Linux-Advocacy Digest #626, Volume #30 Sun, 3 Dec 00 14:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Bill Vermillion)
Re: Linux is awful (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF! (Paul Wilson)
Re: how come Dell makes you buy Windows with all their PC's? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: how come Dell makes you buy Windows with all their PC's? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Red Hat drops Sparc support with new Linux version ("Chad C. Mulligan")
netbench on linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Patrick Raymond Hancox")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Jason Stefanovich)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF! (nf)
Re: Goodwin Acknowledges he's an idiot. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 16:12:47 GMT
In article <90dq5d$4u9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stuart Fox wrote:
>So how do they know the problem is with Windows? If they don't know
>why, they can't really say what the cause is can they?
>
>
This is the catch 22 you will never resolve. The boss believes
them as we have other servers which don't have MF running on
them which are blue screening.
My personal opinion is there shouldn't really be anything a
COBOL compiler could do which would blue screen a Windows Server.
It's not C nor C++, it's cobol here!
But, how do you really know here? Their UNIX customers who
are still using their old UNIX product have never complained
of servers going down. Further, back when I worked for HBOC
we wrote using 3234 MF for Win 95 and Win 3.11 products and
NT. We had suffered the same problems and the MF and Microsoft
support reps who serviced HBOC would disagree as to what was
causing the problems.
So your never going to get an answer out of anybody as you
are left with NO PROOF. It's CLOSED SOURCE.
Charlie
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 15:49:50 GMT
In article <d_lW5.4396$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tom Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8Q4W5.6538$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>> >> Donovan Rebbechi writes:
>>
>> >>> The movement keys are placed sensibly in vi (hjkl),
>>
>> >> Which is not intuitive. First-time vi users, if they try to do
>>
>> > Big fucking deal. NOTHING about computers is "intuitive"
>>
>> Incorrect; consider the power switch.
>You'd be surprised....
>Never underestimate the idiot factor.
Labeling the power switch 0 or 1 is definately not intuitive
to someone who has not been exposed to computer logic.
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 16:25:46 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Kenny Pearce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Eric Meyer wrote:
> >
> > > >They should really try doing a Windows install before complaining.
> > >
> > > I have many times. It may not be as easy as installing Office (or the
> like),
> > > but it's still a hundred times easier than linux.
> > >
> > > Em
> >
> > RedHat installation is really easy... at least as easy as win95/98
> > installation... I've never installed any other distros...
>
> Redhat custom install can be hard, because you need to repartition your HD.
> Server install should be avoided at all cost, RedHat somehow figured out if
> I choose to install a server, I have no need for information on my HDs. And
> so it deletes them happily without even asking my opinion about it.
> Never installed a workstation RH, can't say anything about it.
Just read the guides first.
--
Are you sure you want to read this message?
Click Okay to continue, and Cancel to okay
this dialog.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF!
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 16:33:27 GMT
In article <T9pW5.8795$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin wrote:
>Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
>> From mainframe land we found the
>>
>> VIC 20. A commordore based machine with 256K of ram I think.
>>
>> Then it was a VIC 64.
>
>I've never heard the VIC being described as a mainframe. It certainly never
>had 256k of RAM! The VIC 64 was a 64k machine, I can't remember how much
>the VIC 20 had.
>
>--
>Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>
NO, I commoth from mainframe land into the land of PC.
And I think your right. The 64 had 64K and the Vic 20 had? 2k???
I really don't remember. That was 20 years ago.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 16:38:55 GMT
In article <kAnW5.4399$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sat, 02 Dec 2000 18:38:26 -0500, Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >well to be honest the legal system never thought we would have such a
>> >crybaby loser like we have with Gore so b/c of him we are having a 30
>> >day election instead of a 1 day election with some votes counted 5 times
>> >and the other 95% counted once.
>>
>> Gore did win the popular vote nationally, so your man Bush was really
>> the minority choice. If the tables were turned, would you be telling
>> Bush to concede or would you be insisting that he's only taking
>> advantage of the options available and saying that the electoral
>> college system needs to be thrown out?
>
><soapbox>
>
>Actually, Republicans wouldn't have allowed Bush to follow this course.
>They're not stupid. What Gore is doing now is damaging a party already
>banged-up by Clinton. How the hell else, in this strong economy, could the
>election have even been close? What Gore's doing now is adding more nails
>to the Democratic coffin. I used to be a STAUNCH Democrat, until around
>1993. The Democratic party, now, isn't the party I used to support. Their
>idiotic post-election behavior just re-enforces that decision. The longer it
>goes on, the less viable the party becomes. A smart Democratic party would
>have gracefully bowed out, allowed the Republicans to have a legitimately
>questionable four year turn at the helm, then come back and clean house in
>2004. As it stands, they're putting 2002 senate races in jeopardy. Mark my
>words, the longer this goes on, the more seats they'll lose. Now, any
>efforts by them to tie up the senate to counter Bush proposals will appear
>as more sour grapes. In 2004, they're going to nominate Hillary Clinton.
>Just watch. It will be an unmitigated disaster!
>
>IDIOTS!
>
></soapbox>
>
>--
>Tom Wilson
>A Computer Programmer who wishes he'd chosen another vocation.
There will be no worry about this. When the emporer takes control
he will disband the imperial senate!
I'll throw out my political views now. Why not.
I think Gore and Bush need to leave. I would like 2 actual candidates
and I don't think much of either one of them.
Why is it Mc Cain, a vietnam POW, drank urine to stay alive, is
rejected because he's a liberal/republican. What rubbish.
And Gore/Clinton, do I really need to type anything here?
Why do the democrats always pick the most idiotic freak candidates
they can find? Why?
And I agree with your comments. The Democrats haven't supported
the middle class in 20 or more years.
We have become a nation of extremist parties.
You are either extreme rightwing or your extreme leftwing and
the middle ground where most of us stand is not being represented.
This in itself is an extremely dangerous thing.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Paul Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF!
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 11:01:17 -0600
Charlie Ebert wrote on Sun, 03 Dec 2000 04:01:52 GMT in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> The last thread I started concerning the current OS
> your using is very interesting reading and it's
> still getting attention.
>
> I thought it would be interesting reading and
> refreshing to see your PC history's revealed here.
>
> So from the time you first got any kind of PC forward,
> SOUND OFF.
Here's my list:
1) Sinclair ZX Spectrum 48k
A little all-in-one thing that booted to a BASIC prompt and loaded apps
from cassette at 300 baud. I got that when I was about 6 or 7. I loved that
thing and still have an emulator under Linux for it.
2) Sinclair ZX Spectrum 128k +3
Similar to the first one, except it had 128K of RAM and a built-in
proprietary floppy drive.
3) PC clone. Made by Olivetti. Dual 3.5" floppy drives, no HDD, 512K RAM,
booted to DOS 3.0 from floppy. CGA monitor. My favorite game on it was "The
Magic Candle". If anyone knows where I can get a copy of this for PC, I'd
love to know...
4) Atari 1040 STE. I used it for gaming and MIDI only.
5) PC. P100 16MB RAM, 14.4k modem. Not a bad step up. Win95 on it and dual
boot to Slackware. I don't remember the release but it was kernel 1.2.13 I
think.
6) PC. PII 233, 128MB RAM, ISDN with Slackware/Win95.
7) AMD Athlon 500, 256MB RAM, DSL. RedHat 7. Current. :-)
Paul
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: how come Dell makes you buy Windows with all their PC's?
Date: 3 Dec 2000 17:06:06 GMT
On Sun, 03 Dec 2000 08:21:57 -0500, jtnews wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>I looked at aslab, trouble is, they're not really using the components
>I want, a Creative Soundblaster chip and an Intel or Nvidia graphics
>chip.
They will most probably offer you a machine anyway you want it, most
of the small shops will.
>While they offer an option for a Creative Soundblaster, you have to
>call-in.
>Hmm, I wonder why.
Why do you think ?
>higher than Dell. Going with Dell, I can get a PC for $678.
Yes, you can get a very very very very low end PC from Dell, but
such machines aren't a terribly good choice for running LInux, which
is why Dell and other manufacturers usually don't install Linux on
such machines.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: how come Dell makes you buy Windows with all their PC's?
Date: 3 Dec 2000 17:07:09 GMT
On Sun, 03 Dec 2000 07:27:59 -0500, jtnews wrote:
>Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> No, you said "How come Dell bundles Windows with every PC?"
>>
>> Answer. They don't. You are wrong.
>
>You're correct, the title should read,
>"How come Dell bundles Windows with all their *cheap* PC's?"
The answer would be "because Windows works on all their cheap PCs
and other operating systems do not."
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red Hat drops Sparc support with new Linux version
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 17:12:42 GMT
"Ed Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90d0i7$6tm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <DqlW5.38798$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Chad C. Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> >
> >> >Yeah, right a software company is afraid of hardware manufacturers????
> >> >
> >> You are the one who said that the hardware manufacturers, not me.
> >>
> >> So what does "driven by" but "not afraid of" mean ? What words
> >> should I have used ?
> >>
> >
> >How 'bout something that makes sense. Your claim that MS is afraid of
RAM
> >makers is ludicrous.
> >
> Now I see that you intend to keep ignoring that it was you who said
> Microsoft was "driven" by the hardware manufacturers not me.
Now your statements are made clear. To clarify your confusion I said the
upgrade cycles were driven by the hardware manufacturers not the software.
As a case in point Windows NT4 was originally released for 486 and Entry
level Pentium class machines. Business still upgraded these systems year
after year with no, that's right none, change in the software.
>
> Pretending that hardware costs are low enough to be ignored seem
> disingenuous to me.
>
In business depreciation happens.
> No wonder people label you a troll.
>
No one of any credibility.
> Sorry to to have thought otherwise.
>
Keep trying.
> --
> "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]
Subject: netbench on linux
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 17:41:45 GMT
Can anyone point me to the netbench controller for linux. I see
references to benchmark results against linux so I assume there is
a linux controller. I can only find the window98/NT version.
Thanks.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Patrick Raymond Hancox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Patrick Raymond Hancox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 09:54:52 -0800
Adam,
I'm curious, what service was crashing on these 200 NT servers. I really
can't recall a system that I've ever had to reboot in order to restart a
dead process and I would like to know why you had such bad luck. Your
comment about using the control panel kind of worries me, I hope you weren't
actually walking up to the console to verify and restart these services. It
sounds like you were not given proper training on managing NT /WIN2K systems
by the bank before being assigned the task. Sadly this is all to common.
Patrick
BTW, W2K has a service similar to inetd for starting, stopping, and
restarting other services. The ability to create escalation levels if a
process fails is quite helpful..
"Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90dr8a$b7q$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > False.
> > A properly configured Win2K has no problems staying up for as long as
you
> > like.
> > The only reason it's not up for years is because it's less than a year
in
> > the market.
>
> I have to disagree with you here. My 2 cents, from my experience.
>
> I've been involved with the set up of more than 200 NT Servers, about 5
2000
> Servers, and 5 Linux Servers. Most of the NT Servers were at a bank (I
was
> on their Y2K project).
> > Not 1 of the NT Servers was up more than 6 weeks. Actually, that's not
> true, one SQL Server remained up for 3 months but had to be moved. So I
> guess kudos for whomever set up that machine. Some of the rest of the
> machines had scheduled reboots anywhere from every night to every couple
of
> weeks. This was to prevent them crashing in the middle of the day. Most
of
> the time, they didn't crash, though, it's just that a service died and
> couldn't be restarted. I shook with fear everytime I clicked 'Stop' in
the
> Services Control Panel.
>
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 18:06:41 -0000
>
>That's because Windows is still CP/M at the core.
Unfortunately this is untrue - if it was CPM it wouldn't be so bad
but it is not true cpm but a thrown-together clone written as a
simple programming exercise hence the original name of
QDOS (quick and dirty operating system) until it was bought by
ms and they conned ibm into writing the utilities for it.
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 18:08:30 -0000
>Yes, because most people don't get to pick their own software at work.
>I get to pick some things, but I'm not the one that decided that
>specifications are to be written in Word. At home, where I pick all
>the software, I have no Windows.
>
You could always use openoffice and tell them it was written with word ;-)
------------------------------
From: Jason Stefanovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 18:05:52 GMT
Bill Vermillion wrote:
>
> In article <d_lW5.4396$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Tom Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:8Q4W5.6538$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>
> >> >> Donovan Rebbechi writes:
> >>
> >> >>> The movement keys are placed sensibly in vi (hjkl),
> >>
> >> >> Which is not intuitive. First-time vi users, if they try to do
> >>
> >> > Big fucking deal. NOTHING about computers is "intuitive"
> >>
> >> Incorrect; consider the power switch.
>
> >You'd be surprised....
> >Never underestimate the idiot factor.
>
> Labeling the power switch 0 or 1 is definately not intuitive
> to someone who has not been exposed to computer logic.
Gee, I wonder what Idiotic Big Machine is guilty of doing that.....
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 18:31:13 -0000
>> Are you really saying there's a version of windows on the market
>> which can be installed from a CD and does not need to be rebooted?
>
>No, nor there is any system that you can do it with.
>I was talking about removing & adding TCP/IP.
>
Not had much linux experience then have you - SUSE install CD either boots
into installer directly or starts installer from DOS with cd driver loaded.
Once
installed linux starts without reboot and almost anything can be
reconfigured
without a reboot (add and remove tcp/ip, change ip number, probably anything
else except upgrading kernel). Mandrake and other linuxes are almost the
same
except needing 1 reboot between installing linux and using it. Windows needs
at least 3 reboots just to install it then one for each minor configuration
change.
------------------------------
From: nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF!
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 13:02:42 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> VIC 20. A commordore based machine with 256K of ram I think.
>
Too funny! Try 2k!!! (Usable RAM!)
> Then it was a VIC 64.
This was simply called the Commodore 64. It had (gasp) 64k RAM!
>
> Radio Shack Color computer.
This was my first computer at home. It came with a whopping 16k
initially. (I used a TRS-80 Mod 1 and Apple II+ at school)
I loved the "coco". It eventually came out with an OS called OS-9 (by
Microware). Multitasking & all!
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Goodwin Acknowledges he's an idiot.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 18:58:09 +0000
sandrews wrote:
> yah right, I have been running GNOME with all the goodies for 2 years
> now and I have yet to have anything GNOME related core. I haven't had
> any Linux app core in over a year. Now what dol the wintrolls have to
> say now?
Today whilst I was copy 1GByte of data from a locally mounted drive to an
NFS mounted drive, KDE + X locked up totally. CTRL+ALT+F12 was dead, so I
tried TELNET. Unfortunately, I don't have that service running, so I
rebooted.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 19:00:08 +0000
Avinash Meetoo wrote:
> have you really installed Win 98 SE AFTER having installed Linux ? And
> if yes, was that something easy to do ?
Yes, I had no problems. I reinstalled Windows recently, and then reloaded
LILO.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 19:02:38 +0000
H Dziardziel wrote:
> Believe most "users" will try to install a second o/s on the same hard
> drive the original is on already, and they probably only have one hdd.
> Dos/win proper will install on any partition or drive but the booting
> defaults to only the first primary on the first drive. Only clever
> boot managers, software or people, can work around this- not "normal
> users".
That's what System Commander (costs money) or LILO (free) will do for you.
> Even two hdd's with the bootable first already with a non-ms
> o/s mean major reconstruction of the boot process and perhaps even
> hardware reconnections etc., all not a normal user procedure. So, I
> agree Linux is the easier addition but by no means a snap either- no
> multi o/s installation would be.
It's still not that hard.
> Regretfully some of the new Linux distributions also try to take over
> hardrives be default at installation , so also, not "normal user"
> friendly if there is only one drive for the system.
Yes, Linux Mandrake 7.0 certainly had problems with my setup. Can't say the
same for 7.2, seemed to be real easy.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 19:04:21 +0000
kiwiunixman wrote:
> When comparing Linux to Windows, the tools that are included definately
> beats the ones included with Windows 2000, for example, the media play
> in Winblow$, why does it take so bloody long for it too load? Why once
> it has downloaded a codec, then later re-downloads the same one again
> when you use another site? Compare those problem's to my happy
> experience with KDE2 Media Player, Compact, easy to use, fast and very
> stable, something Microsoft should learn about.
Media Player 7 has "skins", i.e. Window regions, and has an embedded
Internet Explorer in it, that's probably why its so slow to load.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 19:09:01 +0000
I'm surprised you went to Windows for COBOL, it's not exactly a well known
language on that platform (though I could be wrong!). Why didn't you stay
with something that is known to have a good COBOL compiler?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
