Linux-Advocacy Digest #345, Volume #30 Tue, 21 Nov 00 14:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: MS Office goes SUBSCRIPTION! (mark)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (mark)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (mark)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (mark)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (mark)
Re: Corel To Dump Linux? (mark)
Re: Corel To Dump Linux? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux trips over itself once again (mark)
Re: Linux trips over itself once again (mark)
Re: Linux trips over itself once again (mark)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: MS Office goes SUBSCRIPTION!
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:31:45 +0000
In article <_QfS5.9252$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <7j3S5.492$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Patrick Raymond Hancox
>wrote:
>> >Calm down Charlie, it's just software in the end.
>> >
>> >As I read the press release, he (Erik) is correct* Any updates that come
>out
>> >during a subscription period are released no-charge.
>>
>> Yes, but I imagine that Microsoft are considering holding subscription
>prices
>> to eg., 6 month periods, and only issueing updates on month 7 (or some
>similar
>> other arrangement) to ensure that you don't actually get the 'new' product
>at
>> today's prices. Or something similar to that. Microsoft have not been
>keen
>> to provide even bug-fixes for free, so I can't imagine whole upgrades
>coming
>> without a price.
>
>You're acting like the whole word will purchase the subscription at the same
>time.
>
>Fact is, people will be purchasing subscriptions all throughout the year.
>How could MS plan around that?
>
Trivial - you purchase eg., 6 months at any given point, and pay for the
remaining months or weeks or days in this period. After that, you pay
6 months at a time.
This is hardly a complex logical problem.
Mark
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:40:42 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Byrns wrote:
>
>KMart Windows admins just about says it all. When you your corporate culture puts
>UNIX ahead of Windows you tend to get shitty NT admins. Perhaps it's because you
>nix-snobs treat them like second-class citizens? Perhaps it's because their paid
>less? No wonder the only ones you can get to hire on and stay are losers.
>
>
It's probably unfair paying NT admins less, they should be paid at a premium
like oil-rig workers, coal-miners and other people doing dangerous jobs.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:42:05 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Mike Byrns wrote:
>>
>> mark wrote:
>>
>> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JS/PL wrote:
>> > >
>> > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > >> Goldhammer wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> > >> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > > Why use a junky editor such as notepad on Linux when there are
>> > >> > > >so many better editors available?
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > If I want a quick & dirty text editor, notepad is my choice.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > If I want a quick and dirty gui text editor under windows,
>> > >> > I'll download a decent one.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > It's beyond my understanding how MS, a billion+ dollar
>> > >> > company, can ship an OS with such a shit default text
>> > >> > editor. With all their massive resources, they still
>> > >> > haven't ever provided the user with basic text editor
>> > >> > fuctionality.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> That's because Micro-sheep are too stupid to demand better.
>> > >
>> > >It's an operaiting system, not a text editor.
>> > >The second that they include a text editor with any advanced fuctionality
>> > >whatsoever the ant-ms crowd will start weeping and wailing that they're
>> > >trying to put the little guy making a text editor out of business.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > 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.
>
>And each one sucks.
>
I have to agree with Aaron here. I'm not very impressed with any of the
three default editors. Fortunately, I use debian so I've loads to choose
from.
Cheers,
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:45:24 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Byrns wrote:
>Tom Wilson wrote:
>
>> "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Goldhammer wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> > > > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > >
>> > > > > > Why use a junky editor such as notepad on Linux when there are
>> > > > > >so many better editors available?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > If I want a quick & dirty text editor, notepad is my choice.
>> > > >
>> > > > If I want a quick and dirty gui text editor under windows,
>> > > > I'll download a decent one.
>> > > >
>> > > > It's beyond my understanding how MS, a billion+ dollar
>> > > > company, can ship an OS with such a shit default text
>> > > > editor. With all their massive resources, they still
>> > > > haven't ever provided the user with basic text editor
>> > > > fuctionality.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > That's because Micro-sheep are too stupid to demand better.
>> >
>> > It's an operaiting system, not a text editor.
>> > The second that they include a text editor with any advanced fuctionality
>> > whatsoever the ant-ms crowd will start weeping and wailing that they're
>> > trying to put the little guy making a text editor out of business.
>>
>> Didn't seem to stop them where Browsers were concerned...
>
>You didn't have a text editor manufacturer claiming that their text editor was
>going to make the operating system irrelevant either.
>
>I think Fred Langa but it very well when he said:
>
>"Netscape (one of the main witnesses against Microsoft) was once the undisputed
>king of the browser world. When it was still top dog, it announced it intended
>to add OS services to its already-dominant browser, creating a
>browser-plus-operating system that would make Windows--- and Microsoft---
>irrelevant. Netscape's Marc Andreesen stumped around giving speeches predicting
>that Netscape would destroy Microsoft. With Netscape moving to make its browser
>an OS, Microsoft moved to make its OS a browser. Microsoft succeeded, Netscape
>did not. Therefore, we must punish Microsoft. (Huh?)
>
>(BTW: Now that the trial is over, Netscape co-founder Jim Clarke is now telling
>anyone who will listen that Microsoft should be allowed to keep the browser in
>the OS after all. But that's another story.)
>
>I can't imagine any rational thinking that suggests that a company must sit on
>its hands when a competitor announces it is bent on destruction of the
>company's bread and butter, mainstream products. When Netscape announced it
>intended to use its dominant browser to make Windows irrelevant, what should
>Microsoft have done? Sat still? Riiiiiight---*that's* pro-competition, *that's*
>free market: Just sit there and let a competitor kill you.
>
>But I guess that's what some of the anti-Microsoft forces believe: While
>talking about being "pro-competition," they expect a company, in some
>circumstances, not to compete; not to defend itself. That makes no sense to me.
>
>I am 100% pro-competition: <cut>
Me too. Monopolies prevent competition. Monopolies need to be broken up
in order to enable competition to take place.
Microsoft have been found to be a monopoly, and therefore need to be broken
up in order to enable competition.
I fully believe in and support competition, long may it continue.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:46:47 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Curtis wrote:
>Les Mikesell wrote...
>> 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.
>
>Actually, what I do in Win2k here is fire up my TextPad, open the search
>and replace tool, enable regex's and for the search expression:
>^\([[:word:]]+\), \([[:word:]]+\) or
>I could use your expression to be less precise
>\(.*\), (.*\)
>and the replacement expression
>\2, \1
>I hit 'replace all' and I'm done. If I feel I have to do this on more
>occasions, I just create a macro to do it with one programmable shortcut.
>
Whereas I go to the pub and buy a pint with the money that I didn't give
to Microsoft :)
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Corel To Dump Linux?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 18:44:58 +0000
In article <8vdvai$ngn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, MH wrote:
>Of course. What part of linux not being a good business model is it you are
>having trouble with? Anyone who knew anything knew Corel wouldn't have a
>chance with Linux. They tried, received some decent reviews of their
>product, then basically got lynched by the linux zealots for trying to 'dumb
>down' linux. The press seemed to like the product. Oh, it costs money?
>Well, there's your problem Corel. These folks aren't going to pay for squat.
>Ho hum. Same old BS from linux users. But then ..."we've got apps, no we
>don't, yes we do,...SHUTTUP!!!!!
>
As far as I am aware, Corel's problems date from way before their dalliance
with Linux. The failed merger with Borland (then Inprise) is one example,
as well as their difficulties competing with Microsoft. To be honest,
I'm surprised that Corel managed as long as they did head-on with the MS-
Office people - nobody else seems to have come close.
Linux is an OS kernel, not a business model, although I expect you're
trying to suggest that open source free software cannot make a good basis
for a business model.
What really fascinates me is that Microsoft decided to invest in Corel,
and I strongly suspect it's because Corel are a well-known name and
were coming very close to competing head on with MSOffice and the
then very trendy Linux. An investment as large as Microsoft's clearly
enables the Microsoft board to push Corel away from Linux+Wine and
onto more Microsoft-friendly areas.
This story will now fork into 1) what will Corel do next and 2) what
will happen to Corel Linux.
<cut non-relevant words>
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Corel To Dump Linux?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 18:55:56 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 21 Nov 2000 04:46:10 GMT
<8vcumh$mu7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "CJB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Whatever happened to the money Microsoft was supposed to invest
>> in the company?
>
>Its a done deal and Corel is "rethinking" their Linux focus.
They should.
RHAT 8 1/32
This doesn't necessarily mean of course that Linux is no good
(it's a very good OS), just that it's not profitable to sell it.
Using it as a foundation for Web-pased, highly reliable applications
may be far more profitable.
IMO, anyway.
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:00:58 GMT
Giuliano Colla writes:
>>>> sfcybear writes:
>>>>> That still leaves the FACT that NT uptime clocks are only acurate for
>>>>> 49.7 days while Unix clocks are 10 times more acurate than that.
>>>>> remaining accurate for 497 days.
>>>> You're confusing range with accuracy. Both clocks could be equally
>>>> accurate. Range usually comes at the expense of precision. That is,
>>>> the same number of bits can provide a greater range if the precision
>>>> is reduced.
>>> Maybe the terms he used aren't exact.
>> You're not sure?
> It depends wether you're speaking of clock accuracy (which is a hardware
> issue, not OS related, and therefore off topic), or of uptime estimate
> accuracy.
Which do think fits into the context of the discussion, and how does
your "depends" matter?
> Whenever uptime estimate is completely wrong you may well say that
> accuracy of the measured value is not so good, even if clock accuracy
> comes from a caesium primary. In that case with Unix you have an
> accurate measurements for a time 10 times longer than with NT.
That's range, not accuracy.
>>> But if someone comes to your home to measure the floor in order to
>>> deliver you the wall to wall carpet,
>> That's a matter of fitting some material into a space. Rather different
>> from an uptime measurement, which is open-ended.
> That's an abstract notion.
Not at all.
> Any value may be open ended.
Incorrect; consider the amount of carpeting example.
> Writing a program you must decide what will be your upper limit, and
> reserve space accordingly. If your decision is wrong, then you've made
> a silly mistake.
No program writing is involved in computing the amount of carpeting
needed.
>>> and does it with a micrometric gauge, providing .1 mil accuracy, but
>>> spanning only 3 inches, you'd call him an idiot, wouldn't you?
>> He isn't the one who chose the poor analogy.
> Maybe you don't grasp it,
Maybe I did grasp it.
> but if you select a word size and a time resolution, you set your
> upper limit.
If you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would realize that I
already grasped it:
DT] Range usually comes at the expense of precision. That is, the same
DT] number of bits can provide a greater range if the precision is reduced.
Note that the correct word is now precision, not accuracy.
> If the choice is poor you end up exactly like that. Using milliseconds
> to measure uptime isn't much smarter than using a gauge to measure a
> floor.
If uptime is the only thing being measured with that choice, then you
would have a point. You don't suppose they're using that same value
for something else, do you?
> If you think differently I'll address elsewhere whenever in need
> a) to measure my floor, b) to measure uptime.
Be sure to write a program to handle (a), with appropriate upper limits.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Linux trips over itself once again
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 18:52:00 +0000
In article <8vc1v8$sa5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian Langenberger wrote:
>mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><snip!>
>
>: How easy can you get? If a 6 year and and 4 year old kid can use it,
>: I would suggest it's reasonably ready for any office user.
>
>I would assert that 4 and 6 year old kids are likely to be better
>with computers than your average MS Office user. Kids have no
>fear of computers, no preconceived notions, no OS bias, are willing
>to experiment and, occasionally, like to pry open code to find
>out how things work. In short, they're the perfect Linux user
>(which brings back memories of my Apple][ days...) And, with
>even the most rudimentary permissions set, you don't have to
>worry about them trashing either your files or the system.
>
>I could say that Linux is for the kid in all of us,
>but it sounds too sappy so I won't.
>
Perhaps, for the MS Office user, it would be important to
remove virtually all the packages from the machine in order
to only leave a browser, word-processor, spreadsheet and
presentation package.
Maybe what you need is netscape plus staroffice or similar
with everything else removed?
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Linux trips over itself once again
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 18:53:19 +0000
In article <974756693.380594@marvin>, Frank Van Damme wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I'm not really sure that's true. My kids, one 6 and one 4, are quite
>> capable of playing games from the virtual console using the debian
>> pdmenu package. The 6 year old can start pdmenu by typing pdmenu, he
>> can shut the machine down properly (ie., execute a halt or a reboot and
>> wait until the post has started before switching off). He can switch
>> between X-windows system on vt7 and vt1 and back again, he can use
>> windowmaker's menu and afterstep's menu to start games, as can the 4
>> year old.
>
>Then he can do more than I can. I don't know anything about windowmaker,
>I allways use KDE2.
>
>> The 6 year old can 'make the computer talk' by typing say and then the
>> sentence of his choice, he can use the 'up arrow' and return to say the
>> message again.
>
>You'd teach him the 'banner' command!
>
>> He can play doom on it as well.
>>
>> He can start Netscape and check his emails, and is fully aware that the
>> emails, net surfing, printer and lots of other things run on the
>> 'server upstairs', but it's not an issue for him.
>>
>> How easy can you get? If a 6 year and and 4 year old kid can use it, I
>> would suggest it's reasonably ready for any office user.
>>
>> I no longer have to try to track down lost icons, deleted files etc.,
>> because there's a security model which means the kids cannot delete
>> important chunks of the machine.
>>
>> Of course, I wouldn't expect my 4 and 6 year old kids to be able to
>> install debian from floppies, cdrom, ftp or whatever, but they're quite
>> happy with the pre-install (which I did for them). They're also quite
>> happy with a multi-boot scenario, and know which OS to boot for playing
>> which games.
>>
>> I know that there's a general trend towards assuming zero IQ on the part
>> of any user, but the next generation that's coming have no fear of
>> computers at all, thus are able to experiment to learn. My kids are
>> also aware that the Windows OS 'stops working' and the linux one doesn't
>> (they spotted this themselves).
>>
>> I don't know what 'intuitive' means, and I don't think my kids do, at
>> least in terms of user interface on the pc. I do know that my kids have
>> no trouble using linux at both the text console and X with multiple
>> window managers.
>>
>> Oddly enough, the 6 year-old asked to have X-windows system put on his
>> machine because he wanted the fish-tank and xeyes. Interesting what
>> catches the eye of the up-coming consumer, I thought. The _really_ like
>> the penguin with the pint on the sparc version :).
>>
>> Of course you can argue that 'linux isn't ready for the desktop' all
>> day. I'm not very sure what that statement means. I don't undertstand
>> the
>> 'it's not suitable for John Q' statements either. It's certainly no
>> problem for my children.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Mark
>
>WOW. See what a good education does ;-)
>6 and 4? I would start questioning the IQ of the average computer user,
>yes. You could argue that children are generallt keener in learning tech stuff
>like video and computer, games and internet but 6 and 4 is just *too*
>extreme. I'm going to save this post and show it to every fanatic
>Windozer I know.
Please do. The kids are called JJ and Sean respectively (ah, adding a
human element - I'll get a job in marketing yet!).
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Linux trips over itself once again
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 18:57:00 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Topaz Crow wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 20:14:46 +0000, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Once again Linux, in this case Mandrake 7.2, has failed to install on
>>>> a system that has easily installed Windows.
>>>>
>>>
>>>For goodness sake, only somebody particularly ignorant would ever claim
>>>Linux is meant to be easy. It is getting better, but still has a long
>>>way to go.
>>
>>I'm not really sure that's true. My kids, one 6 and one 4, are quite
>>capable of playing games from the virtual console using the debian
>>pdmenu package. The 6 year old can start pdmenu by typing pdmenu,
>>he can shut the machine down properly (ie., execute a halt or a reboot
>>and wait until the post has started before switching off).
>>He can switch between X-windows system on vt7 and vt1 and back again,
>>he can use windowmaker's menu and afterstep's menu to start games,
>>as can the 4 year old.
>>
>>The 6 year old can 'make the computer talk' by typing say and then
>>the sentence of his choice, he can use the 'up arrow' and return to
>>say the message again.
>>
>>He can play doom on it as well.
>>
>>He can start Netscape and check his emails, and is fully aware that
>>the emails, net surfing, printer and lots of other things run on the
>>'server upstairs', but it's not an issue for him.
>>
>>How easy can you get? If a 6 year and and 4 year old kid can use it,
>>I would suggest it's reasonably ready for any office user.
>>
>>I no longer have to try to track down lost icons, deleted files etc.,
>>because there's a security model which means the kids cannot delete
>>important chunks of the machine.
>>
>>Of course, I wouldn't expect my 4 and 6 year old kids to be able to
>>install debian from floppies, cdrom, ftp or whatever, but they're quite
>>happy with the pre-install (which I did for them). They're also quite
>>happy with a multi-boot scenario, and know which OS to boot for playing
>>which games.
>>
>>I know that there's a general trend towards assuming zero IQ on the part
>>of any user, but the next generation that's coming have no fear of computers
>>at all, thus are able to experiment to learn. My kids are also aware that
>>the Windows OS 'stops working' and the linux one doesn't (they spotted
>>this themselves).
>>
>>I don't know what 'intuitive' means, and I don't think my kids do, at least
>>in terms of user interface on the pc. I do know that my kids have no
>>trouble using linux at both the text console and X with multiple window
>>managers.
>>
>>Oddly enough, the 6 year-old asked to have X-windows system put on his
>>machine because he wanted the fish-tank and xeyes. Interesting what
>>catches the eye of the up-coming consumer, I thought. The _really_
>>like the penguin with the pint on the sparc version :).
>>
>>Of course you can argue that 'linux isn't ready for the desktop' all day.
>>I'm not very sure what that statement means. I don't undertstand the
>>'it's not suitable for John Q' statements either. It's certainly no
>>problem for my children.
>>
>
>Same here. My 3 year old loves Asteroids, Snake Race and Connect Four.
>I have a 486 that I set up with windows 95 and some games for him but
>he locks it up on a regular basis and now don't even want to try it. I'm
>going to turn it into a firewall.
Mine used to like playing with paintbrush, but seem to have got bored
with that now. They're major doom fans (they like 2 player games).
Their machines are P100s with 16M, 1G2 HDD, so kind of at the bottom
end of what might support Win95, but fine with Linux.
>
>He don't know how to log on or type in commands on a terminal yet but
>he can use the menus and goes for the XEyes and XTeddy and Xroaches all
>the time.
Mine have got the hang of a username, but struggle to understand the
password thing, so I gave them 'null' passwords. Ok, so there's a
security hazard on my 6 year old's PC!
>
>He does like to mess around with the desktop and panel. removing stuff
>and deleting. But all I have to do is delete his .kde folder and it's back
>to the default. Far better system for a kid to learn on than Windows.
Good idea. I'll have a go with kde or gnome, but I don't know if the
machines will be up to it. Views anyone?
Mark
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
