Linux-Advocacy Digest #294, Volume #30 Sat, 18 Nov 00 13:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (mlw)
Re: wahoo! I'm running now (Edward Rosten)
Re: Alessandro Rubini's very interesting article on system calls... (Edward Rosten)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Donn Miller)
Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux (Edward Rosten)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Jason Bowen)
Re: The Sixth Sense (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Bob Hauck)
Re: All hail the Konqueror development team (Bob Hauck)
Re: Spontaneously Crashing Sun Server Coverup (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Microsoft Speaks German! ("Clifford W. Racz")
Re: The Non Sense: people who are clueless about the WindowsNT (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: The Non Sense: people who are clueless about the WindowsNT registry... (was Re:
The Sixth Sense) ("Chad Myers")
It's even worse than I thought. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (JoeX1029)
Re: Microsoft Speaks German! (Matthias Warkus)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 11:16:44 -0500
Russ Lyttle wrote:
>
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> >
> > On 17 Nov 2000 10:52:15 -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) writes:
> > >
> >
> > >> Yes, in other words, there's built in support for new paradigms like OO and
> > >> generic programming. You can program using these paradigms in C, but it's
> > >> not that much fun.
> > >
> > >Or, a lot of fun, if you like to do that sort of thing. :)
> >
> > I think someone should write a "design patterns in C" book
> > that talks about how to write OO code in C. (So some of the patterns
> > would be "polymorphism" and "inheritence") Or even a book that
> > explains the GTK object model in some depth.It would make very interesting
> > reading.
> >
> > --
> > Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
> > elflord at panix dot com
>
> Great Idea! I don't have time (or ability really) to do that myself,
> but would be willing to throw a few patterns at someone doing the job.
>
There is no technical reason to do so. C++ can do better because the
compiler can handle the things that one would either need copious macros
or repetitive conditional code.
Doing OO in C, is like fixing up old clocks. It can be fun, and there
may be value in novelty, but it is not how one would design modern
clocks.
I have given several code snippets which show issues you raise as
incorrect. I am still curious as to why you have the opinions that you
do. Can you post a code snippet that supports at least one of your
claims so that I can try to understand your points?
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: wahoo! I'm running now
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:11:13 +0000
> Whoever said that is a dumbass. Linux on the Desktop is about as
> productive as Windows on a Server. Linux is hard to learn for the home
> user. Face it. No matter how many GUIs you build on top of each other,
> it'll still be UNIX at the bottom.
And that's supposedf to be a bad thing? Apple don't think so.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Alessandro Rubini's very interesting article on system calls...
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:15:12 +0000
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> I can recall, on many occasions, that every time someone
> complained about WindowsNT's architecture, one of us in
> COMNA would point out that moving the GDI into kernel
> space was a good thing because:
> 1.) It didn't comprimise stability, since even as a
That's not true.
> separate module, a GDI fault would cause a BSOD.
This is partly true. A bus fault or something similar will crash any OS,
whether in the kernel or out of it. There are other faults (like GPFs or
SEGfaults) which will crash the computer if they happen the kernel, but
won't if they happen out of the kernel.
So it does compromise stability.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:22:04 +0200
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:CXwR5.370$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Organization: Self
> > Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Followup-To:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> > >In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Joseph T. Adams
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote
> > >on 17 Nov 2000 00:52:50 GMT
> > ><8v1vh2$7sc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>: Oh, yes.
> > >>: If Whistler is as good from 2K as 2K is from NT & 98, then
Linux\Unix has
> a
> > >>: reason to be *really* afraid, and by the release of the system
*after*
> > >>: whistler, I wouldn't be surprise if those a minority even on the
server.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Even if Microsoft released a version of 'Blows that didn't blow, I
> > >>still wouldn't use it, because:
> > >>
> > >> (a) I don't willingly support criminal organizations, with my money
> > >> or by any other means.
> > >
> > >I'm not sure this has been proven either way yet, although the
> > >findings of fact were interesting.
> > >
> >
> > #1. The Microsoft trial is OVER. They have been found guilty.
>
> By a judge of questionable motives and mind. He himself has claimed
> that he'll be overturned, admitting his poor judgement.
>
> Just because a judge says you're quilty, doesn't necessarily mean
> you're quilty.
Um, didn't you mean to say guilty instead of quilty here?
And I've to object to the last statement.
If a judge rules that you are guilty, then you *are* guilty, that is what
the word means.
At least, that is what the word means in court.
Whatever you actually did what you are accused is a whole different matter,
of course.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 11:28:58 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
mlw wrote:
> There is no technical reason to do so. C++ can do better because the
> compiler can handle the things that one would either need copious macros
> or repetitive conditional code.
Not that I disagree with you, but I've seen an aweful lot of C++ code
that use macros. One such example is the Qt moc (meta object compiler).
====== 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! ======
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:23:29 +0000
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
> > Au contraire... code runs faster on Linux. Disk accesses work
> > faster. The GUI is faster, screen updates are faster, booting
> > is faster, response to the user while running background tasks
> > is faster.
>
> I did some simple benchmarks and found Windows 98 SE and Linux Mandrake 7.2
> run at about the same speed. I did some bench raytraying with POVray and
> found Windows ran faster, even after making sure both had the same options.
POVray is CPU bound. That kind of benchmark tests the compiler, not the
OS.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 16:33:34 GMT
Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> Setup process limits. How do you think that cs departments around the
> country keep machines up with students learning to use pointers for the
> first time?
Yeah, your point being?
Actually, in classes that teach assembly language (way back!),
the student runs the code in some kind of emulator.
And nowadays, if a student has his/her own machine, why protect them?
Inhibits learning.
Chris
--
Click here to cast your vote for [] Gore [] Buchanan [] Gates [] Bush []
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: 18 Nov 2000 16:38:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen wrote:
>>
>> Setup process limits. How do you think that cs departments around the
>> country keep machines up with students learning to use pointers for the
>> first time?
>
>Yeah, your point being?
>
>Actually, in classes that teach assembly language (way back!),
>the student runs the code in some kind of emulator.
>
>And nowadays, if a student has his/her own machine, why protect them?
>Inhibits learning.
Why protect them? You obviously don't admin an undergraduate lab. You
want work to get done and showing them how to debug their code is more
beneficial then letting them bring the machine down. What they do at
home is of no consequence to the lab. You don't let them take down a
machine everytime they write some code that fills memory up. The point is
that your script doesn't work on a machine set up to avoid letting runaway
processes take over.
>
>Chris
>
>--
>Click here to cast your vote for [] Gore [] Buchanan [] Gates [] Bush []
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 16:41:46 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> Even Unix guros agrees that Win2K is just about as capable to be remotedly
> administered as UNIX.
Can you point us to a reference from a UNIX guru (excluding yourself,
of course)? Speaking of UNIX gurus...
A friend at Lucent sent me a lucent.workplace newsgroup posting from
Dennis Ritchie (one of the inventors/evolvers of C). My friend
bemoaned the fact that his posting was made from Mozilla 4.6 on
an WinNT machine. The quoted posting contained Ritchie's e-mail
address, so I asked Ritchie about it. He's working on the Plan 9 operating
system (apparently in a virtual machine on his NT box, though he
didn't say that), and said they haven't bothered to port a browser
over to it yet. An excellent demonstration that, although NT
sucks, it can perform useful work.
Anyway, Microsoft continues to learn lessons from UNIX, which
is to their credit.
Chris
--
Click here to cast your vote for [] Gore [] Buchanan [] Bush []
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 16:43:47 GMT
On Fri, 17 Nov 2000 21:09:29 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Bob Hauck wrote:
>But C++ will generate the same object code.
Only if you stick more-or-less to the C subset. In which case you are
writing C even if it is being compiled with a C++ compiler. I will
grant that using C++ as "C with classes" and sticking to roughly the
Embedded C++ subset (aka C++ circa 1993) avoids most of the worst traps
in terms of performance, compiler bugs, and bloat.
>> So why not do this in Java or Python and avoid dealing with memory
>> management and pointer bugs? The heavy lifting is probably being done
>> by PostgreSQL anyway, isn't it?
>Actually this is quite incorrect. I use C++ for very high speed
>indexing, Java and Python are not fast enough.
Ok, I stand corrected. You may have an application that C++ is well
suited for. As I said, they do exist and I'm certainly not advocating
abandoning C++. It is just that for the work I've been doing lately
other tools require less effort to get the job done.
>I am not arguing that other languages are better suited for applications
>than C++, I am arguing that C++ is a better C and that pure C code is
>pointless. C++ is a better C than C.
C++ is C with bear traps planted around. Touch the wrong one and your
code bloats to huge proportions, or runs 10x slower than you expected,
or makes the compiler spew out unintelligible error messages (templates
are especially good for that last). It is not a particularly easy
language to use well, a trait it got from C. For many things it is
better than C, but for many things other languages are better still.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: All hail the Konqueror development team
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 16:43:48 GMT
On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 09:22:37 -0500, MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You've hit the nail on the proverbial head. I don't usually stereotype,
>but,..most *nix users I meet fall into three categories.
I find that crabby people fall into two categories. Those who are
crabby by nature, and those who learned to be crabby.
>The common element here is "despises"
>The intersection of all linux users is negativity.
You seem to have a lot of that yourself. Yet you are not a Linux user.
What's up with that?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Spontaneously Crashing Sun Server Coverup
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:04:03 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> Because it's idiotic to wait for a service pack when you already has the
> fix.
>
> > >Remember that security hole hotfix that MS didn't apply to its server and
> > >allow the hacker to get it?
> >
> > Which one?
>
> Second (and third?) one.
And it does happen that a service pack introduces new
bugs and holes. Really, just as with Linux, you are
forced to keep track of bugs, holes, and their fixes,
to determine for yourself just how you are going to
update your system.
When you think about it, unless you have a standard
box loaded mainly with office apps, disconnected
from a network, surrounded by either no employees or
very trusted employees, all computer boxes, no matter
what the OS, create potential problems that no
average user will be able to handle.
Basically, only geeks can truly handle networked
computing. All others are babes in the woods.
Chris (a geek, but at least I play a lot of soccer)
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:07:10 GMT
Giuliano Colla wrote:
>
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >
> > Giuliano Colla wrote:
> [snip]
> > >
> > > Question: if I quote one answer on the NG, is it "dissemination"?
> >
> > You said "semination", huh huh heh heh. And you are in big trouble
> > for publishing the proprietary information of Network Solutions.
> >
> > Bailiff, whack his pee-pee!
> >
>
> Please don't tell anybody. What's you price?
You mean the price not to tell, or the price to whack
your pee-pee? <grin>
Basically, I believe that computer users should do what they
want with information, as long as they remain ethical
(whatever that might mean). I'm very against authority
that prevents intellectual curiousity from working.
This may become a bigger issue for me if I ever decide to
buy a DVD for my Lin/Win box.
Chris
------------------------------
From: "Clifford W. Racz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft Speaks German!
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 12:10:24 -0500
I would rather be of the "far right" rather than the far left (i.e. Commie
or Nazi).
At Purdue, I learned to think for myself unfortunately.
"Right-Winger" Cliff
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 23:52:41 -0500, Clifford W. Racz
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Liberals...
> >
> >Execute the unborn, kill off the old people.
> >Rob hard working poeple, give the money to fat, lazy people who won't do
> >anything.
>
> First Kulkis, now you. Is Perdue a hotbed of far-right thinking?
>
>
> --
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| To Whom You Are Speaking
> -| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Non Sense: people who are clueless about the WindowsNT
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:10:08 GMT
Giuliano Colla wrote:
>
> > You're both wrong. Searches must be done (the key names
> > must be converted to memory/disk addresses), but they are
> > probably indexed or hashed for speed, as is common in
> > databases.
> >
>
> I strongly doubt about that. If indexing or hashing is used,
> while REGEDIT (for a Key search) doesn't use it, and offers
> you the classical textual search (search up, or search
> down)? There's no up and down in a hash table!
What you say makes sense. Searches in RegEdt32.exe are pretty
damn slow. But programs seem to work well. Must be the effects
of disk caching, I guess.
Chris
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:17:08 GMT
Of course not :)
claire
On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 09:45:05 +0000, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Well, seeing as your scanner has become a paper weight based upon your
>> choice to run Linux, I would suggest you burn it, in lieu of the coal.
>
>Due to the magic that is LILO I can still boot Windows. You didn't think
>I'd be dumb enough to blow that away did you?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:42:45 GMT
In article <gZwR5.371$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers wrote:
>
>"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Ha! Ha! There goes CM again!
>>
>> Are we a mainframe Systems Administrator this week Chad?
>
>Ah... HP-UX is a mainframe OS now?
Certaintly Chad. Everybody knows the framiliary HP-9000 run's
HP-UX! This is such common knowledge that it only helps me
prove further to the crowd you don't know your head from your
butt on anything.
>
>> Isn't it a little too soon to be leaving that Oracle DBA
>> spot you were in just 3 months ago?
>
>You still really haven't addressed any of my questions, instead
>you're content to attack me personally, thus proving your own
>ignorance.
>
>Please, answer my question: Is DAC an overriding principle in
>HP-UX, or does it just have file ACLs?
Chad,
I really doubt you even know what these terms mean.
>
>-Chad
Chad! Let's get one thing straight first.
An HP-9000 is a mainframe computer produced by Hewlitt Packard
and the HP-UX is their unix operating system which runs that
machine.
Now as far as your asking questions about the grown up world,
if I gave you an answer you'd just argue with me like the
windows Idiot that you've always been! You couldn't accept
the truth if it was against YOUR beliefs in WINDOWS.
In your own words, you don't even know what HP-UX is?
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Non Sense: people who are clueless about the WindowsNT registry...
(was Re: The Sixth Sense)
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:28:06 GMT
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Giuliano Colla wrote:
> >
> > > You're both wrong. Searches must be done (the key names
> > > must be converted to memory/disk addresses), but they are
> > > probably indexed or hashed for speed, as is common in
> > > databases.
> > >
> >
> > I strongly doubt about that. If indexing or hashing is used,
> > while REGEDIT (for a Key search) doesn't use it, and offers
> > you the classical textual search (search up, or search
> > down)? There's no up and down in a hash table!
>
> What you say makes sense. Searches in RegEdt32.exe are pretty
> damn slow. But programs seem to work well. Must be the effects
> of disk caching, I guess.
RegEdit.exe has a much better search functionality than RegEdt32.exe
in many ways.
You're right, however, that programs' access to the registry is
much faster than the search because programs typically do not
access the entire registry at once, they merely access their
few keys.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: It's even worse than I thought.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:52:47 GMT
The Linux community is so out of touch with reality as far as the home
user /desktop Jane is concerned it is comical.
I just got back from a trip to CompUSA this morning and I took a good
look around to see what type of people are buying computers, software
and hardware. This is the Saturday crowd here in NYC, not the
businessman who is on a trip and forgot his ethernet card at home.
These are the home users. So what did I see?
1. A man trying to buy a Network card for his laptop and kept coming
back to the counter with Modem boxes asking if they would work. When
asked what kind of network he had to connect to (Ethernet/Token Ring)
he didn't know.
2. A guy returning a PCI sound card because it didn't fit in his
laptop. Duhhhh.....
3. A person paying $198.00 for a stick of 128mb PCI-100 memory. About
double the going rate.
4. A lady with a DTK 286 motherboard still half connected to the power
supply, looking to get it repaired. You had to see this one to believe
it. It looked like she pried it out with a crowbar. This is one lady I
would NOT want to get mad at me.
5. A lady and her son buying one of those fantasy games (didn't catch
the name but looked like Quake or Diablo, but was something else) and
then asking the salesman if her machine met the requirements on the
side of the box. Not a bad idea except the kid had an iMac and the
software was for Windows only.
6. A man who couldn't figure out why his machine was running slow
compared to his son's and when the salesman asked him how much memory
he had, the guy said he had just bought 30 gig last week.
So this is what you expect to market Linux to? You have to be kidding.
These folks ARE the home market, like it or not. The only hope Linux
has is pre-loads and the hope that each one of them has some geek
friend to help them when they want to upgrade the system.
In closing, I did see one older gentleman holding a Linux box and
talking to a salesman. When I wandered over, I heard him asking the
salesperson if Linux would run Windows programs. The salesman said no.
I thought about mentioning Wine, which was even listed as included on
the box cover, but after seeing what I had already seen in this store,
I kept quiet.
He put it back.
claire
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Date: 18 Nov 2000 17:56:17 GMT
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
>There is a GUI available for Linux. I was running it (XFree86 4.0.1 and
>xfce, in my case) just the other night. It crashed and locked up the whole
>computer. I had to reboot.
>
>CDA
>
>
Bullshit. X locked *every* ps so that even telneting to it and killing the
offending ps would not work?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft Speaks German!
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:38:14 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Sat, 04 Nov 2000 01:45:38 GMT...
...and Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> American's aren't lazy, we do all the work so Europeans can be
> snooty to us.
In Europe, at least we know what apostrophes are for. And what a
genitive case is.
mawa
--
Well, let's just say, don't try to defend your argument with your
body, and you won't feel like it's an ad hominem attack.
-- Andrew "drieux" Hampe <[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
******************************
