Linux-Advocacy Digest #584, Volume #30 Fri, 1 Dec 00 04:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Goodwin Acknowledges he's an idiot. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Whistler review. (Ed Allen)
Re: Red Hat drops Sparc support with new Linux version (Ed Allen)
Re: Things I have noticed................ (kiwiunixman)
Re: Linux is awful ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Whistler review. (kiwiunixman)
Re: Netscape review. (Alan Baker)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Goodwin Acknowledges he's an idiot.
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 07:58:15 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Perry Pip wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Nov 2000 22:32:06 +0000,
>Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>down into the
>>muck they go! Out come the insults! YEEHAA!!
>>
>
>You get insults because you whine like a baby. Stop whining, and
>people will stop insulting you.
>
>
Frankly, I don't think Wintrolls should cruise COLA
either as it seems most people reading thru the lists
only develop an interest in the Linux OS and begin
to experiment.
I have people write me and want help installing
Linux. They decide to experiment from the stuff
they read on here.
They were bitching about how poorly Windows ran
back in the 80's, early 90'S.
Today they bitch about Linux and all they
seem to be doing is stirring up the Linux
furver.
And that's it.
They are actually accomplishing the reverse
of what they intended to accomplish.
Now,
In Pete's case and other Windows
programmers I've met, they are against
the GNU/GPL as they feel it will eliminate
their lively hood.
What WILL happen is the people who write windows
programs for sell will disappear from society.
That path is set and is irreversable now.
What the computer programmer of tommorrow will
be doing for a living is expanding service
companies rolls in technologies such as
WEB appliances, Order Entry Software,
and other support functions which are specialized
to individual business's.
GENERIC features which are shared by many
companies will be written and released
via the GPL back into the code base
for sharing on the global level.
I submit the various companies already
contracted to do just that, such as
GNOME and KDE for large examples, or
you could look at Apple and their
CVS committe rights to FreeBSD.
Generic work will become global
sharing, sales of software will
end, and programmers will work
to specialize/customize on a company
by company basis.
If anything ever got sold on a CD
in the future in the way of a NEW
application it would truely have
to be NEW and not just the same
old bunch of Word Processors,
Spreadsheets or databases.
The GPL situation guarantees
future software develpment will
be for exciting products which do
not currently exist.
The GNU/GPL has been around enough
and sucessful enough the question
of Windows future demise is
assured.
It's already too late for the
Windows programmer.
He's a thing from the last century.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 07:59:01 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said kiwiunixman in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 29 Nov 2000 04:53:23
>>their work has upgraded, hence the new suite file types are not
>>compatible with the previous release...could all this bloatware be a big
>>a conspiracy theory....Microsoft colluding with Hard disk, memory and
>>processor manufacturers. :) so that they (hardware manufacturers) can
>>sell more of their products.
>
>No, I don't think so. There's no collusion, just monopoly.
>
I think that you supposing Microsoft is producing bloated code to
benefit hardware vendors is ignoring an explanation which explains
Microsoft behavior depending solely on their greed.(At the risk of
assigning too much animalistic intent to a corporation)
Software does not wear out so once a consumer has purchased what
he needs to accomplish the tasks desired he has no incentive to buy
that same software again as long as the hardware holds up.
So lack of repeat sales would reduce Microsoft revenues drastically
but this has not happened. Now comes the preload monopoly which
makes sure that even people who already own their desired software
get charged for the most recent Microsoft OS+Apps bundle whenever a
new machine is purchased even if they will be running only Linux or
BSD programs on it.
So now they have a guaranteed income as long as people buy new
machines without ever needing to do anything more. It might coast
along on momentum alone for years but if people could be
"encouraged" to purchase a new machine before the old one wears out
then Microsoft would get more money from them in a given amount of
time.
"Encouragement" can be induced by altering either the OS or the Apps,
or both to be slightly less interoperable with their respective
older versions in each upgrade/release cycle.
But that would be too obvious. Even Wilbur WWFan could recognize a
tie that direct so in addition new features are added, whole
sections of functioning code are rewritten to use as many resources
as possible without slowing them down too much on todays hottest
hardware, about 10%, below the old routine routine on the older hardware.
The reason for consuming more resources is to wear that damn
hardware out faster. Keep that disk busy seeking back and forth
endlessly, fill ever larger amounts of RAM with "highly demanded
features" that Wilbur has no clue even exist, induce peripheral
manufactures, in the name of production cost reduction, to use the
main CPU for even trivial functions, more processing drain means
that the CPU fan will have to work harder and wear out faster and
every time it falters the CPU gets another cycle of temperature
overload, even Silicon can't take that forever.
So Wilbur learns, subconsciously, that the ever more frequent
misbehaviors quiet down for at least a year every time he buys a new
machine. After a while he gets a new one every year. Problem
solved.
Susie Smart doesn't get a new machine so often. She wipes the disk
and installs the older software instead. It flies on the new
hardware so she can run the less stressful software for an even
longer time before her new machine wears out.
But she does have to interact with the Wilburs. Early on she can
learn what is needed to be successful fairly quickly but as time
goes on and more changes appear in the OS and the Apps fewer work
arounds function with fewer Wilburs, almost as if Microsoft had
people reading the help groups and changing the code to make the old
solutions stop working.
Microsoft convinces the peripheral vendors, in the interest of cost
savings, not to port the drivers for their new hardware to any older
OS versions. They know that recompiling well written drivers is not
really costly of course but not going along with the lie might lead
to their removal from next years approved hardware list. Much
better to keep Microsoft happy.
After a while the burden of finding new work arounds and drivers for
the older software gets to be too much and she buys a new machine and
throws away the old, faster, software.
This time things have changed. Only OEMs get installation media,
she gets a "recovery CD" which will only install on this years model
so she will become a Wilbur pretty soon.
So, there is my explanation of why Microsoft writes software the way
it does. No conspiracy, except silence by vendors who benefit from
silence and would lose business if they spoke up, needed.
How far off do you think I am ?
--
"Whether you think their witnesses are credible or non-credible;
they've admitted monopoly power, they've admitted raising prices to hurt
consumers, they've admitted depriving consumers of choice...
-DAVID BOIES, US Department of Justice
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red Hat drops Sparc support with new Linux version
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 07:59:02 GMT
In article <3a26e716$0$3654$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-3937182.html?pt.ms..feed.ne_home
>
>I can't blame them, lack of interest is why MS dropped support for other
>chips in W2K.
>
No, they dropped the more powerful CPUs because NT could not be
rewritten to both stress those systems and not slow to a crawl on
the contemporaneous Intel CPUs.
They need to stress the hardware to drive people toward the upgrade
treadmill, as I explained in another thread.
They tried, and failed, so withdrawing support is the best way of
keeping the forced upgrade scam from being exposed.
--
"Whether you think their witnesses are credible or non-credible;
they've admitted monopoly power, they've admitted raising prices to hurt
consumers, they've admitted depriving consumers of choice...
-DAVID BOIES, US Department of Justice
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Things I have noticed................
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 08:06:15 GMT
I'd say that Linux would be a Volks Wagon Beatle (the original) because
it is small, compact, cheap to run and built to last. Windows however
is like a Lada (or Skoda, take ya pick), ugly on the outside, ugly
inside, unreliable, and boy, do they rust!
kiwiunixman
mark wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, kiwiunixman wrote:
>
>> The concept about the "desktop", IMHO, the OS should be a very thin layer of
>> code in a computer, hence, should not be the main focus and domanant part of
>> the computer (I think 650MB is pretty dominant in the case of Windows 2000).
>> Linux is not a hard OS to master, it is simply a different way of doing
>> something, it's like going from driving a Mini Cooper to a Log Truck,
>> fundimentally, both work the same way, in practice, a little learning is
>> needed to drive the truck.
>
>
> Okay, but I'd tend to see the mini cooper as the linux, and the slow,
> lumbering, constricting, hard to manoeuvre, heavy on gas truck as Win2k.
>
>
>> kiwiunixman
>>
>> James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:3a22a933$0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>> "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>
>>>> Things I have noticed from my own experience and from reply's to this
>>>
>> news
>>
>>>> group:
>>>>
>>>> 1. When wintel users argue a topic and they find that they getting
>>>
>> beaten,
>>
>>>> they bring out the old GUI argument, the perfect example of this is in
>>>
>> the
>>
>>>> whistler post, to sum it up, "Fuck the quality, what about the pretty
>>>> colours", the amount of time Microsoft spends on the GUI, Bill Gates
>>>
>> might
>>
>>>> as well be a fashion designer, "Bill Gates Summer Fashion Collection",
>>>
>>> could
>>>
>>>> you imagine an interview with Bill Gates (fashion designer), "this new
>>>> summer collection is a combination of colour and patterns to compliment
>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>> summer atmosphere, and as normal, we have stuck to the main selling
>>>> principle, "More colour, less quality" ".
>>>>
>>>> This conclusion made from the "whistler" post by Ayende Rahien.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2. From who I know in the Wintel world, Wintel users tend to have the
>>>
>>> worst
>>>
>>>> taste in fashion and music. Two of them could not co-ordinate colours
>>>
>> and
>>
>>>> patterns if their life depended on it :) God, music, listening to
>>>
>> rubbish
>>
>>>> such as Five, Backstreet Boys, S-Club and Boy Zone. You are probably
>>>> saying, "What has fashion and music un-cordination have to do with
>>>
>> OS's",
>>
>>>> everything! This argument is no better than the GUI argument that gets
>>>
>>> used
>>>
>>>> by wintel users.
>>>>
>>>> This conclusion made from analysing Wintel user responses and people at
>>>> university.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3. So-called ex-linux users using the excuse, "it is too hard" as an
>>>
>>> excuse
>>>
>>>> for not continuing to use Linux. Down the road at my local book store
>>>
>>> there
>>>
>>>> were hundreds of books, from linux for beginners up to programming linux
>>>
>>> on
>>>
>>>> servers, so for around $NZ99.95 (incl. GST) a user can get a book and a
>>>> CD-ROM giving a complete guide on how to use Linux . Why should they
>>>
>> read
>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>> book? well, isn't reading a book better than looking at the idiot box
>>>> (television) at night.
>>>>
>>>> This conclusion reached from all the posts from Claire Lynn (now known
>>>
>> as
>>
>>>> Sir)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 4. The so-called UNIX crushing NT4 never achieved what it set out to do,
>>>
>>> it
>>>
>>>> fact, it re-enforced the need to stick with UNIX, so in some respects,
>>>
>> NT4
>>
>>>> was a god send for companys such as Sun Microsystems and SGI (Server
>>>> Division) which gave them something to mock and use as a benchmark to
>>>
>>> prove
>>>
>>>> their system reliability.
>>>>
>>>> This conclusion reached from market information and Chad's conviction
>>>
>> that
>>
>>>> NT4 is better than UNIX.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 5. Wintel users who post here tend to have 6 months experience and can
>>>
>>> click
>>>
>>>> on the start button, hence, by Microsoft definition, they are an expert
>>>> computer user. I, however started off using an Amiga 500, whilst at the
>>>
>>> same
>>>
>>>> time I also taught my self how to program on a BBC-Micro with 32K mem,
>>>
>>> then
>>>
>>>> I gradually moved on to a Pentium 75 with 8MB Ram (later upgraded to
>>>
>>> 40MB),
>>>
>>>> used Windows 95a for around 1 year, got pissed off and moved onto Redhat
>>>> Linux 5.2, then upgraded my machine to a Pentium 200MMX with 64MB Ram,
>>>> installed SuSE Linux 6.0. About a year ago I upgraded to a Pentium 550e
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>> SuSE Linux 7.0 Professional, and here I am, next year I plan to either
>>>> upgrade to a SGI O2 workstation or SUN Ultra Sparc Workstation. Compare
>>>
>>> that
>>>
>>>> time line to the typical wintel poster here with the typical story of,
>>>
>> "I
>>
>>>> bought a computer, I must be a computer expert" mentality.
>>>
>>> Enough bragging! Some windows users here have real qualifications and
>>> experience of computers, such as building embedded systems way back in the
>>> early 80's using the intel 8086 ICE (that is "in circuit emulator"). And
>>> writing large programs in assembler, later PL/M 86.
>>> Personally, I have used virtually all programming languages in my early
>>> engineering years, including the nice Modula-2 (which I prefer to C/C++).
>>> Before that I started on programming the Motorola 6800 in assembler. I
>>
>> even
>>
>>> used to write maths programs for my HP41CV. I have had more computers
>>
>> than
>>
>>> I care to remember, and currently have about (there may be more in the
>>> storeroom) 4 (P3/733 256MB, P/233 MMX, Cyrix 150, 486) at home, another 2
>>
>> at
>>
>>> work (Compaq EN P3/733 256MB, Dell P2/350). Plus an oldish laptop (Compaq
>>> Armada).
>>> Geez! Just because you have had a few machines you think you are now
>>> "qualified" to critisize others who you don't even know.
>>>
>>> What you guys don't realize is that nobody (> 99%) wants a difficult
>>> desktop. Why make something more difficult than it has to be? The goal
>>
>> is
>>
>>> to use the desktop to access programs to get real work done. The object
>>
>> is
>>
>>> *not* the desktop.
>>> Just because you're a mechanic doesn't mean a jalopy will suit you best.
>>
>> To
>>
>>> make the driver not need, or be, a mechanic *is* what is really hard to
>>> achieve. To my delight, Mandrake/KDE is starting to achieve this (see my
>>> previous post).
>>>
>>>
>>>> This conclusion reached by analysising alf-assed efforts to rebuke the
>>>> superior technology behind Linux.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 6. When a wintel user get defeated by carefully phrased responses, they
>>>> change their names, aka Claire Lynn/Chad/ and any other names you care
>>>
>> to
>>
>>>> add.
>>>>
>>>> This conclusion reached by analysing alf-assed efforts to rebuke the
>>>> superior technology behind Linux/UNIX.
>>>>
>>>> kiwiunixman
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 08:05:02 GMT
I can't really see the point of a MS person posting in A Linux message
board, talking how our wonderful penguins are a bunch o' crap, and NOT expect
to get reamed. And then complain bout it. Hell, I've posted in the MS board
bout how much Windoze sucks, but I was TRYING to get a response outta those
dull geeks. And I steered clear o that board for a while. Gotta make life
interesting. And starting a fight is fun. But, that was months ago I did
that. Maybe I should start another? Lets take a poll. I say we ALL go to the
Windoze boards and start fights, each of us posting in different posts.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 07:37:13 GMT
"Marc Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2000 01:45:00 GMT, Chad Mulligan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >>
> >> > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >
> >> > > But it really is very simple to install wine. If you can't do it,
> >then
> >> > you
> >> > > have no brain:
> >> > >
> >> > > rpm -Uvh wine*.rpm
> >> >
> >> > This assumes you use a distribution that supports RPM, not all do.
> >> >
> >>
> >> The other major choice is deb. Just get the deb package and install.
It
> >is
> >> easy.
> >
> >Also an assumption. Ever looked at Slackware????
> >
>
> Oh, yeah, Slackware is a real bitch :-)
>
> download source tarball. Then issue the following commands:
>
> tar xzvf win<tab><return>
> cd win<tab><return>
> ./configure
> make
> su
> make install
>
> Wine is now installed. Custom the .winerc as needed. (very simple)
>
> Compare this to installing any flavor of Windows, as far as steps
> or configuration. <grin>
>
winnt32 [/s:sourcepath] [/tempdrive:drive_letter]
[/unattend[num]:[answer_file]]
any questions. BTW depending on the contents of the answer file
applications can also be installed. This will work both locally and
remotely.
Any questions.
> Any questions?
>
>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > man wine.conf
> >> > >
> >> > > follow the instructions to adjust wine.conf for your local
> >environment.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Taking about a week and several volumes of typing.
> >> >
> >>
>
> Less typing then registering any Windows payware.
>
>
>
> >> I take it you have never installed wine. wine comes with a base
wine.conf
> >> file that typically only requires a one line change to specify where
your
> >> Windows C drive is located, if even that.
> >>
> >
> >Correct, why emulate something that works well enough on it's own.
> >
>
> Because I can run all those goofy .exe email attachments safely
> via Wine on my Slackpad (Thinkpad w/ Slackware 7.1)?
>
> Because I can run Vantive (customer support software) via Wine
> on my Slackpad?
>
> And still run all the Linux stuff that I use?
>
> Which frees up my NT box for Quake 2. (did I say that out loud?)
>
> Just 'cause, I guess.
>
> >> Gary
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Marc A. Richter I&R Deployed Support
>
>
>
>
>
> The contents of this message express only the sender's opinion.
> This message does not necessarily reflect the policy or views of
> my employer, Merck & Co., Inc. All responsibility for the
statements
> made in this Usenet posting resides solely and completely with the
> sender.
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 08:21:28 GMT
ok, it did need to reboot, however under windows, the system has to be
totally rebooted, which is slower than the suse method.
kiwiunixman
Steve Mading wrote:
> kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Install SuSE Linux 7, doesn't totally reboot the computer, only the
> : kernel, at the end of the installation, it goes directly to the login
> : screen. So, it can be done!
>
> *blink*, *blink* - errm - rebooting the kernel requires that all
> the processes quit, and then it has to restart init, and everything
> under it. That *is* a total reboot of the OS. The only thing
> skipped is the BIOS messages that preceed the OS boot.
------------------------------
From: Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Netscape review.
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 08:20:53 GMT
Get a newsreader that posts properly, Bob.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, bob_more
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>spicerun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chad Myers wrote:
> When you're
>done smoking, mark, would you come down and
> join the rest of the real
>world?
How would you know what is in the real world when you are living
>exclusively in a
Bill Gates World?
> Is MS is a monopoly, then why are
>Mac and Linux doing so
> well.
Yep, you're obvious an MS attorney who
>used this statement in court.....Along
with trying to tell us that
>Netscape/AOL could merge now and become a big
company. What your
>selective memory won't let you remember is that until MS was
in court,
>nobody had a shot at the market.....Merchants didn't dare let anything
not
>MS around on their shelves or in their business for fear of MS
>retaliation.
While MS was in court, Merchants could finally allow
>competitors around them
knowing that if MS retaliated, MS would be
>answering for that in court.
As far as Mac doing so well, I think it is a
>combination of putting out a better
product and OS, and MS shooting
>themselves enough in the foot in the court trial
enough that several users
>decided it might be time to try the competition. A Mac
advocate could
>address this issue much better then myself.
As far as Linux doing well,
>MS hasn't been a real factor in how well it does....A
lot of people found
>shortcomings in Windows for years, searched for alternatives,
and started
>using Linux (or any other Free Unix OS). The number of people
finding
>Linux/Free Unixes have been increasing. The MS effect on Linux has been
>really interesting since with Win98, Win2K, and the Court Trial, MS have
>shot
themselves in the foot worse than anybody would have ever
>thought....and Linux
suddenly have record number of people trying Linux to
>get off that unreliable MS
OS.
> You and your kind repeatedly tell us how
>wonderful
> Linux or the MacOS is doing and how it's much better than
>
>any OS MS ever put out.
You and your kind have been pushing MShaft on
>Amiga, Atari, Commodore, and Apple
users for year. In fact you Wintrolls
>have been pushing MS on anything not-MS
related. Were you really so
>stupid as to believe there wouldn't be a backlash
once it was found out
>what liars/FUD spreaders you guys were? And even today,
you represent
>your type well. Here you are again advocating (actually beyond
>advocating) Windows in other newsgroups not concerned or caring about
>Windows.
You Wintrolls obviously think that you own all of these
>newsgroups. Welcome to
the backlash where you find you own nothing! It
>is also obvious that you
Wintrolls apparently can't navigate the internet
>well enough to advocate windows
in a windows newsgroup.
So please don't
>give us a lecture on 'our kind'. Your kind is the worst kind
ever in the
>computer world.
> What then, if MS has a monopoly on OS software, is
>Linux?
Linux is a pain in MS's side since MS can't get Linux off the
>market or out of
distribution like they can with OSes produced by a
>central company that can be
bought up or run out of business. Linux
>happens to be much more stable,
reliable, and, even, robust than Windows
>available on many more platforms that MS
ever considered.
> Or MacOS for
>that matter?
With the advent of OSX, a contender to MS that will probably
>be as stable as the
other Free Unices......MacOS has a good chance to
>overtake MS.
> -Chad
Actually, more of a 'hanging chad'
I agree with
>some of what you say, As far as the mickeysoft die hards go in
lieu of the
>DOJ affair, I have to laugh. They sit back and look all innocent
about the
>fact that they mediocre products and predatory business practices
have
>come due, and they are always pushing their ware down anyone else's
>throats with this "we're the onlt REAL game in town" mentality I think,
>because
they want to put aside their own insecurities.
Mac (Although
>honestly, I dont care much for the platform), stands on a loyal
user base
>that doesnt seem likely to change soon. And Unix/Linux grew out of
their
>own merits long before windows and the MS platform ultimately isnt a
>factor in it's history, the MS'ers have a hard time seeing past the
>desktop.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the
bottom of that cupboard."
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
