Linux-Advocacy Digest #358, Volume #31 Tue, 9 Jan 01 21:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: RPM Hell (JM)
Re: Windows 2000 (JM)
Re: Could only... (JM)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant, but Windows is pure junk! (JM)
Re: Linux, it is great. (JM)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (Steve Mading)
Re: Windows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: You and Microsoft... ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: You and Microsoft... ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Could only... (Kenji Doihara)
Re: You and Microsoft... ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows 2000 ("craig nellist")
Re: Windows 2000 ("craig nellist")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (John Brock)
Re: You and Microsoft... ("Patrick Raymond Hancox")
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (*)
Re: KDE Hell ("MH")
Re: KDE Hell ("MH")
Re: KDE Hell ("MH")
Re: How the f*ck do I install .xpi plugins ? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Windows 2000 (Donn Miller)
Re: Could only... (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RPM Hell
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:03:55 +0000
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 22:25:04 -0000, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>And the registry is SO well organised and SO well documented.
>Yeah I agree, especially when you search ages for a setting and
>find it in a path called something like :-
>fafe79000-a9fa-11ce-92e9-00805f7455c0
>
>Now that's really easier than editing a setting in /etc/configfile or
>similar
>then isn't it --NOT.
Not forgetting when programs insert their own secret keys etc,
especially to the Windows\current version\run directories, so it
automatically starts ad programs.
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:03:56 +0000
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:24:38 +0000, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> > So they can spend hours and hours per day posting crap on Usenet?
>> you misppelled "countering lies with truth"
>He was right the first time.
I think everyone here agrees that Aaron just posts countless amount of
shite every day.
And he lied about being in the Gulf.
And he's a right-wing gun nut.
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.tasteless
Subject: Re: Could only...
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:03:56 +0000
On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:06:31 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bones)) wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JM wrote:
>> I thought we were talking about guns? Obviously not...
>I though we were talking about Linux? Obviously not... When we post off-topic,
>anything goes. (At least this isn't cross-posted, one outta two ain't bad)
Not any more!
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant, but Windows is pure junk!
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:03:57 +0000
On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 12:15:39 +0000, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> To take your example, You oppsed something during an upgrade, you go to the
>> web and search for it. There are much more windows info than linux info
>> around the web.
>
>That's really a very strange argument indeed. One good and relevant
>solution that all the search-engines find will beat fifty million
>badly-indexed poor/useless answers, whatever the domain of discourse.
Most of them about changing the logo.sys files and the registry so you
can put obscene messages in the title bar of IE.
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, it is great.
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:03:58 +0000
On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 14:22:54 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yatima)) wrote:
>On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 15:27:23 +0000, Pete Goodwin
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Downloading stuff at home is pretty impractical across a 56K modem. That's
>>gonna change in Feb 2001 when I get my cable modem installed. 8*)
>Sweet! Congratulations (I love mine).
And I'll probably never have the chance to have one. (:-(
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[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: 10 Jan 2001 00:04:08 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy John Brock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Well, for example, if you have 200 lines containing the variable
: 'foo' and you want to change 20 of them then repeatedly hitting
: 'n' quickly gets tedious. This is of course assuming that you can
: recognize the lines you want to change without the context of the
: surrounding lines, but in my experience this is often the case.
: The changes you want to make may not be the same on each line, so
: you can't do this with any sort of global change.
I usually need the context, because a line like "myfunc(foo);" looks
pretty much the same whether it's inside an if condition I'm
interested in or not... (as an example). A lot of it has to
depend on your programming style of course. I see how it could
be useful to people who put more than one thing on a line (so more
context would exist on the one-line view).
: Another example would be to very quickly check the syntax of every
: instance of a certain function. Again, there might be hundreds,
: and it's *much* faster to check these lines by the screenful rather
: than hopping repeatedly from line to line.
I could see that. Altough, once it got up to more than about 200 or
so, I'd probably not trust my eyeballs to get it right, and I'd use
something programmatic like a regular expression, or just run it
through a make and see what barfs.
: In addition you are not limited to one match. You can refine your
: view by successively hiding or unhiding lines according to various
: unrelated criteria. In the end all I can really say is that when
: I used Xedit I used the ALL command *often*!
Ah, I hadn't picked that up yet from the descriptions. Now *that*
is a very handy thing to have. Currently there is no way I know of
in vi/vim to make a search for an "and" or "or" of two regular
expressions - I have to use a grep piped through another grep for
that.
:>The reason I ask is, that if this is truly a useful feature, there's
:>no reason it couldn't be added to the open-source vi clones out
:>there. The fact that it hasn't, while other modern features like
:>visual selecting have, makes me wonder at its utility.
: It is being added to Vim, and was in fact the most requested
: enhancement for Vim-6. (Check out www.vim.org).
I've heard of this term "folding" before but I never knew what it
meant. Thanks for the info. I might use it when it comes out.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 18:22:07 -0600
"JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:24:38 +0000, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> >> > So they can spend hours and hours per day posting crap on Usenet?
>
> >> you misppelled "countering lies with truth"
>
> >He was right the first time.
>
> I think everyone here agrees that Aaron just posts countless amount of
> shite every day.
>
> And he lied about being in the Gulf.
>
> And he's a right-wing gun nut.
And he lies about being an Engineeer as well. He doesn't hold any
Engineering credentials, and doesn't even have an engineering degree of any
type.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 18:22:59 -0600
"JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 08 Jan 2001 22:25:33 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> "Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:qwq66.162349$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > Nigel Feltham wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > >> You will never be able to install Microsoft Windows via the
> >> > > >> internet.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >But you need a machine on the internet to install it in the first
> >> place!
> >> > >
> >> > > You mean you cannot make a windows bootable disk to connect to the
> >> > > internet and start the installer then - this is possible under
linux
> >> (some
> >> > > distro's still allow this - mandrake can install from an ftp site
but
> >> may
> >> > > need the CD put in your own ftp server as I am not sure if their
server
> >> > > has all files from the CD).
> >> >
> >> > Not as far as I know. The bootable disks supplied with CD's (if they
are
> >> > even supplied at all) are just MSDOS. I don't think anything on the
> >> Windows
> >> > CD's allows this either.
> >> >
> >> > However, it is possible to get a network stack up on MSDOS, though I
> >> > haven't seen a TCP/IP one (that doesn't mean there aren't any).
> >>
> >> This is precisely how you'd do it. The software is here:
> >>
> >> http://www.simtel.net/simtel.net/msdos/tcpip.html
>
> >And where do I get real-mode drivers for my USB ethernet connection,
> >or any other ethernet card made in the last 5 years?
> >
> >No, you cannot install Windows over the net. I've *never* seen anyone
> >do it under Windows, but it happens with Linux all the time (and I've
> >seen considerable more people who've installed Windows than Linux).
> >
> >Net Ghost seems to be the closest thing, but that really is a disk
> >imager, not an OS installer.
>
> And anyway, where would you download Windows from legally?
>From the machine across town that has your site licensed Windows on the
CDROM.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 18:24:59 -0600
"JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:22:05 -0600, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >"JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> >> You will never see a Microsoft Windows Compiler installed
> >> >> in your Windows product by default.
>
> >> >True, you need to buy one.
>
> >> Ahah, more $$$ for microsoft....
>
> >GCC is available for Windows, and there are free compilers, like Borlands
> >5.5 compiler.
>
> What? My version of Windows didn't come with any compilers...
What's so hard to understand about the word "available"? Someone said you
had to *BUY* one, I am saying you don't have to buy one. You can acquire
one, if needed, in several places for free.
> >> >> You will never be able to install Microsoft Windows via the
> >> >> internet.
>
> >> >But you need a machine on the internet to install it in the first
place!
>
> >> On Linux you can boot off a floppy on a bare system and download it
> >> all.
>
> >You can do the same for Windows. Just make a DOS boot floppy with
network
> >stack, download the files and go.
>
> Where from? And what if DOS makes all my files 8.3? And what if I've
> got a Winmodem?
The Windows setup files are all 8.3 conformant. We were talking about using
a network card, not a modem.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kenji Doihara)
Crossposted-To: alt.tasteless
Subject: Re: Could only...
Date: 10 Jan 2001 00:20:05 GMT
JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bones)) wrote:
>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JM wrote:
>>> I thought we were talking about guns? Obviously not...
>>I though we were talking about Linux? Obviously not... When we post off-topic,
>>anything goes. (At least this isn't cross-posted, one outta two ain't bad)
>Not any more!
This is my rifle,
this is my gun,
one if for fighting
and one is for fun.
- Kenji Doihara
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 18:27:36 -0600
"JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >We left our web server alone for two months before rebooting. That's no
> >maintenance at all.
>
> That's strange. Mine seems to crash every two/three days, and
> sometimes it lets individual programs crash the entire thing.
That's because it knows that you despise it, and it's getting revenge.
------------------------------
From: "craig nellist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:26:21 +1100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> you misppelled "countering lies with truth"
^^^
Seeing as though you're so good at pointing other people's mistakes. I
suppose that's the correct spelling in your dictionary.
Have a nice day!
------------------------------
From: "craig nellist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:31:37 +1100
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Are there file format converters available so that later versions of
> Office programs can write files for earlier versions? If so, they are
> late, and they suck.
Yes, there are. They ship with the product - always have - and they work
adequately enough.
Out of the box, Word 2000 can write in these formats:
Word 2000 (Document / Template)
HTML
RTF
TXT
Word 2.x (Windows)
Word 4, 5, 5.1 (Macintosh)
Word 95 (Windows)
WordPerfect 5.0, 5.1 (DOS & Windows)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Brock)
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: 9 Jan 2001 20:32:49 -0500
In article <93g8to$kkm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy John Brock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: Another example would be to very quickly check the syntax of every
>: instance of a certain function. Again, there might be hundreds,
>: and it's *much* faster to check these lines by the screenful rather
>: than hopping repeatedly from line to line.
>I could see that. Altough, once it got up to more than about 200 or
>so, I'd probably not trust my eyeballs to get it right, and I'd use
>something programmatic like a regular expression, or just run it
>through a make and see what barfs.
Here is a variation on the same theme. Let's say I have an error
routine that looks like this: errorexit(errornum, "Error message"),
and that I call it in many different places. Using the ALL command
I can display all the error calls at once and check, not only the
syntax, but also whether the error numbers and the language used
in the error messages is consistent and sensible in the context of
all the other calls. If I don't like what I see I can edit it on
the spot. Seeing these lines all at once means that you can directly
compare each to each, as opposed to looking at one line at a time
and trying to remember all the others. This isn't absolutely
necessary of course, but when you use it it's really *nice*. (Of
course, nothing above the level of 'ed' is really *absolutely*
necessary anyway!)
>: In addition you are not limited to one match. You can refine your
>: view by successively hiding or unhiding lines according to various
>: unrelated criteria. In the end all I can really say is that when
>: I used Xedit I used the ALL command *often*!
>Ah, I hadn't picked that up yet from the descriptions. Now *that*
>is a very handy thing to have. Currently there is no way I know of
>in vi/vim to make a search for an "and" or "or" of two regular
>expressions - I have to use a grep piped through another grep for
>that.
The ability to progressively refine your selection actually wasn't
in the original version of Xedit ALL, but the usefulness was so
obvious that I immediately wrote an Xedit macro myself to supply
it. I don't know for certain whether this functionality was ever
officially added to Xedit (which I haven't used in many years),
but I do know that Kedit (an Xedit clone) has it, so I assume it
probably now exists in Xedit as well. (Can anyone who's used Xedit
more recently then I have verify this for me?)
Incidentally, while the ALL command is an example of horizontal
"folding", Xedit could also fold vertically, hiding specified ranges
of character columns. (Which only makes sense if you are using a
non-proportional font -- but of course we only had one font anyway,
and it was indeed non-proportional!). Can vi do this? In fact,
you could even use various SET options from within macros to turn
Xedit into a data entry front end, or even something like a
spreadsheet. I wouldn't go so far as to say this was something
Xedit did *well*, but if you didn't push too hard it worked OK.
If I remember rightly, a number of IBM system utilities (such as
FILELIST, a full screen file browser) were based on Xedit macros.
I have to disagree with the general argument that "IBM writes bad
software". While VM/CMS certainly had quirks and limitations rooted
in its long history I nevertheless found it to be a very comfortable
and logical environment to program in. The REXX scripting language
is certainly superior to the various Unix shells (although perhaps
not to Perl or Python), and is supported across all IBM operating
systems. In particular I liked the IBM documentation, which was
extensive, professionally written, and highly usable. Compared to
VM/CMS, Unix often strikes me as chaotic, inconsistent, and even
amateurish (in both the good and bad senses of the word)!
--
John Brock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Patrick Raymond Hancox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Patrick Raymond Hancox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 17:35:16 -0800
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And where do I get real-mode drivers for my USB ethernet connection,
> or any other ethernet card made in the last 5 years?
Make and model of your USB-ethernet adapter please. If the drivers for this
don't exist you might perform the install useing a PCMCIA Netboot disk and a
(most any will do) pcmcia nic. Your Win2K source could/should include the
drivers for the USB nic in the $OEM$ directories. Old news
http://www.microsoft.com/ntworkstation/technical/DeploymentDocs/DownGuideAut
omate.asp?LNK=1
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q155/1/97.asp
> No, you cannot install Windows over the net. I've *never* seen anyone
> do it under Windows, but it happens with Linux all the time (and I've
> seen considerable more people who've installed Windows than Linux).
>
> Net Ghost seems to be the closest thing, but that really is a disk
> imager, not an OS installer.
Anyone who claims to be a qualified NT/2K admin that doesn't know about net
installs is lying about their skills. This stuff has been there (on the cd)
forever.
------------------------------
From: * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 01:38:00 GMT
JM wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 21:48:45 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >JM wrote:
>
> >> >anyway, a computer platform is not merely the theoretical core it is based on.
> >> >it is a sum of all it's parts.
>
> >> If you check the name of the group you'll see it's called
> >> comp.os.LINUX.advocacy,
>
> >really???? gee.. from where i'm standing it says alt.linux.SUX
>
> Well, you must be fucking blind. If you look at the headers you'll see
> it says comp.os.linux.advocacy.
so it's true. newsreaders in linux ARE that gay.
well, at least i have satisfaction knowing the HUNDREDS, nay THOUSANDS, of posters
with REAL newsreaders in ALT.LINUX.SUX where this thread is CROSSPOSTED are laughing
with me. at you.
you sorry bastard.
rat.
rat bastard.
> >> and I read somewhere that Linux only refers to
> >> the kernel
>
> >well then it must be true!!!!
> >
> >excessive punctuation for addressing the excessively stupid -kK
>
> OK THEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
RIGHT ON, CHAMPION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!! -kK
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: KDE Hell
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 20:40:56 -0500
You love arguing semantics, don't you? Believe me, I know enough of the
differences between the machinations of QT and X vs. the winAPI to know they
aren't of the same universe.
The point is more that everybody understands the reference I made. Even the
KDE web site likens their UI design to the windows UI. It is a bridge to
windows users, plain and simple. Anyone who argues otherwise is not of sound
opinion.
By existing user base, I'm surmising you're referring to windows users. Most
linux users I talk to don't like or use KDE, only new users. (windows
migratory birds)
Back to your regular sh*t tossing.
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2001 09:15:09 -0500, MH wrote:
>
> >Parable, smarable. I don't think KDE is any of the above.
> >If essence, it's a windows clone designed to bring just those 'desktop
> >users' you claim are not the target of the linux-distro developers to the
> >Linux fold.
>
> No, KDE is not a "Windows clone", and if you were a competent programmer
> you'd know this.
>
> KDE is not designed to bring "new" desktop users. It's designed to meet
> the demands of the existing user base.
>
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
> elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: KDE Hell
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 20:42:50 -0500
> >No. You may hope that Linux is not trying for that market but the
> >movers and shakers with the money riding on Linux sure are hoping it
> >is.
>
> Then they're riding on false hopes. BTW, I think they're more interested
> in the corporate market than they are Joe-Home-Luser.
And what better road to take to that destination than via Joe-Home-Luser?
(you know, you guys should really lose the 'luser' thing. It just doesn't
say much about you)
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: KDE Hell
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 20:45:30 -0500
> BTW, I thought it was the WIndows crowd who rammed windows down everyone
> else's throat. It's the Linux users who are constantly persecuted for
> not running Windows, not the other way around.
pssstt...your spaceship is double parked.
> The only way to get bugged by "Linux zealots" iis to go out of your way
> to look for them (by going to COLA for example)
Summary: "I'm a linux zealot"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: How the f*ck do I install .xpi plugins ?
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 01:43:43 GMT
On 08 Jan 2001 08:39:38 -0700, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yatima) writes:
>> Do the nightly builds come with PSM or do you need to download it from
>> iplanet? I can't get the download to work either as a regular user or as
>> root.
>
>You need to download it (really, just click on the button) -- it
>installs and everything all by itself.
The latest nightly build I got doesn't work with PSM. Going to an https
site causes Mozilla to hang, trying to start PSM from the menu does the same.
Have you seen this?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!?
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 01:43:54 GMT
On 9 Jan 2001 20:42:35 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Anyone who can't pump their own gas is someone who can't get gas at all.
Except in New Jersey.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 21:05:55 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> And he lies about being an Engineeer as well. He doesn't hold any
> Engineering credentials, and doesn't even have an engineering degree of any
> type.
Unlike me, who has an engineering degree w/engineering certification but
is pretending to be a computer science guru.
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Could only...
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 02:06:06 GMT
In article <93f8d5$62q$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Oh, of course. But the fact remains --- unless you are willing to do what
>one US citizen did on the subway, which is to just shoot everyone you feel
>potentially threatened by, you end up *re*acting in a mugging. You are not
>the person who starts the interaction, nor the person who controls it.
>In that situation, you are at an inherently inferior position; And you can
>bet that you are not the only one who learned "how to shoot that thing".
>
I actually would. If I was threatened by a group of thugs on a subway
or in a public park and I was armed, they'd all buy the farm.
>>BTW, if you get shot in the guts your going to die, gunless or not.
>
>Exactly. Which is why I want the person who has the gun pointed at my guts
>to be at ease. It's not like she has anything to fear from me. I am more than
>willing to hand over my wallet, and if she so desires, even my car keys
>(although that would be a stupid thing to steal --- not much use in a getaway
>car that one cannot start, and which also stands out like a sore thumb).
>
In Houston they way they do it is to just dump the entire clip into your
first then they take what they want.
This kind of romanticising about how a mugging happens is very cute.
But it's also very wrong.
>
>Of course, I have never been mugged, assaulted or in any other way
>violently attacked. When I got myself into situations where something
>like that had a better chance of happening than around home (Germany),
>
And we conclude.
>Bernie
>--
Thanks Bernie but leave the thinking to the people who know how.
Charlie
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
