Linux-Advocacy Digest #402, Volume #31 Thu, 11 Jan 01 22:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant ("Kyle Jacobs")
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant (Craig Kelley)
Re: The real truth about NT (pip)
Re: Could only... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux *has* the EDGE! (Yatima)
Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: KDE Hell (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Ballmer says Linux is Microsoft's No. 1 Threat ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: kernel problems (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: KDE Hell (Yatima)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 01:54:12 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> A variety of other distros have their own central admin facilities.
> Most of the central admin facilities in Redhat are not Redhat
> product. So there is absolutely no basis for your blatherings.
They are pathetic excuses for "administration" that barely suceed in
configuring networking support. Let alone other truly HARDWARE dependent
settings.
> Besides, anyone is free to fork a new distro based on the core
> of Redhat anytime they like.
It's not my job to provide the world with a better Linux.
> Alternately, anyone is free to adapt kudzu to their particular
> distribution.
Kudzu seems to be pretty RedHat dependent, contact us when you get Kudzu for
a Debian distro, or slack.
> Furthermore, I have infact upgraded kernels and xservers and kudzu
> continued to be useful. The really useful, core parts of what kudzu
> does are not horribly version dependent.
Aparently you manged to configure your new kernel exactly the same as the
old one. Kudzu can only recognize what it THINKS the kernel supports, and
act approperately with scripts. Those scripts tend not to work when a new
revision of SOMETHING uses a completely different file format.
> Besides, the need to run Redhat to get certain creature comforts
> does not negate their existence. At most it would imply that
> Redhat is ahead of the compeition.
Wonderful. Except RedHat has some of the worst design problems found in a
commercial distro. Remember "BugHat"?
> So, all you've really demonstrated is that genuine choice and
> competition are a good thing.
Not really, so far they only seem to have lead to a load of incompatible
Linux distro's with random and idiotic functionality problems, and general
compatibility problems (FORKING!)
>
> >
> >
> >"Lewis Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:93jgn3$d5d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Kyle Jacobs was heard ranting about
> >> <EfR66.26887$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in alt.linux.sux on 09
Jan
> >> 2001
> >>
> >> >"Ray Chason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in
> >> >message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> The weakness of Linux is that you have to fool with it.
> >> >> The strength of Linux is that you *can* fool with it.
> >> >
> >> >Really? *Can* implies there is an alternative. You admit this in the
> >> >prvious sentance, but can implies alternative, of which THERE IS NONE.
> >>
> >> No, the idea being that you can't fool with Windoze much.
> >>
> >> >don't like minutia. I have enough garbage in my life not to need a
> >> >technical reference book every time I want to dial into an ISP, or
> >> >reconfigure my modem (or ADD a modem for that matter.)
> >>
> >> Neither do I. That's why I learn it once. Besides, hey if you don't
want
> >to
> >> do the work, You don't have to dial into an ISP at all. I'm quite
certain
> >> the internet will go on without you. And what do you need it for? Oh
> >yeah
> >> BTW ever run into Kudzu? When I switched video cards, on my linux box
and
> >> brought it up, before it hit runlevel 4 it told me I had removed a
card,
> >> and added a new one, and if I wanted to remove all the old configs, and
it
> >> installed my new one. :) Holy shit Linux CAN plug and play also. BUT I
can
> >> turn it off also.
> >>
> >> >> Oh, and I don't much appreciate your use of "normal" as if those of
> >> >> us who actually know how our computers work are "abnormal."
> >> >
> >> >I like to come home, and enjoy the simple bliss of "it just works,
> >NEATO!"
> >> >on my home PC. I don't want to tinker the hell out of it to get some
> >> >idillic, whatever working, I really just do want to use it.
> >>
> >> :) Yes well ignorance is bliss.
> >>
> >> >Linux requires tinkering, 24/7. I hate that.
> >>
> >> Again.. really? My DNS server is linux, and it's been running without
a
> >> reboot or tweak for 3 weeks, the one before that, oh I think it was
about
> >a
> >> year. And hey the only reason my other linux boxes get tweaked
everyday,
> >is
> >> the same reason my Windows box gets tweaked every day.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> l8r
> >> -LJM
> >>
> >> a.k.a. Jaster Mereel
> >> a.k.a. MrBobaFett
> >>
> >>
> >> "Little things used to mean so much to Shelly. I used to think
> >> they were kind of trivial. Believe me, nothing's trivial. "
> >> -- Eric Draven, The Crow
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Common Standards, Common Ownership.
>
> The alternative only leads to destructive anti-capitalist
> and anti-democratic monopolies.
> |||
> / | \
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Date: 11 Jan 2001 19:02:13 -0700
"Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 24/7 tinkering is a DESKTOP problem for me. I don't think I care about
> Linux as a server anymore, as that distro makers are beginning to realize
> that hard-customization of Linux for server purposes just works out better
> for admins and uptime anyway.
>
> Kudzu is RedHat based Linux's only, and Kudzu is USELESS if you upgrade ANY
> software component under Kudzu (i.e., new kernel, or new Xserver, or new
> ANYTHING that isn't directly from RedHat).
You are a whiner.
You complain about choice. If you don't want to run RedHat Linux,
then use something else. If you want to use Kudzu, then use RedHat
Linux.
You don't see Linux people complaining that their Real-Mode network
cards don't work under Windows ME or 2000. You don't see Linux people
going into NT advocacy groups and complaining that their PnP sound
cards don't work under NT 4.0 (and using this as conclusive "proof"
that NT is "USELESS"), and then chiding about how ISAPNP.SYS is
"unintuative".
Give it up already.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The real truth about NT
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:09:39 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:13:12 +0000, pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >>
> >> pip wrote:
> >> >
> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > I get 100% success with Windows 98 SE. What's your point?
> >> > >
> >> > > How much do you burn? My company burn's about 1000 CD's per month (all
> >> > > custom stuff for clients).
> >> >
> >> > Then get better CDR software :-)
> >> > What has this got to do with the OS?
> >>
> >> The CD writing process is susceptible to bottle-neck-induced errors.
> >>
> >> NT's "agressive caching" technique (i.e. caching when there's absolutely
> >> no fucking reason to cache), causes disk I/O bottlenecks...thereby
> >> increasing the likelihood of your CDR-burn to have errors.
> >
> >Fair point, except that:
> >1) Linux also has _very_ aggressive file chaching and on the whole it
> >does a great job
> >2) Most decent CD burners have an internal cache to prevent this
> >(remembering that
> >if you are burning cd's you should _not_ be using other programs anyway
>
> This is pure bullshit. You're merely lowering expectations
> in order to make up for pisspoor product.
Well WinNT is truly a "pisspoor" product and in that I have no
doubt, BUT it can burn CD's reliably I am sure! My Win98 box does
and I am sure that both Win2k and NT can also without grinding to
a halt. In other words I simply don't believe the OP claim! Both
Winx and Linux are more than capable of burning CD's without problems,
otherwise it is bad drivers or bad software or bad hardware, not Windows
NT kernel.
I don't think that cache has much to do with this and it is interesting
to note that 2.4 has now a much more aggressive vm caching subsystem
that 2.2x.
> >either under NT or Linux, so caching should not present a real problem).
> >Linux and NT are not "designed" for this type of predictable data flow
> >really (well, maybe RT Linux can be?).
>
> Burning CD's should not be that timing critical.
True. But if you are running a very loaded computer then this is the
only
real way to ensure that things don't go amiss.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Could only...
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:16:33 GMT
In article <93kp33$bs6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>[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".
>
>>Regardless: reacting with force is SUPERIOR to meekly allowing oneself
>> and one's companions to be mugged.
>
>Is it really? Is being dead, but proud really better than being alive, but
>meek?
>
>>Say what you will about Bernie Goetz...a jury of 12 fellow New York City
>>residents UNANIMOUSLY acquitted him...even though ALL of them knew that
>>handguns are illegal in NYC for anybody who isn't politically connected.
>
>That's a very selective view of the truth, isn't it? First of all, they
>didn't acquit him *at all* on the gun possession charges. Quite the
>contrary, they put him into jail for 8 1/2 months on those counts.
>
>Furthermore, the criminal jury *did* acquit him on the charges of
>reckless endangerment and attempted murder. Note that this does not
>mean they believed he was innocent of those charges; It just means they
>weren't sure beyond reasonable doubt of his guilt.
>In 1996, a civil jury awarded one of the shooting victims $43 million
>in damages, finding that he did indeed act recklessly and with intent.
>Given that he walked up to the already wounded victim, uttered the
>words "You don't look too bad, here's another" and then fired a shot that
>paralyzed the guy, that's hardly a strange finding.
>
>
>But anyway, let's just concentrate on the fact that him shooting four
>teenagers because he *felt threatened* by them was not considered a
>criminal act. Apparently, Goetz' fear in the particular situation was
>based on incidents years before. He felt uncomfortable in certain
>situations, but was of the opinion that it was his damn right to go
>where he wanted to go and sit where he wanted to sit, even if it meant
>putting himself into (perceived) danger. He also apparently thought
>that it was his damn right to defend himself against such perceived
>danger, to the point where he shot 4 youths who he didn't know, didn't
>know anything about, and who hadn't done anything other than asking
>for (or demanding, depending on whose version you believe) $5 of him,
>and who between them didn't carry any weapon more potent than a screwdriver.
>
>
>Now, imagine you were a poor black youngster who likes rap music. You
>travel on the subway, with a few of your friends, you are having an
>agitated discussion about the latest CD by your favourite artist, using
>your clique-lingo mixed with a lot of rap-terms. Enter the middle-aged,
>anglo-saxon white collar worker, who sits down next to you and your
>friends, and keeps looking at you nervously, presumable because he
>doesn't understand the language you are using (but then, he might just
>pick out some of the words, which are all about social disequality,
>street violence and also sometimes violent phantasy worlds --- I mean,
>you *are* talking about rap, so those subjects are hardly surprising).
>
>Now, you *are* aware that said white collar worker, if he is frightened
>by his surroundings, might whip out a gun any second and start shooting
>you and your friends. You are also aware that the courts will say that
>he didn't break the law doing so. Furthermore, you are aware that this
>has actually happened on at least one occasion.
>
>Ask yourself a simple question --- would you be justified feeling threatened
>by the white collar worker? Would you, consequently, be justified in
>warding off a perceived threat to your life by shooting that white
>collar worker?
>
>If you answer "yes", then tell me --- do you *really* want to live in
>such a society?
>If you answer "no", please explain why one person feeling threatened by
>another is justified shooting, but another person feeling threatened isn't.
>
>
>Do you really think shooting 4 people, one of them to the point where he
>will live out the rest of his life in a wheel chair and with the mental
>capacity of an eight year old, is an appropriate response to being asked
>for money? Or even to being hassled for money?
>
>Or, to put it even more poignantly: How much did the 5 bullets cost that
>Bernie Goetz dumped into those youths? How does that price compare to
>the $5 that would have sent them on their way?
>
>
>Bernie
>
>--
>If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research,
> would it?
>Albert Einstein
It seems they get more wordie the less they know.
And they like to throw in those little genius tags at the end also.
Albert Einstein on this one.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yatima)
Subject: Re: Linux *has* the EDGE!
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:18:28 GMT
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 19:16:42 +0000, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I have a strong preference for GUI application - I'm a GUI developer, so no
>surprise there.
Guess not :)
>I'm not out to impose my way of working on anyone. Terry Porter appears to
>be confusing CLI applications running on terminals on X with running
>various GUI applications as "using a GUI".
I'd agree. A CLI app in a terminal window on X is still CLI (not that
there's anything wrong with that). Some CLI programs, when run this way,
can take advantage of mouse input however.
>I think the one area Linux does not have an edge over Windows is the
>stability etc. of GUI applications. I've certainly seen a few problems with
>KDE 2.0 so far.
I would agree that many of the windows GUI apps are more polished (This
makes sense with an almost exlusively GUI oriented OS).
>I prefer GUI's over CLI's. CLI's are good for scripting or remote access.
>GUI's are pretty good for everything else - but you'd expect that from
>someone who switched from OpenVMS/UNIX to Windows some years ago.
I don't really agree that GUI apps are better for everything else. Of
course, what would you expect from a someone who switched from windows
and mac OS to linux :)
I appreciate your civil and honest reply Pete.
Take care,
--
yatima
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time.
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:18:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, rus wrote:
>I find the video setup disheartening. I also find that text editing
>instead of GUI controls for program setup frustrating. I am using
>Caldera distro. Is there a distro for people only having time to do
>work and not time for figuring out their OS?
Yes. Debian 2.2 R2.
Why do I write this you ask.
I got sick of exactly the same thing.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time.
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:19:20 GMT
In article <qwm76.345$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>"rus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I find the video setup disheartening. I also find that text editing
>> instead of GUI controls for program setup frustrating. I am using
>> Caldera distro. Is there a distro for people only having time to do
>> work and not time for figuring out their OS?
>
>I'm sorry, but most Linux people seem to think you don't exist. Why would
>someone want to get work done instead of tweaking their OS? (yes, that's
>sarcasm).
>
>
This man is an asshole.
Don't listen to him. Use Debian instead.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: KDE Hell
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:25:10 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Craig Kelley wrote:
>>
>> Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > SMP under Linux levels off after four processors, similar to FreeBSD.
>>
>> FreeBSD can't even MIGRATE PROCESSES (much less, kernel functions).
>>
>> It's not in the same class as Linux or Windows NT for that matter.
>>
>> > Real SMP support is found under Commercial UNIX's, and Windows NT.
>>
>> How is Windows NT/2000 better than Linux 2.4.0?
>>
>> Caveots:
>>
>> 1) FreeBSD is a great platform, don't get me wrong -- I just wouldn't
>> use it for SMP performance; I'd use it for other (network) performance
>> bennies.
>>
>> 2) Yes, Solaris, Irix, AIX (etc.) kick both Linux and Windows NT out
>> the door with massivly MP machines.
>>
>> 3) You can run Linux on 32 processor mahcines *right now* -- Windows
>> 2000 can't outside of Redmond.
>
>Redmond Washington must have some strange energy field...or somethin...
>
Strange energy field nothing.
It's the idiot wave. Haven't you heard of it?
It was originally designed in the 50's to be used
as a weapon against the U.S.S.R.
Look. You fire it off from an ICBM at an enemy
air base. After re-entry a capsule seperates from
the main rocket, parachutes deploy and the as
soon as the iwm hits the ground it starts
transmitting a signal.
Idiots come from miles around and clogg up the
airfield and at the same time changing the
mass structure of the earth forcing warm weather
on Russia which in turn causes them to sweat.
They've renamed the iwm at Redmond to some
other 3 letter flashy thing, but it does exist.
>
>>
>> --
>> The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
>> Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
>
>
>--
>Aaron R. Kulkis
>Unix Systems Engineer
>DNRC Minister of all I survey
>ICQ # 3056642
>
>
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ballmer says Linux is Microsoft's No. 1 Threat
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:23:44 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:41:21 +0000, Pete Goodwin
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Bruce Scott TOK wrote:
> >
> >> Very poorly written piece. From a Corporate IT/MS perspective, it talks
> >> as if Linux has been _technologically_ playing catch up to W* and is
> >> just getting there.
> >
> >Sounds like my comment "Linux lags behind Windows"
> >
> >> Linux was beyond that point several years ago.
> >
> >In certain areas, yes, but in terms of the GUI, it's catching up to Windows.
>
> There really isn't much to do.
>
> Just implement WIMP.
>
> That was done before Linux even existed.
>
How dare you confront Pete with the shallowness of his arguments.
Hrrmph!
> [deletia]
>
> --
>
> The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
> where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
> component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to
> build their own works.
>
> This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
> in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
> anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
> |||
> / | \
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: kernel problems
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:30:39 GMT
In article <93jf12$91b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In article <93dbh4$8du4o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >You mean the simple make makedep make install didn't work properly?
>> >
>>
>> So how do I compile a customised version of windows kernel then arsehole.
>>
>> Linux comes with pre-built kernels which work for anyone but some users
>> want the latest cutting-edge version which is the only time kernel
>> recompiles
>> are needed. Where can you obtain the latest copy of MS's source to compile
>> it then. The only reason windows doesn't have this problem is you are stuck
>> with whatever MS chucks in the box and cannot get cutting-edge source.
>>
>>
>
>Ya know, this is rediculous. I was posting to a LINUX forum, to ask a LINUX
>question, and Windoze users decide to come and turn this into a damn abortion
>protest. If you are not a LINUX user, here to advocate LINUX, then you are in
>the wrong forum, I dunno, maybe IE manipulated the html to make this read
>'windows.advocacy' because it doesn't think any other OS exists, but YOU ARE
>IN THE WRONG FORUM. Go back to your seg faults and let us discuss Linux here,
>in OUR forum. Or, does the M$ philosophy rub off on its users and make them
>believe that they own everything? Don't talk about something you know nothing
>about. I just makes you look like a dumbass.
>
>C Pungent
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com
>http://www.deja.com/
Windows users are middle aged fatasses who drive Pontiacs.
The Wide Track RULES.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time?
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:29:28 -0500
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:ztf76.2261$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:7Y076.13$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > (Mind you, it seems that Matt is one of these strange people that
> > believes
> > > > that writing and debugging device drivers should be easy and
> > > straightforward.
> > > > Shows what a know-nothing kid *he* is, and what a fool you are for
> > rising
> > > to
> > > > his bait. :^)
> > >
> > > Not to mention that he claims to NOT be writing a device driver, but
> still
> > > somehow manages to have his code run in kernel-mode AND claims this
> should
> > > not crash the system if the code is faulty. ;)
> >
> > You gotta admit, a world so forgiving that your OS stays up after your
> > home-brew device drivers and Explorer extension objects crap out, would be
> a
> > wonderful place to live.
>
> The OS stays up just fine if explorer extensions fail. They're just
> userland DLL's.
You ignorant DORK.
There is no such thing as "just a DLL". ALL DLL's are part of a larger
executable. The only reason the code is in a DLL is to conserve
disk space by keeping "high use" library code in a seperate file, rather
than linking the same code, over and over into nearly every executable.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yatima)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: KDE Hell
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:31:57 GMT
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 23:42:11 GMT, Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Here is an idea. If the individual has ANY desire to begin programming
>in ANYTHING they are...
>
>1.Serious; They are, and should be ready and willing to pay for
>programming tools. If they are programming for UNIX, they should have
>UNIX testing facilities available. Same with Windows, same with Mac.
Sorry, I don't agree at all. I'm not a real programmer but I do write
small apps in C to do little jobs that help me in day to day life. Also,
I consider programming to be a hobby. I like linux because I don't have
to pay through the nose for that.
>2.Knowledgeable. This usually means enrolling at a college to take a
>programming course, which satisfies the educational value of a discount
>on Windows programming tools.
I have other work to do and don't have the time to go take courses. I
just want to write a small app once in a whil for fun. Also, I find
programming kind of relaxing :)
>3.Realistic. Programming something costs money.
Not on linux it doesn't so this is incorrect.
>A programmer should be willing to admit this.
Because Bill says so?
> Besides, they COULD just use something like Windows
>notepad, or "copy con" at the "dos prompt" to write their code, and use
>a GNU compiler (available for Win32 now) to make they're program,
Why? A programmer can do this for less or free in linux.
> but that
>neat programming software adds "convince" features to programming,
>which SHOULD be charged for.
WTF? Why "should" something be charged for? I mean, I have no problem
with paying for software but to make it sound like some kind of moral
requirement seems silly. If someone wants to be reimbursed financially
that's perfectly fair and I have no problem at all with that. Likewise I
have no problem with someone that wants to give away stuff. It's their
stuff and they have every right to make it available free of charge if
they so desire.
--
yatima
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
