Linux-Advocacy Digest #101, Volume #31 Thu, 28 Dec 00 17:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (J Sloan)
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (J Sloan)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Mig)
Re: SV: open source is getting worst with time. (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (Gary Hallock)
Advocacy: A Definition from Webster ("bbjb \(BillyBobJoeBuck\)")
Linux Courses ("Simon Mc")
Re: Linux is awful (Form@C)
Re: Please don't laugh. (Peter Hayes)
Re: maximal mounts (Form@C)
Re: Uptimes ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Redhat needs an update tool. Was: My pet peeve (Karen Rosin)
Re: Advocacy: A Definition from Webster ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: VB job offer, and ensuing dilemma ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:02:07 GMT
Todd wrote:
> "Besides, given that 2000 crushed Linux in that famous benchmark that was
> audited by Red Hat, Microsoft, and PCWeek, 2000 still trounced Linux even
> with the mandatory GUI.
"crushed" linux?
Well, I guess as a microsoft employee, you are required
to ignore any recent benchmarks, which by the way have
Linux "crushing" nt/2000...
And BTW congratulations is in order!
It is clear that your firm, microsoft, has been working
very very hard to catch up to Linux on specweb 99.
Just recently, your billion dollar, flagship "unix-killer"
"windows 2000 datacenter server" turned in a spec
performance nearly as fast as Red Hat Linux!
amazing, and a testimony to all your hard work.
congrats you you all at microsoft.
jjs
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:05:29 GMT
Todd wrote:
> This is far different from simply having to know a logon. For example, if I
> knew the root password for a UNIX box, I could get to it over the Internet
> from home.
Looks like your Unix knowledge is lacking.
I can give you the hostnames and root passwords to any or
all of my unix servers and you would still never get in.
ssh, tcp_wrappers, firewall rules in the kernel, host keys, ipsec, etc.
> Not so on a NT/2000 network. I'd have to find a computer that
> was already trusted.
(yawn) so you create an imaginary unix with no security and
then compare your windows to that - sad, todd, very sad.
But then again, as a microsoft employee, that is what I'd expect.
jjs
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 21:03:06 +0100
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> Mig wrote:
>
> > Ahh.. your konqueror claim. Just tryed my /usr/bin directiory. OS.:
> > Mandrake 7.2 Pentium III. Time to list 1994 (1993 files) under one
> > second. It looks a bit to fast for me so i guess some cache is involved.
> > I can certainly not do this in explorer.exe (mayne in Servant Salamander
> > or something like it). Actually i mc is much much aster in the console.
>
> Oops! I missed an important point - the directory is on an NFS mounted
> drive thru a 10MBit hub. That's probably why its so slow.
Cant check that here.. bnut youre probably right
> > > (iii) Outlook Express has a rich address book (but then I use The
> > > Bat!)
> >
> > I dont use an Adress book. OE has a very bad functioning adress book.
> > How can I claim this ? I do Windows support for living and OE (and
> > earlier Internet Mail) has allways been a pain with all kinds of
> > problems. The AB gets corrupt easily (the same goes for the *.idx and
> > *.mbx files OE uses for storage) and wab.exe has sometimes very strange
> > ways of behaviour. Do a look on deja for funny wab.exe problems if you
> > think im trollng about this
>
> I did say I use The Bat!
Sorry.. dont know that one
> > Win ** UI is not consistent.. just think about Windows Media Player..
> > how consistent is that compared to the rest of the system? I do remenber
> > a Word version where you had 3 differint menus for doing the same
> > spellchecker functions.. is that still there?
> > Windows GUI is worth a study in how not to design a UI.... but has
> > everybody else i am used to it.. but that does not make it consistent.
>
> Most applications follow the "rules". You can expect certain things in
> certain places and for it to do things in certain ways.
I dont have trouble finding the things i want... actually i used a MAC
today (has been years since i did that) and could even install and use the
program as intended.
> Windows Media Player has customisable skins etc. and isn't expected to
> follow the rules. It's a funky, glossy (i.e. resource hog) multi-media
> app.
It still is a Windows app and a MS one and they break their own design
rools.
> > But.. so you are against diversity?
>
> Diversity is fine but what I see on Linux isn't diversity, it's a bunch of
> different standards pulling in different directions.
So there is diversity since youre saying "different standards". Lets use
Litestep as an example.. should their modules (or whatever they are called)
use the standard way? This is similar to the KDE Gnome situation.
> > > (v) Has a consistant file open/save dialog
> >
> > But.. so you are against diversity? :-)
>
> No - but I prefer things to work in similar ways.
They do.. even across different systems since i relatively easy could use a
MAC and be productive with it... or are we actually talking about another
kind of user?
> > I partially agree.. i hate that KDE programs use at least two ways of
> > doint that....that is unless youre speaking about Linux generally?
> > Or do you think that KDE and Gnome should use the same dialogs?
>
> KDE has one set, GNOME another and MOTIF another. I'm not sure what the
> answer should be here? Should they all be the same? Should there be a
> standard here?
Hmmm... i personally think that more stuff generally should be moved to X11
or another subsystem . I dont think that file dialogs belong there.
> > > (iii) KMail has a minimalist address book.
> >
> > Suits me well enough... what do you miss?
>
> It's just the address. Sometimes the address doesn't tell me who that is.
Well i wouldnt be worried about that but about Kmail dumping mails with
attachments at times. Anyone has an explanation for that?
> > > (iv) All KDE apps are consistant look and feel, however, some
> > > applications are GNOME, some are MOTIF some are something else again.
> > > There is very little consistancy between these.
> >
> > There shouldnt be any since these are different enviroments and we want
> > diversity.
>
> I want consistant diversity! I don't want to relearn all the hot keys,
> etc. for each desktop.
Consitent diversity? I dont understand that.. or are you thinking about
themability?
> > So use only Gnome, KDE or Motif apps and forget the rest. This is never
> > going to be solved to everybodys satisfaction since noone has a monopoly
>
> But you can't! There are a lot of things for GNOME (Linuxconf) and some
> things for KDE. You can't get applications built for GNOME that are also
> built for KDE. Why would a developer do that?
There is allways an equivalent app... not allways up to the same standard
but there is allways an app. BTW żou seem to mix Gnome and GTK apps
together.. i think linuxconf is based on GTK and not Gnome.
> > > Nonsense! Every piece of hardware I've bought has a Windows 95/98
> > > driver. Very few have a Linux driver.
> >
> > I was speeking out of the box.. here Linux supports much more hardware
> > that Windows.
>
> I was speaking of drivers you get when you buy the hardware for Intel
> PC's. Practically everything comes with Windows drivers - can the same be
> said of Linux drivers?
Evything works here.. even a HP C500 digital camera and 950C printer ( i
dont say that the camera works without probs - but it works)
--
Cheers
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: SV: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:07:41 GMT
Stuart Fox wrote:
>
> Yet when the winvocates say "upgrade to the latest version" when
> someone bitches about some problem or another, they get slammed for
> it. Why?
>
> This is touted as one of the advantages of Linux - break free of the
> needless upgrade cycle, yet the instant someone has a problem, what are
> 90% of the solutions offered? Upgrade!
FREE upgrade, that is.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 15:22:23 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Todd wrote:
>
> Besides, given that 2000 crushed Linux in that famous benchmark that was
> audited by Red Hat, Microsoft, and PCWeek, 2000 still trounced Linux even
> with the mandatory GUI.
>
Wrong in so many ways. It was NT 4.0, not W2K. It was an old version of
Linux, Redhat 5.2. It was well over a year and a half ago. More recent
tests show Linux to be much faster than W2K. Of course, benchmarks are not
necessarily indicative of performance in the real world, but you could at
least use more recent benchmarks and quote the correct OS versions.
Gary
------------------------------
From: "bbjb \(BillyBobJoeBuck\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Advocacy: A Definition from Webster
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 13:41:11 -0600
According to Webster - Advocacy: the act or process of advocating or
supporting a cause or proposal.
Based on my examination so far it would seem that the focus of this group is
to promote the advantages of Linux. Unfortunately, much of this comes in
the form of bashing the MS entry in the OS market.
As a novice Linux explorer, who has already formed his opinions related to
MS, etc., I'd find it much more useful to follow discussions that focus on
the merits of Linux as well as any short comings that must still exist in
such a young OS.
bbjb
------------------------------
From: "Simon Mc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux Courses
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:50:28 -0000
We have just added a load of free Linux courses to the site.
--
For Information on computer networking and certification..Visit your IT home
on the net www.theitweb.com
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Form@C)
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 21:10:30 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <92g3j3$p2b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
<snip>
>the Linux file mgr gui have the equivalent of the CLI's 'man -k' ?
>man and grep can quickly find a lot of info.
unfortunately they usually find information on the second version back from
the one that you need the information on...
<grin>
Oh, and on the subject of GUIs, why do the pop-ups on most Linux GUI
software assume that the user's screen resolution is at least 1024x768 (and
sometimes even greater than that)? Don't Linux/unix users ever use the
standard, basic 640x480 graphics mode? Are the applications too dim to ask
X what the screen res is so that they can suitably size their boxes? Could
it be that we are *still* running 30-year old apps on the new GUIs?
<another grin>
<dives for flameproof cover 'cos he can see what's coming...>
--
Mick
Olde Nascom Computers - http://www.mixtel.co.uk
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Please don't laugh.
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 21:05:38 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000 03:44:56 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bonnie) wrote:
> I'd like to look at Linux butthe only pc I can play with it on is a 25
> Mhz 486 with 4 meg of RAM and a 170 meg hard drive. Is there a free
> version of Linux that'll work on this and where can I find it?
I did get a version of mulinux going on a 486 with 8Mb ram It ran X as
well, with a minimalistic WM like TWM. Worked fine, IIRC it was very
Slackware-like.
Also tried Pygmy Linux, I think it was, but that has grown somewhat
recently.
Go to www.tucows.com -> Linux -> Console -> System -> Mini-distributions
and there's plenty to choose from. Some will run on your 486. mulinux is on
that site, also www.mulinux.free-online.co.uk which is a mirror of the
author's Italian site which seems to be down at the moment.
What gets forgotten in the headlong rush for Gigahertz machines with 128Mb
ram, etc, is that nine or ten years ago we had Windows 3.0 and 3.1 which
worked tolerably well in the context of what was available at that time,
and all done on a 386 or 486 with 4Mb ram and 170 Mb hdd. Is the average
office worker more productive today with the hundredfold increase in
computing power at their disposal?
Peter
------------------------------
Subject: Re: maximal mounts
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Form@C)
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 21:13:37 GMT
Bob Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
<6oC26.30544$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Rather than yet another ``uptime'' comparison, how about a ``maximal
>mount count'' on a home system? :-)
>
>Here's what's running now...a different scenario from the 120 meg hard
>drive running on the 486 I had back in '92 when the source for the
>kernel fit on a floppy!
>
<long snip>
Wow!It's impressive, but why do you do it? This must be a development
system, surely.
--
Mick
Olde Nascom Computers - http://www.mixtel.co.uk
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 15:18:38 -0600
"Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:92figa$2pd4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Netcraft: The uptime is available in the IP packet header, not per spec,
> just by convention, it's the number used for synchronization. Firewalls
use
> a random number, typically.
Incorrect. It's not the IP packet header, but the TCP packet header. I
know it's easy to confuse them, but just a point of clarification.
> Uptimes: The client runs as a service, and you can set it to run under
the
> admin account.
Uptimes is a bit like an internet poll (which are historically inaccurate).
Only people interested in participating are polled, and this in and of
itself severely skews the statistics due to the habits of people that tend
to participate in these kinds of things.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 23:20:36 +0200
From: Karen Rosin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Redhat needs an update tool. Was: My pet peeve
Perry Pip wrote:
> On 24 Dec 2000 13:02:15 -0700,
> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip) writes:
> >
> >> On 22 Dec 2000 14:38:47 -0700,
> >> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip) writes:
> >> >
> >> >> On 22 Dec 2000 08:56:14 -0700,
> >> >> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Actually, I like the way FreeBSD does it. If it needs something to compile,
> >> >> >> it goes out and gets it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Just like rpmfind and apt-get under Linux.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Can you do updates in rpmfind?? As in like:
> >> >>
> >> >> apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
> >> >
> >> >rpmfind --upgrade `rpm -qa`
> >> >
> >>
> >> Do you really do your updates that way?? I just tried it and it
> >> doesn't seem to work. I downloaded it for a RH62 machine from:
> >
> >Sorry, I'd actually use this:
> >
> > rpmfind --latest --upgrade `rpm -qa --queryformat "%{NAME}\\n"`
>
> But it still won't work becuase rpmfind insists on using standard
> (i.e. non-update) packages from the RH70 dist, instead of the updates
> for my RH62 dist.
>
> >But, no, I upgrade by hand usually (call me paranoid),
>
> Translation: Current methods for upgrading redhat are not easy or as
> reliable as apt-get and you have to do it by hand. I don't have to be
> paranoid with apt-get, it has worked seamlessly for years. And before
> apt-get, I could do reliable upgrades with dselect.
>
> >or use rpmfind
> >with a '-s my_local_machine' that has the RPMS I want to use. I do
> >this with about 20 machines regularly.
>
> My current method is to use wget to ftp mirror the RH62 updates
> directory, temporarily move the RPMS I don't want and do 'rpm -Fvh
> *.rpm'. That's inefficient and messy.
>
> >> So now you can see it wants to install RH 7.0 packages, which, if you
> >> check Redhats errata page, isn't event the right sucurity update for
> >> RH 7.0. RH 7.0 isn't even mention in the /etc/rpmfind.conf file. But
> >> as it turns out, the tool created a new file, ~/.rpmfind and put RH
> >> 7.0 in it. So I fix up the ~/.rpmfind, take the RH7.0 out of it,
> >> verify RH62 is at the top, and now everytime I run it it overwrites
> >> the ~/.rpmfind file with it's own configuration!!! What a peice of
> >> shit!!
> >
> >If you just want RedHat 6.2 official security updates:
> >
> >#!/usr/bin/perl
> >$RDIR =
>'ftp://ftp.sourceforge.net/mounts/u2/mirrors/redhat/redhat/updates/6.2/\i386/';
> >@files = `ncftpls $RDIR`;
> >foreach $file (@files) {
> > print `rpm --Fvh $RDIR/$file`;
> >}
>
> That would unfortanely upgrade my kernel if it worked all, Craig. But
> it won't work becuase when you call RPM on the updates one by
> one RPM will fail with broken dependancies. You need a line like:
>
> print `rpm --Fvh $RDIR/*.rpm`
>
> But the wildcard won't work using RPM over FTP.
>
> >All the tools are there.
>
> And for Redhat they work like shit. That's why you have to do it
> manually, or come up with a hack, right??
>
> >If you don't want to use up2date, gnorpm, or
> >rpmfind -- you have many options. This all fits into the UNIX KISS
> >philosophy quite well (IMHO).
>
> But all of these methods aren't what *I* want: an integrated method
> provided by the distributor. As long as you rely on third party hacks
> you are at much more risk of breaking your system with an
> upgrade. Isn't that why you do it manually?? Couldn't you do something
> better with your time?? apt-get can be run reliably from a cron job.
>
> >> Tell me how you get this POS to work on your system, Craig. This is a
> >> major weakness of Redhat, IMHO. Debian, the BSD's and even Win2k all
> >> have decently reliable update tools. With Redhat, you have up2date,
> >> which limits you to X-windows and wants you to pay for 'priority
> >> access', or a third party tool. The problem with third party tools is
> >> every time RH changes their dist it's gonna potentially break the
> >> third party tool.
> >
> >1) It's different, not worse
>
> Bullshit!! It's clearly worse. None of the solutions you have given
> me will work. And as you admit, you do it manually.
>
> >2) Windows hotfixes are not automated at all
>
> Running Windows update from w2k has seemed work for me almost as
> easily as apt-get from he command line. Though it would be difficult
> to fully automate it, it's much easier than redhat.
>
> >3) Debian is indeed cool, but it's not *that* much different
>
> Sure it is. It fucking works!! It's an integrated part of the
> distribution. It's has worked seamlessly for years. And it is easily
> run from a cron job. Instead of being paranoid like you are with
> Redhat, Debian apt-get gives me a warm cozy feeling.
>
> >4) You don't need to pay for 'priority access' at all
>
> No, but Redhat's native tool, up2date, is X-window bound, slow as shit,
> and impossible to automate. Do you use Debian at all, Craig??
>
> Merry xmas,
>
> Perry
> I saw at Slashdot a posting about a new company, which has an automatic
> Upgrade/Downgrade/Install/Uninstall and more goodies.
The company name is Aduva, it sounds like it does the job for you...
www.aduva.com
Cheerio,
K.
I
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advocacy: A Definition from Webster
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 15:26:15 -0600
"bbjb (BillyBobJoeBuck)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:etiTkXQcAHA.280@cpmsnbbsa07...
> According to Webster - Advocacy: the act or process of advocating or
> supporting a cause or proposal.
>
> Based on my examination so far it would seem that the focus of this group
is
> to promote the advantages of Linux. Unfortunately, much of this comes in
> the form of bashing the MS entry in the OS market.
The problem is not with your understanding of the word Advocacy, but the
understanding of what the .advocacy forums are for. In order to understand
this, you have to look at what has happened historically that led to their
creation.
Way back in the early 90's, there was a major reorginization of the
comp.sys.amiga newsgroup. A whole bunch of new newsgroups were created more
in line with what other OS hiearchies had. comp.sys.amiga.advocacy was
created during this reorg as a way to remove as much inflammatory discussion
from the "serious" newsgroups (such as .misc, .programmer, etc.) and devote
a special newsgroup to being inflammatory about your favorite (or least
favorite) OS.
In other words, .advocacy is a filtering mechanism designed to keep the
serious groups less cluttered. If you take away .advocacy or change it's
focus, then the people that flame will go back to cluttering the normal
groups.
It's *FOR* yelling at each other about the OS's in question.
> As a novice Linux explorer, who has already formed his opinions related to
> MS, etc., I'd find it much more useful to follow discussions that focus on
> the merits of Linux as well as any short comings that must still exist in
> such a young OS.
Then you would do better in the other newsgroups.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VB job offer, and ensuing dilemma
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 16:28:37 -0500
"hate_idiots_like_aaron@-" wrote:
>
> Listen you Aaron moron.
>
> Do not quote whole articles just to answer with one line.
>
> also trim down your long stupid sig.
>
> you are trully pathetic.
>
So are you.
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
