Linux-Advocacy Digest #145, Volume #31 Sat, 30 Dec 00 20:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: EXCLUSIVE: Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code ("Keldon Warlord 2000")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (Gary Hallock)
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (kiwiunixman)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (Gary Hallock)
Re: Why Advocacy? (kiwiunixman)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes (Gary Hallock)
Re: Why Advocacy? (kiwiunixman)
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: So how do we get from here to there? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: "Think tank warns that Microsoft hack could pose national security
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Could only... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux, it is great. ("Mike")
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Keldon Warlord 2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: EXCLUSIVE: Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 17:13:51 -0800
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 11:33:46 -0800, "Keldon Warlord 2000"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Sun, 31 Dec 2000 03:24:44 +1200, "Adam Warner"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code"
> >> >
> >>
> >> More proof of the twisted minds of the Penguinista's.
> >>
> >> It's not even funny?
> >>
> >
> >what I don't get is how the hell can somebody "steal" something that is
> >given away for free???
>
>
> I assumed it was a feeble attempt at geek, Penguinista humor.
>
ahh.
>
> Flatfish
> Why do they call it a flatfish?
> Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 19:17:52 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Any editor which, when editing an existing file, REQUIRES you to
> "delete" non-existing characters from the end of a line before you
> can append text to that line is a piece of dain-bread deficient trash.
>
I agree. But xedit does not require you do that. Where did you get such a
crazy idea? I've been using xedit for at least 15-20 years and have never
run into that problem.
Gary
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 00:20:26 GMT
1st its Labour NOT labor, please don't use your bastardised english
around here please.
2nd you never addressed the question. The cost to upgrade (both
hardware and software) from NT to 2000 for small business's is beyond
their financial capacity. Compare that to Linux, where by, no
hardware upgrade would be required when migrating from NT to Linux.
3rd high upgrade cost = move to cheaper platform (aka Linux), hence it
is relevant. Get back to earth. Unfortunately you live in a world
where you think that business's can afford to have an unlimited IT
budget, sorry, that's not the real world. Real business's have to make
money and stay with in its finacial constrants.
kiwiunixman
Todd wrote:
> "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> Well, you mustn't be a bright admin if you need direct access to a
>> server.
>
>
> I don't believe I stated that I *need* direct access to a server. In fact
> at work, some machines I am not allowed access because of our datacenter
> service policies. So I am forced to work remotely via rcmd and terminal
> services.
>
> Don't put down other people anyway because of how they choose to do things.
> The UNIX way of things is the old way, and not necessarily the better way.
> There are always new things coming around (change), and you need to be able
> to adapt. The people that can't will die.
>
>
>> In a tyical UNIX setup (as with the case of Solaris 8 or
>> Unixware 7), all admin tasks can be carried out remotely via an
>> encrypted telnet session (OpenSSH or SSH). You would find that Windows
>> is a bit of a bitch when you need to admin a server on the other side of
>> the country.
>
>
> Well, 2000 is a *ton* easier than NT... be specific, which version are you
> talking about? Remotely admininstration of 2000 is easy. I won't speak
> about NT since 2000 has been out almost a year now...
>
>
>> Also, with out a GUI and unneeded API's and addons,
>> there will be significantly more resources free for real work.
>
>
> Not if those unneeded 'addons' are not loaded into memory unless they are
> needed or being used... as with Windows 2000. Also, if the memory isn't
> being used, it is swapped out of main memory anyway. You should know that.
>
>
>> With the
>> latest version of Windows Server and Advance Server, and the steep
>> requirements mean that many small businesses in New Zealand are moving
>> to Linux/UNIX, because the costs of upgrading is greatly excessive
>> compared to the miniscule amount (hard ware requirements and cost)
>> Linux/UNIX costs.
>
>
> The cost of labor and training far outweigh the cost of software/licenses.
> Using 2000 allows us to develop applications of higher complexity and
> quality than almost any other OS costing 10 times as much. It just isn't
> worth it to skimp on software/hardware costs given the high cost of IT labor
> these days.
>
> Example: The average salary of a *good* IT guy is about US$100K... and
> that's *one* person. And that is only the cost of the salary. Then there
> are benefits, space, etc. This means that you want to make your guys as
> efficient as possible.
>
> Why buy a hacked OS that is so unintuitive where most of the features are
> only half completed?? Hell, I'd buy the department FreeBSD before I gave
> them Linux.
>
> We are about getting work done, getting the job done. Not about hacking
> around in Perl and seeing how an OS works. If you like that, then yes, get
> Linux.
>
>
>> Although in the US, where most business's can throw
>> around money, and don't care whether they spend too much or too little
>> on a server, in New Zealand, with the shit-house exchange rate, combined
>> with the anti-coperate welfare stance from the government (which I think
>> is great), software from Micro$oft cost twice the amount as a Linux
>> server setup.
>
>
> Again, in an IT environment, pretty much irrelevant.
>
> -Todd
>
>
>> kiwiunixman
>>
>> Todd wrote:
>>
>>
>>> "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>
>>>
>>>> The puzzling question I want answered is wtf is he running games on a
>>>
> OS
>
>>>> clearly designed for sever. But here are some more puzzling questions:
>>>>
>>>> Why is there IE on the server version of Windows?
>>>
>>>
>>> To read HTML documents??
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Why is there directX on the server version of Windows?
>>>
>>>
>>> DirectX is simply an API. If the program doesn't use it, DirectX isn't
>>> used. Why *not* have it installed? It is very stable anyway.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Why is there a GUI for the server version of Windows? wounldn't that
>>>> just be a memory and CPU cycle hog?
>>>
>>>
>>> To make it easier and more efficient to get things done in a more
>>
> intuitive
>
>>> manner?
>>>
>>> And no, it doesn't steal cycles... check the 'idle' process when you
>>
> aren't
>
>>> doing anything. It is pegged at 99-100%...
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> -Todd
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> kiwiunixman
>>>>
>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:926u8o$h0a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> steve@x <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> funny, that I had win95 for 5 years before I upgraded, and in
>>>>>>>> all that time, never had an application not install becuase
>>>>>>>> it needed something else to be there before it installed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You don't install many games, do you? DirectX seems to be legendary
>>>>>>
>>> for
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> always being one version behind what your software actually wants...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FUD.
>>>>>> I use my Windows 2000 Advanced Server box for all of my work *plus*
>>>>>
>>> games.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> I installed DirectX 8.0 from the 'windows update' menu item.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So by using the very latest MS OS *and* updating it to the very latest
>>>>> release of DirectX, you can get current games to run. Whoopeedoo, big
>>>>> surprise!
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, how exactly does that relate to Steve's amazing story about using
>>>>> Win95 for 5 years and never having an application requiring upgraded
>>>>> components to install?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Now let's get back to how difficult it is to install stuff on
>>>>>
> Linux...
>
>>>>>
>>>>> I take it that, to level the playing field, we will use the very
>>>>
> latest
>
>>>>> Linux distribution, and apply all the upgrades that are available? Oh,
>>>>> wait, that doesn't sound like what you suppose to "get back" to....
>>>>>
>>>>> Bernie
>>>>
--
"Like a midget at a urinal, you gotta keep on your toes"
Naked Gun 33 1/3
"Like a blind man at an orgy, you gotta feel your way out"
Naked Gun 33 1/3
____
Unix Programmer:
"If it an't broken, don't fix it"
Microsoft Programmer:
"If it an't broken and working perfectly, then there must be a problem"
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 19:21:14 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
>
> Ever edit a pre-existing file in xedit on a 3270...and try to
> append characters to the end of a line.
>
It works perfectly. You have apparently never used xedit.
>
> Now...exactly HOW does one do that without first going through the
> insanely ridiculous procedure of deleting characters that aren't even
> there in the first place.
You move the cursor to the end of the line (there is a PF key to do that)
and start typing. What is the problem?
>
>
> This is the type of thing which I would expect from junior-high school
> programmers, not the producers of the primary editor for flagship
> systems from the largest computer manufacturer on the face of the earth.
>
But you are dead wrong. xedit does not work that way.
Gary
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 13:26:21 +1300
Microsoft has never owned up to the BSOD, or security wholes, or memory
leaks or needs of developers (esp. in the area of API calls) or the
needs of consumers. Pip, do a little research before making sweeping
statements regarding Microsofts legacy of customer and developer relations.
kiwiunixman
pip wrote:
> kiwiunixman wrote:
>
>> <snype>
>>
>>>> This is unfair. Take USB, as Xmas has passed I now have a USB mouse
>>>> which worked fine under windows, yet I know that I really don't want the
>>>> pain of configuring USB under Linux and would prefer to wait until 2.4.
>>>> Linux is a better OS technically, but many end users are not as
>>>> concerned if it does not easily support hardware and perhaps more
>>>> importantly software. Linux will in time.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe USB-support is not perfect in Linux. So I don´t buy USB-Devices
>>> because I want the OS and not a special kind of a mouse.
>>
>> Down at my local computer store, I can either spend $189 for a Mickysoft
>> USB mouse or $50 on a decent logitec PS/2 mouse. What would you choose?
>> most poeple would know which mouse I would choose and it an't the
>> over-priced, glorified micksoft mouse.
>
>
> ....and this is typical of the problems of some Linux advocates. It is
> now the users fault for selecting bad hardware. Don't you both see
> problems with your argument?
>
> Also, "glorified" features are sometimes very useful. It is called
> progress. With that attitude you'd never user GUI.
>
> As a matter of interest it is a Logitech mouse and it also comes with a
> usb-ps/2 adapter. This is hardly the point. Everything is possible, but
> if you want an advantage of windows it is off the hoof usb and 1394
> support. These are examples where Linux must catch up. Own up, own the
> problem and stop avoiding the issue. There is nothing wrong with the
> current situation as it will produce the best results in the long term
> when properly thought out support is included.
--
"Like a midget at a urinal, you gotta keep on your toes"
Naked Gun 33 1/3
"Like a blind man at an orgy, you gotta feel your way out"
Naked Gun 33 1/3
____
Unix Programmer:
"If it an't broken, don't fix it"
Microsoft Programmer:
"If it an't broken and working perfectly, then there must be a problem"
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 19:26:19 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 20:51:11 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Flat head, is more like it.
>
> I'm not the one who has to pound one's head against the wall in
> frustration begging manufacturers to support Linux.
>
No, but you are the one who uses an OS made by a company that has to
pound its head against the wall begging manufacturers to support their
OS on anything other than x86.
Gary
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 00:30:42 GMT
USB is merely a way of Microsoft hiding the real problems Windows has,
esp. in the area of Plug 'n' Play support. Works flawlesy under MacOS,
but never in Windows? why is that? your precious windows can't handle a
device properly!
kiwiunixman
pip wrote:
>
> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>
>> [snippage]
>> What ??
>> USB is really good for (what) ??
>
>
> Read the spec
>
>
>> I my opinion, USB is just a piece of shit,
>
>
> I see you like a reasoned argument...
>
>
>> thought of by Miccysoft, just to
>> detract people from the very real problems winblows has with any REAL
>> computing problem.
>
>
> Shows you have not read the spec
>
>
>> Up to this date i have not seen ANY good USB device, which you could
>> not buy also for SCSI. USB just stinks.
>
>
> You have not read the spec.
> SCSI is not hot plug. Read the spec. Why do you think so many people in
> the Linux community are working hard to get USB support? Don't detract
> from their efforts.
> You are not helping any cause :-(
--
"Like a midget at a urinal, you gotta keep on your toes"
Naked Gun 33 1/3
"Like a blind man at an orgy, you gotta feel your way out"
Naked Gun 33 1/3
____
Unix Programmer:
"If it an't broken, don't fix it"
Microsoft Programmer:
"If it an't broken and working perfectly, then there must be a problem"
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 18:41:44 -0600
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Unlike you, I am observant of the world around me.
>
> I am fully aware not only of Unix and LoseDOS, but also vms,
> cms, S/390, and other operating systems.
Considering that S/390 isn't an operating system, that's quite a feat.
> You, on the other hand, seem to be only hazily cognizant of anything
> not produced by Microshaft-everyone.
Considering that I doubt you've ever used a mainframe in your life, much
less a mini, that's pretty funny.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 00:45:37 GMT
On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 18:43:33 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>GM, Ford, Chrysler, Jeep, Mitsubishi, Mercedes Benz, Volvo, Mazda,
>Subaru, Saab, Fiat, Alfa-Romeo, Jaguar, Bentley, Rolls-Royce, and
>nearly every other designer for ANY auto or OEM auto-parts supplier
>on the face of the earth has been using Unix over 10 years now.
Unix is NOT Linux.
>My cousin started as a detailer, he's a designer now. Never took a
>day of "unix classes", and yet, that's the platform he prefers.
Catia (sp?) is the program of choice for high end design. Does it run
on Linux?
My comments were referring to desktop/home user application of Linux,
not corporate use.
I support Linux in a corporate setting for certain functions where it
is an excellent alternative to Windows.
>Why is that.
See above
>>
>> Flatfish
>> Why do they call it a flatfish?
>> Remove the ++++ to reply.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So how do we get from here to there?
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 18:54:45 -0600
"Kai Henningsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > There's no such thing as a 486-75. The fastest 486 is a DX2/66. Unless
> > your talking about some 486 clone, in which case, it's not a 486.
That's
> > lie 1.
>
> Bzzzt!
>
> I've had an GenuineIntel 486/100 (yes, with CPUID support) in my box for a
> long time. (Which was a slight disappointment, as I actually wanted an AMD
> 486/133 at the time.)
You're right. I forgot about Intel's so called DX4 chip, which despite it's
name was really a clock tripler. There was indeed a 75Mhz DX4 (3x 25Mhz
bus) as well as a 100Mhz DX4 (3 x 33.3Mhz Bus). I had long since gone up to
Pentiums when they came out with the DX4.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: "Think tank warns that Microsoft hack could pose national security
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 00:56:54 +0000
Adam Warner wrote:
>
> Hi goughtr,
>
> > > hackers. Whoever stole proprietary secrets at the heart of the
> ubiquitous
> > > Windows program can hack into any PC in the world that uses it and is
> > > connected to the Internet."
> > >
> > > (Now that's an overstatement--I hope :-)
> > >
> >
> > I see no reason why this should be an overstatement. The group in
> > question probably now know all the security precautions taken in the
> > windows kernel an so can get around them. Moreover, despite denials
> > from MS, they may have inserted Trojan code, giving them easy access to
> > all windows machines.
> >
> > At the end of the day, it is closed source, so who knows?
>
> One of the reasons why it must be an overstatement is that if someone uses a
> firewall that blocks incoming connections by default then there would be
> little if any way for anyone to break into the computer (unless they find a
> buffer overrun in the early stage of the TCP/IP stack?)
>
> Regards,
> Adam
But if you use a closed source firewall, how do you know it really does
block incoming connections? Or does this just sound paranoid?
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Could only...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 00:56:21 GMT
On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 23:43:57 GMT, kiwiunixman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Overly simplistic and xenaphobic to say the least. Posters/Readers, goto:
>
>http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/talking_point/newsid_324000/324871.asp
>
>and read some of the comments. Society in American thinks different
>when compared to the societies in other countries. Although these types
>of things are common in the US, where I live (New Zealand), we as a
>country would be horrified, and this issue would have been put on the
Pretty good assessment of American politics Kiwi.
Technically, America is not a democracy but really a corporate
oligarchy meaning that the corporations, or people with $$$$ who are
typically heads or owners of those corporations and their special
interest lobbies run the country not the people at large. This is why
we have bastards like Lou Gerstner (CEO of IBM) cutting heads,
screwing his long time employees out of pensions and then hiring h1b
visa people by the thousands as well as moving American jobs to Mexico
(cheap labor, and even cheaper quality) all in the name of
artificially boosting the stock price of IBM. And it as worked to some
degree, but when the bottom falls out, and it will shortly, Gerstner
will escape a billionaire. Take a look at the following links for
information:
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/ibmunion
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/ibmpension
Gerstner is surely not alone in this quest to control the people and
the govt.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, it is great.
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 01:00:28 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote:
> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > Software patents are bogus and stupid. We must all fight them.
> >
> > I always thought it silly to claim exclusive rights to an algorithm.
> >
> Actually, the algorithm itself can't be patented...
> but the PROCESS can.
Wrong. Algorithms are patentable.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it
does) )
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 01:08:11 GMT
On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 19:26:19 -0500, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>No, but you are the one who uses an OS made by a company that has to
>pound its head against the wall begging manufacturers to support their
>OS on anything other than x86.
Doesn't bother me or the 10's of millions of other home Windows users
Gary because I don't happen to have a Freeway in my den, although with
3 children at times I do wonder.
I do however have an accountant that uses Quicken/Money compatible
files, a USB scanner/mouse/printer all of which do not work with
Linux. A Sound card which half functions under Linsux. I also have to
exchange files between Office users as well as Mac users and need FULL
compatibility.
In addition I like running MusicMatch Jukebox as an MP3 player etc and
prefer the current NATIVE Windows version instead of running a half
assed 13 meg bloated piece of crap which is at least a version behind,
running under Whino like I would have to use under Linsux.
I enjoy running Wordperfect 2000 suite under Windows in it's native
environment, encompassing the latest features and technology instead
of running some half assed abortive version for Linsux, that yet
again, runs under Whino.
Can't these people write native Linux versions of their programs?
Maybe they just don't care, because they know there is no money in it.
I like having fonts that are clear and do not strain the eyes.
I enjoy having a state of the art web browser instead of some piece of
garbage like Nutscrape.
BTW, do YOU have a Freeway in YOUR living room?
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
