Linux-Advocacy Digest #172, Volume #31 Mon, 1 Jan 01 14:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: EXCLUSIVE: Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: EXCLUSIVE: Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Could only... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000 ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Why Hatred? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Why Hatred? (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EXCLUSIVE: Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 13:07:10 -0500
Flatfish wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > Translation: People smarter than squashed-fish.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Flatfish
> > > Why do they call it a flatfish?
> > > Remove the ++++ to reply.
> >
> >
> Not in this case, because I at least caught the attempt at humor. Most of
> the others thought it was for real.
Only your fellow travellers from Lose-DOS-dom..
> --
> Flatfish
> Why Do They Call It A Flatfish?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you REALLY this much of fucking idiot, or do you only play one on USENET
> Check The Headers Dude
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 13:08:55 -0500
Bob Eager wrote:
>
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2001 01:48:18, Tim Timmins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps Xedit's default behaviour is the same as the editor it replaced.
> >
> > Did you really not think of that?
> >
> > There must be something about that university...
>
> And...once the default has been out there a little while....it is best
> not to change it anyway...
Translation: IBM has had an idiotic default for 30+ YEARS.
> --
> Bob Eager
> rde at tavi.co.uk
> PC Server 325; PS/2s 8595*3, 9595*3 (2*P60 + P90), 8535, 8570, 9556*2,
> 8580*6,
> 8557*2, 8550, 9577, 8530, P70, PC/AT..
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: EXCLUSIVE: Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 13:11:59 -0500
Keldon Warlord 2000 wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Keldon Warlord 2000 wrote:
> > >
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:7ohn29.dpn.ln@gd2zzx...
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > "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???
> > > >
> > > > It's really sad when sarcasm and wit isn't noticed anymore. They
> > > > make the English language so special. As Peter Ustinov said,
> > > > English is the only language where you need to interpret the
> > > > law. :-)
> > >
> > > its really sad that you think that those attributes of the human
> language
> > > can be adequately expressed in a written forum.
> >
> > Are you a moron?
> >
> > You certainly write like one.
> >
> >
>
> ok....if you couldn't even understand a concept as simple as sarcasm can't
> be expressed very well in a written forum, then you've earned the right to
> be in my killfile.
>
> goodbye, moron.
>
> *PLONK*
>
Translation: Keldon Warlard realizes he's been outsmarted.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!?
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 13:12:56 -0500
John Hong wrote:
>
> "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >Come on Erik, Corel didn't start to kill off its Linux stuff until Microsoft
> >went to them. It wasn't profitable, because everyone on Linux either uses
> >Staroffice/Openoffice, or vi or emacs. I for one am not sad to see Corel go.
>
> I am sad to see Corel go and I think more Linux users should be
> too. Linux would be better served with Corel than without, IMO. Their
> only mistake was trying to make their own Linux distribution. They would
> have better served the Linux community in refining their applications
> without needing WINE and providing a push for the already established
> Linux distro's.
I see another anti-trust action coming...
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Could only...
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 13:14:03 -0500
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > kiwiunixman wrote:
> > >
> > > <snype>
>
> > > Also, just under 20 years ago, the set of legislation under
> > > the banner, "Separate, but equal" was removed from southern states,
> >
> > laws enacted from the supposedly non-racist American Democrat party.
>
> One of the most idiotic and demeaning policies ever put forward, I might
> add.
The Democrats are all about plutocracy...
>
> --
> Tom Wilson
> Sunbelt Software Solutions
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000
Date: 1 Jan 2001 18:19:42 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> Over the past year, Mozilla and Konqueror became usable, and
:> StarOffice was finally freed.
:>
:> Hence, it's now possible to create a VERY reliable, functional, and
:> cost-effective Linux desktop in a corporate environment for about a
:> fifth of the initial cost of its NT equivalent, and with virtually
:> zero ongoing support/maintenance costs. (There will be a one-time
:> cost for retraining heavy MSOffice users.)
: functional is a bit of stretch. I guarantee you that if you take any 100
: office users and give them StarOffice, the majority will find StarOffice to
: lack features they need to do their jobs.
I hear moaning and bitching every day about how MSOffice or Winblows
crashed just before an important presentation or deadline.
If users are temporarily concerned about things SO "cannot" do because
the keyboard shortcut might be different, or it might be in a
different place on the menu, I think I can live with that.
: You're also assuming that a typical office worker only has needs for those
: programs. Most companies have Access databases, contact management systems
: (ACT or GoldMine for instance. Nothing similar exists for Linux), custom VB
: programs, etc...
You're *assuming* that I'm assuming. I've been around long enough to
have a pretty good idea of how "[m]ost companies" work.
Yes, there is some proprietary crap like what you've described. In
many cases, there's a lot, and at least some of it is fairly central
to some people's responsibilities.
However, there is no reason that a browser-based front end can't be
quickly and easily built around a contact system or any reasonably
built Access "database." If it can't, then that's a very good reason
to discontinue use of the thing as soon as possible, regardless of
platform.
The VNC solution works in the interim.
:> "What about custom VB/Powerbuilder/Delphi apps," you might ask? Well,
:> in the short term, you can keep NT boxes around for these, and access
:> them via VNC.
: That won't work, because every user will then be sharing the same desktop.
: Try putting 100 users on the same desktop.
Obviously you still need 1 copy and 1 license per concurrent user.
But you've already got one of each, or at least I hope you do, or else
Mafia$oft's lawyers will be very unhappy.
You still win if not all of your users are in the system at the same
time.
You may be able to use something like Terminal Server or Winframe to
manage multiple instances per box, if licensing issues permit.
And this is only a stopgap measure. Slapping a Web interface onto a
well designed custom app is really not a big deal - you did remember
to use a MVC architecture, right? If not, then the thing needs to be
rebuilt anyway.
:> In the longer term, though, most of the kinds of apps
:> these tools used to be used for are being redesigned and rewritten
:> using an n-tier architecture, with thin (browser-based) clients being
:> the preferred mode of access. There is no reason the app should know
:> or care what kind of OS the browser is running on.
: They're not going to rewrite those apps. VB allowed them to write a simple
: app to do something quickly, they're not going to spend 100x more in
: developer time to do something in C.
Why use C *or* VB when every Linux distribution comes with good
scripting languages and IDEs (including some GUI builders)?
:> : In a more
:> : traditional windows environment though, say a home user or even small
:> : unmanaged business then Linux is not something that is acceptable.
:>
:> That's changing too.
:>
:> It is very conceivable to me that within the next two years, 50% or
:> more of games and home-oriented apps will be cross-platform.
: Perhaps. That won't make Linux any friendlier to setup and maintain for the
: home user.
Addressed below. One thing at a time, OK? :)
:> Even in a mostly Windows-dominated world, it makes sense not to tie
:> one's code tightly to any particular version of Windows, since there
:> are now dozens in widespread use, and they differ fairly substantially
:> from the perspective of an application developer. It's much better to
:> isolate the platform-dependent code behind some type of abstraction
:> layer, *even* if most or all of your users use Windows. You then have
:> most if not all of the platform-specific problems, bugs, and fixes
:> confined to one relatively small section of your app.
: Actually, windows is getting EASIER for the developer. Windows 2000
: supports all the same API's as Windows 9x now, with DirectX, MAPI, Direct3D,
: etc...
I'm an architect/developer in a fairly typical large enterprise.
We're doing mostly n-tier for new development, but are saddled with
having to maintain a LOT of legacy stuff, much of it developed using
VB and a primitive client/server architecture.
We have only two supported platforms for desktops right now, NT4 and
Win95.
Building software that runs on both of these is a nightmare, mostly
because of DLL issues (to be fair to Mafia$oft, many of them are
related to third-party products such as Seagate Crystal Reports, and
thus not completely M$'s fault).
Granted, if the original developers had used a MVC architecture, with
most of the business logic implemented as COM components living on an
MTS server, then our porting and maintenance woes might have been far
less.
But given that they didn't, it is my belief and recommendation that
most of them be rewritten using an architecture like this:
DB server: Oracle (since we have company-wide site license)
(would rather use PostgreSQL if it were completely
up to me since Oracle is mass overkill for what we do)
Middleware: PHP for simpler projects, and JSP/servlets for
more involved ones. Won't rule out use of Perl and/or
Python, preferably the latter, where appropriate.
Front end: HTML4, with limited and optional Javascript on
client side; tested using IE and Netscape versions
from 3.0 to current;
*PLUS*
Rich clients using Java/Swing where needed (for instance
in data-entry-intensive apps, where the spartan UI
available in HTML4 is not sufficient). We know that
Swing requires substantial resources to perform well,
but believe that these resources are a bargain compared
to the long-term cost of continuing to build and deploy
VB applications.
Modeling: Corporate standard will be Rational Rose (ironically
this necessitates NT client licenses since the Rational
folks haven't yet ported to *n*x). Also investigating
open-source Java tool, ArgoUML.
Communication: My preference is XML over SSL; we don't have all
the infrastructure needed to implement yet, and thus
may use lesser forms of encryption in the meantime.
MS DNA: We will be using MS DNA in a few situations where
time to market, integration with MSOffice, or
interaction with existing MS-centric apps are overriding
considerations. However, the company allows only NT4,
not W2K, for this purpose. I'm skeptical that NT4 and
compatible tools will continue to be supported after
.NET is released, but the company is taking a "wait and
see" attitude.
We're building prototype classes and "starter" apps from which most of
the functionality that our typical apps need can be derived, so as to
maximize opportunities for code reuse and thereby speed up time to
market.
Please note that these are the company's decisions, not mine. I'd
have gone a different way on a few points, although I largely agree
with most of them (including DNA - we had to fight to keep it as an
acceptable option for new development, since it's burned the company
quite a bit; however, I'm not averse to recommending it in the rare
cases where it is the technically better solution and where it doesn't
result in continued over-dependence upon Mafia$oft).
:> But, once you've done that, it becomes possible to port the app
:> relatively easily to other platforms.
: No, those apps are still using Windows API's, they're just using common
: subsets.
Using the API directly is a very bad idea, especially from VB, where
most of our Windows-only developers work. Most knowledgeable
developers abstract it behind functions that take VB data types at the
very least; watching a VB novice try to figure out why embedded null
characters f*ck up VB string handling is a painful experience, and so
senior developers always write functions that others can use rather
than attempting to figure this stuff out on their own.
Yes, we do use Appelman's API book - it's starting to appear dated,
but there still isn't anything better that I'm aware of.
:> Hardware support: this is a chicken-and-egg problem, exacerbated by
:> pressure illegally asserted by Mafia$oft, but even so, we're seeing
:> more chickens and more eggs all the time. I predict this will be a
:> non-issue within those same two years.
: I doubt it. Linux will never have those scaled down modems and other
: hardware that OEM's love because they're cheap.
They could publish the interfaces, and then Linux hackers could write
drivers. That they don't is almost certainly 100% due to Mafia$oft
pressure, and it remains to be seen whether it will be able (or even
willing, in light of .NET) to continue to exert it.
:> Appearance: yes, we need better font rendering. XFree86 4.0.2 has it.
:> The toolkits need minor adjustment to take advantage of the render
:> extensions. That will be a done deal soon, with completely
:> antialiased distros available probably midyear if not sooner.
: Apart from fonts, they also need more standards between desktop
: environments.
That's coming.
I will be the first to admit that UI design is one of the few areas
where most Windows programs are demonstrably superior to their Linux
counterparts.
But that is a sign of the relative immaturity of these apps. Windows
apps of a similar vintage (~10 years ago) were monstrosities compared
to KDE- or Gnome-anything. Linux apps will catch up, especially once
more formerly Windows-centric ISVs are on board.
:> Ease of installing new packages: Debian's apt-get and the *BSD ports
:> collections solve this problem nicely. RPMs, even with GUI front
:> ends, still need for someone to go out and fetch the required
:> dependencies, and this process needs to be better automated. As Linux
:> becomes more "mainstream," my guess it that it will be.
: One can hope.
We do more than hope. We constantly improve. :)
:> :> The user will user a system with the least amount of work. Just because
:> :> there are work arounds for this limitation, and it is a LIMITATION,
: does
:> :> not mean the average user will use the more complex solution. Most of
:> :> the NT users I have seen just give themselves admin privileges.
:>
:> : And most Linux users i've seen run as root.
:>
:> I find that hard to believe, since I've never seen *any* Linux user
:> run as root, but, if that's really the case, you should be able to fix
:> that problem yourself with minimal effort. :)
: It's easy to run as root. Most users don't understand the security issues.
: When you don't run as root, you need to worry about file privs and such.
: It's a pain to su all the time.
Once you get on the net, you *will* be portscanned, and once a
portscan finds a way to do something nasty as root, you *will* be
cracked. Once you're cracked, at least in the way that people usually
are cracked (i.e., by "script kiddiez"), you will soon find out.
Many net services including IRC simply refuse to connect to users who
appear to be running as root, for their own protection.
Yes, su is a pain, but it's a very small one compared to the pain of
being convincingly cracked, and most folks learn that very quickly.
Joe
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 18:23:14 +0000
mlw wrote:
> The registry is a binary database which holds critical configuration and
> operating system information. Errors in this database can render a
> system inoperable, yet the only tools which can find and correct errors
> in this database must be run from an operable system, and on a complete
> and uncorrupted database.
Erik has stated in other posts (did I get this right Erik?) that you can
restore the registry from MSDOS. That is, you can boot form floppy, run
regedit and restore the registry.
> Anyone that does not see the fundamental problem with this system, does
> not understand what makes a system maintainable.
If what Erik said is true, then there's no problem.
> What is important is when the system is NOT working and you have to fix
> it quickly. The registry is a disaster when there is a problem. Under
> Linux, one can boot off a floppy, edit the text files as necessary to
> remove offending drivers or settings, and boot a working system.
See above.
> Here is an actual NT problem I have seen which proves my point:
> I installed WinCE development kit on a version of NT, that had been
> service packed. It called for RAS components to be installed. The
> install program requested my original NT CD, which I put in, and it
> installed the components. When I had to reboot (It is, after all,
> Windows) it would blue screen before ever getting to the GUI.
Did you backup the registry before you did this?
If you didn't then what did you expect? If you don't backup /etc on Linux
and make a drastic change, again, what did you expect?
Did you try restore from last known good setup after this occured?
> There is no way to fix it from the system. I had to pull the hard disk
> out and add it as a slave to a working NT system, delete the drivers
> which had been crashing, and move the hard disk back to the original
> system. I reinstalled the service pack.
Did you try any of the above before you pulled the hard disk?
> Had this been a Linux system, I could have booted off a floppy,
> commented out entries in the modules.conf file, or deleted the entry in
> /etc/rc.d/rc?.d that started the service.
If you have a Linux system on a floppy yes. If you don't and you don't have
a Linux system handy, what then? If you're system won't boot, what are you
to do?
> The registry is a bad idea, I have yet to see one reasonable argument
> for it that can't be countered by a number of very good reasons against
> it.
Without backups any kind of recover is lost.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!?
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 18:22:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>John Hong wrote:
>>
>> "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> >Come on Erik, Corel didn't start to kill off its Linux stuff until Microsoft
>> >went to them. It wasn't profitable, because everyone on Linux either uses
>> >Staroffice/Openoffice, or vi or emacs. I for one am not sad to see Corel go.
>>
>> I am sad to see Corel go and I think more Linux users should be
>> too. Linux would be better served with Corel than without, IMO. Their
>> only mistake was trying to make their own Linux distribution. They would
>> have better served the Linux community in refining their applications
>> without needing WINE and providing a push for the already established
>> Linux distro's.
>
>I see another anti-trust action coming...
>
>
>--
>Aaron R. Kulkis
>Unix Systems Engineer
I will answer.
Question "Is Bill Gates MAD?"
The man lives in a custom built house with a TV screen on
virtually every wall and the entire house is run by
Windows technology.
I don't think MAD is quite the word to describe this situation.
Most crazy people have a obsession for the thing their crazy
about. Adolf and Eva had a special lamp. Bill Gates has
a special house.
You tell me.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 18:24:52 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > I don't think Linux is going to be held back by being configured by text
> > files - I think your other excellent points are closer to the truth.
>
> You misinterpret what I said. I said as long as Linux *MUST* be
> maintained
> through text files. In other words, even with tools like linuxconf, you
> still need to maintain quite a bit through text files exclusively.
Hmmm... I managed to get my workstation up and running through Linuxconf.
The other system I'll admit I had to prod around files myself.
> There's nothing wrong with text configuration files, as long as there are
> easier ways to maintain it as well.
I'm not sure I understand this. How can anything be more easier than a text
file? Are you referring to a GUI here?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
