Linux-Advocacy Digest #452, Volume #31 Sun, 14 Jan 01 11:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Chad Myers")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad Myers")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad Myers")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux *has* the EDGE! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux *has* the EDGE! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (sfcybear)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (sfcybear)
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (Edward Rosten)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (sfcybear)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (sfcybear)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (Gary Hallock)
Re: Windows 2000 (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Windows Stability (Andres Soolo)
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (Edward Rosten)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:12:59 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > Ok, what is khttpd then?
>
> an experimental kernel based web server
So it's a kernel based web server, that's exactly what I was talking about.
> > Please post a URL of the specweb 99 results. The results I recall
> > reading only had WinNT/IIS, Linux/Apache, and Linux/Tux.
>
> I don't know of any specweb results for khttpd.
<sigh>
You just said that kttpd kicked IIS's ass in specweb99, so please admit
you were wrong, or show me the results.
> > Microsoft wouldn't write a hack httpd just to win a single
> > benchmark and then claim they're the best web server around.
>
> In the first place, Red Hat never claimed tux was the best
> around - they let the figures speak for themselves.
>
> In the second place, it was not a "hack httpd", but a clever
> and innovative web server, and a showcase for the scalability
> of the Linux kernel.
In a benchmark... real stable. In real world? Just like everything
else linux: FLOP.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:14:45 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > So, SuSE ships with lots of beta software. Just because it's beta
> > in SuSE, doesn't mean that it's not beta anymore.
>
> You can call it what ever you want, that doesn't change
> the fact that it is used in poroduction environments, and
> works quite well. I'm not sure what the point is that you
> are trying to make.
Just because there's some brave souls out there doesn't mean
that the Linux community is about to say: "Linux is enterprise
ready, and we have an enterprise OS called "ReiserFS", it's
good enough to run NASDAQ without worry of fault".
No one has said that, because Reiser isn't production, it hasn't
been released, it hasn't been thoroughly tested in many environments
and it's not going to be taken seriously until it is.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:16:06 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > Um, hmm. I never seem to have trouble finding work as a windows
> > sa or developer
>
> You will. I guarantee it.
Ok, I will mark your words.
Windows developers are in more demand now than ever. With .NET approaching,
there are already training courses sprouting up to get developers up
to speed so they can hit the ground running.
> > in fact, there are tons of jobs. .NET will make
> > that even more.
>
> .net is going to be a flop.
Oh right. This from a man that says a beta FS is "production".
You probably don't even know what .NET is.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:19:13 GMT
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> >
> > Hmm, oh well. Never had a reason to really. The past two jobs I've
> > worked at, Linux couldn't be used AT ALL because of all it's
> > shortcomings, so this "option to be configured" really doesn't
> > mean dittly squat.
> >
>
> Where did you work? At a gas pump?
1.) Video people did tons of video editing with files well over 2GB.
Linux couldn't be used without spending thousands of dollars for 64-bit
hardware to overcome Linux's poorly designed VFS infrastructure. Windows
2000 was the prime choice. It was the best performing, most stable
server software to serve to both the Mac and PC video editing machines.
Never failed us once.
2.) My current employer is releasing a product based on EJB. There is
very little support, if any from major web application platform vendors.
Some provide it, but it's a use-at-your-own-risk type situation. Sun
Solaris and Windows 2000 were the platforms of choice.
We tried it on Linux, but it performed less than half as well as the
Solaris and Windows 2000 implementations.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:19:54 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Rrj86.2343$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Myers wrote:
> > >
> > [snip]
> > >
> > > Hmm, oh well. Never had a reason to really. The past two jobs I've
> > > worked at, Linux couldn't be used AT ALL because of all it's
> > > shortcomings, so this "option to be configured" really doesn't
> > > mean dittly squat.
> > >
> >
> > Where did you work? At a gas pump?
>
> 1.) Video people did tons of video editing with files well over 2GB.
> Linux couldn't be used without spending thousands of dollars for 64-bit
> hardware to overcome Linux's poorly designed VFS infrastructure. Windows
> 2000 was the prime choice. It was the best performing, most stable
> server software to serve to both the Mac and PC video editing machines.
> Never failed us once.
>
> 2.) My current employer is releasing a product based on EJB. There is
> very little support, if any from major web application platform vendors.
> Some provide it, but it's a use-at-your-own-risk type situation. Sun
> Solaris and Windows 2000 were the platforms of choice.
>
> We tried it on Linux, but it performed less than half as well as the
> Solaris and Windows 2000 implementations.
>
> -Chad
One more thing I forgot to add...
Bottom Line:
Linux isn't enterprise ready. It may do static web serving well (not
the best, but well and cheap) but it doesn't cut it for doing big-boy
tasks.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux *has* the EDGE!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:47:38 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Nearly all of which failed because of their incompetance. Borland failed
> because they abandoned C++, their core product. They later tried to get
> their market back but it was too late.
Borland are still with us. They haven't failed yet.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux *has* the EDGE!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:49:33 +0000
Tom Wilson wrote:
> > Let me see, what was I using at EMI and Digital before then. Gasp! A
> > CLI!
>
> Liar! All pre-microsoft computing involved punch-cards and patch cables.
> ;)
Ah the good ol' days. I still remember one of the guys disassembling the
assembler so he could reassemble the disassembler. All done with paper
tape... 8*}
Now was it disassemble the assembler... or assemble the disassembler... oh
boy...
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:37:26 GMT
In article <PY086.174537$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> sfcybear wrote:
>
> > Better check to make sure the cable is pluged in. Based on your past
> > performance, I'll bet you're connecting an ethenet card to a token
ring
> > network.
>
> That explains why the lights flash on the hub. You did READ what I
posted
> didn't you?
For all I know, judging by your past performance, you were looking at
the wrong hub.
>
> > Why is it that you constanly bitch about problems but never ask
> > questions in a technical news group?
>
> Because it's not about posting problems here, is it. I'm posting
examples
> of why Linux is not so great.
And I am explaining that you do not know what you are doing and refuse
to get help. That is not a Linux problem.
>
> --
> Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>From your posts, this is hard to beleive.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:42:47 GMT
So what? you post from Linux, but that's not a big deal. Your lack of
skills, and complete refusal to look in the appropreate places for help
shows that you are just a lump of coal in my opinion. If you were
running mandrake correctly and looked in the right places for help, you
would have found the stupid mistakes you made and would not need to post
your miss-conceptions here.
In article <5%086.174551$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> sfcybear wrote:
>
> > > Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
> >
> > Highly unlikely.
>
> Care to examine my message headers:
>
>
Path:nnrp3.clara.net!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!nnrp4.clara.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From:Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject:Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel
> Newsgroups:comp.os.linux.advocacy
> Reply-To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> References:<D2K76.170316$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Lines:16
> Mime-Version:1.0
> Content-Type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding:8Bit
> User-Agent:KNode/0.3.2
> Message-ID:<xaT76.31619$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date:Sat, 13 Jan 2001 07:11:32 +0000
> NNTP-Posting-Host:212.126.147.184
> X-Complaints-To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Trace:nnrp4.clara.net 979369757 212.126.147.184 (Sat, 13 Jan 2001
> 07:09:17 GMT)
> NNTP-Posting-Date:Sat, 13 Jan 2001 07:09:17 GMT
> Xref:newspeer.clara.net comp.os.linux.advocacy:386867
>
> Now what does it say - User Agent: KNode
>
> KNode is part of KDE.
>
> What does KDE run on?
>
> --
> Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:51:30 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>>> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>
>>>
>>>> Here is a question for all us Linux people.
>>>>
>>>> If Apple made the OS-X GUI GPL, and worked with RedHat, S.u.S.E, and
>>>> others to get it installable on various linux distributions, would you
>>>> consider it?
>>>
>>>
>>> The problem is that X is so entrenched in Linux that it would be damn
>>
> near
>
>>> impossible. Already there are FrameBuffer versions of QT and GTK+, but
>>> they're only used for embedded applications where X would not be a good
>>> choice.
>>>
>>> Unless Quartz ran on top of X, or vice versa, I don't see how it would
>>
> work.
>
>> I don't see any obstacle for X running on top of quartz. It can already
>> run on top of DOS, Windows (most flavours), MacOS and probably many
>
> others.
>
> No, of course not. X can run on Quartz, no problem. But you'd need a
> totally new version of XFree86 to do so.
It would be easier making X run on top of Quartz than on top of nothing,
since X would not need drivers (it uses the drivers through Quartz),
much like, say eXceed on NT.
>> If, however, Quartz ran on top of X (again, I see no insurmountable
>> obstacle for this, seeing as Win32 (ish) can run on top of X) I wouldn't
>> hesitate to use Quartz apps.
>
>
> That would make Quartz a very poor performer, considering it already has to
> go through display postscript.
For many apps such as wordporcessors, poor graphics speed probably
wouldn't show too badly.
>
>> Then the quartz apps could be linked against quartz only libraries (ie
>> not via X) for small devices. I think the number of people wanting to
>> run apps on palmtops, but displaying on their desktops is fairly limited.
>
>
> Yes, but those libraries would ultimately have to use X.
I don't see how: when running a Win32 app under Wine, it ultimately goes
through X before its displayed. When running under windows, it does not
go through X. The same would happen with hese apps. If they're linked
against Quartz for X, they would go through X. If they're linked against
Quartz running natively, thn they would not go through X.
As it stands at the moment, you can get X to run on top of other GUIs
and other GUIs such as Win32 gui[*] to run on X. I think that it would
be possible to do Quartz either way, based on these examples. I'd
personally prefer Quartz for X on desktops, since I use the network
transparency a lot.
* Wine is very slow, but this is probably due to a lack of documentation.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:51:02 GMT
In article <jV386.93$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:93q4j9$poc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I always like how people like this continualy claim to have problems
> > with Linux but when I review his posting history on Deja, not a
single
> > post to a technical news group. Seems very odd to me.
>
> My personal opinion is that if I can't find a solution in Deja, then
it's
> highly unlikely that posting will solve the problem.
Considering how wrong you were when you claimed that development on 2.3
started before 2.2 was released, Why should I even think of listen to a
personal opinion of yours? I have, on many ocations run into problems
that were not on Deja, posted the problem and got an fix. You are again,
as usual, wrong again.
>
> On top of that, I want a solution now, not in several hours,
Then you really don't want to call MS techsupport! You'll spend several
hours there and still get the wrong advice!
so i'd rather
> spend the time in search engines.
>
So do I. But just because you do not find an answer does not mean it is
"highly unlikely" that you will get a solution from the usenet. Unless
you problems are always so simple that they are posted 1000 times over.
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:52:13 GMT
In article <D%086.174555$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> sfcybear wrote:
>
> > I always like how people like this continualy claim to have problems
> > with Linux but when I review his posting history on Deja, not a
single
> > post to a technical news group. Seems very odd to me.
>
> Just posting examples of how GREAT the Linux product is.
And I'm just posting how incompitant you are.
>
> --
> Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 11:00:04 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Chad Myers wrote:
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, what is khttpd then?
> >
> > an experimental kernel based web server
>
> So it's a kernel based web server, that's exactly what I was talking about.
>
That's khttp, not Tux.
>
> > > Please post a URL of the specweb 99 results. The results I recall
> > > reading only had WinNT/IIS, Linux/Apache, and Linux/Tux.
> >
> > I don't know of any specweb results for khttpd.
>
> <sigh>
>
> You just said that kttpd kicked IIS's ass in specweb99, so please admit
> you were wrong, or show me the results.
No, Tux kicked IIS's ass in specweb99. khttpd is a totally different program.
As far as I know there are no specweb results for khttpd.
>
>
> > > Microsoft wouldn't write a hack httpd just to win a single
> > > benchmark and then claim they're the best web server around.
> >
> > In the first place, Red Hat never claimed tux was the best
> > around - they let the figures speak for themselves.
> >
> > In the second place, it was not a "hack httpd", but a clever
> > and innovative web server, and a showcase for the scalability
> > of the Linux kernel.
>
> In a benchmark... real stable. In real world? Just like everything
> else linux: FLOP.
>
You should really read up on Tux. You seem to think thay khttpd and Tux and the
same thing. They are totally different programs.
Gary
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:02:09 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <MrK76.1164$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 10 Jan 2001
> > >> >Word 2000 and Word 97 use the same format. The files are
> > >interchangeable.
> > >>
> > >> What about Word98?
> > >
> > >Word98 is for the Mac, All Mac versions of word have had different
> formats.
> >
> > Funny but just 3 days ago you said that Word 2000 and Word 98 were
> compatible
> > formats. You said there were NO incompatible Word formats in this series.
>
> No, I said Word 2000 and Word 97 were compatible. Wake up and pay
> attention.
>
> > Now this.
> >
> > Again! How much proof from the MANS OWN WORDS do we need before we
> > just stamp "DUMBSHIT" across his forehead and cut this man loose.
>
> You're the dumbshit that can't even keep an argument straight.
>
> > Does anybody listen to this idiot?
>
> Clearly you don't listen to anyone.
So everyone who jumped on the bandwagon and converted from Word97 to
Word98 are screwed and now have to convert to Word2000 format? How many
Word formats are there?
--
Russ
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows Stability
Date: 14 Jan 2001 16:03:18 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> (But it is much more stable than Windows NT, in my experience)
> Then you don't know how to set up Windows NT properly. Linux has
> been far less stable in my experience and in the experience of several
> of my colleagues (who come from Unix backgrounds and prefer to stick
> with their Solaris and HP-UX boxes).
Umm, are you sure it isn't the other way around?
Maybe it's you who don't know how to set up Linux properly?
--
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You never realize how many friends you
have until you rent a house at the beach.
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:06:51 +0000
Donn Miller wrote:
> Tom Wilson wrote:
>
>> "Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
>>> Write one nice non-X11-based GUI system for unix, and give it a super
>>> API everyone could agree on. Then, if people like it, it could always
>>> be ported to X11 as an API layer.
>>
>
>> Flames? Its' the first intelligent Linux GUI comment I've heard in a while.
>> X is overkill unless you need the remote display capabilities. A smaller,
>> local GUI system would be a wonderful thing. It isn't going to make major
>> inroads into the desktop market without one, IMO.
>
>
> See, X is inefficient for certain types of drawing. There's always ways
> around it. But, AFAIK, X11 always uses TCP/IP streams, even if your
> display is local.
IIRC X uses UNIX domain sockets for local connections, instead of TCP/IP
because they're faster and use fewer resources.
> Because it is designed to be a networked and
> remotable windowing system, X likes to bundle certain drawing requests
> into a little "package". The reason is that over a network, it makes
> sense to do things this way. However, not everyone is on a network.
It does do this but... (see later)
> I also think that Xlib tends to scare potential games developers away.
> For one, the Xlib API is lower level then more popular windowing
> systems, like Windows' GDI.
Games delelopers generally use DirectX. I have had very little
experience with this, but it seemed to be very low level at the time
(much lower than the rest of the Windows GUI).
> Also, you have to program your Xlib apps
> such that the graphics will display exactly when you want them to,
> because Xlib likes to buffer drawing requests into little "packages" for
> optimum network performance.
> So, you may call a certain Xlib drawing
> function, but you may not get the output at the exact time you want it
> to. How often this actually happens in practice, I don't know.
... there's an XFlush() call which flushes all requests. It's useful if
you want to ensure that stuff is drawn exactly at the right time.
> Under Windows, for example, there is only one window manager to worry
> about, so developers can expect the window manager to manage their
> windows operations exactly how they expect. There's just so many
> toolkits out there. It probably makes developers uneasy, not knowing
> which toolkit to use. Furthermore, how is one to know that toolkit will
> be around in the next 2-3 years, as there is no "official" X toolkit?
All of the open source toolkits will be around in 2-3 years, since noone
can destroy or remove them.
> With one very well thought-out API, developers can be sure that the look
> and feel is consistent across all apps. Also, when you restrict the
> developers to just one API, they spend less time worrying about which
> toolkit is best, because that decision is already made. Also, it would
> eliminate the X11 toolkit wars we are having now.
> This windowing system would access the HW directly. If all goes well,
> and people like it, the all-in-one Windowing system / GUI could be laid
> directly on top of X, as most toolkits already are, and use Xlib calls
> instead of direct HW calls. So, you wouldn't be at a total loss in the
> event that you still wanted to use X for network windowing apps and
> still use this new windowing system.
>
> Disclaimer: the above is only my opinion, and is correct to the best of
> my knowledge! If it appears to be misleading, it is only my opinion and
> is correct to the best of my knowledge. Hopefully, I was right about
> the dilemma with X11, networking, and buffering drawing requests over a
> network.
Just a point about toolkits etc (with respect to games developers). I
expect that many games developers would use OpenGL (since most games
seem to be 3D these days). That does seem to work pretty well for real
time 3D work, and is independent of toolkits.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
