Linux-Advocacy Digest #804, Volume #31 Sun, 28 Jan 01 21:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!! (Peter Hayes)
Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) ) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux! (Jim Richardson)
Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it (Giuliano
Colla)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it (Giuliano
Colla)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Sound a networks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Kernel upgrade - not bad at all ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Best way to learn Linux? (Michel Catudal)
Re: Kernel upgrade - not bad at all ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Best way to learn Linux? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Kernel upgrade - not bad at all ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:15:18 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> : Sorry, Open Source was essentially created by RMS, an American who followed
>> : his principles for something like 10+ years before Linus got on the
>> : bandwagon. Why do you people like to think the US never invents anything?
>>
>> That is incorrect. RMS has nothing to do with "Open Source," and
>> admits that free software predates him by a long time - he may have
>> popularized, written, and supported a great deal of it himself, but
>> the idea is at least as old as computing itself.
>>
>
>Back to the 1950's at least..
>
>
>> Joe
>
>
>--
>Aaron R. Kulkis
>Unix Systems Engineer
>DNRC Minister of all I survey
>ICQ # 3056642
>
Let me just GELL this down for everybody.
And I know AK knows this but this is for the
rest of you.
RMS has a gameplan and a philosophy.
Ray Krock had a gameplan and a philosophy.
When you develop a model such as the GPL
and you've talked this over with attorneys
and thought it thru with other developers
you stick to that model.
Open Source could mean anything!
It could mean anything tied with being able
to view the source code.
Copyrighted code can be opensource!
GPL'ed code is open source by nature
but the difference is it's FREE code
which can not legally return to a
copyrighted domain. Therefore RMS
invented the first TRUELY unrevokable
public domain license.
Remember the previous PDL's from the 70's
and 80's had problems in that those
PDL's would allow code to pass back
to copyrighted material. OR worse they
would be copyrighted material and the
PDL would be the last years release.
The GPL doesn't allow for time migrations
other than one way. Once software is
GPL'ed it stays GPL'ed.
It can't be PDL for a year then right
back to copyrighted material again.
There ARE some sources who copyright
code for 1 year then GPL it. But
these are one time products which
future private development is NOT
planned. You don't have this
scenerio like with BSD style licensing
where copyrighted versions are the
tip while the BSD'd version are
last years material.
Once a product is GPL'ed - future
development under a copyright is
impossible as it would violate
the GPL license requirements.
And since organizations like Debian
REQUIRE the correct GPL licensing
before the code is accepted to
the free sourced directory, you find
it very tuff to get your product into
the Linux market without GPL'ing it.
To do that, like Oracle does, would
mean that you have a standalone support
and distribution effort for all distributions.
This is *WHY* companies like IBM are welcomed
in the Linux community and not feared as
they play by the rules or they hit the road.
IBM's take on this is a mono-os which costs
little to make usable on all their systems
which benefits their customer base and
consolidates their users once again.
I am planning on buying an IBM portable.
They make the best portable in my opinion.
And they have an interest in developing
the OS I choose to run.
And this is something I couldn't have said
10 years ago.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!!
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:12:06 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 14:15:33 -0500, Seán Ó Donnchadha
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote:
>
> >
> >Don't you see the RAW power behind 250,000 Linux developers
> >over a mere 2,000 Microsoft developers....
> >
>
> Sure, just like I see the raw power behind a million backyard
> mechanics over the mere few at BMW.
>
> >
> >4 OS's to support now.
> >
>
> Actually, there are 2 OSs to support now - Win9x/ME and WinNT/2K.
Looks like 4 to me, or certainly 3 Win9x/ME, WinNT and 2K.
> Later this year Win9x/ME is finally going away. Think about that. All
> the OEMs that currently ship Win9x/ME will be shipping Whistler by the
> middle of next year.
That'll be GamerWhistler, HomeWhistler, OfficeWhistler, EnterpriseWhistler,
plus server versions, plus EnterpriseServer versions of the last two, all
different, with more/less 16/31/64 bit code. A dog's dinner.
> What's going to happen to Lunix's chances on the
> desktop when its only advantage over the current mainstream desktop OS
> (stability over that of Win9x/ME) goes away?
>
> >
> >I predicted Microsoft would loose dominance to Linux by
> >2005. I wonder if they will make it that long?
> >
>
> Give me a fucking break. Lunix is finally becoming a real-world OS, as
> opposed to the hobbyist OS it started life as.
Linux started in 1991. Windows started in 1985. So Windows has had a 6 year
head start, 10 if you include Dos, and despite all that accumulated
experience together with their illegal business practices Microsoft can
only just keep pace with Linux. It doesn't need a crystal ball to see where
each will be in 2005.
> And look what's
> happening to it as a result: years between major kernel updates,
> mutually incompatible distributions, distribution-specific 3d-party
> software, GUI wars, a mountain of unfinished crap software, and worst
> of all, the deadly embrace of those horrible proprietary commercial
> corporations (like IBM). You Lunix zealots should have kept this
> wonderful OS to yourselves; now that it's in the radar range of the
> commercial world, you may not like what it ends up turning into.
This does worry me somewhat, the commercialisation of Linux may turn into
the Microsoftisation of Linux.
BeOS, QNX, V2OS anyone?
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:23:42 -0600
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Actually, there are 2 OSs to support now - Win9x/ME and WinNT/2K.
> >Later this year Win9x/ME is finally going away. Think about that. All
> >the OEMs that currently ship Win9x/ME will be shipping Whistler by the
> >middle of next year. What's going to happen to Lunix's chances on the
> >desktop when its only advantage over the current mainstream desktop OS
> >(stability over that of Win9x/ME) goes away?
> >
>
> They said exactly the same fucking thing when W2k went out.
> And it's said they are going to make a residential/personal
> version of Whistler also.
No, they said it when Win98 came out. At the time, they intended to make a
personal version of Win2000, but ended up pushing it back because Win2k was
already over burdened with new features. They are actually shipping public
betas of Whistler personal. The beta exists, and is available. They can't
back out now.
> Give ME a break!
>
> Linux is UNIX. It's posix compliant.
POSIX is not UNIX. BeOS is POSIX compliant, so is NT. POSIX is OS
agnostic.
> Unix has been running the world and the web for over 30 years now.
> Microsoft hasn't been making Windows for half the time.
Strange that the web hasn't existed for 30 years.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
)
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 17:37:15 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 00:17:45 GMT,
Kyle Jacobs, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:952c93$hk7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> >>> Key word here is "good"
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>When that's the keyword, MS crap falls out of the picture.
>>
>> > Tell that to the 95 percent of the world that is using MS.
>>
>> Oh. Its the best because everyone uses it.
>>
>> Thats some argument youve got there.
>
>The road less traveled is less traveled for a reason genius.
So, Palm must have a better OS than M$ for handhelds, after all, they have the
lions share of the market, and Apache must be better than IIS because it has
way more users.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 17:41:47 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 17:25:25 -0600,
Erik Funkenbusch, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>>
>> So are you saying MS hasn't been doing Internet for more than 3 months
>> or that Bell South couldn't get a T3 connection done in the last 10
>> years? Or is it that buildings are sooooo expensive in Mississippi that
>> MS couldn't afford to buy one?
>
>I'm saying that MS decided in the last few days to create geographical
>seperation of their DNS servers. This is not something you can do
>overnight, since it requires months of planning, construction of new lines,
>etc... It's far easier to just outsource it to a third party that's already
>providing the services.
>
The amusing part, is that outsourcing it to a company is one thing, outsourcing
it to a company that uses a competing product is another. You mean to tell me
that they couldn't find anyone using W2K that they could trust? yet they want
*other* businesses to trust their solution.
Looks bad no matter how you spin it.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:27:13 -0600
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "CR Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >This is even worse for them than the original event. They now have to
> > > >admit they can't run a big network and switch to people running
Linux!
> > >
> > > The DNS service in Active Directory, has now proven itself to be
> > > severely flawed.
> > >
> > >
> >
http://www.lucent-netcare.com/knowledge/whitepapers/win_2k_dns_integration.a
> > sp
> > >
> > > "It is important to note that Microsoft's implementation of secure DNS
> > > update does not interoperate with DNS servers that support RFC 2137,
> > > so currently there is no mechanism to enforce secure DNS updates
> > > between Windows 2000 systems and a BIND DNS server.
> > >
> > > Note: BIND is what everyone but M$ uses.
> >
> > Note: The article is well over a year old. RFC 2137 is obsolete, and
is
> > replaced by RFC 3007
> >
>
> Enough with the Red Herrings, Erik.
>
> M$ DNS servers are insecure....and there's NO getting around it.
>
> Now....try this for a while, you pathetic little fool:
>
> 1. SIT DOWN
>
> 2. SHUT THE FUCK UP.
Ahh.. more of that stimulating Kulkis intellectual prowess.
If you'd rather stick your head in the sand and pretend that 18 month old
articles are still valid, be my guest.
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:23:42 GMT
Jim Richardson wrote:
>
> On 28 Jan 2001 07:44:44 -0500,
> Norman D. Megill, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
> >In article <dGKc6.19391$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> >
> >> Besides, Win2K has NTFS5 which doesn't have this problem anyhow.
> >
> >If so, let's hope they have better luck than these people when they
> >try to use Win2K for their enterprise application:
> >
> >http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/16075.html
> >
> >--Norm
> >
>
> I did find this story amusing, wonder if M$ will fly some techs and muscle out
> to "convince" Delphi to change their minds...
>
A quick glance to:
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.delphi.com
tells that if they did, they didn't succeed, for the moment.
It also tells that with Win2k they weren't able to keep their site up
for more than half a day.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:25:56 GMT
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 16:03:32 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim
Richardson) wrote:
>yeah, you move on when you find a problem, or develope little habits like
>"don't move the mouse when it's saving a file" or "make sure you don't use the
>shortcut icon, start it from the startbar." Or the one my mom is currently
>dealing with, don't use the printer if you used the webcam since the last
>reboot, windows doesn't like it.
> See, we are a little different, when we find a problem, we fix it...
>Try is sometime.
What a bunch of FUD.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:25:58 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:28:15 GMT, Giuliano Colla
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Key word here is "good"
> >>
> >
> >When that's the keyword, MS crap falls out of the picture.
>
> Tell that to the 95 percent of the world that is using MS.
>
Ever heard the word "monopoly"?
Nothing to do with "good".
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:27:15 GMT
Kyle Jacobs wrote:
>
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:952c93$hk7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > >>> Key word here is "good"
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>When that's the keyword, MS crap falls out of the picture.
> >
> > > Tell that to the 95 percent of the world that is using MS.
> >
> > Oh. Its the best because everyone uses it.
> >
> > Thats some argument youve got there.
>
> The road less traveled is less traveled for a reason genius.
The reason is called "monopolization". And its illegal.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:29:01 GMT
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 00:22:05 GMT, spicerun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I wish you'd get off this 'built just for Linux' kick. My system wasn't
>built for Linux (including
Damm right.
Only an idiot would advertise "built for Linsux".
He'd never sell a single unit!
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:36:17 -0600
"Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >4 OS's to support now.
> >
> > Actually, there are 2 OSs to support now - Win9x/ME and WinNT/2K.
>
> Looks like 4 to me, or certainly 3 Win9x/ME, WinNT and 2K.
Hmm.. then there must be hundreds of versions of Linux, including every
version of the test kernels an 2.3 and 2.1, etc.. kernels. That's not even
counting the numerous different distributions.
> > Later this year Win9x/ME is finally going away. Think about that. All
> > the OEMs that currently ship Win9x/ME will be shipping Whistler by the
> > middle of next year.
>
> That'll be GamerWhistler, HomeWhistler, OfficeWhistler,
EnterpriseWhistler,
> plus server versions, plus EnterpriseServer versions of the last two, all
> different, with more/less 16/31/64 bit code. A dog's dinner.
No, Whistler is 32 bit or 64 bit, depending on architecture. It has no 16
bit code in it.
> > Give me a fucking break. Lunix is finally becoming a real-world OS, as
> > opposed to the hobbyist OS it started life as.
>
> Linux started in 1991. Windows started in 1985. So Windows has had a 6
year
> head start, 10 if you include Dos, and despite all that accumulated
> experience together with their illegal business practices Microsoft can
> only just keep pace with Linux. It doesn't need a crystal ball to see
where
> each will be in 2005.
NT was released in 1993, but then so were the first full distro's of Linux.
Given that both have been on the market for about the same time, Win2k seems
to be much more advanced that Linux in many ways.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:29:31 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>>> mlw wrote:
>>>> I am having a bit of difficulty relating this thread to anything having to do
>>>> with Linux advocacy.
>>> Regard it as a pollution control technique.
>> Impossible, considering how much pollution you're depositing.
> Tholen is the disease.
Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical
argument.
> I'm the cure.
"Arrogance and stupidity in a single package. How efficient of you."
--Londo Mollari.
> Hope that helps.
It doesn't.
>>> I'm hoping to convince the walking toxic waste dump to remove himself
>>> from the human gene pool.
>> Talking to yourself, Kulkis?
> Not at all, ferret-face.
I see you're hallucinating now. I'm not Frank Burns.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:30:25 GMT
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 00:54:57 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie
Ebert) wrote:
>
>That's total bullshit. I have Netscape up all the time and
>so does my wife. We never take it down.
Of course not.
It goes down all the time all by itself with no intervention from the
user required.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:30:42 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
> Charlie Ebert wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>> Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>>>> mlw wrote:
>>>>> I am having a bit of difficulty relating this thread to anything having to do
>>>>> with Linux advocacy.
>>>> Regard it as a pollution control technique.
>>> Impossible, considering how much pollution you're depositing.
>>>> I'm hoping to convince the walking toxic waste dump to remove himself
>>>> from the human gene pool.
>>> Talking to yourself, Kulkis?
>> I think we've found a volunteer to test NASA's new
>> space re-entry suit.
> Alpha-tester.
Is that what you are, Kulkis?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Sound a networks
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:31:42 GMT
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 00:20:09 GMT, "Kyle Jacobs"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Oh bull fucking shit. Your the guy who would sooner torch every single
>person at your job who doesn't know how to recompile their word processor to
>support their spelling mistakes before you would teach them how to use the
>spell checker.
Linsux has a spellchecker?
Damm!
Where the hell did they hide it?
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,soc.singles
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:31:50 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
> Marty wrote:
>> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>> You've been hiding in academia ever since you left mom and dad's house.
>>> Why is that?
>> You're presupposing that he's left "mom and dad's house".
> My bad.
Interesting that one of your few correct presuppositions is something
you regard as "bad".
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:39:59 -0600
"Jim Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >I'm saying that MS decided in the last few days to create geographical
> >seperation of their DNS servers. This is not something you can do
> >overnight, since it requires months of planning, construction of new
lines,
> >etc... It's far easier to just outsource it to a third party that's
already
> >providing the services.
>
> The amusing part, is that outsourcing it to a company is one thing,
outsourcing
> it to a company that uses a competing product is another. You mean to tell
me
> that they couldn't find anyone using W2K that they could trust? yet they
want
> *other* businesses to trust their solution.
> Looks bad no matter how you spin it.
You're acting as if it mattered to them what OS their outsourcer was
running. It doesn't, as was proved by them outsourcing their MSN homepages
to a company that used Unix. When you outsource, you don't care what it
runs as long as it gets the job done.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Kernel upgrade - not bad at all
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:34:41 +0000
Philo wrote:
>
> not only am i a linux newbie...i'm a newbie to computers in general but
> recently compiled a new kernel and found the actual process not difficult.
> the big problem i had was finding correct instructions.
> i have three fairly comprehensive books on linux and not one of them listed
> the procedure correctly...but by using bits and pieces from each...was
> finally
> able to get it done.
>
> now my big challenge:
> i had compiled a new kernel because i wanted USB support...
> and i can now get my USB card detected! too bad not one of my USB devices
> gets detected though.
> so it seems that compiling a new kernel is only about half the battle :)
>
> --
>
> Philo
>
> website: www.plazaearth.com/philo
You need to compile in support for input core devices, then the HID
driver.
Once this is done, they will need device files to be created through
which you can address the devices.
There should be some documentation on this with the kernel sources.
Once you have done this, you will need to tell X etc to use them
(although I think it is simpler for keyboards, but as I don't have a USB
keyboard I don't know).
HTH
Tom
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: Michel Catudal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Best way to learn Linux?
Date: 28 Jan 2001 19:35:09 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
>
> Spent last couple of years building well-known e-commerce sites using
> Open Source code. Ran everything on Linux and had to teach jr.
> programmers a lot about Linux. Found out most effective way was the so-
> called Socratic method of question/answer. So, put together a website
> www.codecity.com to explore this approach to teaching Open Source. Hope
> to get some feedback/participation from this group. Hope this is
> appropriate.
>
The best way to learn Linux is like with a language, you plunge into
it. Install Linux on your PC and do most of your computing with it.
There are tons of compilers that you can play with.
Get some good books too. The online doc is usefull but will never
replace a good book.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Kernel upgrade - not bad at all
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:37:42 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2001 11:10:04 -0600, "Philo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >now my big challenge:
> >i had compiled a new kernel because i wanted USB support...
> >and i can now get my USB card detected! too bad not one of my USB devices
> >gets detected though.
> >so it seems that compiling a new kernel is only about half the battle :)
>
> Welcome to Linux!
>
> I couldn't get any of my USB devices to work either :(
>
> They all work fine under Windows as well as my Mac however.
>
It took me 3 hours to get USB support up under windows!
Linux:
after compiling and installing 2.4.0 (which took a while cos I was doing
my laundry and cooking at the same time) It took about 2 minutes to add
the devices and edit config files et voila! USB under Linux.
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Best way to learn Linux?
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:44:24 -0600
"Michel Catudal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The best way to learn Linux is like with a language, you plunge into
> it. Install Linux on your PC and do most of your computing with it.
> There are tons of compilers that you can play with.
> Get some good books too. The online doc is usefull but will never
> replace a good book.
That works great if you have the extra time to devote to figuring things
out.
Some people need to get their work done in a timely manner, and digging
through man pages and books for solutions they already know in the other OS
is unproductive and loses them money.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Kernel upgrade - not bad at all
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:39:41 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 20:43:16 GMT, J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Of course this bozo can't get anything to work in Linux -
> >
> >It's against his religion!
>
> Why should I have to "Get anything to work" under Linux?
>
> I don't have to "Get anything to work" under Windows, my USB devices
> just work.
>
> Plug them in and they work.
>
> I don't have to "Get anything to work" with my iMac.
> I just plug my USB devices in and they work.
>
> It's quite simple with Windows and Mac.
>
> Same devices and 2 different platforms and they work fine.
>
> Why don't the exact same devices work under Linsux?
>
Because you don't bother to read documentation.
Or is reading too hard for you?
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:43:51 +0000
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> "David T. Johnson" wrote:
> >
> > Is anything that can be done about Kulkis and his foul mouth?
>
> Quit acting like a shithead, and I won't call you one.
>
> Deal?
>
You are fucking fouled mouthed!
Usenet would be a duller place without you!
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
