Linux-Advocacy Digest #43, Volume #31 Sun, 24 Dec 00 06:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Hotmail again {Re: Another UNIX sight is doun!} ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Looks kike Linux is taking the lead! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Tell us Why you use Windows over Linux. (nf)
open source is getting worst with time. (steve@x)
Re: Linux lacks (nf)
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. ("Kyle Jacobs")
Re: Linux lacks (nf)
Re: This group should rename itself (Pete Goodwin)
Re: This group should rename itself (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000 (Tim Smith)
Re: An Entire Day With Linux (Yukkkkk!!!) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000 (mlw)
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("billh")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("billh")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("billh")
Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000 (mlw)
Re: open source is getting worst with time. ("Darren Winsper")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Hotmail again {Re: Another UNIX sight is doun!}
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 03:30:08 -0500
Santa Warlord wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Richard Wright wrote:
> > >
> > > Hotmail WAS recently transferred to a win 2000 server.
> >
> > That's LOSE 2000 server, you moron.
> >
> >
>
> that wasn't funny.
Especially for Hotmail.
>
> --
> "One by one the Penguins steal my sanity." (found printed on a T-shirt)
--
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Looks kike Linux is taking the lead!
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 03:33:41 -0500
"." wrote:
>
> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
>
> >> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Whistler Beta 1 is quite stable.
> >>
> >> I especially love those cute mouseovers all over the GUI.
> >>
> >> No seriously, thats nessesary.
>
> > Yep, just like all the mouse-overs that are required by some unwritten
> > perverse law for commercial websites. It was cute 3 years ago, it's
> > annoying now (ditto with mouse-over popup menus and most every other
> > use of mouse-over).
>
> Agreed. The "industry" regularly fixates itself on useless eyecandy (as
> opposed to useful eyecandy; see animated desktops re: NextStep/OpenStep)
> without regard to efficiency or stability.
>
> And microsoft somehow seems to always be the lead in this regard.
>
That's because they pander to pseudo-intellectual in-duh-viduals
who have a difficult time distinguishing between a computer monitor
and a boob tube.
> -----.
--
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: nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Tell us Why you use Windows over Linux.
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 22:16:44 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:16:34 GMT, Ian Davey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Why MSN Messenger in particular though, there are plenty of other messaging
> >programs that do run in Linux: IRC, ICQ. Plus AIM and it's compatibles (gaim).
>
> Is there a Linux ICQ client that doesn't suck?
>
> --Tim Smith
>
>
All ICQ clients suck.
I can't wait until there is a standard so we can all use our own client
that we like and STILL be able to talk to everyone else. (Including
those who like clients that suck)
------------------------------
From: steve@x <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: 24 Dec 2000 00:13:44 -0800
Ok, I wanted to try this program that is supposed to be good.
When I tried to install AbiWord using rpm, I get the error
"only packages with major numbers <= 3 are supported by this version of RPM"
Ok, after searching the net, I found rpm version 4 out there
(I was using rpm 3.0.3). So, I download rpm for rpm 4.0, but
when I try to install rpm 4.0 using my current rpm, I also get
the same error.
So, I search the net again, and I find someone saying that rpm 3.0.5
will not give the above error. So, I search for rpm 3.0.5 and downdownload
the rpm file for it.
I rpm -Uhv it, but I get dependcy error, it wanted these
error: failed dependencies:
textutils is needed by rpm-3.0.5-9.6x
sh-utils is needed by rpm-3.0.5-9.6x
bzip2 >= 0.9.0c-2 is needed by rpm-3.0.5-9.6x
libbz2.so.0 is needed by rpm-3.0.5-9.6x
Ok, so I hit the net again searching for textutils, I download
it, then I do
root>rpm -Uhv textutils-2.0g-1.i386.rpm
only packages with major numbers <= 3 are supported by this version of RPM
error: textutils-2.0g-1.i386.rpm cannot be installed
root>
Ok, so to update my rpm, I need an rpm that needs a packages that
will not install with my current rpm.
This is so amazing. NO wonder 90% of the world uses windows.
On windows, I never had such idiotic installation problems. never.
back to windows, you guys can keep this junk.
it is true what they say, linux is for those whose time is worthless.
It has been years, and this system is still as hard to install
programs for as ever, I thought maybe after all this time, someone
would have fixed this crap. But I was wrong.
------------------------------
From: nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 19:37:27 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> Said nf in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 19 Dec 2000 02:37:19 -0500;
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >says...
> >>
> >> >However Access isn't all
> >> >that bad. It broke new ground when it was released. A database which
> >> >allowed fully relational tables that could be normalized properly for
> >> >$99 ??? (That was 1.0!)
> >>
> >> When you say a software product 'breaks new ground', you generally
> >> aren't talking about product dumping pricing. Not that I recall this
> >> being any particular feature of Access. The retail price was probably
> >> less than the competitor, notably FoxBase at the time (MS bought them
> >> when they still couldn't force people to use crapware), but discount
> >> pricing was commonplace for every product. And a version 1.0 that
> >> wasn't priced substantially below competition wasn't going anywhere.
> >> Access was crapware, and it still is.
> >
> >Actually the biggest game in town at the time was Ashton-Tate's dBase
> >III product. (Not sure if the awful dBase IV hit the market yet or not
> >... )
>
> dBase IV was out years before Access was. There was a lengthy time
> period, not unusual in real software markets, where the two versions
> co-existed, because a competitive software developer has absolutely no
> reason to cut off customers who want to maintain compatibility in order
> to support those who want new features. Having used both, I can tell
> you that there was no real difference, and dBase IV wasn't "awful"
> outside of the worst hyperbole. It just wasn't dBase III, which many
> customers were quite happy with. This was before there were any decent
> RDBMS' for Windows. (Well, there still aren't, but that's a different
> issue.)
>
dBase IV was buggy as hell for quite a while after it's initial release.
(Longer than usual for software products of the era). Yes ... I say it
was awful and not just because it wasn't dBase III.
> >> >The newest version comes with an optional SQL
> >> >Server 7 engine that can be installed which makes it far easier to scale
> >> >up to SQL Server later.
> >>
> >> You get paid for this, nf? It sure sounds that way.
> >
> >Why would it sound like I get paid for this stuff? You've never pointed
> >out the features of a product that you liked? Are you paid to bash it?
> >How odd.
>
> Only odd given your ironic yet obvious leaping to an argument from
> ignorance, like a bunny jumping behind a tree when startled by being
> caught out in the open. Liking SQL Server as a product is a sign of
> brain-damage, to be perfectly honest. I'm paid to know what is good and
> what is not, and it has nothing to do with features. An SQL-accessible
> database is the only feature an SQL-compatible database needs, and
> Microsoft's Sybase corpse isn't much of one.
>
>
You know ... people usually like to resort to name calling and insults
when they don't have a clue. I'll refain from lumping you into this
category because I'm feeling the holiday spirit. <GRIN>
I too am paid to know what's good and what is not, and also what will
get the job done most effectively for the money spent. (Best bang for
the buck if you will). I don't want to get into a urination contest of
credentials (and I won't) but you should be aware that your opinion
about products isn't the only one in the world nor is it the always best
one for each case.
------------------------------
From: "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 09:23:49 GMT
Well, I guess your right, this is one place where Linux clearly excels.
Implementing 1960's technology TODAY!
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Kyle Jacobs wrote:
> >
> > Windows NT TERMINAL SERVICES EDITION does exactly that genius. And
Windows
>
> Oh god....
>
> Microsoft....developing 1960's technology....tomorrow!
>
>
>
> > 2000 now serve's a remote console session (remote DOS prompt)
> >
> > Gee, sucks when Windows is moving along, and Linux is standing still.
> >
> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > No, Linux splits the user interface and treats it like it were a
> > program.
> > > > > UNIX did this because IT HAD NO CHOICE. Linux does this
because...???
> > > >
> > > > No...it was done that way because it MAKES MORE SENSE and KEEPS
> > > > SYSTEM STABILITY HIGH.
> > >
> > > Bravo!!! Here! Here!
> > >
> > > And only now is Windozzzzzzzz getting a "terminal server". I'm
curious
> > > though, as to where that leaves "pcAnywhere"?
> > >
> > > Chris
>
>
> --
> 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: nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 21:47:59 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> >dBase IV was out years before Access was. There was a lengthy time
> >period, not unusual in real software markets, where the two versions
> >co-existed, because a competitive software developer has absolutely no
> >reason to cut off customers who want to maintain compatibility in order
> >to support those who want new features. Having used both, I can tell
> >you that there was no real difference, and dBase IV wasn't "awful"
> >outside of the worst hyperbole. It just wasn't dBase III, which many
> >customers were quite happy with. This was before there were any decent
> >RDBMS' for Windows. (Well, there still aren't, but that's a different
> >issue.)
>
> Are you kidding?
> dBase IV when it was first released was one of the buggiest piles of
> junk ever written. Customers were SCREAMING at Ashton Tate at the
> time. They tried to use a gui which was a mess and importing dBase III
> files was a mixed bag.
>
> dBase IV was the straw that eventually put Aston Tate at the bottom of
> the sea.
>
It was that text based GUI. I remember dealing with it when I attempted
to port one of my companies applications from dBase III to IV. Before I
finished the project the company scraped the port and stayed with dBase
III. (And I was thrilled). dBase IV besides being buggy was very slow.
(We were running it on an IBM PS/2 Model 70 which was a fairily stocked
machine for the time.)
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: This group should rename itself
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 09:36:34 +0000
Gary Hallock wrote:
> I just tried it. Worked perfectly. It picked the right file every
> time.
How many files in your directory? In mine, there are 1,961. As I watch, the
directory is changing as KDE finds all the files. If I try clicking on one,
as it's changing, it picks whatever happens to be under the mouse at the
time.
The filing system is an NFS mounted directory from my file server on a
10MBit link. It takes 35 seconds for Konqueror to stop showing the spinning
cog. During that time, the files shift around at the start - that's what
I'm referring to.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: This group should rename itself
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 09:37:50 +0000
Donn Miller wrote:
> For Windows, I imagine Visual Studio is the best choice. But for the
> situation I'm in right now, Cygwin or mingwin will have to suffice.
> They're all pretty decent compilers,and Cygwin produces decently fast
> code as long as you don't link in the Cygwin unix layer.
I've used Visual Studio. I prefer Borland's Delphi.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000
Date: 24 Dec 2000 01:25:25 -0800
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000 00:59:26 GMT, J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>bzzt, wrong answer - there are mechanisms in Linux like
>immutable files, etc which make it impossible for even root
>to overwrite or delete them.
Root can get around those mechanisms.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Entire Day With Linux (Yukkkkk!!!)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 09:43:44 +0000
Yatima wrote:
> BTW, stop top posting and quoting entire messages. It's very poor
> netiquette and consumes bandwith that costs people with pay per min
> dialup connections.
Tell Aaron that. He does it all the time.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 05:54:42 -0500
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > We're talking about formatting the drive.
> >
> > The point is that a UNIX system is VERY usable as a normal user.
>
> As is windows.
Not even close.
>
> > To do real damage, one has to be user ID 0. AFAIK no system installs a
> > user account as this. To do maintenance on a UNIX system one uses su, or
> > su enabled programs which ask for a password. One does not read e-mail
> > as root.
>
> Same thing can be done in Win2k.
Not as easily.
>
> > In Windows NT, one can assign themselves any privileges they wish. Often
> > times, as I have said before, and is made evident from some of
> > Microsoft's own knowledge base articles, one must assign themselves many
> > privileges which are dangerous, just to install and use software.
>
> Install, yes. Use, no. There are some knowledge base articles about older
> versions of office, which, in their default configuraitons required write
> access to the windows directory, however you could change the locations of
> these files and invalidate that need. This isn't the case with Office 97+.
You are speaking only of office. I am talking about racks of Windows
software at the store.
>
> Further, Windows 2000 allows you to install software with admin privs
> without giving them to yourself. Simply run a setup program and Win2k asks
> you how you want to install it, and if you want to install with
> administrator privs (requiring that administrator password).
Provided that the software has the newest installer, perhaps.
>
> > Most Windows software, under NT, must be installed as the user which
> > will be using it. Other wise, the registry settings and start menu
> > entries won't be available. Thus, to install the software they must
> > assign themselves privileges which a normal user should not have.
>
> Most? Some. Not most. I install software all the time and access it from
> multiple accounts.
Most of the software I see.
>
> > The difference being that UNIX software is made assuming that a user
> > account does not have the rights to install, but must be able to use the
> > software once it is installed by the system administrator.
> >
> > NT will never be truly secure as long as this problem persists.
>
> It hasn't been a problem for almost a year, and even before that it was an
> easily solveable one.
Not everyone is running to Windows 2K.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 12:45:38 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Sorry; still cleaning up old threads.
>
> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 30 Nov 2000 10:06:08
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 28 Nov 2000
21:13:09
> >> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >
> >> >> >For example, a program that rip CD-Audio has every reason in the
world to
> >> >> >add itself as an alternative to the CD-Audio menu.
> >> >>
> >> >> Add itself as an alternative? I thought you said they had "every
> >> >> right"; why on earth would anyone want their app to be an
alternative?
> >> >
> >> >Because ripping CD-Audio is not a common task with CDs.
> >>
> >> That would depend, wouldn't it? For those that rip audio from or to
> >> CDs, I'd say its probably a common task, wouldn't you? For the rest,
it
> >> might be uncommon, I guess.
> >
> >That is why it should ask if it should add itself as the default.
>
> Why not ask also if it wants to be an alternative. Better yet, don't
> ask anything at all, and let the user *tell* the computer how it should
> work. Oh, no, I forgot, Windows doesn't have a functional method for
> the user to control extensions/associations/file types. My bad.
Of course it has.
We've been through this already.
The problem isn't in the association part, it's a easy to change what any
association points to.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 12:50:04 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 19 Dec 2000 13:58:29
> [...]
> >> >High bandwitdh connection, monopol.
> >>
> >> I don't know what you're talking about. Satellite? DSL counts as
> >> either phone or cable, generally.
> >
> >Anything above ISDN is high bandwidth IMO.
>
> Yes, but ISDN is on the telephone network, and cable is on a different
> medium, and there's satellite, like I said, as well as DSL, which may be
> telephone or something else. How can a market be monopolized if you
> don't know what it is?
Because right now, there is one place where you can get a high bandwidth
connection from.
Phone company, and then we are expecting ADSL sometimes in 2001.
Cables won't be here this year, satellites are also unlikely to compete with
them.
And the stupid... "person in charge of limitation on bussiness" (is the best
translation I can offer for this) had lowered the ADSL prices considerably.
This sucks.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 10:54:31 GMT
"T. Max Devlin"
> >Kulkis has claimed to do things he hasn't. One is that he has claimed to
> >have been on classified ops that he can't talk about, yet he talks about
> >them. [...]
>
> He's yanking your chain, dude.
No, actually he just pathetically and desperately tries to impress others by
lying and can't handle it when he gets caught in those lies.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 10:57:01 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > He's yanking your chain, dude.
>
>
> Proving that Max is Waaaaaaaaaay smarter than Bill.
KuKu, your a pathetic soul who lies desperately in the vain attempt to
impress others. You simple can't handle getting caught in your own lies.
You are childish. Grow up and mature a bit. You'll do wonders for
yourself.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 11:02:24 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> My uniform layout is as follows
>
> [ACM][AAM]
> [RCGCM][ASR][NDSM]
> [PUC][JMUC] [SWASM][OTR][IOSR]
>
Again, you lie, KuKu. You are truly pathetic. Firstly, unit awards are
only worn above the right pocket. Secondly, you haven't been awarded the
PUC. Now, go somewhere else and try to inpress some teenagers bercause you
sure haven't impressed any soldiers.
BTW there is no medal known by the acronym "ACM". It's "ARCOM", wannabe.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 06:02:19 -0500
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Philip Neves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:Xu_06.862967
> > As of right now There are no viruses that I know of for linux.
>
> Guess you've never heard of Bliss:
>
> http://math-www.uni-paderborn.de/~axel/bliss/
>
> It's been around for a while. Not to mention that there have been
> virus-like things, such as the morris internet worm.
>
> > I've been using linux for five years and I have never heard of one.
>
> I guess ignorance, is Bliss.
The thing you are missing is that most NT users must operate with OS
privileges which would allow a virus to spread, while UNIX/Linux do not.
"bliss" would do little (if any) damage to an average users system,
because average users are not supposed to have write access to binary
executable files.
Viruses can exist in theory, yes, can they work in practice? It is very
very very difficult. Windows and NT, on the other hand, have regular
proof of poor security.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: "Darren Winsper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 11:02:44 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ok, so to update my rpm, I need an rpm that needs a packages that will
> not install with my current rpm.
>
> This is so amazing. NO wonder 90% of the world uses windows.
>
> On windows, I never had such idiotic installation problems. never.
>
> back to windows, you guys can keep this junk.
Oh dear, you really did have a few problems. Oh well, let's see what
happens when I want to install abiword:
apt-get install abiword
Press return a couple of times
Done
Now, why did I want abiword again? Oh yeah, I didn't, I just wanted to
prove that Linux needn't be as bad as Steve portrays.
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
