Linux-Advocacy Digest #319, Volume #30 Mon, 20 Nov 00 01:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Christopher Smith")
Re: wahoo! I'm running now (Topaz Crow)
Re: wahoo! I'm running now (Topaz Crow)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux ("Keldon Warlord")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux ("Keldon Warlord")
Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux ("Keldon Warlord")
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: wahoo! I'm running now ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: wahoo! I'm running now ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Linux trips over itself once again ("Operator Jack")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 15:01:09 +1000
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Lf0S5.22533$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8v9ft5$n26$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > > Well, duh. Links are only useful to someone with a filesystem that
> > > > understands them.
> > >
> > > No, they work fine in any number of cross-platform way. File
> > > servers, ftp servers, etc. all follow symlinks.
> >
> > With translation at the server OS end, obviously. What makes you think
> > there would be any difference if you wrote an FTP server for Windows
that
> > treated a shortcut like a link ?
>
> The point is that you don't have to write a special kind of server. Unix
> is not made of enormous special-case kludges cascaded on top of
> each other. Symlinks are handled by open() - any open automatically
> works with them.
I'd be surprised if programmatically referencing shortcuts was any different
from programmatically referencing any other shell object, as well.
> > > The point
> > > of a link is that all programs can use them.
> >
> > The point of a shortcut is that anything making use of the shell's
> features
> > can use them, and the extra features they offer.
>
> Yes - a typical special-case situation in windows.
Not a special case at all in Windows. A _common_ case.
> > > That depends on the option you use. Most programs don't know that
> > > links are different than the thing they reference which is the whole
> > > point of having them, so if you copy them you normally get a
> > > copy of the target. However, some programs do know and can
> > > copy and move them. Dump/restore, tar, etc. obviously have to
> > > know, cp with the -d (don't dereference) option, rsync, and some
> > > others. Whether they work when copied depends on the target
> > > still being in the right place - an absolute path (starting with
slash)
> > > will work anywhere on the same machine, but on another machine
> > > it would depend on the target being in the same place. Likewise
> > > relative links depend on the target being in the right relative place.
> >
> > My point, I believe. You can't just grab a link like you do any other
> file,
> > take it somewhere else and expect it to work. Even if the target hasn't
> > changed.
>
> Hard links word this way, although only within the same filesystem.
> There must be special cases of when you can and can't move
> shortcuts too. What if you make a shortcut to a network mounted
> file and then disconnect the network drive or move it to a different
> drive letter?
Shortcuts use UNC paths and will try to reconnect to the machine that the
target is on. The drive letter it is connected to is irrelevant.
> > > > I've yet to bump into a Win32 program that couldn't make use of a
> > > shortcut.
> > >
> > > Yes, clearly limited.
> >
> > How so ?
>
> In case you haven't noticed, not everything is a win32 program, although
> a certain company would like to force you to use nothing else.
Everything running on Windows is, by definition, a Win32 program.
> > > > Printers ? URLs ? Networked computers ? Shares on networked
> computers
> > ?
> > > > Being able to transport these things between machines just by
emailing
> > or
> > > > copying to a floppy disk ? How do symlinks do these things ?
> > >
> > > URLs are a relatively new concept that depend on programs to interpret
> > > them, but symlinks appear to be files and devices to any program that
> > > knows how to open a file or device (and on unix these appear the
same).
> > > Devices are always your 'own' devices - the magic of opening a device
> > > is accessing the major/minor driver numbers known to your own kernel,
> > > but files can be accessed from anywhere - that is the target may be a
> > > network mounted directory or file.
> >
> > That's interesting, but something I already knew. Care to answer the
> > question now ?
>
> If you knew how that works, why did you ask about printers, network
> shares, etc? Of course they all work through symlinks.
But they don't. The *hardware ports* can be symlinked, the devices
themselves cannot. I can't create a symlink to a printer on some given
machine, move that symlink to another machine and then expect it to work.
There is a difference between the *hardware ports* that the devices connect
to and the objects that represent the actual devices in the UI. That's the
fundamental difference between shortcuts and symlinks.
> > > Agreed, but given symlinks most of the reasons to have shortcuts go
> away.
> >
> > Given shortcuts, most of the reasons for symlinks go away. Your point ?
>
> Hardly. The most useful cases for symlinks are directories and devices.
For which shortcuts work perfectly from within the shell, where they are
meant to.
> Shortcuts don't even come close, even if you supply all the special-case
> software that understands them.
And symlinks don't come close for all the useful things shortcuts do either.
So what ?
They're different concepts, meant for different things. Each has advantages
and disadvantages. Is that really so hard to deal with ?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Topaz Crow)
Subject: Re: wahoo! I'm running now
Date: 20 Nov 2000 04:59:57 GMT
Reply-To: alt.anonymous.messages;ATTN: Topaz Crow
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 03:26:42 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>On 20 Nov 2000 01:10:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Topaz Crow)
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 22:15:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>>For an engineer you really should learn how to read better, Gary
>>>
>>>I said USE THE MENU'S, NOT the buttons.
>>>
>>>Now try it that way and tell me it works and you will be lying.
>>>
>>
>>This started with mouse buttons which everyone but you, it seems, was
>>talking about. And the menu's do work.
>
>Believe what you wish.
>
>claire
>
And you also, claire. You make judgements on something you can't even work.
You are not qualified to say there is anything wrong with Linux since you
cannot use it.
--
Topaz Crow -- No replies by email, sorry.
Reply to alt.anonymous.messages Subject: ATTN: Topaz Crow
PGP/GPG: DSS: 0xBADA36EA RSA: 0x357245A1
Using SuSE 7.0 and Slackware 7.1
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Topaz Crow)
Subject: Re: wahoo! I'm running now
Date: 20 Nov 2000 05:02:09 GMT
Reply-To: alt.anonymous.messages;ATTN: Topaz Crow
On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 23:15:59 -0500, Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Believe what you wish.
>>
>> claire
>
>Everyone can get the menus to work but you. Doesn't that tell you something?
>
>Gary
>
I don't think it tells her anything. She insists on screaming to everyone on
these groups that she is to stupid to use linux.
--
Topaz Crow -- No replies by email, sorry.
Reply to alt.anonymous.messages Subject: ATTN: Topaz Crow
PGP/GPG: DSS: 0xBADA36EA RSA: 0x357245A1
Using SuSE 7.0 and Slackware 7.1
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: 20 Nov 2000 05:04:28 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Bob Lyday" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> > Since we don't know how netcraft is retrieving the uptime value, one
: must
:> > assume that it's a command sent to the web server to retrieve it. The
: web
:> > server is merely returning the value of GetTickCount() which has a 49.7
: day
:> > maximum value.
:>
:> Is that why the Starbucks NT server was being rebooted every day,
:> Eric? Because NT stays up for 49 days? ;)
: Starbucks is Win2k, not NT4.
: And without inside knowledge, we don't know what the problem is there.
: Maybe they have power problems. Maybe they had some hardware failures.
: Maybe they've been experimenting with beta software. Who knows.
If they're using any version of Windows, then obviously, they *are*
experimenting with, at best, beta software. :)
Joe
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 05:15:51 GMT
Les Mikesell wrote:
> "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Indeed, quite a lot of functionality has been withheld from those
> computer
> > > users and they don't even know what they are missing. I'll bet if they
> > > have a huge list of names in
> > > Last, First
> > > format and wanted
> > > First Last
> > > they would retype the whole thing since they don't have:
> > > :%s/\(.*\), \(.*\)/\2 \1/
> > > or any reasonable equivalent. Their loss. And it would be
> > > mine if that is all I had.
> > >
> >
> > And who would teach them this code? How often will they have this need?
> They'd
> > be more likely to just load it into Excel I think -- it does that
> formatting
> > stuff for ya...
>
> I usually have a need for that sort of text transformation several times
> a day.
That's you pal.
> The same group that reformats their disks and reloads windows for them
> when the OS screws up could teach them while they wait for the
> operation to complete.
That's a group that only the linux folks seem to know. Some people do that when
they don't understand something but their Windows savvy buddy (if he's really
that) would just explain how to reassociate app with extension or whatever the
small problem is. You are grasping for straws here Les. Most people don't do
what you do with those name lists. They couldn't care less about regex.
Notepad or edit or wordpad is better targeted to THEM. Not you.
> Or they could read it in a 20 year old book.
Why force them. They can learn Windows by inspection.
> Or, if they had grep they could learn it in a natural process extending
> from plain strings.
They have grep. Start:Find:File and Folders. BTW it does to regexps if you
look ;-) BTW, go back to the mall and ask people about "grep". See what you
get...
> Hmm, Excel might do that particular operation if you imported the
> data as delimited text into 2 columns, but that is a complex process.
> Who would teach them to do that?
File, Open? Sure, I'll do that. You see Les, it recognizes the file format and
offers to help the user.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 05:17:16 GMT
Christopher Smith wrote:
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:fk0S5.22535$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > >
> > > > Certainly the text editors which come with the debian linux distro are
> > > > far superior to notepad.exe which comes with windows. I like vi, but
> > > > joe is interesting, and emacs is nearly an os anyway. There're stacks
> > > > of them and all seem better than notepad.
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > >
> > > How many do you need? There are actually three editors that ship with
> > > Windows, notepad, wordpad and edit. To each his own.
> >
> > You need one or more with regular expression matching and substitution.
> > How many of the ones included with Windows have it?
>
> Why would Joe User need such functionality ?
Or even know that he could?
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: 20 Nov 2000 05:19:10 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Jack Troughton wrote:
:>
:> And any system can be taken down by a nastily written app; I have a
:> friend that claims to be able to kill any *nix box so long as he has
:> shell access, and not even root access. It's not that he crashes it
:> so much as he just renders it useless for anybody else who wants to
:> use the machine...
: Here's a little app that will force you to reboot (if you're running
: a Linux box):
: Put the following code in a shell script, then execute it:
: ($0 & $0 &)
: The script will recursively spawn copies of itself until no more
: process table entries are left. (I tried it, and I had to hit
: the reset button.)
Fork bombs and similar DoS attacks don't work with a properly set up
UNIX or Linux machine (with ulimits enabled and set to sane values).
Admittedly, many Linux distros don't have these limits set up properly
out of the box, but any competent sysadmin would know how to fix that,
and well-administered UNIX machines are very difficult to take down,
even by knowledgedable and dedicated crackers.
Joe
------------------------------
From: "Keldon Warlord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 22:23:29 -0800
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:IzHR5.22073$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Direct-X allows the use of all types of plugin's for programs like
> > SoundForge and it allows manipulation of the sound as well as
> > interoperability between programs (ie: the plugin appears as a menu
> > item in all programs that support Direct-X).
>
> Interoperability? Is that what you call it when most programs
> you try to run refuse and tell you to install a different version
> of Direct-X first? What is this month's flavor?
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
refuse to run??? ....oh dear lord...look, try and RUN a few of the Direct-X
programs before you puke up your nonsensical babble to the masses!
here's a clue to the ignorant Linux user: a Windows program that requires
Direct-X only checks what version you have AT THE INSTALL. If it requires
Direct-X 5.0 and you have Direct-X 7.0, you'll only be advised to keep your
latest version AND THE PROGRAM WILL STILL RUN.
--
"One by one the Penguins steal my sanity." (found printed on a T-shirt)
My Website(s):
http://kwarlord.tripod.com/index.html
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 05:28:02 GMT
"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8vaa2f$a2j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > >
> > > Any Unix with #!/bin/<shell> in a text file and the file set to
> > executable
> > > has essentially done this.
> >
> > Note that there is exactly zero chance that this will be the case for
> > an email attachment, and it still isn't the case when you save to a
> > file from the mailer.
>
> Note also that there are less safeguards for saving attachments in *nix
> mailers and a quick one-line instruction will soon rectify the lack of +x.
But that one line has to come explicitly from the user in question. It is
not hidden behind a disguised meaning of 'open' or automatically
associated with something controlled by an unknown sender.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Keldon Warlord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 22:33:27 -0800
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Keldon Warlord wrote:
> >
> > "Uncle Fester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Now if it only had some decent multimedia programs to run like
> > > > SoundForge or Cooledit or Cubase or Cakewalk or DVD or some Direct-X
> > > > plugins then we would be in business.
> > >
> > >
> > > Linux would be worth it just to finally break free of DirectX!
> > > You're right though, we're missing a lot of programs in LinuxLand.
> > > Let's see... Happy99, Melissa, Navidad...
> > >
> >
> > are all Linux users this dense or just you? he said DVD and other
multimedia
> > programs....or is it insane jealousy that the MPAA won't give away those
DVD
> > source codes for FREE like the other dozen brainwashed companies that
have?
> >
>
> So...what you're saying is...being held hostage to the likes of
> Sony and Time-Warner is a good thing?
>
>
no...what I'm saying is that this is the only DVD player that I have...and I
sure as hell don't want to mess it up!
besides, do you really think I can get away with buying a seperate DVD
player AFTER I bought this new computer?! ;-)
P.S. I thought longs .sigs weren't allowed???
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> ICQ # 3056642
>
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Keldon Warlord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 22:37:42 -0800
"Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:qx1S5.87207$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8v60jc$907$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Terrible argument. You would lose the war for sure.
>
>
> Yeah I know, you can get solitaire *and* minesweeper in linux, what will I
> use windows for now?
>
> -m
>
>
do they have something along the lines of winamp for Linux? :-)
(hey, I'm just asking...)
--
"One by one the Penguins steal my sanity." (found printed on a T-shirt)
My Website(s):
http://kwarlord.tripod.com/index.html
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: 20 Nov 2000 05:43:50 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Please don't get your boobies out of their holders here.
: NT will not stay up for more than 48 hours in a normal
: business environment before it begins to falter.
: It will typically "falter" by painting a great big
: blue screen on the system console monitor.
You can get 1-2 week uptimes from a well-maintained NT4 box under
moderate load. Still not much compared to any real OS, but certainly
more than 48 hours. Dying that soon usually indicates a hardware,
DLL, or memory or resource leak problem, and anything that blatant
should be relatively easy to track down and fix.
Also, NT usually won't die without some warning. Usually it will bog
down and begin to act goofy before dying outright. If someone happens
to notice, it's usually possible to shut down cleanly and reboot at
that point, rather than waiting for a bluescreen or outright lockup.
With Linux or UNIX, of course, day-to-day reliability isn't even an
issue; the hardware will usually die before the OS does.
Joe
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: 20 Nov 2000 05:44:48 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
:>
:> > Put the following code in a shell script, then execute it:
:> >
:> > ($0 & $0 &)
:> >
:> > The script will recursively spawn copies of itself until no more
:> > process table entries are left. (I tried it, and I had to hit
:> > the reset button.)
:>
:> Only when run as root.
:>
:> Normal users will hit their max proc limit.
: I ran it as meself, and got tired of waiting for it to calm down
: before I hit the reset button. This was maybe five to ten minutes
: on a P-II 400. Then I had to wait a little for the fsck's to
: finish at reboot.
Set ulimits.
Joe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: 20 Nov 2000 05:50:37 GMT
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 03:37:20 GMT, Les Mikesell wrote:
>When I was using a SysV version of g++ to try to compile the newest
>changes to the hylafax source, the results were in fact unpredictable.
>I'd be a lot more interested in the language if I could expect the same
>source to compile to the same program on different platforms and/or
>compiler versions.
Are you sure that the "unpredictability" is due to C++ language features ?
It's not like C doesn't have its own portability issues. They usually pop
up when you use different libraries.
>> must use them judiciously. That's not in itself a reason to discard the
>> whole language.
>
>In order to work around omissions and implementation differences, you have
>to be aware of all of them.
It's not as hard as you may think. Basically, the features that are very new
(such as STL) may have implementation differences. The ones that have been
around for years (the OO model, the C pseudo-subset) are pretty well
established.
The '95 draft is available, and the parts of the standard that are also in
the 95 draft are pretty dependable.
> That could turn out to be harder than writing
>the program in the first place,
No, it isn't. See above.
>> In C++, one may complain about small differences in STL
>> implementations, but at least C++ has something like this -- you'd have to
>> install a third party library in C. One could do the same in C++ also.
>> Or better, you could just install and use a certain implementation of STL.
>
>Are there a variety of implementations of STL that can be used in
>any compiler?
Yes, for small values of "any".
http://www.stlport.org/doc/platforms.html
This would make it more portable than glib, for example.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: wahoo! I'm running now
Date: 20 Nov 2000 05:53:04 GMT
MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Nice reply. Refreshing not to read the usual cola trash. But,...
:> > And after probably 2 months of
:> > infrequent work (say, 1 or two hours a week,) and about 10 hours of
:> > concentrated effort, I'm beginning now to really understand this little
:> > box.
:> That's a kewl feeling isn't it, that's the moment where you think :
:> "Damn, it was harder than Windows, but I don't worry about anything
:> anymore, I can do anything I want, I can go anywhere I want today."
: This statement contradicts 90% of the cola mantra that linux is no harder to
: use\learn than windows.
: Which is it guys?
It does take time to learn if you're used to something else. I
certainly have never suggested otherwise. Once you know it, though,
it's *far* easier to use than 'Doze, because it works reliably and
predictably, comes with very powerful and flexible tools, and runs
virtually all of the high-quality software currently available.
Also, with the recent improvements to KDE, Gnome, and the typical
install/setup process, it's now possible for nontechnical people to
*use* Linux in much the same fashion that they used to use 'Doze, with
minimal retraining. To *administer* the very powerful multiuser OS
underneath the pretty pictures is still just a bit outside the realm
of the average nontechnical user's competence, but this is only an
issue in a home environment, not in a corporate or enterprise setting,
where competent help is readily available and extremely
cost-effective.
Joe
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: wahoo! I'm running now
Date: 20 Nov 2000 05:53:58 GMT
Pedro Iglesias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I've tested RedHat 7.0 on a couple of servers and now
: I am back installing 6.2 one instead. I think 7.0 shouldn't
: even have come out. Don't like a GNU/Linux company
: shipping such kind of shit.
Red Hat's x.0 releases have always sucked. By 7.1 or 7.2, they should
have it pretty solid.
Joe
------------------------------
From: "Operator Jack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux trips over itself once again
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 21:51:34 -0800
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Once again Linux, in this case Mandrake 7.2, has failed to install on
> a system that has easily installed Windows.
Um. No .. you are doing something wrong. I was actually going to go
through the setup in a message here.. but you are kinda jerky.. suffice it
to say, if you RTFM that talks about COMMANDLINE options, you'll get it.
NOTE: W2K has NOT installed or run all of my hardware. In fact, I have
something as simple as a Webcam that won't install properly. Linux does
just fine. I have seen VERY little that Linux does not run on.
I bet you're one of those people that spreads nastyness like "Well, Windows
runs on S/390, and MAC G4, etc.."
butthead.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
