Linux-Advocacy Digest #262, Volume #30 Thu, 16 Nov 00 03:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Steve Mading)
Re: OS stability (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: OS stability (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: The Sixth Sense (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8) (Steve Mading)
Re: Need some advice on Linux ("Frank Van Damme")
Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights? ("Frank Van Damme")
Re: OS stability (sfcybear)
Re: Mandrake, thoughts? Opinions? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: If Linux Sux.... ("Tom Wilson")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: 16 Nov 2000 06:25:24 GMT
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 05:59:50 GMT, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> >Only if the compiler is perfect. Has that been your experience?
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean. I haven't had big problems with compilers
>> choking on good code. There are some obscure things with templates that
>> some compilers don't support, but things tend to either work or not work.
>
>What if you see different runtime behavior depending on the compiler
>version?
I've never seen this before. If it happened, it'd be news to me.
>> I've just decided to throw out large amounts of code in a project and
>> redo it because the guy who coded it did so with a C mentality, and
>> there are strdups al over the place (few of them freed) as well as a
>> lot of strings with hard coded lengths.
>
>Are the strings really ones that need to grow or do you just
>want the source to look pretty?
If the strings are created and modified dynamically or copied from other
strings, which covers most nontrivial examples, you really do want your
strings to be able to grow.
That's why the other guy used strdup(). He obviously wouldn't have done so
if statically allocated strings were OK.
>> >The first c++ programs I saw come around in the unix
>> >open source area, like Sam Leffler's Hylafax had to be
>> >matched precisely with a version of g++. Every time either
>> >the source or the compiler version changed it took a new
>> >round of patches to make it work, and then people
>> >who couldn't match the compiler version on the OS they
>> >used would have trouble.
>>
>> This kind of thing usually happens because the code has some glitch
>> that the earlier compiler didn't catch (for example, not declaring
>> the return type of a function)
>
>No, he was doing it on a standards-conforming SGI compiler, I
There is no such thing as a "standards conforming" C++ compiler. As I've
already mentioned, for example, SGI's STL has at least one omission.
>assume, then having to break it to match the defects of the
>g++ dejour -
g++ is actually pretty good nowadays.
>> >Who knows? One set of developers here is working on a test wrapper
>> >for some other things, and depending on which service pack they
>> >have applied to the compiler, a whole loop may disappear.
>>
>> I'm not clear on what you're talking about. Can you be more specific ?
>
>Different run-time behavior of the same code.
Can't say I've had any problem with this. The only place I see it being
problematic is where code depends on implementation specific behaviour.
>> C++ doesn't just write half of your code for you.
>
>I thought that was the point - with containers and the STL algorithms to
>replace most of the things where you would have to write your
>own loops.
To what are you referring to ? I don't think the iterators are terribly
error prone, if that's what you mean.
>> >If it is completely reliable. If it isn't what do you do? You can fix
>> >the part you did wrong in your own code.
>>
>> If it isn't you can write your own implementation and write it once, or
>> if it's open source you can fix it.
>
>Write your own compiler?
I think you're underrating C++ compilers.
I certainly don't believe that the existing C++ compilers are so awful that
we need to use something as ancient as C. There are large application
frameworks such as Qt and KDE which compile fine on several different
versions of C++.
>> Either way, I don't see how you can keep a straight face and try to argue
>> that it's easier to manage memory in 1000 blocks of code than it is
>> to manage it in one block of code.
>
>And how does that relate to c++ vs. c?
The fact that C is error prone because you have to manually manage memory
for things as trivial as using a string.
>> That's a very good thing -- because there are going to be a lot more
>> mistakes in C. While you chase down 1000 bugs caused by some idiot using
>> strdup() or strcpy(), I'll simply use the string class (or if it's broken,
>> which is highly unlikely, I'll write my own, and at least localise
>> the bugs)
>
>Does this mean you can't write bad c++?
No. It means that it's easier to avoid memory management errors in C++.
But it's certainly easy to write bad C++.
>> You can. You just need to avoid the more obscure features. To be honest,
>> I've only seen one feature that doesn't work in the STL on g++.
>
>As of when? The sstream header has only shown up in the most
>recent Linux distributions - has it been hiding somewhere I didn't
>know about? And I think it still won't compile a set of trivial
>training examples I've seen.
The sstream header has been downloadable for quite a while, though it
hasn't shipped with distributions until recently. See the FAQ. You can
always download it and ship it with your own code.
>> In practice, you need to be prepared to target a few STL implementations
>> (and in practice, there are only a few that you need to target. )
>
>What an odd sentiment, coming from a long history of c's goal
>of portability. Has it really come to a point where no one cares
>any more?
No, it hasn't. There are portable implementations of STL. For example,
there are implementations that will work on g++, MS VC++, and BCC32
>> >Using STL seems to me to be the whole point of c++ and I
>>
>> No, it is not the "whole point". Support for generic programming is
>> nice, but the main reason to use C++ is the fact that it supports
>> run time polymorphism within an OO framework.
>
>Do all problems map to that model? What is an example of something
>that you couldn't do by passing structs (or arrays of structs) around?
(*) How do you write a destructor in C ?
(*) How do you implement a vtable ? Yes, I know it can be done, but it
isn't pretty.
>> >don't think I'd want to learn how to work around not having it.
>>
>> You don't have to "work around not having it".
>
>Why is it in the standard if you don't need it?
Perhaps because someone finds it useful.
> Won't portable code >expect all of the standard?
Not necessarily.
>> Well, perhaps the GNOME developers should all just program in Xlib, and
>> the Windows developers should program in raw Win32, for fear of learning
>> anything new !
>
>I don't understand how having to be aware of your own data types keeps
>you from doing anything new.
Most of the arguments against C++ boil down to something like "We shouldn't
use C++ because it's not a million years old". But there's a point where
it's advantageous to use something that's new and improved.
>> I don't know. Probably. Certainly, there's a plan to make C++ stable, it's
>> called the 1998 ansi standards document. Why is this relevant ?
>
>Predictable run-time behavior is a nice feature.
I haven't seen any evidence to support your assertion that C++ has
"unpredictable runtime behaviour".
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[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: 16 Nov 2000 06:29:55 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:8uvast$gmo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> : It's a failing and design flaw of Linux, would you please admit this
:> : and move on? Linus, Red Hat, and several others have admitted this
:> : flaw and are fixing it, why can't you?
:>
:> I *am* willing to admit that not being able to go bigger than 2GB
:> is a flaw. I am *not* willing to admit that this flaw has anything
:> to do with high-end databases, since they use partitions anyway,
: Which ones? Oracle? They say themselves that raw paritions aren't
: very flexible, difficult to manage, and in fact can limit your
: fault tolerance and offer only limited performance benefits.
: The majority of DBAs run Oracle with files.
: In fact, the leading contender in the TPC using Oracle is BullFrog
: (notice Sun used Sybase??)
: The Full Disclosure in PDF format is here:
: http://www.tpc.org/results/FDR/Tpcc/bull.epc2450.00110701.fdr.pdf
I had a look at that site, and under what definition of "leading"
is Bull the "leading" contender? I didn't see it at the top of
any of the various rankings there, for any of the various types
of TPC benchmark. It did come out fourth place in one of them
though. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume
the benchmarks shifted a bit since you last looked, though, since they
are rather close.
This mostly doesn't matter anyway, because of the really huge
glaring error you made next:
: Notice page 132 which is the database file setup scripts including
: using files for the tablespaces, not raw partitions.
Yup, I just read it. I don't see why you assume it was using
a file in the filesystem for data, though. As you should already
know if you are getting into this argument, in Unix systems, one
typically refers to a partition by specifying its device filename.
The "alter tablespace _foo_ add datafile _bar_" command that's
in there can work on both ordinary files and device filenames
that refer to partitions. Here's an example for how to do it
on Solaris:
(This is from the bottom of this page:
http://www.camden.rutgers.edu/HELP/Documentation/Oracle/server.805/a59708/ch3_opt.html
)
If you want to add the partition to a tablespace in an existing Oracle
database instead, enter:
$ svrmgrl
SVRMGR> alter tablespace tablespace_name add datafile
'/dev/rdsk/c0t1d0s6' size 10000K reuse;
(Note the use of "/dev/rdisk/c0t1d0s6", which is a device file
referring to:
scsi controller 0, scsi ID 1, lun 0, partition 6.)
Those scripts you referred to on page 132 of that PDF file don't
specify what type of filename was passed in to the function,
so what you posted reveals absolutely nothing one way or the
other on this question.
Thank you for wasting my time making me look this up.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: OS stability
Date: 16 Nov 2000 06:38:43 GMT
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 03:29:12 GMT, sfcybear wrote:
>First prove were I said you were and anti-linux anything? Be spacific!
===
Yeah, people who do not like to look at the truth. Hey if you get thank
yous from the likes of chad. drestin, and fun... And and get some sort
...
But the fact remains. Now 2 sources show PRODUCTION W2K servers to be
less stable than Unix! Yeah, say I'm behaving badly for lininking to
data you do not like! That is YOUR problem! The data is there, if you
don't like it don't blaim me, complain to MS they are the ones that
wrote the unstable stuff!
===
First, you're claiming that I'm receiving high fives from the Windows
crowd. Second, you're claiming that I "dislike" data that shows that
Linux is a reliable platform.
>Second please count up the number of times you have insulted me and
A complaint is not an insult.
>requests to stay on the subject you have continued to insult me. In my
A complaint is not the same as an insult. Look them up in a dictionary.
>book, that is the behavior of a jerk.
That you do not understand the difference between a complaint and an insult
does not make me a jerk. It merely makes you someone who has poor reading
comprehension skills. BTW, your spelling is also attrocious. Have you
considered taking a remedial English class ?
>Let's see, you hang your contibutions to linux out like it makes you
>some kind of hero, that I call ego based behavior, yes.
No, I don't claim that it "makes me some kind of hero". This is a lie that
you keep repeating despite the fact that I keep refuting it.
The reason I "hang up my contributions" is to rebut your dishonest attacks.
>Pathetic. You seem to think that your linux contibutions exuse your
>behavior.
I don't think my behaviour needs excusing. I am not the one who is acting
like a usenet goon, and posting illiterate ramblings in all caps under a
cloak of anonymity. Complaining about the conduct of a usenet goon is not
something I need to be excused for.
>intention of joining the disscution
You treat your petty pissing match as though it's somehow important or
consequential. Get a clue -- it isn't.
>very poor and imature behavior. May I suggest you stop programing for a
>while and go out to the real world and get some social skills.
Hahahaha. My social skills are doing just fine. The fact that I have
an attitude problem with usenet goons in no way hurts me socially in
the real world.
Thank you
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: OS stability
Date: 16 Nov 2000 06:47:55 GMT
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 03:14:34 GMT, sfcybear wrote:
>the false name is to stop trolls like you from spaming me.
More baseless slander.
(1) Your claim that I am a "troll" is a baseless lie.
(2) Your claim that I "spam" people is also a baseless lie.
(3) You could use a real name without a real email address (or with a
spam protected address). So your premise is also a lie.
> People ignore
>the topic and do nothing but insult
Again, a lie. A complaint is not an insult.
> are so imature
> that they think they
>accomlish something by subscribing me to news groups and sending out
>spam with my email addres as the return address.
Do you have any evidence that anyone's done this ? Do you have any evidence
that I'd do this ? Is there anything to stop you from using your real name
and a spam protected email address ?
>conversation insuling me
A complaint is not an insult.
>subject you have continued to do nothing but insult me. In my book that
A complaint is not an insult
>is the behavior of a jerk.
I'm sorry that your reading comprehension skills are so poor.
In case you haven't got it yet, my comments wer ecomplaints and
not insults.
>Do you have anything to contibute to the subject or is it more insults
>as usual?
BTW, I can't believe you call me a jerk, and then whine about "insults".
The "subject" in this case is a dreary pissing contest. So no, I don't
want to participate.
Welcome to my killfile.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: 16 Nov 2000 06:43:32 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Limited function? Shortcuts are great!
Their funcitionality is a subset of the functionality of symbolic
links in Unix. Symbolic links in unix point *any* filename at
*any* other file on the system, not just executable programs.
I can make a link for a program *or* a data file, and that link
is at a lower level than a shortcut in Windows, such that it works
almost everywhere on the system, not just in the GUI. (The only place
where symbolic links don't work like normal files is in those places
where the programs were written to *deliberately* detect their presence
and treat them specially, such as when making archives with 'tar'.
And even then, you can fool such programs by making an even lower-level
link called a hard-link. With hard-links both the original filename
and the new filename have equal precedence - neither one is the main
filename anymore after the link is made, they are peers.)
Shortcuts are handy, no doubt, but they only cover a small subset of
what can be done with unix symbolic links, which is why they look
like they have limited functionality to someone used to unix. If
you don't try to compare them to symbolic links, then sure, they
do a fine job. Something doesn't lose functionality just because
something else is better.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8)
Date: 16 Nov 2000 06:52:33 GMT
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <8urmg7$4da$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> Are you sure you are exiting kppp cleanly?
: I don't see any error messages when I do.
Again, I can't toot it's horn enough on this, but wvdial
works excelently as a dialup. Sure it's CLI, but it's
highly configurable, and quite verbose about what it's doing,
which makes debugging problems easier. One thing it does is
that it catches all the death signals (except 9 of course) and
shuts down the connection cleanly.
You have to 'kill -9' it in order to make it shut down in an
ugly, sloppy way. Everything else makes it shut down nicely.
------------------------------
From: "Frank Van Damme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need some advice on Linux
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 08:23:35 +0100
In bericht <eRJQ5.20872$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peroreerde
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8uvg7n$b6n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > Defragment disk and use Partition Magic or fips >=2.0 to resize
>> WinME
>> > partition size and then install Linux on one or several partitions in
>> the
>> > remaining space. I suggest 4GB for Windows and 22GB for GNU/Linux
>> > (one or two distributions) ... the other 4GB are ok for Solaris on
>> > Intel :)
>>
>> Is there any inexpensive way of doing this? I mean can I get some kind
>> of free utilities to defragment and resize the partition? Thanks for
>> the advice.
>
> Windows should have it's own defrag utility. Fips will do it should be
> included in the install on Mandrake 7.2. However, if your defrag
> doesn't move all the files up (and there are some that won't move), fips
> can't adjust the partitions. Gnu partd (also free) seems to work in
> this case.
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Partitionmagic resizes everything. However, if it's a freshly installed
Windows with not yet too many data and programs on it, I assume
everything is located at the beginning of the disk; well, more or less.
Especcially on a 30 Gig disk. If you take Linux)Mandrake, you can resize
your fat partition during installation and make ext2 partitions on it.
ftp://ftp.belnet.be/pub/os/linux/linux-mandrake if you have broadband
internet, and I recommend you get the .iso files and burn them to CDs.
ciao
------------------------------
From: "Frank Van Damme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights?
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 08:35:17 +0100
In bericht <8uvc27$7p8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peroreerde "tom"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> tom wrote:
>> > Pan looks promising. Dumb question: which file(s) do I need to
>> > download? I know Mandrake can use rpm's, but there are about five
>> > different one's listed, perhaps for different systems? (I have a
> P266.)
>>
>> Look for i386 or i586 in the rpm name. Download all such packages, as
>> there may be depencies.
>
> Thanks. Be nice if they'd give more info, e.g. if the rpm's are a
> complete set.
>
> Tom
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.
Netscape is 3 rpms: common, navigator and messenger, normally found
together in the same dir at an ftp-server. I think Belnet does have them.
At the moment I use pan for news (works great) and Opera as a browser. It
is still Bèta and it shows. Crashes a lot. Hope the linux version becomes
as good as the windows version.
Frank.
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS stability
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 07:30:16 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 03:29:12 GMT, sfcybear wrote:
> >First prove were I said you were and anti-linux anything? Be
spacific!
>
> ===
> Yeah, people who do not like to look at the truth. Hey if you get
thank
> yous from the likes of chad. drestin, and fun... And and get some sort
>
> ...
No link to anti-linux here Just to bad behavior! I have found all of
these people usr personal put downs to try to further their goals.
Personal putdowns is the same behavior that I have been claiming that
you are engaging with. YOU read in something that was not their.
Starting to sound paranoid.
>
> But the fact remains. Now 2 sources show PRODUCTION W2K servers to be
> less stable than Unix! Yeah, say I'm behaving badly for lininking to
> data you do not like! That is YOUR problem! The data is there, if you
> don't like it don't blaim me, complain to MS they are the ones that
> wrote the unstable stuff!
Not liking data about MS is NOT claiming that you are anti-linux Linux
was NOT mentioned here! I was griping about your BEHAVIOR here! I also
used an important word here "IF". Do you know what that means? It means
I did not say that you were anything. I said "If you do not like..." The
decision about your feelings was yours. You will also notice that I was
talking about your feelings to the figures as they related to MS, Try to
see were I said Linux or anti-linux anywere here. Again the way you read
things into what I said are sounding a bit paranoid.
> ===
>
> First, you're claiming that I'm receiving high fives from the Windows
> crowd. Second, you're claiming that I "dislike" data that shows that
> Linux is a reliable platform.
I was claiming that you are runing with a bunch of people with poor
behavior!!!! I said nothing about their stance on OS. you seem to let
you insecurities read things into it that were NOT there!!!!
>
> >Second please count up the number of times you have insulted me and
>
> A complaint is not an insult.
BS! It was ment as an insult. You have done nothing but put me down
since you entered the thread. You entered the thread not to disscus the
topic, but to put me down.
>
> >requests to stay on the subject you have continued to insult me. In
my
>
> A complaint is not the same as an insult. Look them up in a
dictionary.
I don't need to. it was insulting behavior no matter what kind of
wrapping you wrap it in!
>
> >book, that is the behavior of a jerk.
>
> That you do not understand the difference between a complaint and an
insult
> does not make me a jerk. It merely makes you someone who has poor
reading
> comprehension skills. BTW, your spelling is also attrocious. Have you
> considered taking a remedial English class ?
Insults again! My typing is attrocious. My spelling is attrocious, but
you behavior is attrocious.
The fact that you do not know the differece be between your insulting
behavior and constructive comments is YOUR problem
>
> >Let's see, you hang your contibutions to linux out like it makes you
> >some kind of hero, that I call ego based behavior, yes.
>
> No, I don't claim that it "makes me some kind of hero". This is a lie
that
> you keep repeating despite the fact that I keep refuting it.
Sure you do the only positive thing you have said is about yourself why
you degraded me. The clasic behavior of a person with low self image.
>
> The reason I "hang up my contributions" is to rebut your dishonest
attacks.
>
Now infering that I'm a liar.
> >Pathetic. You seem to think that your linux contibutions exuse your
> >behavior.
>
> I don't think my behaviour needs excusing. I am not the one who is
acting
> like a usenet goon, and posting illiterate ramblings in all caps under
a
> cloak of anonymity. Complaining about the conduct of a usenet goon is
not
> something I need to be excused for.
>
> >intention of joining the disscution
>
> You treat your petty pissing match as though it's somehow important or
> consequential. Get a clue -- it isn't.
>
> >very poor and imature behavior. May I suggest you stop programing for
a
> >while and go out to the real world and get some social skills.
>
> Hahahaha. My social skills are doing just fine. The fact that I have
> an attitude problem with usenet goons in no way hurts me socially in
> the real world.
>
> Thank you
Poor little Donnavan Read your post it's nothing but apeing me back!
Very childish behavior.
It's clear to me that the only thing you have going for you is Linux
coding and putting people down.
Very sad
Ready to comment on the topic or are you going to contiue with you
childish put downs???
>
> --
> Donovan
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mandrake, thoughts? Opinions?
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 07:41:46 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 00:11:04 +0100, "Frank Van Damme"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >OK, do so. Laugh with people who try Linux, consider it good enough to
> >keep it and use it intensively.
>
> Good enough for you, a student I presume, is not good enough for me
Out of curiosity, what do you DO with computers?
>
>
> > Personally, I laugh at dumb-asses who
> >still use an ever-crashing windowsbox and claim they're using something
> >userfriendly. I also like jokes, cartoons and wallpapers about Gates and
> >MS.
> My Windows box never crashes. I do however enjoy the Gates/MS cartoons
> as much as the Linux ones.
>
> >You're really starting to annoy me with your idiot comments. Go laugh at
> >people at comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy.
>
> No reason to laugh at an operating system that has 90 percent or more
> of the desktop.
No reason to denigrate the others, either.
Particularly when your lack of proficiency with one is glaringly obvious. It
tends to blunt your arguments.
You look foolish.
>
> >Are you sure you have seen a computer before?
>
> Long before your parents ever decided to waste their money sending you
> to school.
Not to mention childish...
>
> Figure out how to access Napster through the schools firewall yet?
>
> claire
--
Tom Wilson
Registered Linux User #194021
Also...
NT 4.0 User
Win 95/98 User
They're operating systems...Not religions
GET A LIFE!
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights?
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 07:41:47 GMT
"tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8uvhfo$c5f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> There's a good chance that the operating system itself was fine and
> still going strong. I'm just too much of a newbie to know how to deal
> with such issues gracefully. Windows & DOS have gotten me too used to
> bailing out of little problems with the three-finger salute.
>From my experience, OS halting crashes are a rairity under Linux. (I've had
1 in the last six months)
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Matt Gaia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ahhh, the fine musings of a Win-troll. No one in here ever said that
> > Linux was completely bullet-proof. It just doesn't have the lovely
> > BSOD's
> > and dll-hell that Windows have. Sure, it may not have all the pretty
> > fonts and colors on it, but I'll take stability over eye-candy any
> day.
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > You better duck Tom :)
> > >
> > > Linux doesn't have any problems like that at all.
> > >
> > > Just ask the fine folks around here :)
> > >
> > > claire
Show me an OS that doesn't have its' share of problems, Claire....
> >
> > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> > -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Tom Wilson
Registered Linux User #194021
Also...
NT 4.0 User
Win 95/98 User
They're operating systems...Not religions
GET A LIFE!
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 07:41:48 GMT
"Stephen Howe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8uu5da$861$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > windows OS's are designed for ease of use and not for staying up
longest.
> >
> > you really can't have it both ways. If you want a pretty looking OS,
> > you have to put up with a crash here and there. If you want a solid
> > OS like unix, you have to put up with not having all those pretty
windows
> > on the desktop.
>
> Nonsense. There is no reason why having a GUI and reliability cannot both
be
> achieved.
>
Sounds reasonable...
But then why has everyone, Linux included, failed thus far with GUI's?
--
Tom Wilson
Registered Linux User #194021
Also...
NT 4.0 User
Win 95/98 User
They're operating systems...Not religions
GET A LIFE!
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: If Linux Sux....
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 07:41:50 GMT
"Black Dragon " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> If Linux Sux as much as some people say it does, then why does this news
> group see so little traffic?
The detractors hang out in comp.os.linux.advocacy
Go Figure :)
--
Tom Wilson
Registered Linux User #194021
Also...
NT 4.0 User
Win 95/98 User
They're operating systems...Not religions
GET A LIFE!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
