Linux-Advocacy Digest #448, Volume #30 Sun, 26 Nov 00 17:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Ayende Rahien describes the Windows Experience ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: C++ is very alive! (mlw)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (mark)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 16:05:15 -0500
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
>
> > The registry is as likely to be damaged as any other file.
>
> No, it isn't.
> The only way to access the registry is through the APIs
> And the APIs keeps the registry structure.
Yes, the registry IS just as corruptible as any other file.
The only reason for making the registry an atomic database
is to prevent it from becoming *MORE* corruptible.
Let's say that I have a large sheet of paper...covered with various
Post-it notes....and you tell me that, pasted somewhere on this paper,
is a "noncorruptible" 3"x5" (7.6cm x 12.7cm) notecard...because all
information written on notecard is going to be internally coherent.
What happens if the paper gets introduced to Mr. Paper Shredder.
Damage to a file-system can corrupt ANY AND ALL FILES STORED WITHIN IT.
The *ONLY* way for the LoseDOS registry to be truly incorruptible
is for the damned thing to be put on it's own raw partition.
However...Microsoft REFUSES to even allow this as an option.
Why is that?
--
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 16:07:36 -0500
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8vpf2i$5buf6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> < ... >
>
> > > To make a complete directory structure unusable - no, even
> > > Windows has never done that on me. Please provide some
> > > credible evidence of these ludicrous claims.
> >
> > FAT & NTFS are indeed more robust than ext2 in this regard.
>
> With all due respect, how do you come to that conclusion? My personal
> experience is that FAT is utterly horrible. NTFS, is something i've only had
> a few problems with. I've never had an ext2 FS failure, excepting an old 1GB
> drive that lunched itself.
I HATE that grinding sound...
>
> --
> Tom Wilson
> A Computer Programmer who wishes he'd chosen another vocation.
>
> >
> > > >> The registry is well renowned as a major weakness in the design of
> > > >> windows.
> > > >
> > > >It takes a *lot* to corrupt the registery, usually a hard drive
> failure.
> > > >Currupting the data *inside* the registry is another matter, and can
> > cause
> > > >system instability, just like putting invalid data in the files in the
> > /etc
> > > >dir.
> > >
> > > Err, text file damage is a minor problem - binary file damage is a
> > > massive problem, especially if it happens close to the start of the
> > > file.
> >
> > Please provide more information about any of these claimed events where
> the
> > registry was damaged that badly.
> >
> > > *That's* why the registry is a bad design decision making for a
> > > weak OS.
> >
> > Please provide some credible evidence of these ludicrous claims.
> >
> >
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 13:20:56 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 26 Nov 2000 05:01:00 GMT,
Donovan Rebbechi, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On Sun, 26 Nov 2000 04:17:42 GMT, Mike wrote:
>>
>>"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> On Fri, 24 Nov 2000 17:10:37 GMT, Mike wrote:
>>> >
>>>
>>> >Without going into the historical context, what customers demand is an
>>> >editable document.
>>>
>>> They may or they may not. It depends on the type of document.
>>>
>>> HTML is editable (and modern word processors can import it).
>>>
>>> RTF is also editable and can be created on any platform.
>>
>
>If you are going to write equations, just FORGET about MS word. Dump it like
>a hot potato, because it is not up to the job. If you need a lot of equations
>in your document, you need either LaTeX or some other professional publishing
>software.
>
>--
Have you checked into the mathML extension used in Mozilla now?
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 16:11:26 -0500
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Man, I thought for a second (in a later reply to your post -- I read these
> > things chronologically backward) that you were talking about programming
> > /languages/, in which case I was gonna flame ya.
>
> AFAIK, the only language which I use for programming which isn't supported
> by linux is VB, and KBasic should solve this problem, to some (probably
> limited) extent.
>
> > Seriously, Microsoft seems to have some decent support for languages,
> > in the sense that many are supported, including ones with big
> > character sets. Is Microsoft the best at this? Who knows?
> > They do certainly have the most money to put into "non-essentials".
>
> I know that some Japanese fonts (in unicode) wieght more than 50MB.
> But I've to disagree very strongly about the "non-essentials" part of your
> post. Just saying this proves that you probably never had to dealt with
> language differences.
> The majority of the people in the world don't speak english, or
> speak/read/write it very poorly.
But the majority of people educated enough to use computers do.
> Without translating software to other languages, a *lot* of people would be
> stuck without any way to access the computer.
> And you call *that* "non-essentials"???
--
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Ayende Rahien describes the Windows Experience
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 16:13:42 -0500
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> Or provide support and do something like:
>
> On the top of the window there is a list of words, right, one of them start
> with F, like fish (or fuck, as in "fuck you stupid moron!" as I often wish I
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> could've said), click on it, do you see something that start with O like on
> (or "Oh My God, what an idiot") Click it, now, go to drive C... What is C,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> well....
--
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 16:15:52 -0500
Curtis wrote:
>
> Ayende Rahien wrote...
> > > And so now suddenly you're suggesting that others should give a shit
> > > about languages they don't use, even though you just said previously
> > > that you see no reason to do that yourself.
> >
> > They shouldn't, they give shit about what *they* are using.
> > Got that?
>
> That's the practical approach. Why should I care that Windows supports
> Japanese? If it does, good for the Japanese, but I don't really care.
> It's for MS to care since they wish to market their OS to the Japanese.
>
> The same goes for the OS features. I only care about the features I wish
> to use and how they're implemented. I couldn't care less about the
> features a sysadmin would need. That's for MS and the sysadmins to care
> about.
>
Actually, EVERY user is affected by what sysadmin tools are available.
The better tools for the admins, the better your system will work FOR YOU.
This is why corporate Unix users are ALWAYS happier than corporate LoseDOS lusers.
--
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: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C++ is very alive!
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 16:22:20 -0500
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2000 12:35:41 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> >> However, I don't agree at all with the implication that "real
> >> engineers use C++".
> >
> >No such implication was made. I said "like" C++. This could be any
> >language who's langauge has the ability to represent a close resemblemce
> >to the CPU.
>
> There are CPUs that can execute Java bytecodes. There used to be
> (maybe still are) CPUs that can execute Lisp. Forth is pretty close to
> the machine and can do amazing things on small boxes, but I hope you
> don't advocate it for development of large systems by a cast of
> thousands.
Specialized CPUs are generally held to be failures. I worked on Lisp for
a little bit, it has been my experience that it is a disaster for large
multi-person projects.
>
> But that's beside the point. Many developers, who deserve the title of
> "software engineer" in that they have commensurate education and
> background, work in areas where it is not particularly helpful to be
> close to the CPU. Yes, we should all have some exposure to such
> languages, but there's no reason why they should be the first choice of
> working engineers.
Yes, but they should know the basics.
>
> During my EE training, I learned how to design an electric motor,
> something that I have never once done as a working engineer. If I have
> to control a motor with a computer, it is useful background, but
> designing motors isn't something that I normally do. Similarly, a
> working knowledge of computer architecture, registers, and algorithms
> are good background to have. This doesn't mean that you need to use
> C++ and assembler for every job or have information about Pentium
> registers on the tip of your tongue at all times.
Absolutely, lets look at your motor control stuff. You fully understand
how electric motors work. (A little mechanical engineering helps with
Motor control too) When writing software, I'm sure you drew on your
knowledge of how motors worked when you wrote your control software. PID
algorithms are difficult to model without a good understanding of the
whole system. (My favorite personal bug was an error counter wrap around
to zero.)
Take software design, having an understanding of how all this stuff
works, affects your decision making process during coding. Knowing how
qsort works, will change the way you do something, especially if know
the data will be mostly sorted.
>
> If for instance you are building browser applets, then that's downright
> counterproductive, since you can't know what CPU your client has. Even
> lots of regular business data processing isn't concerned so much with
> ultimate efficiency as with correctness, portability, and development
> time. People are costly, and often it makes economic sense to write a
> slower program faster.
Absolutely, I agree.
>
> Engineers are in the business of making tradeoffs. The implementation
> language is just one more factor to be considered during the design
> process.
Yes and no. Sometimes a software engineering job is to make impossible
software on impossible software deadlines. A lot of the time,
performance is a big part of the problem which needs to be solved.
>
> >If Java is is the right tool, perhaps, but it is rarely the correct
> >tool. There are environment that are very much easier in which to code.
>
> C++ not being one of them.
Yes, but languages like C++ and Java are two different animals. Java is
virtual environment. C++ compiles native code. They have completely
different uses. Using one where the other would be appropriate is a
mistake.
FYI, last I looked, C++ is a standard. Java is still a proprietary API
owned by Sun, as such, something like Perl or TCL would be a better
choice when an interpreted language fits the requirements.
I would not mind seeing Java-like features come to C++ in a standardized
form.
>
> --
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| To Whom You Are Speaking
> -| http://www.haucks.org/
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 21:35:03 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>mark wrote:
>>
>> In article <8vqtuv$56ngn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> >
>> >"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In article <8vploe$5eu5a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> >Actually, no, I couldn't.
>> >> >If I'm on win9x, I would've to go to Dos(real mode) and do it.
>> >> >Otherwise, I would get permission denied or some such error.
>> >>
>> >> You have to be root user in linux to achieve this, this means,
>> >> at the _very_ least you've made a specific decision to do
>> >> some admin task. Otherwise you'll get permission denied or
>> >> some such error.
>> >
>> >A lot of users are running as root.
>>
>> Which users are these? I'm not aware of any.
>>
>> >In nt/2000, you've to elevate your admin privileges in order to damage the
>> >registry, which is something an ignorant user simply is unlikely to do.
>>
>> *Who* has to do this - this would be the people running as admin
>> with maximum privileges all the time? Of course, if you go around
>> re-partitioning, then I can assume you run with max privileges all
>> the time.
>>
>> If your users are that ignorant, you don't give them root passwords.
>>
>> Nobody but myself has root passwords for my machines.
>>
>> You've removed the start of this thread, which was that rm -r
>> in /etc would need root privileges. You go on later in this to
>> say that /etc got fully and totally trashed in your experience, and
>> then later corrected that to say that it really happened because
>> you re-partitioned the machine.
>>
>> I'm glad you're not a linux advocate.
>> >
>> >
>> >> >"*Please Note*: A server-class installation will remove any existing
>> >> >partitions of any type on all existing hard drives of your system. All
>> >> >drives will be erased of all information and existing operating systems,
>> >> >regardless if they are Linux partitions or not."
>> >>
>> >> So if you know all this, why did you do it?
>> >
>> >Because I didn't know about it *at the time*
>> >Gee, it's so hard to rememer that?
>>
>> I don't know because I wasn't there, so I didn't have to remember
>> it. Was it hard to remember?
>>
>> Why were you installing a server setup on a multi-boot machine?
>> This is not sensible.
>
>What????
>
>you've never seen a webserver that had to do double duty as
>a LoseDOS95 box during the day?
>
>As I recall, you usually implement this setup on a laptop, too,
>so that you can run your webserver while on layover in the airport...
Oh, yeah - I remember now. Thanks for the heads up.
I must have got to enthralled with the thread and just
lost sight of all of this...
>
>
>>
>> >
>> >> >Read what I said, it won't mount on other systems.
>> >> >I tried the rescue disk method, and it failed.
>> >> >The hardisk was find, I repartitioned it and it worked, no bad sectors.
>> >>
>> >> What do you mean by 'if failed'. Rescue disks can't fail, they
>> >> just boot. That's what they do. If you can't boot the
>> >> machine you've bigger problems than you're claiming already.
>> >
>> >rescue disk to boot.
>> >fschk, on one occasion I stopped it after 5 hours (4GB HD, about 3/4 full).
>> >The second & third time fschk itself failed to fix the system.
>>
>> How did a rescue disk fail? They can't fail! They just boot. They
>> provide fresh copies of key filesystem management tools, often
>> statically linked, so that you can cp,mv, rm, fsck etc., work in
>> a ram based root filesystem etc etc.
>>
>> If you had to repartition the disk, then everything else was trashed
>> anyway. Repartitioning seems to happen to you a lot, but not
>> to anyone else - why might this be?
>>
>> Fsck does not take 5 hours on a 4Gb hd. That is a Windows speed
>> process. No-one sane would stop an fsck in mid-stream, unless
>> they don't know what they're doing, of course.
>>
>> >
>> >I think that the file table itself was screw up.
>> >
>> >
>> >> Why would you repartition? The only reason to do this is if
>> >> the partition table has been damaged on the machine. If that
>> >> has happened, it is nothing to do with the filesystem on
>> >> any partition at all. It will not prevent a rescue disk
>> >> from working. How did you know that the partition table had
>> >> been damaged? This just doesn't add up.
>> >
>> >Because I then had to reinstall, and I wanted to make some changes in the
>> >partition table for the new install.
>>
>> The only systems which need reinstalling are windows ones. You
>> don't reinstall linux ones because there is no advantage in
>> doing so. This is a windowsism.
>>
>> I think you need to learn a bit more about linux before making
>> these posts - your windows experiences simply do not have
>> analogues in the linux world.
>> >
>> >
>> >> > >> To make a complete directory structure unusable - no, even
>> >> >> >> Windows has never done that on me. Please provide some
>> >> >> >> credible evidence of these ludicrous claims.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >FAT & NTFS are indeed more robust than ext2 in this regard.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> FAT certainly is not.
>> >> >
>> >> >FAT has yet to take all my files away from a system crush or power down.
>> >>
>> >> For ext2 to do this, you'd have to have information about every
>> >> single file in a given area stored in the cache, which means you'd
>> >> have to be editing eg., every /etc file, at the same time.
>> >>
>> >> I just do not believe this. No-one in the right mind would
>> >> even consider doing something that risky.
>> >
>> >
>> >> >> NTFS I don't know much about.
>> >> >> Please provide evidence that this has happened.
>> >> >> Perhaps you could list the files in /etc which
>> >> >> were corrupted, that might help us here. (Although I
>> >> >> strongly suspect you can't because you don't know).
>> >> >
>> >> >You weren't paying attention.
>> >> >The whole FS vanished.
>> >>
>> >> Vanished???? This is isn't the X-files! Further back, you
>> >> were claiming that the partition table was damaged. Now
>> >> you're claiming that the filesystem vanished - what, every
>> >> single bit on the HD just 'went away'?
>> >
>> >The partition table was fine, I just didn't like the way it was set up, and
>> >changed it on reinstall.
>>
>> Then there was nothing wrong with /etc - you just re-partitioned the
>> disk. I wonder how you're going to trim this post to try to hide
>> the history to this one.
>>
>> Your claims go from sublime to ridiculous.
>>
>> >
>> >> You hope.
>> >
>> >No, I know.
>> >There is hardly anything that can curropt the registry.
>> >If you know of something, please provide some info about it.
>>
>> I would suggest you partitioning the machine for reasons known
>> only to yourself would be the largest risk to the registry in
>> any machine anywhere near you.
>>
>> >
>> >> >The almost sole reason that the registry become curropted is HD failure.
>> >>
>> >> HD failure is extremely rare compared to Win crashes in my experience.
>> >> In fact, I've never had a HD fail (although I do know several folk
>> >> who have).
>> >
>> >Lucky you.
>> >On my machine (home one)
>> >I'd three failures with WD 1.6 GB HD
>> >One with a 10 GB (Seaquest, I think)
>> >And one with a 15 GB from IBM
>>
>> What do you do to your machines which results in damaged partition
>> tables, random re-partitions 'cos you feel like it, destroyed...
>> this is silly.
>>
>> >
>> >Those are usually bad sectures, btw.
>> >In one case over 25% of the disk became unusable.
>> >Linux machines usually use older hardware, more prune to mistakes.
>> >
>> >BTW, what Win are you talking about?
>> >I've yet to have Win2k BSOD on me unless it's the screen saver.
>>
>> The screen saver BSODs?
>>
>> Linux machines use hardware which is as old as it is. They
>> do not usually use newer or older hardware than any other OS
>> installed at the same time. Another very silly statement.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >> >And, if we are already talking about it, the registry is not a single
>> >file,
>> >> >but several.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> Damage of 1 or 2 bytes to a monolithic binary file can cause
>> >> >> the whole file to be unparsable; to achieve the same effect
>> >> >> in /etc., you'd have to damage *every* file in there, near
>> >> >> the start of the file *and* each package would have to have
>> >> >> non-sensible defaults compiled in (which they don't).
>> >> >
>> >> >And as I've said, you are very unlikely to damage the registry short of
>> >> >damaging the HD itself.
>> >>
>> >> The registry is as likely to be damaged as any other file.
>> >
>> >How? Nothing can write to the registry save the OS.
>> >And the OS hadnle the registry in a very strict manner, so you can't corrupt
>> >it.
>> >
>>
>> Well, apparently you like to re-partition on a whim.
>>
>> The registry can be corrupted, the OS is not free of bugs (in
>> fact its renowned for not being so).
>>
>> The registry is as likely to be damaged as any other file.
>>
>> Mark
>
>
>--
>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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
