Linux-Advocacy Digest #369, Volume #30 Wed, 22 Nov 00 18:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Stuart Fox)
Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats ! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Stuart Fox)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (mark)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I am finding installing a multi-function card needless reading. ("Bennetts
family")
Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats ! (mark)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (mark)
Re: LINUX USED BY THE NEW ZEALAND ARMY FOR ARMED FORCES SIMULATION: (kiwiunixman)
Re: Microsoft Song (sung to the turn, oh what a wonderful world) a oldie but a
goodie (kiwiunixman)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Microsoft Song (sung to the turn, oh what a wonderful world) a oldie but a
goodie (kiwiunixman)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats ! (Gary Hallock)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. ("stevekimble")
Re: Linux needs now ... (kiwiunixman)
Re: Linux + KDE2 + hello world = 8( (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Christopher Smith")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:02:59 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stuart Fox wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> > I still cannot see why people are so hung up on this. If you want
> > accurate uptime information, use the uptime.exe tool. I don't care
> > whether anyone else wants to attempt to measure my uptime via the
> > network stack.
> >
>
> Maybe you've heard sometime speak about servers. They're
> boxes sitting there and providing services to other boxes
> (called clients) via a network, sometimes nearby, sometimes
> at the other side of the globe.
> It's not a common usage for Windows boxes, because of their
> poor reliability, but nonetheless some are sold (such as NT
> servers) for that purpose.
Very witty.
>
> Well, there's quite a number of reasons a client would like
> to know whether the server is still running since the
> previous time it connected, or it has been subject to
> reboot.
> Most of them are related to the possibility that
> informations previously left on server can reliably be
> believed to be still there or not.
What data would you leave on a web server that is volatile enough that
a reboot would affect it?
> It's a matter of optimizing performance by avoiding an
> useless transfer of substantial bulk of data. Bandwidth is
> costly.
>
> Well, a server which cannot produce such a reliable
> information, nullifies this optimization.
>
> A one and a half year time span, with respect to this
> purpose is reasonable, because you wouldn't rely too much on
> data sent almost two years before, less than two months on
> the contrary is a design flaw.
So the question is, what data is so volatile that a reboot will affect
this?
>
> Nobody cares about your uptime. Most care about server
> uptime, which was the subject of this thread.
Your comprehension needs some work unfortunately. As I was talking in
context, I don't care whether people want to see my **Server** uptime
via the network stack or not. I really don't.
Your attempts to make this seem important when it's not are admirable,
but seem a little misguided. You haven't provided a single example of
what could happen to your data in the event of a reboot.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats !
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:16:06 GMT
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:02:54 -0500, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Upward, backward or inside out the fact remains that you complained
about PPQ not working with Windows ME and 2k. It was also you that was
running a down level version. It was also you that didn't bother to
check to see that they have an update to fix 5.0 so it works with
Win2k and you don't need to buy a new version.
Partition Magic worked fine for me, like I said.
claire
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:17:45 GMT
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 14:55:58 -0500, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On 22 Nov 2000 18:38:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:09:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>You Penguinista's have a difficult time reading for some reason.
>> >>Maybe your eyes are worn out from reading all of those How-Not-To's.
>> >>
>> >>He said MENU BASED.
>> >
>> >Not in the post I followed up to, he didn't.
>>
>> Everybody seems to miss the menu part, I wonder why?
>> Maybe because it doesn't work correctly?
>> claire
>
>What an idiot. Read the thread. Follow the links up from Donovans post. NO
>mention of menu based. You are looking at a different subthread. You really
>should stop jumping into the middle off a discussion like this.
>
>Gary
And you should learn to wrap your lines, or at least use a decent News
Reader.
claire
------------------------------
From: Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:09:26 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stuart Fox wrote:
> [snip]
You also failed to answer my question about which particular internet
standard you were referring to? Is it because there isn't one which
covers this?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:20:46 GMT
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 14:48:49 -0500, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>all talk to each other. You think you're hiding behind these multiple names, but
>you have such constant posting style, everyone here can tell who you are, whatever
>name you happen to be using at the moment.
>
>Gary
Constant posting style?
What the hell is that?
You're really losing it these days Gary. Did you just get your rating
dropped or something? (I hope not).
claire
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sucks
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:13:00 +0000
In article <8vh1v5$bgp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Robert Marshall wrote:
>
>> the 95 line... (is there anyone who actually
>> LIKES this OS? Seriously?)
>I don't mind 95b.
>What is so good about 98 or ME?
>(Not interested in NT/2K)
>
Nothing. Debian GNU/Linux is good though.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:22:01 GMT
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:17:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 14:55:58 -0500, Gary Hallock
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>> On 22 Nov 2000 18:38:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:09:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> >>You Penguinista's have a difficult time reading for some reason.
>>> >>Maybe your eyes are worn out from reading all of those How-Not-To's.
>>> >>
>>> >>He said MENU BASED.
>>> >
>>> >Not in the post I followed up to, he didn't.
>>>
>>> Everybody seems to miss the menu part, I wonder why?
>>> Maybe because it doesn't work correctly?
>>> claire
>>
>>What an idiot. Read the thread. Follow the links up from Donovans post. NO
>mention of menu based. You are looking at a different subthread. You really
>should stop jumping into the middle off a discussion like this.
>>
>>Gary
>
>
>And you should learn to wrap your lines, or at least use a decent News
>Reader.
>
>claire
And maybe Donovan is the one who should read the thread before he
post's a non answer to the question.
claire
------------------------------
From: "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I am finding installing a multi-function card needless reading.
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 08:33:34 +1100
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Welcome to Linux the "Build it Yourself" operating system.
Claire/steve/heather/cat/..., if you don't like it, then don't use it, and
stop ranting around here.
--Chris
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats !
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:22:55 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 13:22:51 -0500, Gary Hallock
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>Oh yeh, right! PM 6.0 did not exist at the time Windows ME and W2K came out. It
>did not
>>exist when I had to use PM on Windows ME. And why should I have to spend more
>money to
>>upgrade PM?. What can't Windows provide upward compatibility?
>
>Because Gary, Windows (Microsoft) shouldn't have to worry about
>supporting backward compatability with every piece of software that is
>out there. If they did, they would be stuck in a rut and in many cases
>not able to advance.
Microsoft should only have to worry about what their customers want and
what their competition is offering. Unfortunately, since they lack
the latter, they're not interested in the former. This means issues
of backwards compatibility are of no interest to them.
>That is exactly what happend with OS/2 which
>tried to maintain compatability with Windows applications (Win/OS)
>while MS marched on and OS/2 died.
I thought what happened with OS/2 was more to do with a microsoft &
IBM battle, I don't recall anything about backwards compatibility.
>
>It is also the reason why Linux is mired in old technology, like it's
>file system.
I like my data stored on a reliable, efficient, secure filesystem. Then
there's my work data which has to be stored on Fat32, which kind of
doesn't really meet any of that.
>
>>Your Dos VFat argument is backwards. That's called backwards compatibility. I
>don't
>>expect to be able run a new program on an old OS. But I do expect to be able to
>run an
>>old program on a new version of the OS.
>
>I prefer the latest technology and if I have to upgrade to get it
>that's ok with me.Linux has broken many things along the way as well
>with Lib5/LibC and so forth. It's just that you guys love flittering
>around hoping to be the first one on /. to find the bug and fix it.
Nothing was broken which couldn't be recompiled with the available
source. Or, if you use e.g, debian, then the libc5 stuff runs
just fine, and on my machine, even the libc4 stuff still does.
I agree, I've been upgrading the machines for years. I've not been
filling Bill's pockets whilst doing it, though.
>
>Linux will always be living in the past. It will always be behind in
>hardware support and it will forever be trying to have even a small
>amount of the high quality and broad range of applications that
>Windows has. Nothing but a huge influx of money and Linux going
>commercial, is going to change that.
Linux is certainly my future, Windows is not. Linux is now edging
windows away from the kids machines. It won't be long before
windows has completely gone from my network, having been replaced
by debian GNU/Linux.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:31:19 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty wrote:
>mark wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty wrote:
>> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Kind of like the speedometer scale on production street cars is
>> >> ALWAYS higher than the maximum speed that the car will go with
>> >> the factory drivetrain.
>> >
>> >[Aside:] That's not always the case. My '92 Ford Exploder (er.. Explorer)
>> >only went up to 85MPH on the speedometer and I've gotten it to 105 or so.
>> Just wondering - how did you know?
>
>Mostly extrapolation and seat-of-the-pants sensing. I didn't have a
>"peg" at 85, so the needle continued around a bit and it looked about
>right to be about 105.
Ok - basic engineering extrapolation - I can live with that :-)
>
>> My experience of speedos is that once you exceed common speed limits then
>> they become quite inaccurate. They're also increasingly affected by
>> such things as how inflated your tyres are as speed goes up. Also,
>> how loaded the vehicle is affects the tyre profile which affects the
>> reported speed.
>>
>> This is why real speed tests use external machines - car speedos are
>> really not very accurate.
>
>Agreed. It was definitely faster than 85 at least. ;-)
That's about top speed for my big landrover (110"), but not for the
little one (90"). Drinks fuel at that speed tho'
Happy driving,
Mark
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX USED BY THE NEW ZEALAND ARMY FOR ARMED FORCES SIMULATION:
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 22:17:00 GMT
Sorry, I sometimes get a little worked up when simpletons like Claire
Lynn proclaim xzy country is better than country zxy because of some
anecdotal story. This isn't the first time she/he has done this, a
couple of months back she posted a comment about Germany that was
incorrect and half-witted. I have been to the US, Canada, New
Calidonia, Australia, Fiji, France, UK, and most of Eastern Europe,
every country I visted was an awsome experience, Claire Lynn lacks the
anylitical skills to analyse something, the perfect example his her/his
attempts to justify why he/she believes Windows is better that Linux.
Unlike her, I admit I donot have all the answers, however, what I post
is based on my own experiences with Linux, any posts that contridict my
opinion I take as its face value, and accept that Linux does not meet
that particular persons needs, and I respect that, however, Claire Lynn
doesn't, hence, she has no respect in this newsgroup.
kiwiunixman
Pan wrote:
>
> kiwiunixman wrote:
>
>> Claire, Have you ever been to New Zealand? probably not. Unlike the US
>> military
>
>
> Please don't turn this into a yankee vs kiwi bashing episode. Claire
> Lynn is a prick. 'nuff said.
>
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Song (sung to the turn, oh what a wonderful world) a oldie but
a goodie
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 22:19:14 GMT
I saw it on Slashdot and thought it was a bit of a classic, so I posted
it here, just bring a bit of humour into this newsgroup. I didn't write
the song, however, I forgot to get the name of the person who posted on
Slashdot. Unfortunately I am not a good singer, however, I can play the
piano. If I could sing I would post an MP3 of it on the news group.
kiwiunixman
Frank Van Damme wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "kiwiunixman"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Reposted from Slashdot
>>
>> Sung to the tune of (What a) Wonderful world:
>>
>> (What a) Microsoft World
>> ------------------------
>>
>> <songtext>
>
>> What would the BOFH do?
>
>
> Haha, that's what I call humor! Has this been recorded yet?
> Did you write this yourself?
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 22:24:32 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:58:20 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Nik Simpson wrote:
>>
>> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Nik Simpson wrote:
>> > >
>> > > "Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > > On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 20:19:57 GMT, Chad Myers wrote:
>> > > >> Dos on the other hand is so spartan that it's barely usable (which is
>> why
>> > > > the vast majority of windows users stay away from it whenever
>> possible)
>> > >
>> > > Or if we are smart and come from a UNIX background we load things like
>> UWIN
>> > > and have a complete UNIX command line and ksh to play with.
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Nik Simpson
>> >
>> > It still sucks.
>>
>> Thankyou for such an incisive and well thought out response, it just what
>> we've come to expect from you.
>
>The DOS command line sucks, because it is poorly implemented.
>
>In contrast, the Unix command line interfaces are works of pure genius.
Can you be more specific?
I will note that the raw DOS command line sucks eggs (F3 to edit
a line??), but DOSKEY makes it more or less usable. There
are presumably other command line editors as well, which shim
themselves between the current keyboard handler, and the input
system reading the keystrokes.
Also, older Unix tty drives/command lines don't have:
- history
- file completion
- double TAB file/command listing
- arrow key editing (KSH did have VI-style editing, though).
And most Unix command lines in olden times may have been limited to
single-character options prefixed with a '-'; '+' and '--'
were added later.
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random command line here
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Song (sung to the turn, oh what a wonderful world) a oldie but
a goodie
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 22:26:49 GMT
I would I want to quite my day job? Are you a little sour because it
may be true, or someone stole your funny bone. Lighten up for goodness
sake, unlike you, I actually like to bring a little sunshine into
peoples lives, if you want to be a sour-puss all your life, then hide ya
self in a closet, because no ones likes a sour-puss.
kiwiunixman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Don't quit your day job :(
>
> claire
>
>
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 16:36:27 +1300, kiwiunixman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Reposted from Slashdot
>>
>> Sung to the tune of (What a) Wonderful world:
>>
>> (What a) Microsoft World
>> ------------------------
>>
>> Don't know much about my CPU,
>> Don't know what a DIMM's supposed to do,
>> Don't know what a hard disk is for,
>> Don't know how to overclock my core;
>> But I do know that Microsoft rules,
>> 'cuz that's what they taught us all in school,
>> Oh, What a Microsoft world it must be.
>>
>> Don't know why my screen is always blue,
>> Don't know what these damn exceptions do,
>> Don't know why my modem runs so slow,
>> What it's sending out I just don't know;
>> But I do know what the salesman said,
>> Once I save enough to finally upgrade,
>> What a wonderful world it will be.
>>
>> What would the BOFH do?
>>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 17:30:08 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
>
>
> Constant posting style?
>
> What the hell is that?
>
> You're really losing it these days Gary. Did you just get your rating
> dropped or something? (I hope not).
>
> claire
Oh, really? You live in NYC. You hate Windows NT, but love Windows 9x. You
constantly complain about sound cards on Linux (supposedly because that is how you
make a living). You constantly complain about printer support on Linux. You used
to have a Cannon 4400 which you complained to no end that Linux didn't have a GUI to
clean to heads (iti didn't need it since you could clean the heads from the front
panel). You claim to have a friend on the inside of IBM where you get IBM internal
and confidential info. You have a habit of spraying insults and then apologizing (as
if that makes it all ok). I could go on and on. You have been regurgitating that
same crap for over a year now, under at least a dozen pseudonyms. Since you don'
remember, I'll give you a hint. The name you went by when you put my phone and
office number in this ng started with a "t". The friend (another one of your
personalities, I'm sure) had a name that started with an "S".
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 17:33:47 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats !
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:02:54 -0500, Gary Hallock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Upward, backward or inside out the fact remains that you complained
> about PPQ not working with Windows ME and 2k. It was also you that was
> running a down level version. It was also you that didn't bother to
> check to see that they have an update to fix 5.0 so it works with
> Win2k and you don't need to buy a new version.
>
> Partition Magic worked fine for me, like I said.
>
> claire
Wrong. You just can't read, can you. The version of PM that tried to
use with Windows ME was the latest version of PM at the time.
THERE WAS NO PM 6.0. GET IT.
Gary
------------------------------
From: "stevekimble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 01:06:50 -0000
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:s35N5.3499$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > > "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Does it matter? If fact is, they do. You and others were
ignorantly
> > > > > claiming that if Redmond got nuked (how cute, by the way), that
Windows
> > > > > would be lost forever which is simply rediculous.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > But even if code survives, there are still a few issues. First, who
owns
> > > > the code? Second, would that owner(s) be able to control changes to
the
> > > > code?
> > >
> > > There would certainly be someone left alive from MS, regardless,
> > > MS would be done and the remaining employees or an appointed lawyer
> (assuming
> > > all the lawyers died as well) would be responsible for selling the
> > > remainder of the assets to pay off debts in good faith. Someone would
> > > purchase it in an auction (probably IBM) and either throw it away
(unlikely)
> > > or continue producing Windows and assume leader in the multi-billion
dollar
> > > market of the desktop OS.
> >
> > But Windows isn't just the code. Who could stringarm the OEM's into
> > preinstalling it?
>
> "stringarm"? There's no stringarming necessary. Dell, Compaq, Gateway,
> and many others wouldn't be where they're at, if at all had it not
> been for Windows and the fortunes it has brought those who sell it.
> They are more than happy/willing/able to sell it and make the profits.
>
> No "stringarm"ing necessary.
>
> -Chad
Omigawd, I just found myself nodding in agreement with something Chad wrote.
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux needs now ...
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 22:57:59 GMT
A few years ago, the LSB, Linux standard base was formed to standardise
Linux distro's so that fragmentation does not occur (like what happened
in the Unix world), the main distros are actively embracing this
standisation by striving towards LSB compliance, hence, any program
written on a LSB compliant distro should work on any other distro that
conforms to the LSB specifications. Like UNIX, the number of linux
distros will decrease until a small number (Caldera, SuSE, Redhat,
Debian and Mandrake) are left. If you look at the commercial UNIX
world there are now only Solaris (for x86 and Sparc (the major focus is
on the Sparc version)), IRIX (used on SGI machines), AIX (some UNIX
puritans believe it isn't UNIX, however, I disagree (used in IBM PowerPC
Workstations and Servers), compared to 20 years ago when virtually every
company had their own version of UNIX, even Microsoft (Xenix, kicked the
Xenix project and embrace DOS) and Kodak (Interactive Unix, later sold
to SUN) had their own UNIX varient.
kiwiunixman
Pedro Iglesias wrote:
>> Linux has the same standard directory scheme and configuration files
>> location as Unix. Linux also has several universal installation
>> methods....rpms, debs, tar.gz, and tar.bz2 packages. Installshield
>> <blech> is also coming.
>
>
> Yes, that's why SuSE put configuration files in a site and Redhat or
> Debian on another one. And by installation I meant the process of
> installing the OS, the package manager does not mind me since as
> a desktop end user I think it would be hidden for him.
>
>> You already have those things. However, what you don't have is that
>> 'one' authoritative way that Windows does limit you to. Why does having
>> many different ways to do something that allow you to pick your own
>> favorite method scare you so much?
>
>
> Why does having many different ways to do something has to be
> always good ? Limitations on the Windows world come more than
> all by the non open source style, why having a good standar open
> source installation method is a limit to anyone ?
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Linux + KDE2 + hello world = 8(
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 23:03:51 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:25:36 +0000
<TJBS5.20246$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
>> You're right.
>>
>> MOV #HELLO,DX (or LEA HELLO,DX)
>> MOV #9,AH
>> INT 21H
>> MOV #0,AL
>> INT 20H
>> HELLO: .DB 'Hello, world!',13,10,'$'
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> (with my luck I committed half a dozen errors, though. It's been
>> a very long time since I've done Intel MASM-style assembly.)
>
>Now, how do you do "hello world" in WIN32, or X, or KDE2?
The X "hello world" takes about 50 lines or so.
The Win32 "hello world" takes even more.
KDE2 doesn't do "hello world"; that's a function of its underlying
widget set, Qt.
>
>That's what I was writing about in my original post.
>
>--
>Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 09:09:46 +1000
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:hUFS5.23397$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8vf6ke$voq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > >
> > > > 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.
> >
> > As does the command to open an attachment.
>
> But 'open' has nothing in common with the meaning of 'execute' to
> anyone who hasn't been brainwashed since birth.
You mean it has nothing in common for those who haven't been using OSes like
MacOS and Windows their whole life.
That would be, erm, about 2% of the population, if that.
Different UIs have different principles defining them. Deal with it.
> > > It is
> > > not hidden behind a disguised meaning of 'open' or automatically
> > > associated with something controlled by an unknown sender.
> >
> > The meangin of open is not disguised, it behaves identically to "open"
> > anywhere else in the GUI. Neither is the association controlled by the
> > sender.
>
> Email is an application, not a shell. It's meaning of open is unlike the
> meaning of open in any other application. If you tell notepad or
> word to open a *vbs file, will it launch an interpreter?
The difference is in notepad you've specifically gone to the file menu and
chosen to open a file, whereas in outlook you're just double clicking on an
icon.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
