
"OK, I'll edit and rebuild."
"Oh, and make it periwinkle."
"OK, I'll edit and rebuild."
| Why do people do the reverse?
+----
The best solution is to avoid _both_, keep the HTML and code as
_separate_ as possible. Let each do their thing, without
conflict.
There are various approaches approaching maturity, no clear
winners yet.
--
Gary Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Privacy on the net is still illegal.
<a href=http://www.squeak.org>Tired of selfish technology monopolies?</a>
<a href="http://www.votenader.org/issues/agriculture_hemp.html">vote hip</a>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux and Mac instead of Windows.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 03:52:59 GMT
I think it is just the server portion. Last I heard Lotus has
"refused" to write a client, stupid mistake IMHO.
As for Wine, I appreciate the efforts of the programmers, but I would
just as soon run real Windows than Wine.
I would say the same thing if there was a Linux version of Wine
(Line?) for Windows.
claire
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000 02:50:51 GMT, "Les Mikesell"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> >> Where is the compettion for Lotus Notes on Linux? Client version that
>> >> is not some Domino server.
>> >
>> >Notes itself: http://notes.net/linux
>>
>> You didn't read my message.
>>
>> Client.
>>
>I read it - I didn't understand it. Doesn't the Linux package
>include a client?
>
>>
>> >> In fact where is ANY groupware for Linux?
>> >>
>> >A search on freshmeat.net pops up a list of 26 right
>> >off the bat, including the above Lotus notes and
>> >several web based solutions. Some loose collaboration
>> >can be done with a web bbs and a mailing list manager
>> >which are all over the place.
>>
>>
>> And who is using them?
>> I see Notes used in quite a lot of places.
>>
>> claire
>
>Some people claim to be using the Notes client under Wine
>successfully. I use separate web components for a bbs
>and calendar plus normal email myself. Plus client-server
>CVS, of course.
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
------------------------------
From: . <[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: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 16:56:37 +1300
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > Actually, no.. it wouldn't. Windows 98 introduced the registry backup
> > system. If the registry is corrupted or missing, it will restore a backup
> > automatically.
>
> Yeah, and Win98 had that "automatic optimization" feature that was supposed
> to eventually move all of your oft-used apps to the faster part of the
> hard drive. You don't hear much about that feature, do you? Never
> helped.
Umm, at least one version of 95 supported the default registry backup....
system.da0 and user.da0...
I remember falling back on it once in 96 due to a retard double-clicking
his entire-registry export file to 'see what was in it'.
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 17:03:28 +1300
> Yes. Sitting at my desk, I can perform administration on machines
> downstairs...AND on machines in california and florida simultaneously.
>
> This means that all of those remote locations don't need anybody beyond
> basic operator skills.
>
> Meanwhile, back at the NT ranch...every site needs it's own NT babysitter.
A Microsoft study released today shows NT increases employment
exponentially as computers increase in numbers.
"Obviously this was our intent. We deliberately made the system a pain
in the ass so that more and more people would be recruited into IT jobs
to deal with the horrible OS no-one with qualifications wanted to touch.
To ensure that the NT users appear to know what they're doing, we have
also developed a range of multi-choice exams."
"Here at Microsoft, we take the economy very seriously, because the more
clueless punters are backing our OS, the more copies we sell."
[No offense intended to people who actually WORKED to get their MCSE]
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion.
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 22:06:10 -0600
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8u5u5e$rks$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Let's avoid getting into a pissing war about applications. Lets talk
> > about real serious (technical) limitations or problems with Linux.
> >
> > What can Windows or Win2K do that Linux can not?
> > What can Linux do that Windows or Win2K can't?
> > Why isn't Linux suitable for the desktop?
>
> Linux on its own does not have a desktop. If you mean Linux + KDE or
> Linux + Gnome or whatever, then you might get close to comparing like
> with like.
>
> Windows 95/98/ME are consumer products with a built in flaw - they have
> no memory protection against errant applications overwriting memory,
> hence the whole system is unstable.
>
> Windows 2000 has memory protection and is a lot better at handling
> application problems, though the integration of the desktop (i.e.
> explorer) into Windows 2000 is a weakness.
>
> Windows does not have a strong scripting interface - though VB scripting
> is appearing more and more. Whilst I'm a GUI fan, I recognise that some
> things are done better in a script than a GUI.
>
> Windows relies on the registry, a single hierarchical database, to
> provide configuration. Linux uses multiple text or whatever
> configuration files spread here and there (though as I understand it,
> the base system configuration is collected in one place).
>
> The registry is not exactly a stable piece of code in Windows. It has a
> hard limit on Windows 95/98 (not sure about ME), which can cause
> headaches. On Windows 2000 it can be expanded.
>
> Something Windows can do is decide your registry is somehow corrupted
> and revert you back to your configuration from six months ago - ouch! -
> it tried to do that to me twice before I deleted the code that attempted
> to do it!
>
> Linux desktop is a bunch of seperate applications. X + KDE gives you a
> desktop - if this goes wrong, you can try to recover from a console (if
> you can get to one). None of the Windows products have a console, so if
> the desktop dies on Windows, your fairly sunk.
>
> Where Windows in general has the edge is in hardware support. Most
> manufacturers produce consumer hardware for Windows first, and Linux is
> usually an after thought (and yes, there are exceptions).
>
> Linux is multi user - you can have multiple logins. Windows is multi
> user in that you can have many accounts but only one can be on the
> desktop. Since you can't remote login, that kills that one.
>
> Windows has services (simple services on 95/98/ME and full services on
> NT/2000), Linux has daemons. These are background code with no UI that
> runs silently.
>
> Linux has a console I dislike and has commands I hate but thats my
> preference and bias. I did work for Digital Equipment Corporation so I
> prefer DCL style commands. It is a very strong console with a load of
> choices (bash, tshell etc.).
>
> Windows has a weak console with limited commands. On Windows 95/98/ME
> its actually MSDOS. On Windows 2000 its a better 32 bit console but
> still limited.
>
> Linux has command line recall and tab completion. Windows 2000 has
> command line recall. Windows 95/98/ME have command line recall provided
> you run doskey/insert first! Tab recall is only enabled via the registry
> (why not the default?).
>
> Linux has a rich heritage from the UNIX world. Another more cynical way
> of looking at it is Linux is bogged down in the past 8).
>
> Windows has a lot more applications, games etc. for the desktop market.
> Linux + KDE/Gnome is rapidly getting there but has a way to go yet.
>
> Linux has the market share in terms of web servers. NT/2000 just aren't
> getting there with IIS. Last time I checked, Windows 2000 doesn't scale
> well, Linux does.
>
> Technically Linux and Windows 2000 ought to be similar (but I'm sure the
> Linux advocates will disagree). I'm biased because I'm a Windows user.
> However, being technically better doesn't mean you're going to be the
> dominant OS - marketing and applications makes the leader. Not to
> mention tying everyone to your desktop and your applications (something
> I find appalling).
>
> The Windows desktop is perhaps more polished than Linux + KDE. I'm not
> so sure now I've been using KDE 2.0 (you can tell I like KDE can't
> you!). I rather like the marble style - reminds me of RISC OS.
>
> If KDE 2.0 can sort out some of the problems then I'll be eagerly
> awaiting Delphi for Linux (aka Kylix) to appear. I've fixed one problem
> by deleting the .kde directory. That fixed the fonts being stuck in
> "fixed".
>
> --
> ---
> Pete
> Why don't I use Linux? I'm waiting for Delphi to appear on Linux...
>
I didn't snip anything because the whole post was worth repeating. Easily
the most honest, unbiased article I've seen in this newsgroup from either
side.
Thanks, Pete.
jwb
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux and Mac instead of Windows.
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 04:09:28 GMT
"ZHN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Why though? I ahve heard this for so many years but no one has ever
volunteered
> to ask why windows has a wider application base. Is it becuase it's
easier to
> program than unix or linux. No!!! It's not. Try doing com and see what I
> mean. No the real reason is that microsoft did the one most brilliant and
yet
> obvious things in the virtual world to do. Namely they went out and
invented
> an operating system specially suited to serve as a medium for their
> applications. That's it. You can do things with windows that you just
cant do
> with Linux or mac.
> If you disagree tell us why.
Do you mean it is specially suited to lock people into writing
non-portable code if they ever start using it? With COM you
can connect parts written in different languages and deal with
the weird windows threading modes but only on a single platform.
You need a wire-level protocol or some standard like CORBA or
RMI that encapsulates it if you want to work across platforms.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
