Linux-Advocacy Digest #738, Volume #30 Fri, 8 Dec 00 09:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: What does KDE do after all ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF! (Ian Davey)
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Chad Myers")
Security (was Re: Several items) (Stephen King)
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Chad Myers")
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux is awful ("Anders Mörtsell")
Re: Segmentation fault (core dumped) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows review ("Chad Myers")
Re: Uptimes ("Chad Myers")
Re: Uptimes (Stephen King)
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Chad Myers")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does KDE do after all
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 08:34:39 -0500
SwifT - wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> > Sockets were developed on 4.3 BSD Unix.
>
> Whatever. It's no reason to call them 'bad'.
>
> > I'm talking about a properly defined syntax for the byte-stream.
> >
> > Any IPC bytestream that can be implemented in sockets can be
> > implemented through pipes.
>
> Actually, if a socket is used for IPC bytestream, it creates pipes. So
> since a socket creates pipes, a socket can't be worser than a pipe (since
> it relies on them).
>
Now you've got it.
> --
> SwifT
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
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] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF!
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 13:35:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Check out "http://www.lemon64.com" for a good site on c-64
>> retro emulations and games.
>>
>> Who could ever forget: "Destroy him, my robots.", and "AAAaaaahhhhh..."
>
>Where do you get the executable images?
Just search on google for C64 emulation sites, you should be able to find
plenty of disk images. There are sites that do nothing but archive these
things.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[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: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 13:33:23 GMT
"Mike V." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:17:25 -0700, "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> posted :
>
> >You should have read the whole thread, I'll repeat:
> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Post
> >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.
>
> They weren't built right.
I don't think I've ever built and NT system that wasn't able to stay up
for several months AT THE LEAST regardless of load (because I would configure
it appropriately).
This just speaks more to Adam's incompetence or to his embellishment than
to anything related to NT.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: Stephen King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Security (was Re: Several items)
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 13:51:03 GMT
mmnnoo wrote:
> > > "...server hosting more than 1500 virtual Linux servers simultaneously."
> > Puny.
> <snip>
>
> You realize you both are talking about the exact same story?
Do tell. I didn't check the link, but knew that I had seen different
numbers.
It doesn't matter, yeah? The story is worth telling several times ;-)
On another matter, I see BG touting security considerations for 'what we
call the .net future' at a conference. This is choice - coming from a
comapny with the WORST security record EVER. (He seems to be stealing
pages from Sun's playbook, too.)
You all know that Microsoft keeps its CD images on 'industrial strength'
Unix servers, because they are more secure? (this from the Microsoft
website)
I maintain that all versions of unix/linux are 'industrial strength'. By
Microsoft's own admission, their systems are not.
Why settle for less?
More to the point, why PAY for less?
--
Porsche Boxster 88,295,395 Club-Z points away
Stephen J King :: RR2 Utopia Canada L0M 1T0
--
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 13:35:52 GMT
"Walton Simons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90pjtj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> If you want to have a decent, professional display and control over it, you
> would get an SGI or a Mac. Windows provides no control over your display
> whatsover, except for those pretty truetype fonts, which can be easily
> installed under X in linux.
Um, what about icc and other color correction technologies? Windows also
has support, with decent display adapters, for advanced color technologies
and display/output techniques. Support for sRGB, etc.
Does Linux support icc profiles? No, didn't think so.
-Chad
> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:LdrX5.17272$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Vann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9feX5.4904$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <mt6X5.2408$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Vann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:eXVW5.4689$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> In article <a3EW5.9418$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad
> Myers"
> > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> <snip my post>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Or you can just get a real OS with a real windowing and display
> > > >> > system that support advanced font rendering, color correction,
> > > >> > aliasing or anti-, etc.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > -Chad
> > > >> It infuriates me when I try to help a person and I receive a slap in
> > > >> the face for it. You sir, disgust me.
> > > >
> > > > You weren't helping me. It appeared that someone was cracking on
> Linux's
> > > > poor display system and you, perhaps naievly, begain detailing the
> > > > laborious process of attempting to get Linux to be a modern
> > > > display-oriented OS.
> > > >
> > > > If you were sincerely trying to help him, then I apologize. However,
> if
> > > > you were really trying to help him get a better display, you would've
> > > > told him to get a Mac or a Windows PC because Linux is years from
> having
> > > > a serious system for professional display and color correction.
> > > >
> > > > -Chad
> > > Please don't put thought into my head. I am not one to question why he
> > > was using linux. Maybe he likes being able to hack around with the
> > > kernel. But, it is neither my position, nor yours, to claim he is
> making
> > > a mistake. The choice of what OS to use is an intimate one - one you
> will
> > > have to deal with every second the computer is used. If I demanded you
> > > always buy a chevrolet instead of a ford because a chevrolet is
> > > "technically superior", you'd probably chose to ignore me.
> > > Personal computers are called such for a reason, you know.
> >
> > You can BS and wax philosophical all you want, but what it really comes
> down
> > to is, if you want to have a decent, professional display and control over
> it,
> > Linux would be the last choice.
> >
> > If you wanted to help him, you would've told him the truth.
> >
> > -Chad
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 13:40:06 GMT
"Vann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:UIYX5.6206$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <LdrX5.17272$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "Vann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9feX5.4904$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In article <mt6X5.2408$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Vann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:eXVW5.4689$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> In article <a3EW5.9418$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad
> >> >> Myers"
> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> <snip my post>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Or you can just get a real OS with a real windowing and display
> >> >> > system that support advanced font rendering, color correction,
> >> >> > aliasing or anti-, etc.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -Chad
> >> >> It infuriates me when I try to help a person and I receive a slap in
> >> >> the face for it. You sir, disgust me.
> >> >
> >> > You weren't helping me. It appeared that someone was cracking on
> >> > Linux's poor display system and you, perhaps naievly, begain
> >> > detailing the laborious process of attempting to get Linux to be a
> >> > modern display-oriented OS.
> >> >
> >> > If you were sincerely trying to help him, then I apologize. However,
> >> > if you were really trying to help him get a better display, you
> >> > would've told him to get a Mac or a Windows PC because Linux is years
> >> > from having a serious system for professional display and color
> >> > correction.
> >> >
> >> > -Chad
> >> Please don't put thought into my head. I am not one to question why he
> >> was using linux. Maybe he likes being able to hack around with the
> >> kernel. But, it is neither my position, nor yours, to claim he is
> >> making a mistake. The choice of what OS to use is an intimate one -
> >> one you will have to deal with every second the computer is used. If I
> >> demanded you always buy a chevrolet instead of a ford because a
> >> chevrolet is
> >> "technically superior", you'd probably chose to ignore me.
> >> Personal computers are called such for a reason, you know.
> >
> > You can BS and wax philosophical all you want, but what it really comes
> > down to is, if you want to have a decent, professional display and
> > control over it, Linux would be the last choice.
> >
> > If you wanted to help him, you would've told him the truth.
> >
> > -Chad
> I probably shouldn't be responding to this, but oh well. I, personally,
> can't stand Windows. I know over a dozen people who, in my village ( Yes,
> village, about 1,000 people ), who use linux without a problem. I know
> its weaknessess, but I also know its strengths. For me, PERSONALLY, the
> strengths outweigh the weaknessess. Unlike you, I don't have the gall to
> tell another person what his personal choice is.
Look, I don't know what you're on, or what your problem is. No one is
telling anyone what to do.
All I'm saying is, if you want to do high end graphics and need the
advanced graphic technologies like color correction, Linux is not the choice
for you. Period. I'm sorry you have to face this fact, but it's the truth.
If you like Linux, great, if you don't, who cares. If you want to do graphics,
than Linux isn't the best OS. If you want the best OS for this, then something
else would be in order.
What's so bad about the truth?
> I don't give a rat's ass if he uses Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, MacOS, QNX,
> whatever floats his boat. He had problems with linux, I helped him with
> those problems. That's all
I believe he was asking how to do some of these advanced things. Rather
than giving him the straight dope that you simply cannot do those things
on Linux, you made up some stuff. I don't understand why. You're not
helping anyone.
> I did. You can mock his choice until the cows come up, but it is just
> that, his choice.
Who was mocking? I'm just stating a fact. Have you become so blind in
your devotion to Linus that you can't acknowledge simple truths?
> Stop trying to claim some sort of victory with such
> subjective criteria.
Oh my god, now you've really gone off the deep end. Are you now trying
to say that Linux has as good graphical control as say Mac, Windows
or SGI? You are sorely mistaken.
Try pulling you head from the sand once in awhile and looking around.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Anders Mörtsell" <[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: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 14:59:09 +0100
Yes, I agree on everything you say. I also read this from a Linux newsgroup,
so I guess that's why I feel that it's more common with Linux people posting
the "He's a troll" kind of messages than Windows people doing it.
My intention was not to imply that you were a troll, to start this part of
the thread, I just wanted to post a message saying that the original poster
must have been planning a "fight" between Linux and Windows users. The
reason I think so is that he crossposted to so many groups, both linux and
windows.
Sorry if I stepped on someone elses toes here (is that a phrase that could
be used in english too? In Sweden it's used as a metaphore for saying things
that some will find abusing), that wasn't what I wanted to do, I only wanted
to say that I think it's sad that people always enters these discussions
although it's rather obvious what the intention of the original poster is.
However, I agree with you on the fact that you can actually find useful
information every now and then and that's why I've read through all the
messages myself.
I hope I made my point clear this time.
/ Anders
"Adam Short" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:JI4Y5.3839$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> What I think is interesting is that, as a side effect, people sometimes
> learn things about the opposing viewpoint that they would otherwise not
> know. This is sometimes useful to those who don't get too entrenched in
> their own opinions (an admittedly small number I know), and are willing to
> re-think their views in light of new evidence from others (an even smaller
> number). In the post that sparked this little sideline off I was asking
why
> there appeared to be differences between what Windows does on my computer
> and what it appears to do on other computers. It was a genuine question,
not
> an attempt at trolling, for which I have not received any answer. I
honestly
> wanted to know about this so that I could re-evaluate the weird things
that
> happen with windows on my machine. My opinion of Windows isn't very high
> currently, but if people explain to me why its perceived shortcomings (to
my
> mind) are there, I'll certainly look at it again. I''m reading these posts
> from a Linux newsgroup and its pretty rare to see any pro-windows comments
> there at all. It would be nice to evaluate the pros and cons.
>
>
> Anders Mörtsell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:90qf1q$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Adam Short" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:143Y5.2673$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > I guess he is a average Linux user, ie. Troll.....
> > >
> > > I know you may not be used to this, but this is what's known as a
> > > "discussion", it means to look at ideas, to put forward arguments and
to
> > > deal with them objectively. It may have started out as a slightly
> > half-assed
> > > observation, but there are some good points coming out here, on both
> > sides.
> > >
> > > A one line quip that isn't even grammatically correct, has very little
> > place
> > > in such a discussion.
> > >
> > > I happen to like Linux and dislike Windows. Thats my position and I'm
> > simply
> > > putting forward arguments for that position. If you don't like it, at
> > least
> > > come up with a sensible argument.
> > >
> >
> > If you try to run a discussion on that subject, you are very likely to
> have
> > to cope with such quips. I think that this kind of discussion is no use,
> > because no real Linux user will ever agree on that Windows could be
useful
> > for some tasks and vice versa. You could go on discussing forever, and
no
> > one will change their minds on this, it's all a matter of personal
taste,
> > and I don't think you can change that no matter for how long you discuss
> it.
> > However I was surprised to see that it was a Windows user who put in the
> > "He's a troll" argument. From what I have seen, that's what linux users
> tend
> > to do when they run out of arguments, which is a petty, because I'm a
> Linux
> > fan myself.
> >
> > / Anders
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Segmentation fault (core dumped)
Date: 8 Dec 2000 14:04:02 GMT
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> news wrote:
>>
>> While working on a project ( which I thought to be quite small ) I have
>> received this message:
>> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
>> Everything compiled okay. This happened as a result of a.out
>> I was wondering if someone could point out to me what I should be looking
>> for that might cause such a message.
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Joarder
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> If you compiled the program as:
> gcc program.c[pp]
> do this:
> gcc -g program.c[pp]
or even gcc -ggdb program.c
> The -g option includes debug info.
> Then run the program as:
> gcc a.out
> type 'r' and see where it takes you.
I guess you meant:
gdb a.out
before typing 'r'...
But probably this here isn't the best forum for discussions about segfaults.
You better take this to groups like comp.unix.programmer. If you do so you
better post also the code because nobody can really help you when all you
tell is that your program segfaulted (except that you dereferenced a pointer
pointing to memory that don't belongs to your program).
HTH, Jens
--
_ _____ _____
| ||_ _||_ _| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_ | | | | | | AG Moebius, Institut fuer Molekuelphysik
| |_| | | | | | Fachbereich Physik, Freie Universitaet Berlin
\___/ens|_|homs|_|oerring Tel: ++49 (0)30 838 - 53394 / FAX: - 56046
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[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: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 13:47:54 GMT
"Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>
>
> > > How to obey the One Great Software Company (Microsoft).
> > >
> > > Really, how about programming? Or tuning the kernel?
> >
> > Out of any given 1,000 users, how many do you think actually write programs?
> > Of those who even know about such things, how many care about tuning
> > kernels?
> >
>
> Most have to tune the kernel to get sound to work.
That's intuitive.
Linux: The Best Multimedia OS (except when it's not)
> > > > learn all the commands and become knowledgeable about the command line.
> > > >
> > > > There's a reason why we got away from the command line...
> > >
> > > No. The reason is is that you couldn't handle it.
> >
> > Being unable to handle something and not wanting to are different things. I
> > use a command line because for _my_ purposes, it is often more useful than
> > other methods. For others, this is not true. It is the _individual's_
> > needs that will determine whether it's even potentially worth learning a new
> > tool or technology, and that is balanced against the expense or effort of
> > learning it. You, personally, seem to think kernel hacking and command line
> > utilities and programming are useful tools, and they are - to you.
> > Grandpappy doesn't _want_ to hack kernels,
>
> Why doesn't he?
Well, considering most can barely grasp the idea of double-clicking, hacking
the kernel seems to be way to overbearing.
Windows gives the appearance of being easy, but allows you to get down to
the nitty gritty if you know what you're doing.
Linux, OTOH, forces you to be a kernel developer to do the most basic
things.
It tries not to be, but the overriding arrogance built into it is overwhelming
for a novice user.
-Chad
>
>
> > he wants to write documents and
> > browse the web; what possible use are command lines and hacked kernels to
> > him?
>
> What if wants to write them in a nice, nonproprietary format?
Why would he want to do that? Most of them don't care, they're just
writing documents to print out. Besides, who cares about those poor Linux
users who painted themselves into a corner and are now whining for everyone
else to cave to their demands.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 13:51:36 GMT
"Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90pm13$2pvo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Where can I find some hard numbers about the best and mena uptimes of NT and
> Linux? I have my own experience, which I'm sure varies from others. I have
> Netcraft numbers which don't show NT 4 and W2K hasn't been around long
> enough fro some good numbers.
>
> I keep seeing this debate and they always end up with someone saying, "My
> machine has been up for x months!". Which someone promptly replies,
> "B.S.!". So has there been any research in this area?
Not really. You can ask people to post their uptimes.
I recall this one web site with this client you installed that reported
uptime to a web site, but it was rather slanted. It was run and used
primarily by Penguinistas and so they'd have a few token windows boxes
which they seemed to reboot daily for no reason just to kill the
Windows numbers and make Linux look better.
Anywhere you go, YMMV and you'll have to take it with a grain of salt.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: Stephen King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 14:07:41 GMT
Adam Ruth wrote:
>
> Where can I find some hard numbers about the best and mena uptimes of NT and
> Linux? I have my own experience, which I'm sure varies from others. I have
> Netcraft numbers which don't show NT 4 and W2K hasn't been around long
> enough fro some good numbers.
Which means they have yet to prove themselves - acutlly Netcraft shows
that NT need regular reboots, Win2000 seems to be better, but is still
playing catch-up to Irix, Solaris, BSD, Linux etc.
> I keep seeing this debate and they always end up with someone saying, "My
> machine has been up for x months!". Which someone promptly replies,
> "B.S.!". So has there been any research in this area?
The research, I would think, cannot be done in non-real time. It's not
like a toilet seat (well, maybe WIndos is) where one can have a machine
which operates the device at 100x normal rate.
Not only do *nix machines have longer uptimes, they have longer useful
lifespans. My desktop machine is 7 years old, and will remain useful for
the development work I do for some time to come, while Windows machines
have a lifespan of what, 3 years before they must be replaced? The
Macintosh fares better than this, I bet.
The race is on. Windows has a LOT of catching up to do in many respects,
most notably security and reliability. (scalability too, I imagine)
--
Porsche Boxster 88,295,395 Club-Z points away
Stephen J King :: RR2 Utopia Canada L0M 1T0
--
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[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: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 13:53:24 GMT
"Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90plbj$2pdn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Strange, Microsoft consultants built them....
Right....
You mean a company that was a "Microsoft Solution Provider" but had
no other ties to Microsoft.
They probably sent some interns over or something.
Or you're lying, which is what this is all starting to sound like.
-Chad
> "Mike V." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:17:25 -0700, "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > posted :
> >
> > >You should have read the whole thread, I'll repeat:
> > >
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Post
> > >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.
> >
> > They weren't built right.
>
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
