Linux-Advocacy Digest #45, Volume #31 Sun, 24 Dec 00 10:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: open source is getting worst with time. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Conclusion ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (steve@x)
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (Yatima)
Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) (Yatima)
Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000 ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Name one thing Microsoft INVENTED.... (Matthias Warkus)
Re: This group should rename itself ("Tom Wilson")
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (Nick Ruisi)
Re: Conclusion ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Conclusion ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Conclusion ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux is free. ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("billh")
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (matt newell)
Re: Linux lacks (nf)
Re: Since this is an Advocacy.... ("Tom Wilson")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 14:13:16 +0200
"John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> > Does Microsoft -- or anyone else -- have a list of known compatible
hardware?
> > Linux does. :-)
http://www.microsoft.com/hcl/default.asp
> Not that I'm aware of, but if it does, the next question is equally
> important: do they have documentation on the proper configuration for
> that hardware?
>
> Like, say, the proper AHA-2940UW BIOS settings for Windows 98?
I think that you would need to go to the manufactor site's for those
settings, but anyway, here is what MS supplies about this:
Adaptec Inc.
AHA-2940UW
This Device meets the following logo-level classifications:
Windows 98:
Windows Me:
Windows NT4 x86:
Windows 2000:
No Test Data
No Test Data
PC97 Compliant
No Test Data
Firmware Revision: 1.26
Firmware/BIOS Revision: 1.26
I *strongly* suggest that you would go to the Hardware Compatibility List
(link above) and search for this, there are about dozen entries about
AHA-2940UW there, some that work on 98, so you'd better check and verify
exactly what card you've.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 12:23:04 GMT
On 24 Dec 2000 00:13:44 -0800, steve@x <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>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.
And we have another winner ladies and gentlemen!
Seriously, welcome to Linux where time is worthless, just like Linux.
Simple tasks, like installing applications become crusades as you
search through reams of How-To's in the quest to perform a simple
task.
The Penguinista's love that kind of crap so they don't mind.
I suspect you will get a 100 responses calling you an idiot and making
sure you know that it worked fine for them and you are the only idiot
in the world that can't make it work.
Don't be fooled!
Some of them are having the exact same problems you are, only they are
too stupid to admit it because of their religious desire to not
blaspheme Linux.
Linux is pathetic.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 14:25:05 +0200
"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Adam Warner wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ayende,
> >
> > > > > > Anyone else encountered users doing this rm /tmp ?
> > > >
> > > > Now would be a good time to ask: what's wrong with deleting files in
the
> > > > /tmp directory?
> > >
> > > The wrong thing is when you delete the directory itself.
> >
> > OK, thanks. That would obviously cause problems for all programs trying
to
> > access/create temporary files.
> >
> > Adam
>
> Pedant point:
>
> rm /tmp isn't going to do anything at all unless /tmp is a symbolic link.
>
> The rm command won't remove directories unless it's given the -r
> (recursive) option
Murphy law dictate that morons will always be able to learn how to make life
misreble, but not enough to stop them doing it.
> The DEL command in MS-DOS used to remove directories as well as files,
> but I don't think that was recursive. Wan't there a DELTREE command
> for recursive removal?
deltree is for recursive removal, indeed.
But del is not capable of removing directories.
You need rd to remove a directory, and it need to be clean (no file or
sub-directories) for it to work.
------------------------------
From: steve@x <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: 24 Dec 2000 03:57:49 -0800
In article <924l75$piu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Darren says...
>
>
>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.
apt-get install abiword
bash: apt-get: command not found
now, which rpm I need to install this apt-get thing so I can
install abiword which my rpm could install becuase the abiword
package I allready have needed an newer rpm program that needed
a package that needed the newer rpm to install?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yatima)
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 12:58:57 GMT
On 24 Dec 2000 03:57:49 -0800, steve@x <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>apt-get install abiword
>bash: apt-get: command not found
>
>now, which rpm I need to install this apt-get thing so I can
>install abiword which my rpm could install becuase the abiword
>package I allready have needed an newer rpm program that needed
>a package that needed the newer rpm to install?
You need to be running either debian or a debian based system like Storm
Linux or Libranet in order to use apt (although I hear they are porting
it to rpm based distributions so you may be in luck soon).
--
yatima
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yatima)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 13:04:32 GMT
On Thu, 21 Dec 2000 23:15:53 GMT, Robin and [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Ah yes!
>
>The joy of Linux, once again illustrated for all to see.
>
>By the time Linux catches up to Windows 2000, Windows will be at
>Windows 2100 and then some.
>
>Linux is a pile of junk.
How many aliases are you at now
Steve/Heather/Claire_lynn/Swang/Flatfish/Robin and Jimmy etc ad nauseum?
Just curious.
--
yatima
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 13:22:47 GMT
"nf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <BDf16.207$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> says...
> >
> > > The problem is that many programs are written to a Win9x model and
don't
> > > do the right things as far as use of registry keys and such. The
> > > vendors get away with this because the poor security on a default
> > > installation of NT allows it to work. OTOH, one could probably make
an
> > > agrument that the whole registry mechanism is too complicated and that
> > > is the reason that developers don't use it as they should. There
seems
> > > to be a lot of random and unexplained complexity in Win32.
> >
> > IMHO, Win32 is the way it is because it was rushed and not well thought
out
> > in advance. The same goes for the registry. Had they stuck with ini
files
> > (placing them into an /etc or equivalent rather than the windows system
> > directory), it'd been better.
> >
> >
>
> It would have been FAR better. Especially for those of us who have to
> program to the damn thing.
Amen, power brother! <g>
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
Chattanooga, TN.
Welcome home, Al Gore...LOSER!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Name one thing Microsoft INVENTED....
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 11:53:53 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Fri, 22 Dec 2000 09:38:58 GMT...
...and Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Marketing of computer software. Noone else seemed to do it, and
> seemed
> > > a little surprised when Microsoft did. Some seemed to steadfastly
> > > refuse to market their software until it was too late (OS/2 anyone?)
> > >
> >
> > You're insane. Byte and Creative Computing were FULL Of software
> > ads long before Microsoft stole QDOS.
> >
> Let me rephrase that then. Marketing software **well**. Or doing ads
> that didn't just appeal to the geeks.
I bet IBM had software ads appealing to businessmen years before Bill
Gates programmed his first BASIC interpreter.
mawa
--
...do I really want to find love? Or is it just that I want to get
laid and thus prove to all of them and to myself, once and for all,
that I'm not a nerd, may they consider me one or not...
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: This group should rename itself
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 13:36:12 GMT
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Yrj16.98561$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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.
The last I played with Delphi was v1.0. Wrote a Win95 boot/install disk
generator with it. It seemed like a good package.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: Nick Ruisi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 08:32:13 -0500
rpm -i --force --nodeps
The software might not work after install, though.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 13:46:43 GMT
"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Adam Warner wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ayende,
> >
> > > > > > Anyone else encountered users doing this rm /tmp ?
> > > >
> > > > Now would be a good time to ask: what's wrong with deleting files in
the
> > > > /tmp directory?
> > >
> > > The wrong thing is when you delete the directory itself.
> >
> > OK, thanks. That would obviously cause problems for all programs trying
to
> > access/create temporary files.
> >
> > Adam
>
> Pedant point:
>
> rm /tmp isn't going to do anything at all unless /tmp is a symbolic link.
>
> The rm command won't remove directories unless it's given the -r
> (recursive) option
>
> The DEL command in MS-DOS used to remove directories as well as files,
> but I don't think that was recursive. Wan't there a DELTREE command
> for recursive removal?
Yup, version 5.0 and above if memory serves correctly.
(And often, it doesn't <g>)
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 13:56:08 GMT
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ELw06.15239$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snippage>
> Mine are designed that way too.
>
> > The internal structure will typically be quite complex, with access
> > to the "public" servers, internal web servers etc in their own DMZ(s)
> > and so on - I'm more concerned with the external view for this example.
>
> And another reason Netcraft numbers should be taken with a grain of salt.
> hear that Matt?
I think this whole debate is meaningless. Netcraft statistics, like any
other statistics, can be manipulated or outright distorted to fit ANY point
of view and are therefore next to useless. The only yardstick any of us have
is our own experiences with the platforms in question.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 13:58:32 GMT
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:SG816.23891$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:922u16$hpp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Right chad. And you still have NO proof to show that the numbers are
> > wrong. The only thing you can say is that the netcraft numbers don't
> > come from the computers *you* think they should. YOu and the winvocates
> > here have NEVER shown that the numbers are NOT From W2K boxes and that
> > they are not accurate. Even Erics statement of how it works states
> > basicly the same. All of which is CLEARLY documented on the Webcraft
> > page. From all the actual evidance (real, not your claims) shows that
> > the numbers are indeed from W2K boxes and are indeed accurate.
> >
>
> So how do you gain anonymous administrator access to secured performance
> metrics?
>
> > 2 sources claim the same thing you despite your persistand claims that
> > they are worng, neither have been PROVEN to be giving false information.
> > Yes, Netcraft does not always get the numbers from the webserver proper,
> > but the numbers it does get for W2K DO come from W2K and are accurate,
> > even according to eric.
> >
>
> Repeating the big lie, Joe Goebbells would be proud of you.
Looking for the 'H' word, I take it? ;)
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 14:07:19 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Steve Mading in alt.destroy.microsoft on 13 Dec 2000 22:28:33 GMT;
> >In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >: Yes...the term liberal (root: liber = freedom) has been absconded
> >: with by the freedom-hating socialists.
> >
> >Then why help then mis-use it? Stop calling them liberals then.
>
> LOL
Don't laugh!
Calling them Prefix-Absconding-Freedom-Hating-Socialists wastes bandwidth
and is hard on the fingers!
Liberal, in comparison, is bandwidth friendly and simply flows from the
finger-tips!
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is free.
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 14:18:20 GMT
"David Dorward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:91v24k$65f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> > David Dorward wrote:
> >
> > > Installing base system
> > That doesn't take three hours.
>
> It does take one
>
> > > Installing graphics drivers
> >
> > Depends on your graphics card. Shouldn't take more than a few minutes.
> > Some graphics cards are already part of the base system (not that many).
>
> VooDoo 3 - most of the effort is in setting up the correct res etc
> afterwards.
>
> > > Rebooting to safe mode to fix the strangeness caused by my monitor not
> > > liking 800x600 (higher or lower is fine, just not 800x600)
> >
> > Why 800x600?
>
> No idea. I just gives out of range errors
>
I had a similar problem with that card, except for 1280x1024 resolution. I'd
select it from DrakConf, DrakConf said everything was A-OK and that I was
presently at 1280x1024, but in fact, I was at 1024x768. Turns out, I could
select ANY resolution, including 1600x1200, and it would work. Only
1280x1024 gave me any grief. Went through this routine a couple of times.
Got good and pissed off then hacked XF86Config myself...Grrr!
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 14:39:44 GMT
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:4Cw06.15176$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
> >
> > > > And "Freeware" != "Open Source". Many open source products are >
> available
> > > for sale.
> > > >
> > >
> > > So now the cost goes up for open sores.
> >
> > LOL! Even a drowning man will clutch at straws.
> >
> > > > > Additionally, the little
> > > > > extra I pay for quality software wouldn't be a months pay for a
> staff
> > > > > programmer.
> > > >
> > > > s/quality/closed/g. Paying for your software doesn't make it closed,
> and
> > > closing
> > > > the software doesn't make it quality.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I don't always buy closed software, I do buy professionally developed
> > > software not someones hobby.
> >
> > Lots of open source software is professionally developed. e.g. The GNU C
> > Compiler was originally developed by Richard Stallman who is a
> professional
> > compiler writer. IBM now has a policy that all it's (professionally
> developed)
> > software is to be released as open source unless there is a compelling
> business
> > reason to close it.
> >
>
> Why no open source on OS/2 then? The market has dissapeared, practically,
> OSS in that arena would return users because support would now be
possible.
Probably they want to bury OS/2 along side of their other mistake - PS/2.
They're on the right track now, don't give them any ideas <G>
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 14:41:22 GMT
"Tim Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad C. Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >The point is that Alpha and Beta releases are part of a normal software
> >development cycle whether you develop for windows or any other platform.
>
> True if you limit yourself to software development models from 20 year
> old textbooks. Newer models don't necessarily have alpha and beta
> releases.
They should.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 14:42:26 GMT
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:YkV06.21748$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Tim Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >2.2 kernel is two years behind what the market need. Two years in one
of
> the
> >
> > What do you think is missing from 2.2 that the market needs?
> >
>
> functionality.
Such as?
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
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 14:43:57 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> You hae Zeeeeeeero credibility, loser.
KuKu, this is a wonderful statement since it comes from you. Keep it up.
------------------------------
From: matt newell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 04:14:23 -0800
steve@x wrote:
>
> 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.
>
Linux is all about options, you could
A. Use Debian - No more rpms
B. Compile from source - This results in faster programs that are optimized
for your computer
C. kindly ask that package maintainer to use rpm version < 4 - This may work.
There will always be stumbling blocks in our lives, don't curse at the men
building the steps, help them out.
I relize that linux is not perfect, but I have rock solid opengl drivers,
anti-aliased text in all my applications(looks great), a browser that is
faster and more complient than IE(konqueror), a kernel that NEVER crashes, and
an obsolutely wonderfull set of applications provided by KDE. None of these
things were available a year ago, so I don't see how you can justify that open
source is getting worse with time.
Matt Newell
------------------------------
From: nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lacks
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 09:18:31 -0500
In article <Oyl16.227$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> While I disagree with nearly everything you spew forth in your posts, I'll
> side with you on this.
>
>
> DBIV was a very unfunny joke and I never gave an Ashton-Tate product a
> second glance from that point forward. If I could lay hands on a box with a
> 5 1/4" drive, I'd format over the floppies (Still have them somewhere) out
> of principal like I did with OS/2 2.0.
>
Please .... OS/2 2.0 (as bad as it was) was FAR better than dBase IV!
:-)
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Since this is an Advocacy....
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 14:55:54 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2000 22:32:46 -0500, glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >when is the last time you edited your autoexec.bat file or config.sys in
> >order to use your dos bootdisk which had your cdrom driver (and mscdex)
> >in order to install windows from a CD?
>
> Somewhere areound 1997 or so. I am smart enough to make a rescue
> diskette.
But not smart enough to cope with a certain IBM laptop huh,
"Steve/Mike/Heather/Simon/teknite/keymaster/keys88/Sewer Rat/
S/Sponge/Sarek/piddy/McSwain/pickle_pete/Ishmeal_hafizi/
Syphon/Proculous/Tiberious/Amy/Jerry_Butler/Wobbles/wazzoo/
Tim Palmer/BklynBoy/susie_wong/leg log/bison/deadpenguin/
clair_lynn/Swango/flatfish++++" ?
^^^^^^^
PS: I believe they're called "boot disks", not "rescue disks".
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
