Linux-Advocacy Digest #716, Volume #30 Thu, 7 Dec 00 13:13:03 EST
Contents:
DHCP problems ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows review ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: OS Installation Help? ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: Microsoft Light Bulb Part 2 ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: Linux is awful ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux is awful ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux is awful (WorLord)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows review (Ian Davey)
Re: Linux is awful (WorLord)
Microsoft , makers of what ? ("Alan Parker")
Re: Linux is awful (WorLord)
Re: Microsoft , makers of what ? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: DHCP problems
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 16:19:47 GMT
Hi.
I am using a DHCP based Internet service, via cable. My ISP tells me
that the DHCP server will give me all the DNS, IP and such information
when it connects to the server.
The problem is that it just won't connect! On boot, linux tells me
that "eth0 connecting to dhcpd failed..". But I don't know why!
Linux automatically finds my networking card (it's a rt18139(A/B/C) but
it automatically selects the rtl8139-module for me) so that might not
be the problem. Here's my setup:
Config mode: Dhcp
IP: <empty>
Network mask: 255.255.255.0
Hostname + domain: localhost.localdomain
Primary name + domain: localhost.localdomain
HTTP proxy: <empty>
FTP proxy: <empty>
Kernel module: rtl8139
Net device: eth0
(Reply _only_ via email, thanks!)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 16:51:03 GMT
"Goldhammer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:sPDX5.64153$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 07 Dec 2000 02:54:55 GMT, Kelsey Bjarnason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> >Grandpappy could care less about the command line. From the GUI, he can
do
> >all his work, he can copy, rename, print, delete, backup and restore
files,
> >he can browse the web, he can get e-mail and news, he can do every single
> >task he actually needs to do. So what benefit is there in learning the
> >command line for him?
>
>
> What are you trying to prove with this argument?
The original quote I was responding to: "But even if you're a new user, it's
still worth taking the time to learn how to use the command line."
Now, what benefit does the command line offer Grandpappy, as a new user?
Answer: it doesn't do a thing for him that he isn't already doing, via the
GUI, in a manner he's comfortable with, so there is absolutely no reason
whatsoever for him to learn it. Therefore the original statement is
incorrect as stated; were it limited to a smaller subset of new users, such
as those intending to be programmers, sysadmins, and so forth, perhaps it
would be correct.
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[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: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 16:58:52 GMT
[snips]
"Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90oc6t$1rp9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "That isn't good".
>
> Allow me to illustrate:
>
> 200 servers, max 6 weeks up time = average of 4.76 servers crashing daily
> (under the best conditions). Shall we examine the cost in manpower to
work
> with those servers? The cost in lost productivity?
Well, I don't know where you get the 6 weeks figure from, nor does it state
_why_ the machines are going down after 6 weeks. Hardware failures? Or do
they simply need to be rebooted? If the latter, then the total manpower
necessary to cope with the situation(assuming Win2K) is about 5 seconds per
box[1], or less than a minute per day - hardly a big issue on that score.
Further, when running 200 servers, its very likely there's some redundancy
happening, so you're probably not losing any productivity, either. All in
all, pretty much a non-issue... except that your machines should _not_ be
going down that often; ours don't.
[1] The time it takes to signal the box to restart. No need to log on after
the restart, ya know.
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS Installation Help?
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 17:02:07 GMT
"JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:22:54 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >Can't find the dimensions my suppliers website, however, I would say it
> >would be 4-5cm high.
>
> It pisses me off when everyone here goes on about how much RAM they've
> got and how big their hard disks are and how good their operating
> systems are etc.
>
> They should trying using Windows 98SE on 28MB of RAM on a 3GB hard
> disk.
Used to use it in 16Mb and a 1.6Gb drive. It is kinda cramped, wot? :)
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Light Bulb Part 2
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 17:08:21 GMT
[snips]
"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:YP9X5.677$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> A buddy of mine is doing some Windows programming today.
>
> Hack/Crash/Reboot
> Hack/Crash/Reboot
>
> I emailed your little diatribe to him and he told me to tell you to fuck
> off.
>
>
> I think he liked it ;)
Funny; I do Windows development regularly, and I don't have that problem.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:15:56 -0600
"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:njJX5.2299$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > Just as I thought. You don't know what it means.
> >
> > System Resources is an average of the three 64K system heaps in 16 bit
> > Windows. These are used for GDI handles, Menu handles, global 16 bit
> memory
> > handles, etc.. They have nothing to do with the first 640k.
> >
> > Further, being low on resources does not slow your system down. The
only
> > negative aspect that these resources are capable of producings is if you
> run
> > out of them completely, in which case windows will fail to open and a
few
> > other peculiarities.
>
> Some software, even MS's own software, fails to release GDI handles and
that
> fragments the crap out of your memory pool. Legacy Win16 apps are
> particularly bad about it. It indeed can slow things down over time. Kept
up
> long enough, one of those peculiarites is a completely schizo box that can
> and will crash with a boom. Even NT boxes. One of my projects did that
very
> thing until I tracked down the offending code.The problem behavior went
away
> after I corrected it.
The 3 system heaps in 9x are kept in non-pageable memory. Their maximum
size is 64K. What you're suggesting is just not possible. If the heaps
were huge and pageable, then larger allocations and management would be an
issue, but 64K, no matter how fragmented is virtualy instantaneous.
NT generally doesn't have the problem with running out of resources (It's
possible, but HIGHLY unlikely. You would need to be creating new resources
at a tremendous rate to run out of the 2GB system heaps.)
> Another thing I found is that the less you rely on MFC, the better your
> application's performance and uptime.
That's simply not true. There are gotcha's to using MFC that, if you're
aware of them, don't cause any problems. For instance, if a resource (such
as a bitmap or pen) is selected into a DC when the MFC wrapper goes out of
scope, it won't delete the resource and you'll have a leak. MFC does have a
few leaks, but they are one-time leaks and fairly small, thus they do not
grow and are taken care of by the OS when it exits.
If you use a tool like Purify (which is available for Unix as well) you can
easily prevent your apps from having resource problems.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[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: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:17:37 -0600
"Adam Short" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:f4KX5.9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> From what I've read here, some people seem to be running completely
> different versions of Windows to anything I've ever come across. MY
Win98SE
> does exactly what Jerry says w/r to the registry. MY Win98SE install prog
> formats the Windows partition if it finds a FAT32 partition with no
> filesystem actually written to it, regardless of what I want it to do.
You're making no sense here. In order for a partition to be FAT32, it must
have a filesystem since FAT32 *IS* a filesystem. If there's no filesystem,
it's unformated and has no type.
------------------------------
From: WorLord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 09:17:48 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Taken from the obscure and questionable writings of "Kelsey Bjarnason"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
>"WorLord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
~ Universal Bullshit-to-English Translation Engine: ONLINE ~
>Hey, this is *Linux* - the be-all and end-all of OSen, right?
"I cannot read, and I feel comfortable crying about my illiteracy in
public."
>Hint: WinME -
>which was released _before_ this particular distro of Linux, if I'm not
>mistaken -
"I am mistaken, because I'm not aware that the distribution has about
as much to do with UDMA-100 controller/drive support as a fish has to
do with a bicycle."
>Compare that to Mandrake. Can't even _install_ it, it won't recognize the
>drives, even as IDE. Yup, modern, advanced, powerful... but won't even
>install. Love it.
"I am too stupid to just use what works for me - I have to be a
Troll."
--WorLord
"You could spend an hour counting the petals in a flower
It might take you a year to count the veins in each petal
If you spent ten lifetimes, maybe you could count its cells...
...but you'd have completely missed the point
You fuckhead."
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:21:02 -0600
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:44HX5.2279$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In NT, a user mode program cannot capture C-A-D, thus it cannot
simulate
> > > an
> > > > NT login in a way that would fool someone that has ever logged into
NT
> > > > before. It would be immediately obvious that something was wrong
unless
> > > > they were paying absolutely no attention.
> > >
> > > I'm almost willing to bet it is possible...
> > > If I get bored Thursday night, I might just fire up VC++ and see. I've
> > > captured Alt-Tab and most of the others (POS software that can't be
exited
> > > or switched w/o a password) I outgrew the hacker shit years ago, but,
I
> > > need a break from the project I'm working on. Sounds like fun!
> >
> > You do that. If you figure out a way to do it without requiring admin
privs
> > to install on a locked down system, I'll send you $50. (I'm not joking
> > either). Not exactly a stellar return for your investment of time, but
not
> > chicken scratch either.
>
> In HACKING EXPOSED, 2nd Edition, Chapter 5 "Hacking Windows NT", various
> ways of obtaining root priviledge are discussed. They conclude that
> it is no cakewalk, but that you must take strenuous administrative steps.
> The one they recommend most is getting Windows 2000 (in lieu of grabbing
> SP6a and some more recent hot-fixes.)
We're not talking about obtainint root. In fact, obtainint root first would
invalidate this claim.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 17:24:41 GMT
In article <XdPX5.6686$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Kelsey Bjarnason"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The original quote I was responding to: "But even if you're a new user, it's
>still worth taking the time to learn how to use the command line."
>
>Now, what benefit does the command line offer Grandpappy, as a new user?
>Answer: it doesn't do a thing for him that he isn't already doing, via the
>GUI, in a manner he's comfortable with, so there is absolutely no reason
>whatsoever for him to learn it.
That is not a reason not to learn it though. Becoming more familiar with the
workings of your computer is always worthwhile. File operations are often
easier on the command line, especially in your example of an elderly person.
Holding down Ctrl and selecting multiple files and moving them to another
directory can often be quite fiddly, I'm 26 yet still find myself having to
select the files all over again as I made a slip up with the mouse. I dread
to think what trouble Granpappy would have. Far easier to type what you want
to do at the command line.
mv *.txt ../newdir
As opposed to a series of point and click operations that are very liable to
mistakes. Also, by learning the command line you can learn to create scripts
to automate the tasks you do often.
There's no reason why the command line should solely be the preserve of
programmers. Seeing as five year old kids can handle it if you give them the
chance, this attitude that the command line is some aloof ivory tower is
inappropriate. People should be encouraged to get as much out of there
computers as they can.
That Granpappy stuff is just stereotyping anyway, I know Granpappy's and
Granmama's who are old school hardcore programmers.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: WorLord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 09:29:19 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Taken from the obscure and questionable writings of "scatterman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
>All I can relate is my personal experiences, But if you can keep windows up
>for that long then your a wizard.
Oh, it *can* be done.
More often then not, though, it never *is* done right out of the box,
and, in order to have a quasi-stable machine, you first have to start
with buying the appropriate hardware. There are some pieces of
hardware that are just *not* stable with Win9x, no matter how you
tweak it, what drivers you use, or how many spells you cast.
(USB is a particularly screwed spot, now that I think about it.
Iomega Zip Drives seem to work fine on USB in Win9x, but I've seen an
otherwise solid-as-a-rock system go down like a cheap hooker for no
apparent reason once a printer or USB handspring cradle is used.
Moving each device to a serial or parallel port, without even messing
with the drivers, restores stability all 'round.)
One also has to make sure no other programs, daemons, or TSR's are
running - and Win9x seems to hide tons of these in the registry.
--WorLord
"You could spend an hour counting the petals in a flower
It might take you a year to count the veins in each petal
If you spent ten lifetimes, maybe you could count its cells...
...but you'd have completely missed the point
You fuckhead."
------------------------------
From: "Alan Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Microsoft , makers of what ?
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 12:28:05 -0500
I post "Linux rocks and windows sucks"
why I say Gates is a son of bitch,well
these are my points of view :
1) He becomes multimillonaire stolen the work and
ideas of others!
*** Micro$oft DOS stolen from Tim Paterson at Seattle,1980
*** Micro$oft Basic carbon copy of Darmouth-Basic.
*** Micro$oft Windows stolen from Mac-Os,Apple Computer
since 1984.
*** Micro$oft Word, Excel stolen from Mac-Os,Apple Computer
since 1984.
*** Micro$oft Internet Exploter stole code of NCSA Mosaic
and concepts of Netscape .
*** Micro$oft Flight Simulator was made very far from
Redmond, Micro$oft.
And all the Micro$oft's web-sites are a bunch of shit !!!
Because all the mayor advances of computer technology
history in the last 30 years 1970-2000, are thanks
to 3 brilliants dudes:
Dennis Ritchie >>> language C , UNIX
Brian Kernigham >>> language C
Ken Thompson >>> UNIX
If these 3 guys had never touched a computer in their lives;
now, we don't have TCP/IP, Internet, FTP, IRC, Intranets, mp3,
etc...
and in the earlies 80's, 90's to the new team of hackers:
Bill Joy >>> made the C shell
Linus Torvalds >>> father and mother
of Linux Operating System
Alan Cox >>> hacker of TCP/IP on linux
well, there are more hackers, but i don't remember
their names.
So, what is the invent of Micro$oft ?
what is the pretty cool software made for Micro$oft ?
I think that the best software of Micro$oft is the
notepad.exe, because when i run that app, and only
that app, Winbugs 98 is so stable.
Warning: If you launch another app is at your own risk!!!
I don't have anything against Bill; it even likes well me.
He is a charismatic character, he knows as managing to the public and the
press.
I am in against that every time that a new technology of computers comes
out,
at once they attribute it to Microsoft.
And I am also against that every time that leaves a good game as Unreal,
Quake2, Duke Nukem Forever, be only available for Windows; when
will we see versions of these games for Linux, FreeBSD?
Regards,
Alan
------------------------------
From: WorLord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 09:34:17 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Taken from the obscure and questionable writings of "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
>Clue for the goddamned fucking clueless:
>That's not "maintenance" that's FIREFIGHTING.
AGREED. Heartfelt agreement, too.
And *I'm* the guy who can keep WinME up for a month and counting. I'm
doing it because it can be done, but the common misconceptions that
require correction here are:
- That it was this stable with no effort on my part - such is not
true. I had to tweak the damn thing for about a week, and read a LOT.
- That once it's properly set-up for stability, it stays that way
indefinitely.
I much prefer my Linux Box. I had to read a bunch of stuff exactly
ONCE (for Red Hat 5.0), and set things up ONCE (when I install a
distribution), and then I can forget about it.
--WorLord
"You could spend an hour counting the petals in a flower
It might take you a year to count the veins in each petal
If you spent ten lifetimes, maybe you could count its cells...
...but you'd have completely missed the point
You fuckhead."
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft , makers of what ?
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 12:02:07 -0600
"Alan Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90ohdl$1qpi5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> why I say Gates is a son of bitch,well
> these are my points of view :
> 1) He becomes multimillonaire stolen the work and
> ideas of others!
> *** Micro$oft DOS stolen from Tim Paterson at Seattle,1980
Purchased from Tim Paterson. Microsoft also employed Tim, giving him stock
options. He's now a multi-millionaire because of it.
> *** Micro$oft Basic carbon copy of Darmouth-Basic.
You've looked at the code?
> *** Micro$oft Windows stolen from Mac-Os,Apple Computer
> since 1984.
Apple stole it from Xerox, big deal.
> *** Micro$oft Word, Excel stolen from Mac-Os,Apple Computer
> since 1984.
Not even close. Excel was the first major spreadsheet on the Mac, and was
available for quite some time before being ported to the PC.
> *** Micro$oft Internet Exploter stole code of NCSA Mosaic
> and concepts of Netscape .
Microsoft licensed Spyglass Mosaic. Spyglass was the officially sanctioned
licenser of NCSA Mosaic. Perfectly legal.
> *** Micro$oft Flight Simulator was made very far from
> Redmond, Micro$oft.
Uhh... so what? And how much of Linux is made far from Linux Torvolds?
> And all the Micro$oft's web-sites are a bunch of shit !!!
Now there's a reasoned argument.
> Because all the mayor advances of computer technology
> history in the last 30 years 1970-2000, are thanks
> to 3 brilliants dudes:
> Dennis Ritchie >>> language C , UNIX
> Brian Kernigham >>> language C
> Ken Thompson >>> UNIX
>
> If these 3 guys had never touched a computer in their lives;
> now, we don't have TCP/IP, Internet, FTP, IRC, Intranets, mp3,
> etc...
Sorry, TCP/IP was not invented on Unix.
> and in the earlies 80's, 90's to the new team of hackers:
> Bill Joy >>> made the C shell
> Linus Torvalds >>> father and mother
> of Linux Operating System
> Alan Cox >>> hacker of TCP/IP on linux
What does this have to do with your point?
> I don't have anything against Bill; it even likes well me.
> He is a charismatic character, he knows as managing to the public and the
> press.
> I am in against that every time that a new technology of computers comes
> out, at once they attribute it to Microsoft.
But you have no problem attributing things to Apple and Linux that they
didn't invent.
> And I am also against that every time that leaves a good game as Unreal,
> Quake2, Duke Nukem Forever, be only available for Windows; when
> will we see versions of these games for Linux, FreeBSD?
Ask the developers of those games. MS isn't forcing them to develop only
for windows.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
