Linux-Advocacy Digest #351, Volume #30 Tue, 21 Nov 00 20:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Russ Lyttle)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Russ Lyttle)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Same old Linux..Nothing new here... (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: wahoo! I'm running now (Gary Hallock)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux for nitwits ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: wahoo! I'm running now ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Sixth Sense (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Jan Purwin)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:02:16 GMT
mlw wrote:
>
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "Russ Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > That's because you don't know what you're doing.
> > > >
> > > > http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q156/5/13.asp
> >
> > > I won't tell that to my customer because I don't want him to take his
> > > millions and go home. Everything that is part of a build gets checked in
> > > and controlled. MS may think that there is no need to put the
> > > autogenerated files under source control, but they aren't paying me to
> > > develop software. We even have to save the compiler used to make the
> > > build!
> >
> > You're a moron then. Do you save the temp files generated by the compiler
> > in the Temp directory as well?
>
> The project files generated by VC and code are dependent on environment
> settings in a system. They are important.
>
Absolutely correct. This type of problem is not unique to VC++ either.
> >That's what these are. Hell, the temp files
> > are even more relavant than the ones listed in the knowledge base article
> > because the temp files are actually generated code,
>
> Many companies that have to be able to reproduce and "audit" code
> production do save the object files.
>
Thats us.
> > while the the
> > autogenerated files are things to do with Intellisense and the class
> > browser.
> >
> > In other words, they have nothing to do with either the code generated, or
> > the source code in any way. They're to do with the IDE as temp files.
>
> In many projects, one has to use a properly version controlled compiler,
> library set, installer, etc. They have to save everything that is used
> to create the code which is shipped. In things like banking, there is
> often an audit process with each new version of software and
> differences, no matter how minor, must be accounted for. Sometimes your
> customer even wants to inspect the build process.
>
Inspections at no more than 90 day interverals.
> You MUST be able to take a fresh machine, and build the code from what
> is in version control, and get the same executable. (The differences,
> like date and time stamps, etc. MUST able to be explained!)
>
Not just explained but explained so as to make the auditor happy. Not an
easy task.
> I have my differences with Russ, but I know what he is talking about
> when he says this kind of stuff. People change compilers mid project
> under Windows, but this is hardly the case in large non-windows
> projects. In Old CS classes many years ago, the professors took a dim
> view of changing compilers mis stream, because you could never know what
> bugs were fixed and what bugs were new, and how much code would function
> differently.
>
just had a project that was archived 10 years ago. The contract required
25 years minimum. Had to build a system that would read 5-1/4" SSSD
disks. After we did that, we were able to get relief to permit
transfering everything to 3-1/2" disketts.
> --
> http://www.mohawksoft.com
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:04:19 GMT
Ketil Z Malde wrote:
>
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > You MUST be able to take a fresh machine, and build the code from what
> > is in version control, and get the same executable. (The differences,
> > like date and time stamps, etc. MUST able to be explained!)
>
> A suggestion?
>
> Use VMWare, and save the whole NT installation along with your source
> tree. When you need to rebuild, simply boot up that installation, and
> compile.
>
> -kzm
> --
> If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
Been there, done that. Had a problem where a service pack change caused
a change in built code. Legal is having problems with MS about us being
able to reinstall the NT source on a different computer. Thus the move
away from NT for critical projects.
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:06:13 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Russ Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Source Safe, I think you mean. CVS crippled by MS putting a gui over it
> > and changing it for marketing. You can use it only if your customer buys
> > your version control plan. The local ISO auditor won't buy that plan.
>
> SourceSafe has nothing to do with CVS, nor was it designed by Microsoft.
> They bought it from a company called OneTree about 5 years ago. SourceSafe
> also has a command line, but then you wouldn't know that because you're such
> an "expert".
Used SourceSafe several times. Underneath it is CVS. It should be as
good as CVS if you get by the GUI and crippled command line.
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Same old Linux..Nothing new here...
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:08:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 14 Nov 2000 15:18:10 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 10:52:34 +0000, "Scaramanga"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Can't get a mousewheel to work?
>>
>>Well I'd rather have that than a whole OS that is quite clearly faulty.
>
>It's amazing what lack of ergonomics and ease of use you Linvocates
>are willing to put up with to run Linux.
Dumb question, but what would you rather have, a mouse whose wheel
doesn't wrk on an ultra-secure operating system, or a wheelmouse
which works perfectly on an OS which has more security holes
than a piece of Swiss cheese? :-)
(Fortunately, Win2k seems to have addressed most of the NT4 security
issues. However, I don't know if WinMe is secure yet -- and it's
*still* sitting "on top of" DOS, an architecture that MS wanted
to get rid of 5 years ago.)
>
>>Also, what do you expect to achieve by constatntly slating linux?
>>You surely know that it is a work in progress.
>
>It shows.
It certainly does, on occasion. (xfig on RH 6.2 can't export PNG
pictures because of an incompatibility between xfig and fig2dev).
However, I am not sure that
Windows on occasion is all that finished a product, either.
("Hi there! I'm Windows NT version 4 and I *still* can't get tooltips
to display correctly!")
>
>>If you *really* dont like something, either download the
>>source code and help out with fixing it, even submitting
>>a bug report will help. Stop bothering the people in this
>>newsgroup with it. We clearly don't care.
>
>Yawn...
>
>I don't feel like writing my own operating system today.
>Maybe tomorrow.
Nobody's stopping you from using the OS most suited
for your tasks. (In your case, that's probably Win2k
or WinMe. However, that's for you to decide.)
You might even be able to document your attempts at
running Linux (wotthehell, we can't stop you except by
gently suggesting things to your ISP -- which would be
akin to taking away one's driver's license because he
drove over a ladybug, i.e., overkill).
However, there are remedies, some of them very readily available
with but a simple WebSearch.
>
>
>>We are far more concerned with advocating linux to people who need it,
>>bringing free software in to vital roles, and to poor/developing countries,
>>and schools. Not to idiots who are just looking for fuel for flaimbait.
>
>You certainly seem interested.
>
>Why don't go and help that poor chap in the setup group who can't get
>his mouse working instead of "advocating" Linux. While you're at it
>you can help the guy who can't get his modem to work, scanner, CDRW,
>printer and so forth. Hardware that worked just fine under Windows.
>
>claire
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: 22 Nov 2000 00:09:43 GMT
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 23:34:51 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Donovan Rebbechi
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>If you're talking about ostrstream (there's no ostrstring), it's obsolete.
>
>Yep, typo on my part.
I forgot to mention also -- ostrstream is very error prone, because it's
a very easy way to create memory leaks.
>>ostringstream (int the <sstream> header) should be used instead. This is
>>another flaw in g++ (which doesn't ship this header, though you can download
>>it)
>
>Not sure if this is a flaw in g++ or libstdc++.
>(ObGNU: at least I have a chance at fixing it, since it's Open Source. :-) )
Yes, you're right. It is libstdc++ after all. And yes, it's been fixed -- you
can download the sstream header from a link in the FAQ. Do it -- and then
take strstream outside and shoot it, then place it in the hall of shame next
to scanf, gets, sprintf and strcpy.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: 22 Nov 2000 00:13:37 GMT
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 23:30:15 GMT, Russ Lyttle wrote:
>mlw wrote:
>So? Want to compare procedural C++ with procedural C? OOP with
>procedural? If the program is to be procedural why use C++ at all? The
Using procedural functions doesn't preclude using OO code. C++ is a multi
paradigm language after all. I think you'd have a hard time convincing C++
programmers to stay away from the math library because it's "procedural".
>fact is that, in general, procedural languages/designs produce faster
>tighter code than OOP languages/designs.
But there's also the 80/20 rule.
BTW, you still haven't addressed my observation that cout.write() actually
performs quite well. Which would seem to lend strength to the argument that C++
performs quite well if you know how to program efficiently.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:13:29 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: wahoo! I'm running now
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> True, but if select/cut/copy is done from the menu, and I press the 2
> buttons to paste, nothing paste's. The menues just don't work between
> those 2 applications. They DO work between the 2 editors in kde
> however but they fail using the kde web browser as well. Maybe it has
> something to do with pasting into a web page?
>
>
It sounds like you neglected to choose the option to emulate a 3-button
mouse.
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:19:48 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How do you know if I post in any other groups? Just because you look
> for "claire" doesn't mean there aren't post's from me.
>
> Look a little bit harder.
And you think this helps your credibility?
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:21:46 GMT
That's because I don't have to worry about &^*%$#@?{}":;:"""!~`\|}{
and all the other"wonderful" keys you Penguinista's dream about using
in your next version of the Linux How-Not To.
claire
BTW how did your kde experiment work out?
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:00:42 -0500, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> It made me ill just trying to find all the different keys on the
>> keyboard.
>
>You seem to have no problem finding all of the keys to post to c.o.l.a.
>
>Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:33:09 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Bruce Schuck
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 11 Nov 2000 10:31:03 -0800
<WdgP5.125439$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 19:21:42 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> >Well...eMbedded VB 3.0 and eMbedded C++ are free. Except for shipping and
>> >handling.
>>
>> GNU tools are free too. And I can configure the same compiler and
>> libraries for dozens of different targets.
>
>Tell me about GNU VB.
With or without DCOM? :-)
An interesting concept, that -- if Wine gets well-developed enough
to implement DCOM, things could get *very* different, especially
if we do get a Basic which understands it.
(Of course, CORBA might be better-suited anyway, and there's
always Java's RMI. :-) )
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:43:25 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Jacques Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> If you'd done any work on a Unix box, you'd know. Click at the beginning
:> of the text you want to copy, drag to the end (DO NOT click there!),
:> go to where you want to paste the text, click the middle button. Voila.
:> If you have only a two-button mouse, click both buttons at once.
: This annoys me. One of my most common paste operations is to copy some
: text, highlight some other text and paste, deleting the text in the second
: document and replacing it with the pasted text. Can't do that.
Interesting. You'll have to swap two of your ops. You'll have to paste
the first text before the second with a click, then highlight the second
text and delete it (supposing your editor supports delete lilke that!).
At the moment you're highlighting, then clicking. You'll have to click,
then highlight (and delete).
: It also seems that you can't have highlighted text in more than one
: document.
No, of course not. The highlighted text is the mouse selection. You
can't have two or it wouldn't be one! Try it with two mice!
You're looking at two different interfaces, that are of comparable
power. You've picked the only operation (select-replace) that is one
interacton quicker under windows. All the rest are one or two longer.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:40:26 GMT
And you think posting your real name to an advocacy group does?
claire
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:19:48 -0500, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> How do you know if I post in any other groups? Just because you look
>> for "claire" doesn't mean there aren't post's from me.
>>
>> Look a little bit harder.
>
>And you think this helps your credibility?
>
>Gary
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux for nitwits
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:40:54 GMT
You must be a real idiot then because at least where I live the cable
company comes and sets the entire thing up. Unfortunately they haven't
reached my street yet and if you happen to mention Linux, they will
not come at all.
claire
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 18:37:49 -0500, "Clifford W. Racz"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> First, I too am a Linux nitwit, but unfortunately
>> your solution to install Linux on your laptop is
>> already supported by Windows 9x. "Direct Cable
>> Connection" uses the parallel port to directly
>> connect computers together in Windows, thereby
>> allowing the same procedure to work in Windows as
>> it did in Linux.
>
>A "direct cable connection" is the biggest PITA I have ever dealt with wrt
>Windows. I have yet to get 1 to work. I would rather use Linux than rely
>on that.
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: wahoo! I'm running now
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:40:59 GMT
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:13:29 -0500, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> True, but if select/cut/copy is done from the menu, and I press the 2
>> buttons to paste, nothing paste's. The menues just don't work between
>> those 2 applications. They DO work between the 2 editors in kde
>> however but they fail using the kde web browser as well. Maybe it has
>> something to do with pasting into a web page?
>>
>>
>
>It sounds like you neglected to choose the option to emulate a 3-button
>mouse.
>
>Gary
True at first, only because the default configuration under XF86Setup
worked fine so I didn't know. I went back and DID select Emulate 3
button mouse and now cute paste DOES work with mouse but STILL fails
using menues.
claire
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:43:56 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ayende Rahien
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 10 Nov 2000 23:58:23 +0200
<8uhusk$qd7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
>> I for one am curious as to these limitations. Remote administration
>> should in theory be possible with tools such as pcAnywhere (which
>> may or may not work on win2K, but presumably it'll be upgraded soon)
>> and since pcAnywhere mirrors the console (I think it uses a bitmap
>> which is a bit of a bandwidth hog -- yuck), any task that is
>> doable by point-and-click or from the Start menu, with the exception
>> of sounds (which isn't much of an issue on business apps, although it
>> might be an issue for business presentations), should be doable,
>> given bandwidth restrictions (e.g., playing Unreal Tournament or Quake
>> might be difficult even on a high-bandwidth connection :-), but not
>> many people do sysadmin playing Quake. DOOM, maybe (there's a
>> patch out), but not Quake.)
>
>Actually, you don't need PcAnyWhere in order to do this.
>You've remote administration mode in Terminal Services, which allows you to
>control another computer as if you were using your own.
>I would like to know what those limitation on remote adminstration are, as I
>haven't been able to find anything that I can't do remotedly that I can
>locally (aside from replacing hardware and things like that)
>Even unix gurus agrees that you can remotedly manage windows 2000 almost as
>well as you can remotedly manage a unix.
Finaly. :-)
>
>
>> I could be totally wrong, admittedly -- and IMO X does it better,
>> assuming X is even needed here in light of the CLI vs. GUI debate.
>> (Tools such as linuxconf support both.)
>
>http://catalog.com/hopkins/unix-haters/x-windows/disaster.html
>You might want to read this. Some people disagrees with you about this.
I did say it was my opinion. The piece you point to here mentions
NeWS, but oddly enough doesn't mention Microsoft at all.
I agree that X could be better, but it's not clear that Windows is
better than X.
(He's also slightly sloppy regarding device independence. The
X *server* is quite device-dependent in spots (it kinda has to be),
but the X *protocol*, *library*, and *clients* are not; they can
run on any system (given executable code limitations; X can't magically
port an executable from, say, x86 to 680x0, although it might help with
remote display :-) ).
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: Jan Purwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:03:36 -0500
>>
PS: You've been screening this shit since the eighties. Have you caught
anybody yet?
They cannot they got stuck with MS-windows that does not work long enought to
make a trace!!
Jan
Tom Wilson wrote:
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Bob Germer wrote:
> > >
> > > On 11/19/2000 at 08:58 PM,
> > > "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > >
> > > > So, NT could not possibly 'beat' any system.
> > >
> > > Typical lies from a MS whore. No MS operating system has EVER been
> stable
> > > from the stolen DOS1 to everything available today. For stability, look
> to
> > > IBM, Novell, and Unix.
> > >
> > > Only assholes run MS operating systems.
> > > ---------
> > > Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
> > > MR/2 Ice 2.21 Registration Number 67
> > > Aut Pax, Aut Bellum - Motto of Clan Gunn Translated: Peace or War
> > > --------
> >
> > Be careful... OS/2 was a big jewel in the eyes of Bill Gates for
> > quite awhile, until Windows 3.0 came out and did well. OS/2 could
> > have been an MS OS!
> >
>
> Actually, it was supposed to be the other way around... Bill, essentially
> took the code and ran. To his credit, and I say this grudgingly, Windows
> turned out better than OS/2. At least early on.
>
> Amazing but true department: OS/2 was meant to be the OS for the IBM-AT.
> Talk about missing deadlines!
>
> --
> Tom Wilson
>
> Linux User
> Windows NT User
> Windows 95/98 User
>
> For our CARNIVOROUS FBI friends:
>
> Kill Gore, Kill Bush, Free McVeigh, Turner Diaries, Oswald, Long Live
> Saddam, Bomb, Ammonium Nitrate, Revolution, Guns, Nuke Florida, Anthrax,
> Samples, The Alien at Roswell, Kennedy, Ransom, Demands, The Drop, and
> Hoffa got loose again!
>
> PS: You've been screening this shit since the eighties. Have you caught
> anybody yet?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:49:47 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > How do you know if I post in any other groups? Just because you look
> > for "claire" doesn't mean there aren't post's from me.
> >
> > Look a little bit harder.
>
> And you think this helps your credibility?
He/she's right, you know. You'd have to look under his/her thirty-two
other aliases as well; a daunting task just to confirm what everybody
already accepts as fact. Claire's a troll, and a not very believeable
one at that.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
