Linux-Advocacy Digest #133, Volume #31 Sat, 30 Dec 00 01:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
("Kyle Jacobs")
Re: Linux, it is great. (Charlie C. Ebert)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Please, give up fighting with Windows users. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge (Charlie C. Ebert)
Re: Please, give up fighting with Windows users. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (redc1c4)
Re: HardcoreLinux.com domain name for sale ("[Bad-Knees]")
Re: Please don't laugh. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Advocacy: A Definition from Webster ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Linux, it is great. (Glitch)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it (Chris
Ahlstrom)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it (Chris
Ahlstrom)
Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Who LOVES Linux again? (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) (Chris Ahlstrom)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 04:07:58 GMT
Your pleas fall on deaf ears.
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:92jn3i$t3e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:O6c36.52621$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:92jgm4$qgt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > A single tool has handled all text config files for as long as
anyone
> > > > has used them. Actually many tools are useful with them besides
> > > > the editor: diff, patch, cvs, etc. can all be very handy when you
have
> > > > several versions to maintain.
> > >
> > > Irrelevent to the discussion, because that isn't what I'm talking
about.
> > > I'm talking about making a global config tool, and why it is so hard
to
> do
> > > so.
> >
> > The text editor is a global config tool.
>
> Not for the kind I'm talking about.
>
> > > Why is LinuxConf is so popular?
> >
> > Personally, I dislike it and don't understand why it is
> > popular at all. Webmin seems like a much nicer
> > approach to me - it doesn't try to 'fix' all the
> > services whenever you touch any one of them.
>
> LinuxConf is just an example, I'm talking about UIing the configurations
of
> applications.
>
> > > Because it's much nicer to have UI instead of flat text files when you
> try
> > > to configure something.
> >
> > Why? If it is something you can automate, why should I touch it
> > at all, and if you can't automate it how does hiding the config
> > file help?
>
> It doesn't hide the config file help, the method which I propuse gives you
> the help inside the configurator.
> And who is talking about automation here? How did this came in the
> discussion?
>
> > > What I'm propusing would include the bad syntax checking internally,
so
> > the
> > > configurator will be able to handle it, and not the application.
> > > See link above, to see what I'm talking about.
> >
> > You can do a certain amount of syntax checking against a DTD or schema
> > but you can't do the hard part: complex relationships with other values
> > that may or may not be part of the same configuration. That leaves the
> > hard part to a human who now has no understanding of what would have
> > been the easy things about the configuration.
>
> Dependencies I've not thought about, but never the less, you could still
put
> them in the XML file.
> It isn't very hard to do anyway.
> http://www10.ewebcity.com/ayende/lmc.xml
>
> Now contains a possible way to verify dependencies, including comlex ones.
>
> > You are back to the basic
> > problem of the GUI - it makes easy things easier and difficult things
> > impossible.
>
> Wrong.
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie C. Ebert)
Subject: Re: Linux, it is great.
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 04:27:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bruce Scott TOK wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>elmig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Well, KDE and GNOME are too unstable and too "heavy". They are like a copy
>>of the Windows desktop but with worst performance and more byggy. The good
>>thing about them: themes.
>>I really like WindowMaker. Fast, simple and reliable. What can i possibly
>>want more on a wm?
>
>KDE and Gnome are a waste of time for me...
>
>Is WM smaller and more flexible than fvwm/2?
>
>--
>cu,
>Bruce
>
In Debian there is a collection of smaller X managers but
if small is the issue why not just leave X off.
They have enough console packages to do anything X does.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 06:17:28 +0200
"Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ycd36.71114$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Your pleas fall on deaf ears.
I still have faith that somebody here thinks that it's a good idea to make
Linux easy to use.
This method alone should be able to eliminate much of the learning curve in
linux.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 04:40:03 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 02:25:05 GMT, "Les Mikesell"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"the_blur" <the_blur_oc@*removespamguard*hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:VQ_26.3724$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > After one year, the Linux users will be running circles around the
> >> > Windows users.
> >>
> >> Why?
> >
> >Because they learn the shell's features for automating repetitive tasks.
> >Nearly
> >anything done in the CLI can be automated by simply putting the same
lines
> >you would type into a file, and the variable parts can often be provided
> >at runtime through prompting or some completely automatic operation.
> >
>
> You are making the assumption that they will still be using Linux a
> year from when they start which for the average desktop user is highly
> unlikely.
>
Isn't it time to change aliases again?
Just curious....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Please, give up fighting with Windows users.
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 04:40:33 GMT
In article <92f650$rc6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ummm... isn't this an advocacy group?
yes, Linux Advocacy, not Linux vs Windows Philosophy discussion. Advocacy,
meaning "lets talk about what is happening this week in Linux news, and lets
share new developments this week."
I'm not quite understanding the meaning of your post, did you want
clarification? That should suffice, I hope. Otherwise, tell me what you mean
by yr question.
C Pungent
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie C. Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 04:58:45 GMT
In article <92jdq0$bji$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) wrote:
>In article <jN636.111860$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> "R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:92ijql$mrj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> : While Linux stocks dropped substantially, so did internet stocks.
>>
>> Most of the internet stocks did not drop as substancially as the Linux
>> stocks did.
>
Debian is the answer your looking for here.
Debian has no stock, makes no profit, and is the motherload of
the Linux industry.
Linux is free per Debian standards. This means free for the download
and free for the modification usage under the GPL.
Anytime you compare a product such as this one which is free against
one which doesn't work right and is not free, the answer as to which
will survive and prosper is self evident.
Linux does NOT run on the stock market.
Linux is to computers what bricks are to Masons.
Linux does not suffer from financial woes like Microsoft or any
other commerical company would.
Linux is like a GOD whilst Microsoft is a mere mortal.
People from 2,000 years ago might read about the meaning of
the word Linux in the history books but GPL'd software will
be with us in some form and name.
Beyond 2010 there will be no serious commerical OS competitors
to Linux of any kind.
You could easily say and envision NO commerical OS competitors
of any kind beyond 2010 due to the enormous cost of bringing
a new OS forth and attempting to compete with a free one which
has no flaws.
The notion of using a commerical OS after 2010 would be like
the current notion of mounting a horse in an armor suit and charging
a burlap bag with a pointed pole. It will be so bizarre and
confusing that people 20 years ago will laugh at the notion you
used one.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Please, give up fighting with Windows users.
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 04:46:54 GMT
In article <omA26.179882$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"John Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got a new term for you to read up on ... PARAGRAPH BREAKS!
>Aren't you witty. Reading up would be pointless, as I understand English grammar very
>well, having independantly studied it when I did my studies of German grammar.
>Paragraph breaks on the forum to me is like inserting periods into a poem or a peice
>of "beat" prose; like Kerouac described, you just let it flow out, just your thoughts
>and no worries of grammar.
<paragraph break>Hope that is a sufficient answer to your suggestion.<end
paragraph>
C Pungent
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: redc1c4 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "delete the \".ies\""
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: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:04:05 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> redc1c4 wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > (snipage occurs)
> >
> > > Ask Bill about how belief that EVERY German, Japanese, North Korean,
> > > Chinese, VietCong, and North Vietnamese combatant observed the
> > > Geneva Convention and refrained from firing at medics.
> > >
> > > Then ask him why in WW2, Korea, and VietNam, for EACH war, medics
> > > a casualty rate 50% higher than the infantry serving in the same war.
> >
> > better yet, ask erron, the mad eunuch engineer, to post where Bill,
> > myself, or any other reg posted such tripe. then ask him to produce
> > verifiable cites to back his claim. he won't do it, 'cause he can't.
>
> Of course, when DejaNews restores their entire message-base again,
> it will be quite evident.
>
> If you don't recall, it was PRECISELY because I *dared* to mention
> that historically, our enemies have considered our medics to be
> high priority targets in an ambush that got your (yellowc1c4's),
> Bill Hudson's, Dave Casey's, and V-(wo)man's undies in such a bunch.
actually, i recall it all quite well: you were spewing all sorts of
bullshit on alt.singles, and one of the regs there, came here, looking
to verify/deny said bullshit. being bullshit, you were pissed at being
caught.
you then progressed to making various wild assed stupid claims here, and
getting caught out routinely. after being spanked repeatedly, you suddenly
decided to try putting a better face on it all by claiming to be a troll.
when backed into a corner, you change the subject, or ignore the facts.
when proved wrong, you change the subject or ignore the facts.
and when asked to back up ANY of your claims, you tell others to do
the work of defending your indefensible claims.
you are a lying wannabe "war hero", and that's all you'll ever be.
> > redc1c4,
> > he's a lying wannabe "war hero", that's all.
>
> I was there
> you weren't
> hope that helps, coward.
you were on the police call, after the war, and publicly announced that
you'd apply for PLDC..... ONLY if there was a war, thereby conveniently
avoiding combat duty, making YOU the publicly avowed coward.
redc1c4,
REAL field troops don't wear "undies".......
what a surprise you don't know this either, wannabe.
--
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We
ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed
you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that
ye were our countrymen."
Samuel Adams
------------------------------
From: "[Bad-Knees]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HardcoreLinux.com domain name for sale
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:05:06 -0000
huh?
and...
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i en meddelelse
news:912ves$nht$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Swangoremovemee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 09 Dec 2000 15:22:00 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The big question is how many hits and how fast it returns them when
> > searching:
>
> > "Linux+Sux"
>
> > Google has 100's of thousands of hits.
>
> What would Google know? It runs on 6000 LINUX nodes.
>
>
>
>
> -----.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Please don't laugh.
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 04:55:41 GMT
In article <92glc7$72hug$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Btw, I LIKE old 486s, I run some command line stuff on one. Nostalgia
> effect.
> >So, I wouldn't laugh at that. But I don't recommend doing a comparision of
> >Linux vs Windows on that machine. At least put them on similar boxes. C
> >Pungent
> >
> Would be fun comparing linux vs windows current versions for simple things
> like running an internet router or as a telnet terminal - A small linux
> distro like
> slackware or tomsrtbt will run well on this hardware as long as you <Clarification>
>Slackware is not *necessarily a small distro, it can be as big as you want it to be.
>I run it, always have. Well, now that I think about it, I have it installed in < 1GB,
>that includes gcc,egcs, all that standard stuff, kernel src, X, Gnome, Kde (I use
>both),gimp, kdevelop, plus a ton of other apps. So, I guess it is kind of small,
>though I don't see why other distros containing the same stuff can't be installed in
>the same amount of space. Here's a project: try installing Win**, Photoshop 5.5, MS
>Visual Studio, etc-as-an-equivalent-to-this in <1 gig.
C Pungent
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Advocacy: A Definition from Webster
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:08:22 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Form@C) wrote:
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> <Z9O26.4333$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> <snip>>
> >It's *FOR* yelling at each other about the OS's in question.
> >
> <snip>
>
> YEAH! Right on!
>
> It would be very boring if this group was filled with nothing but nice,
> polite posts which merely listed possible new applications for Linux. This
> is what its name would suggest... The arguments are useful. They make
> people think about their choice of OS. Some of us even believe that Linux
> is *not* the best OS for every purpose!
That is true. But, however the history goes, what is wrong with some change?
If the arguement it worthwhile, I see your point, and yes, it would be boring
for everyone to be polite. However, what I am seeing a lot of in here is
simple "Windows sucks" "Linux sucks" "Kde sucks" "Red Hat sucks"......not too
much intelligence and not very useful to a newbie looking for the *right* OS
for him/her. I dunno. Thats what forums are for. Discussion. C Pungent
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:21:36 GMT
Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 29 Dec 2000 14:00:24
[...]
>What assinine behavior did the Republicans demonstrate?
Posting drivel to Usenet.
>Standing
>up for the laws? The Constitution? Trying to prevent the Democrats
>from doing what they always do: piss on the laws and the Constitution
>for their own ends?
What a maroon.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:21:38 GMT
Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 29 Dec 2000 13:55:01
[...]
>The most important law, which you missed, and which proved T. Max Devlin
>to be speaking from other orrifices again, was the one that the legislature
>had set forth as a period of election, counting/recounting, contest, and
>finality.
Oh, for heaven's sake. If you consider this the "most important law",
then apparently you don't care what the law says, as long as its
followed, because you prefer the most arbitrary law, like a deadline, to
any that provides for *law*.
>The election was to occur on Nov 7, as dictated by the U.S. Constitution.
>The counting was to go on until Nov 14 (one week). Recounts can be request
>at any time between Nov 7 and Nov 14, but all must end on Nov 14 at which
>point the Secretary of State must certify the results as official.
>At this time, the loser can contest the election and proceed through the
>contest framework also laid forth by the legislature.
Apparently, not.
>This is what the law said, this is what the Republicans wanted (because it's
>the law).
Its soft headed lack of thinking like this that makes Republicans
dangerous.
>This wasn't convenient for the Democrats, so they called up the
>FL Supreme Court and had them change the laws and rewrite them a little to
>fit todays purpose. This was the worst kind of Judicial activism. It's
>no joke that they were all liberals.
You're the joke. Yea, they phone their Republican buddies and said 'I
got an idea; why don't you stop the recounts because you are partisan
and your guy is ahead, and then that will give us a reason to ask for
the Supreme Court.'
You wouldn't know "judicial activism" if it was up your rear-end,
keeping your brain company.
>Even worse, this is a constitutional issue now because the 14th amendment in
>the U.S. Constitution clearly states that the election must proceed with the
>laws that were in the books BEFORE Nov 7 and cannot be changed after the
>fact until the next election. The laws WERE changed by the Democrats which
>is why this whole thing went to the SUPREME COURT.
>
>The 14th amendment is in place because local officials would change the
>rules on and after Nov 7 to try to prevent minorities and other folks they
>didn't like from voting or having their vote count. The Constitution
>put a stop to that, but the Democrats saw fit to try it again.
Oh, what a pathetic stance.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[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: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:33:12 GMT
"John W. Stevens" wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >
> > I was a card-carrying libertarian at that time, in fact. It wasn't so
> > much the convention, as silly as it was, but my partner's comment, that
> > the whole place was filled with flakes and rich middle-aged white guys
> > who didn't want to pay any taxes. I've refused any party affiliations
> > since then, though I'd have to default to the Demos if I needed to
> > choose one, but only because they're powerful enough to matter under
> > whatever circumstances would force me to choose. That, and they're not
> > Republicans.
>
> Yet another indication of "the liberal mindset" . . . fear of
> commitment.
Only an idiot or a demagogue commits without all the facts... and it is
very rare that all the facts are obtainable. Omniscience, anyone?
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[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: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:37:17 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> The U.S. Supreme Court is hardly Republican. It would've been a unanimous
> and obvious decision if it weren't for the hard-line left-wing ultra-liberals
> who desented (Ginsberg, Kennedy) and who issued wacko and off-beat dissents
> that legal scholars are still scratching their heads at.
Which legal scholars? I thought the Supreme Court justices all qualify
as legal scholars.
> The truth is, the Democrats bended the laws far beyond reasonable tolerance
No, no, you and your ilk are /not/ reasonable.
>
> Please Max, stop the lying. It only serves to embarass you.
>
Please stop saying people are lying. You sound like a second-grader.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 00:44:51 -0500
From: Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, it is great.
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> mlw wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what you mean. It is a full transactional database. Check
> > it out, you'll be quite surprised if you have had to work around MySQL's
> > limitations. www.postgresql.org.
>
> Sorry, I meant is it a full transactional database. The answer is yes, I
> guess.
>
> > > > KDE2, a very good desktop environment.
> > >
> > > But unstable.
> > Really? I don't see that and I use it all the time. By unstable I assume
> > you mean lock-ups and/or X server crashes, right? I am running KDE
> > 2.0.1, I have had it running non-stop since, hmm, at least a week
> > anyway. 2.0 before that. The browser is really quite usable unlike
> > GNOME's help browser.
>
> KNode just exited without warning. No message, no nowt. I've seen the whole
> system lock up tight, and various crashes from konqueror and kontrol. It's
> hardly a stable desktop.
>
so you get 2 or 3 illegal ops in Windows and it gives you time to curse
at it before the same thing happens, not too much of a difference.
> > Don't know why not. I have a two computers here, one next to the other.
> > One is RedHat 7.0, the other is Windows 98SE. I haven't had an OS level
> > problem on the Linux box in well over a year. I've had to reinstall
> > Windows, twice. I use the Linux box much more often. The Windows box is
> > for my parport scanner and my son's games. I never do any real work on
> > it because it is too unstable, as is all Windows versions.
>
> I've started using Linux far more because it has the reputation of being
> more stable. Unfortunately, I'm seeing problems with KDE 2.0, so I'm
> becoming a little disappointed.
yeah and some people use it just fine.
Same thing can be said of Windows (all flavors). Some people
miraculously do not have any or little trouble with it, others can
hardly use it. I can't explain why and I can't explain why the same
things can happen in Linux(evident by this thread) but I wouldn't down
Linux just b/c the same pattern appears(if you do then u have to down
Windows). Although realize that the same thing happens much less
frequently with Linux than Windows. That is a plus for Linux.
>
> I still use Windows for development work - I have seen nasty problems with
> Windows 98/ME etc., however I've seen far less (like none) with Windows
> 2000. What causes a blue screen and death on Windows 98 SE was a simple
> application error on Windows 2000.
>
> --
> Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:45:54 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:ycd36.71114$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Your pleas fall on deaf ears.
>
> I still have faith that somebody here thinks that it's a good idea to make
> Linux easy to use.
> This method alone should be able to eliminate much of the learning curve in
> linux.
Linux is already easy to use. Easier than Windozzzzzzz anyway,
with its big fucking Control Panel where you can never be sure
where to find the config item for which you're searching.
Or is it in Network Neighborhood properties? On in Adminitrative
Tools? Or is it only in the Resource Kit?
Such a load of crap, "intuitive NT", "intuitive 2000". Yeah, intuitive
if you're the original developers. Or should I say "innovators".
Or should I say, "copiers".
Propaganda city -- Microsoft.
Chris
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:46:22 GMT
Kyle Jacobs wrote:
>
> Your pleas fall on deaf ears.
Your admission is a noble gesture.
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:50:40 GMT
Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:vlb36.71054$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Yes, standards would make this fascinating idea possible. Pity NONE
> exist.
> >
> > This is why the Windows registry shines. It's truly uniform.
>
> Yes, uniformly obscure and difficult to manage.
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Registry's only advantage over INI files is that it
can more easily nest items deeper. Says nothing about
how easy the items are to understand. And, of course, you
have to buy a bunch of third-party Registry books, or scour
Livingston's frikkin' columns, to find out the tricks that
are need to work with Windows and its vaunted Registry.
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:54:11 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:vlb36.71054$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Yes, standards would make this fascinating idea possible. Pity NONE
> exist.
> >
> > This is why the Windows registry shines. It's truly uniform.
>
> Actually, not in the way I'm talking about.
>
> It's quite possible, and very easy, to do what I'm talking about here in
> Windows.
> But what I'm talking about here is a global configurator for all
> applications.
Global stuff doesn't work. By von Neumann's principle, you'll always
find something that breaks the rules. So you have to extend them
anyway. It's just as easy to keep the extension outside the
main configuration... nay, it is easier, since the app alone
needs to handle it.
On the other hand...
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Who LOVES Linux again?
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 05:56:31 GMT
Steve Mading wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Ayende Rahien wrote:
> :>
> :> Because it craves memory like there is no tomorrow?
>
> : That's what SWAP SPACE is for, you moron. Inactive processes get
> : swapped out as needed, so it's a NON-ISSUE.
>
> I've seen Netscape *GROW* its memory footprint over time, and also not
> spend enough time sleeping (Or so I assume since the CPU percentage
> starts rising if you leave it going a long time.) So yes, it can still
> be worth it to shut it down occasionally regardless of how much swap
> space you use. The worst culprit seems to be its Java engine (I really
> wish you could just plug in any generic JVM to Netscape, so I could use
> Blackdown instead of Netscape's broken Java engine.) Even after the
> applet page is done being viewed and there are no more pages with
> applets on them visible, there is sometimes a runaway java thread
> laying about slowly eating away at your system resources.
I thought Java was supposed to "collect its garbage".
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 06:01:34 GMT
Kyle Jacobs wrote:
>
> Oh my god, this makes SENSE.
No, XML is good when you have nested classes, or when you
want to predefine some syntax. For a simple app,
app-dependent lines parsed by, say, scanf() are pretty
damn simple.
Now, I am using an XML format for my stuff, but only
because it handles nesting well. It took quite awhile
to compose the code and write good operator <<() and
operator >>() functions.
Chris
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
