Linux-Advocacy Digest #714, Volume #31 Wed, 24 Jan 01 23:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Chad Myers")
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Chad Myers")
Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software (T. Max Devlin)
Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The *BEST* advertising! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The *BEST* advertising! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (.)
Re: The *BEST* advertising! (Bob Hauck)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (J Sloan)
Re: Please help! adding a line ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I am preparing to teach a Linux class and I am soliciting advice
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up? (Michel Catudal)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 (Michel Catudal)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 02:54:01 GMT
"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > While little MiG tries to impress with some brochure sites...
> > > >
> > > > MediaWave is deploying over 3,100 windows 2000 advanced servers all over
> > > > europe to handle multimillions of simultaneous audio and video streams.
> > >
> > > And your point is?
> >
> > That W2K is obviously stable and powerful enough to do the job.
> >
>
> Let's see now.
>
> MTTF of 2893 hours (*), 3100 servers.
> I make that >1 crash / hr on average ;-)
BIG NOTE: these are _DESKTOP_ numbers. Please ignore the Penguinista
FUD.
Where is the URL mentioning 3100 for servers?
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 02:57:08 GMT
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Mig
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:58:22 +0100
> <94l2ib$t3j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> >> > Sour grapes from a Lemming.
> >> >
> >> > ...how pathetic.
> >>
> >> realvideo? ahahahaaa
> >
> >This is your best post so far. Why do you even bother when you dont have
> >anything to contributte?
>
> No, he's correct; Microsoft's video format is in fact superior
> in video quality and in compression, as I understand it.
>
> It's not portable beyond Microsoft, unfortunately.
Yeah, that's the only drawback, but a minor one given that 90+%
of the machines out there are Microsoft-based anyhow.
Quick note: It's not actually "Microsoft's video format", it's
MPEG3v3 which is tailored for streaming more so than v1 or v2.
It's the streaming component where MS really shines. Often
far less than a comparable Real or Quicktime video. MPEGv3
even beats Sorenson under certain circumstances.
The MS-Audiov1 and v2 are the real prize. This dramatically
lowers the streaming size. MS-Audio can accomplish in
half (or less in some circumstances) of what MP3 can
do.
In fact, it's so good, I remember reading a news story
about Real licensing the MS-Audio codec for their own
products.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:01:26 GMT
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Now, (I know you can't answer this, but just think about it), how
many
> > > > > > articles/100 about Microsoft are favorable, or at least non-bashing?
> > > > >
> > > > > c't is a mainstream computer magazine, probably #1 in Europe.
> > > > > Your theory is full of holes, do you think they can make money
> > > > > by being devoted to windows bashing?
> > > > >
> > > > > > I bet it would be significantly lower, if not zero, than any of the
> > > > > > mainstream tech magazines (PC World & Magazine, Wired, etc).
> > > > >
> > > > > This proves the integrity of c't. They aren't bought by microsoft
> > > > > advertising dollars, they tell it like it is, and that's why c't
readers
> > > > > trust them technically.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Are there any benchmarks showing Microsoft leading anything?
> > > > >
> > > > > You mean mindcraft? haven't you heard, that organization has
> > > > > been discredited - they were nothing more than a microsoft puppet.
> > > >
> > > > <sigh>
> > > >
> > > > in c't
> > > >
> > > > Please follow the thread, or don't post, sir.
> > >
> > > Please show some Mindcraft tests that are critical of Microsoft.
> >
> > Who said anything about Mindcraft. Throw them out of this
> > discussion too if it makes you feel better, it won't change the
> > outcome any.
>
> I agree, but you're the one trying to discredit some source because it
> publishes positive benchmarks for Linux.
Nice try to twist.
I'm merely discrediting them because it's obvious they have a huge
bias, in fact a grudge. They can't be any more trusted than, say,
Linux.com or similar.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:17:56 GMT
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 25 Jan
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>>>What were you saying again?
>>
>> That 127.0.0.1 and 0.0.0.0 are not valid destination addresses for any
>> packet ever found on a wire. You may notice that, while your
>> nmap/tcpdump experiment works quite well, the traffic is rather
>> worthless, since 192.168.5.5 will NEVER be able to respond to you.
>
>Have you never heard of DoS attacks whereby you flood a host with icmp,
>tcp syn, etc? To avoid detection you use random source addresses. You
>said that 127.0.0.1 would never be seen on the wire.
No, I said that it would never be used as a destination address on the
wire. Nor is 127.0.0.1 a 'random source address', though I could
certainly see it being used in the way you describe, as it would never
be a valid source address under any circumstances whatsoever, yet I'm
sure no router would care.
>I have proved you
>wrong.
You misread me because you jumped to a conclusion. No doubt you'll now
accuse me of back-pedaling. In case you still haven't gotten it, the
*fourth* time, let me make it a fifth: the key is the term "destination
address".
>Why don't you read Stevens' book AND actually try the examples
>he gives throughout the book. You might actually learn something. This
>method has been used to cripple a host so that an attacker may take
>over the address of the host for whatever evil purpose they have in
>mind. Not easy to do but has been well documented. From other threads
>you rant in it is clear you are a Jack of all trades but master of
>none.
Well, at least your last statement is at least, finally, close to the
mark. One of my specialties is not having a specialty. Another is
explaining things to people who do have a specialty. Still a third is
network management.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:20:16 GMT
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 25 Jan
2001 01:35:12 +0100;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I have beyond your help since four or five years ago, at least.
>> Outside of the simian chest-beating, though, I do appreciate your
>> attempts. I did warn you I already knew this stuff.
>
>As they say, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. It is clear you
>have read a little but have not implemented any of it.
I don't understand why you keep repeating that, nor why you assumed it
was true from the very first post you responded to. How could it be
'clear'. I don't even think its clear yet if you actually know your ass
from a whole in the ground, but I don't keep repeating it.
>Is it no
>wonder that the teaching profession has such a bad name these days
>especially in your neck of the woods. Try making your classes a bit
>more practical. Then the teacher may learn something.
When you stop playing with your dick, wash your hands and get a life.
You have obviously never been in one of my classes.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: The *BEST* advertising!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:24:20 GMT
Said ono in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:32:41 +0100;
>> It's pretty clear that flatfish is beside himself because Linux
>> is threatening windows - why this should bother anyboy is not clear,
>> unless they own ms stock, or getting paid to poison usenet forums.
>It bothers me because there are always 'managers' asking us why we build
>industrial robots using w2k instead of linux. Of course they heard that
>linux is free and stable where w2k is too expensive and unreliable.
>We mostly respond that it is theoretically possible but if they want to find
>out, they have to hire new programmers.
And so it goes...
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: The *BEST* advertising!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:25:14 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:34:19
>"ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:94ni84$2kt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > It's pretty clear that flatfish is beside himself because Linux
>> > is threatening windows - why this should bother anyboy is not clear,
>> > unless they own ms stock, or getting paid to poison usenet forums.
>> It bothers me because there are always 'managers' asking us why we build
>> industrial robots using w2k instead of linux. Of course they heard that
>> linux is free and stable where w2k is too expensive and unreliable.
>> We mostly respond that it is theoretically possible but if they want to find
>> out, they have to hire new programmers.
>
>Ha? What does this have to do with anything?
>Any coder worth his paycheck should be able to write code to any platform
>that the language was ported to.
>I won't get into porting code, which can be a mess, and if you already has a
>large code base, I can understand what you are saying.
>But to say that you won't code for linux just because you don't like it?
>Because you can't be bothered to learn a new set of APIs?
>It's not pleasant to break old habits, I know, but it's sure sign of
>laziness not being willing to *try*.
>I hope you have other reasons, more practicle ones, to favoring Win2K over
>Linux than this one.
Thanks for joining us, Ayende. Glad you could make it.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 16:33:04 +1300
> If the machine is safe from attacks, and if it's stable, why mess with it?
> If it was open to attacks, I would disagree, but if it's working and it's
> stable, why bother?
The state of NT4 prior to Service Pack 3 is (one reason) why.
I certainly agree a service pack should not be applied until a great deal
of backing up and testing is done... MS didn't get it right the first
time, so you can't rely on them to get it right the second, third,
fourth, fifth, sixth or six-a'th time either. But the important point is
that they definitely did not get it right on the first go.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: The *BEST* advertising!
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:43:54 GMT
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:32:41 +0100, ono <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It bothers me because there are always 'managers' asking us why we build
>industrial robots using w2k instead of linux.
Why don't you tell us which robots these are?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:43:55 GMT
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 10:34:42 +1300, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Our solaris box we've retired and I can say not soon enough, we were
>> tired of it crashing all the time.
>Two possibilities here:
>
>1) You're lying
>
>2) Your admins are incompetent
You forgot 3) the machine was 10 years old and had a bad disk drive.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:48:15 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
> I'm merely discrediting them because it's obvious they have a huge
> bias, in fact a grudge. They can't be any more trusted than, say,
> Linux.com or similar.
Now look who's twisting things -
You are saying that any reviews not sponsored
by microsoft, then, are corrupt? Isn't it the other
way around?
jjs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Please help! adding a line
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:44:51 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >> Bones wrote:
> >> 1) Assuming that you want a carriage return:
> >> echo -e "I wonder \n$(cat fileA)" > filea
> ^^^^^^^^^^^
> > YUK! This isn't going to work for big files. It's also a little
> > inefficient to copy the whole of the file to the command line before
> > putting it back in to a file.
>
> OK, I was shooting for elegant. No one said anything about adding
entries to
> the tops of huge files. Anyway, I made a flub. What I meant was:
>
> echo -e "I wonder \n$(cat fileA)" > fileA
>
> I know it doesn't make too much of a difference with your argument,
but I
> did not mean to involve another file in that snippet.
>
> Anyway... I tried my method and added the line "I wonder" to the
beginning
> of the Text-Terminal-HOWTO, weighing in at about 265K. It worked
fine, so I
> got brave. I concatenated the entire collection of documents in the
HOW-TO
> directory on my system into a single file. That topped out at
9,119,701
> bytes. Although it took about 20 seconds, I was able to successfully
prepend
> the monster document with "I wonder" using my example above. How big
is big
> relative to file sizes?
>
> Your examples:
> > echo "I wonder" | cat - fileA > filea
> [trim]
> > echo -n "I wonder" | cat - fileA > filea
>
> I see where you are coming from. Also, Bash on my Linux system
doesn't add a
> newline with the second example, assuming that is what '-n' is there
for.
>
> > With the 2 above examples, filea and fileA MUST NOT BE THE SAME!!!
> > because the shell will truncate the file (as a result of >) before
> > trying to read it, so you will loose the old file.
> ...
> > Or you could try:
> > echo "I wonder" > filea
> > cat filea >> fileA
>
> Hmmm... I believe this appends "I wonder" to the end of fileA, a
result
> which the original poster expressly forbade.
>
> What OS are you using?
>
> ----
> Bones
>
Thank you guys for the information.
It was a lab assignment for my college.
Afterwards my teacher explained me that I should create one file with
the text "I wonder" and append the first one to that using cat, and
after rename the file using mv. It worked fine. (but really - it was
like a substitution of files, not really adding a line on the top of a
file).
Anyhow I will try the information that you gave me to see how it works.
Thank you very much.
Marcus
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: I am preparing to teach a Linux class and I am soliciting advice
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:44:00 GMT
In article <94gqn6$rmd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jeff Silverman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi. I am an experienced Linux/UNIX sysadmin and I am getting ready to
teach a class on Linux for
> the Communications Workers of America and WashTech. I am soliciting
comments and suggestions from
> people in the Linux community about what I ought to teach.
>
> The students will be adults with some computer experience, most likely
in MacOS or MS-Windows.
>
> I assume that I have to teach them the basics:
>
> 1) How to login and how to logout
> 2) File manipulation commands: cp, mv, rm, rmdir, ln, cat, more, find,
grep, sort, uniq. Also I/O
> redirection and pipelines
> 3) An editor. vi? emacs? Something else? No flame wars, please.
> 4) Minimal sysadmin stuff - assuming they are going to run their own
machines. Is that a reasonable
> assumption? Account management. Minimal security issues. Networking
(that's a mouthful).
>
> It gets more complicated... GUIs. Should I teach KDE? gnome? Motif?
>
> How about shell scripting?
>
> What do beginning users need to know?
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
> --
> Jeff Silverman, PC guy, Linux wannabe, Java wannabe, Software
engineer, husband, father etc.
> See my website: http://www.commercialventvac.com/~jeffs
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
Jeff,
If you need support materials for you class, you should take a look at
Andamooka (http://www.andamooka.org). There are about 18
Open Content books on our website which cover most every topic you
mentioned. There's KDE 2.0 Development, GTK+/GNOME Application
Development, Learning Debian (covers bash and sysadmin), Linux Newbie
Administrator's Guide, ...
You are welcome to download and print the materials for your class. The
books (almost 2000 pages worth) are all open content, which is licensed
similarly to free software.
Dave
(Andamooka webmaster)
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Michel Catudal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Date: 24 Jan 2001 21:51:12 -0600
jtnews a écrit :
>
> what's wrong with the fonts on cnet in netscape?
> I use netscape all the time in linux and it looks
> fine.
>
Looks fine here too. Perhaps the moron didn't know how to
setup fonts when he looked at it or perhaps he had been
sniffing some flour at the time.
--
Tired of Microsoft's rebootive multitasking?
then it's time to upgrade to Linux.
http://www.netonecom.net/~bbcat
We have all kinds of links
and many SuSE 7.0 Linux RPM packages
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 04:01:52 GMT
Said Kyle Jacobs in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 24 Jan 2001 21:52:19
[...]
>> SOME, a few did I'm sure. Most ppl know it is worthless.
>
>Sure, now. "Back then" Microsoft Works was a fantastic suite.
Not by anyone that I've ever talked to (and that would cover more people
using Works than your average person.) It was great in comparison to
nothing, of course, so plenty of new users probably figured it was
great. But Works itself disavowed them of that notion, even if they
figured out how to make it work for their purposes.
The thing is, Works was the 'low cost' crapware bundle. It was included
on millions upon millions of PCs, if they didn't have any 'real' office
suite. It was the only 'integrated package' available, really, for
Windows, and the cheapest and cruddiest in DOS. Even on systems that
would come with WordPerfect or the Lotus suite if you bought a bundled
option, the default if you didn't was Microsoft Works.
Because it was a fantastic suite? Don't make me laugh; its the cheapest
and the cruddiest, remember? Its just the only one that came from One
Microsoft Way.
>WP users had
>training (remember Word Perfect classes?) Works required none.
No, they just didn't get any. Usually. I've been called in on quite
few 'emergency [doesn't] Works sessions', back when I did PC apps.
>People just
>understood, and having a well made instruction manual didn't hurt either.
The fact that it was so rudimentary it was laughable (even considering
the technology of the time and the alternatives when it had
alternatives) is what made it really painless.
[...]
>> Now if you want to compare Word to WP. that's fair and I could even see
>> competition. But Works, not even.
>
>WP is older than office. Back in "the day", MSDOS based WP was the
>"professional rage" even though it didn't come to Windows for quite some
>time. Even then, the Win version was terribly slow, and majorly buggy. Of
>course people prefered Office.
After all, Office programmers had full and complete access to the Win32
developers and documentation, weren't distracted by developing for OS/2,
and got at least a year's start on Windows.
People didn't 'prefer' Office, though. They did prefer Word; they even
preferred Excel. Both ran better than any of the professional packages
from non-monopoly-owners on Windows, and nobody could get a PC without
Windows for some odd reason! But they pretty much didn't go for Office
until Microsoft started force-bundling it, after Win95. Old
applications die hard, of course, but a few years with no air supply
makes for quite a bit of attrition.
[...]
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: Michel Catudal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Date: 24 Jan 2001 22:02:10 -0600
Conrad Rutherford a écrit :
>
> OK, lesse...
>
> W2K:
Give your credit card, reach for your heart to see if it is still
running, it's getting sore over there.
> Insert CD into a CD ROM and turn on computer. It boots and begins to
> install. Enter your CD key,
"Goddam winblows is costing a bundle ..."
"Food is going to be scarce this week..."
The guy next door is enjoying his Linux install which was a breeze to install,
hasn't had to shut down or reboot the system for months. Before too long SuSE
is likely to come up with the latest 2.4 kernel, but no rush since
whatever he's got now works beautifully. When 2.4 comes out it will just
be icing on the cake. Winblows 98 seems to be taking too much room, need
space to test new kernel on a separate partition, bye bye useless winblows!
--
Tired of Microsoft's rebootive multitasking?
then it's time to upgrade to Linux.
http://www.netonecom.net/~bbcat
We have all kinds of links
and many SuSE 7.0 Linux RPM packages
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
