Linux-Advocacy Digest #843, Volume #31 Tue, 30 Jan 01 09:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux! (Nick Condon)
Re: Gates Vaccine (Nick Condon)
Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (Nick Condon)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Roberto Alsina)
Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Progeny Debian... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Who was saying Crays don't run Linux? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Nick Condon)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Nick Condon)
Re: Linux headache (Jasper)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Looking for quotes for article about migrating from Windows to Linux (Ian
Pulsford)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT (Marty)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux!
Date: 30 Jan 2001 12:22:32 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erik Funkenbusch) wrote in
<39vd6.344$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:YJtd6.64679$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Figuring out a problem requires testing an awful lot of things
>> > before even narrowing it down to a specific piece of hardware, and a
>> > specific configuration. You don't know if it's a hardware failure,
>> > a configuraiton failure, a NAP failure, etc..
>>
>> Traceroute tells you where the packets stop. Fix that box and you
>> are usually done.
>
>You have the benefit of hindsight. Knowing it was a router problem. To
>get to that stage, you have to go through a lot of diagnosis. They
>probably initially concentrated on the DNS servers. Whatever the
>problem, it's not as black and white as you pretend it is.
Yes it is.
I work for an ISP and having all your DNS servers on a single subnet is a
well known single point of failure. Having a single point of failure on any
public service is a big no-no, and the number one thing people look for
when they draw up or review a system design.
This is shoddy, unprofessional workmanship; completely avoidable and
totally inexcusable.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Subject: Re: Gates Vaccine
Date: 30 Jan 2001 12:32:16 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mlw) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Matthias Warkus wrote:
>> Ooops... Silly me was thinking we were talking about the present.
>>
>> Turns out we were talking about the past!
>
>Do you really think there is a difference? Have you learned nothing from
>history?
I learned 2 things from my high school history lessons: boredom can't kill
you; and history *doesn't* repeat itself (but historians *do* repeat each
other).
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy,us.military.army
Subject: Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 07:33:22 -0500
Nick Condon wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erik Funkenbusch) wrote in
> <39vd6.344$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:YJtd6.64679$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > Figuring out a problem requires testing an awful lot of things
> >> > before even narrowing it down to a specific piece of hardware, and a
> >> > specific configuration. You don't know if it's a hardware failure,
> >> > a configuraiton failure, a NAP failure, etc..
> >>
> >> Traceroute tells you where the packets stop. Fix that box and you
> >> are usually done.
> >
> >You have the benefit of hindsight. Knowing it was a router problem. To
> >get to that stage, you have to go through a lot of diagnosis. They
> >probably initially concentrated on the DNS servers. Whatever the
> >problem, it's not as black and white as you pretend it is.
>
> Yes it is.
>
> I work for an ISP and having all your DNS servers on a single subnet is a
> well known single point of failure. Having a single point of failure on any
> public service is a big no-no, and the number one thing people look for
> when they draw up or review a system design.
>
> This is shoddy, unprofessional workmanship; completely avoidable and
> totally inexcusable.
In other words: Business as Usual for Microsoft.
--
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] (Nick Condon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: 30 Jan 2001 12:56:52 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Myers) wrote in
<Qppc6.27759$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> What a load of bull - most studies are sponsored, yes, but not
>> necessarily by one of the parties being judged in the study.
>> A study sponsored by a third party can be impartial, but a study
>> sponsored by one of the parties being judged by the study cannot.
>
>I'm not saying that influce CAN'T happen, I'm saying that there
>are trusted scientific sources which can provide unbiased,
>uninfluenced results in a study. NTSL, Gartner, and others.
Gartner are unbiased? hahahaha.
I read a Gartner quote about the recent conclusion of the Sun-vs-Microsoft
Java case. They said (something like) "Sun is upset with Microsoft for
making a better JVM than they do. The message from Sun is: if want to do
Java you have to do it on Unix".
Wow, I thought. Has this "analyst" even heard of Java before today? And
then I spotted he was from Gartner. Still, kudos for putting a pro-
Microsoft spin on *that* story, I'd have thought it was impossible.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 12:53:45 GMT
In article <954ala$4q4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <954581$vff$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Yes, of course they are, as you would know if you had used them.
>
> Which I have, and I've found a few bugs.
>
> > What
> > is more, because the underlying kernel crashes roughly once in a
> > millennium, there is always an escape route if the worst should
happen.
> > Allow me to demonstrate:
> >
> > PROBLEM
> > An ill-behaved KDE program crashes the GUI (very, very hard).
> > SOLUTION
> > <Ctrl-Alt-F1>
> > $ killall nastyapp
> > <Ctrl-Alt-F7>
> > Now continue with your work...
>
> Except I tried all these to no avail...
What do you mean "all these"? He only mentioned one.
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux!
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:04:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nick Condon wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erik Funkenbusch) wrote in
><39vd6.344$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:YJtd6.64679$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> > Figuring out a problem requires testing an awful lot of things
>>> > before even narrowing it down to a specific piece of hardware, and a
>>> > specific configuration. You don't know if it's a hardware failure,
>>> > a configuraiton failure, a NAP failure, etc..
>>>
>>> Traceroute tells you where the packets stop. Fix that box and you
>>> are usually done.
>>
>>You have the benefit of hindsight. Knowing it was a router problem. To
>>get to that stage, you have to go through a lot of diagnosis. They
>>probably initially concentrated on the DNS servers. Whatever the
>>problem, it's not as black and white as you pretend it is.
>
>Yes it is.
>
>I work for an ISP and having all your DNS servers on a single subnet is a
>well known single point of failure. Having a single point of failure on any
>public service is a big no-no, and the number one thing people look for
>when they draw up or review a system design.
>
>This is shoddy, unprofessional workmanship; completely avoidable and
>totally inexcusable.
And that's exactly why it wasn't this which brought the site down!
It's TOO obvious!
It's Microsoft's stinking OS.
It's the stink inside.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux!
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:06:04 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>>
>> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:Czsd6.335$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > "Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > > You aren't listening. Since the failure occured a great deal of
>> > > > time
>> > after
>> > > > the change was made, it was difficult to connect the failure with
>> > > > that
>> > > > specific change. It took them a great deal of time to track down
>> > exactly
>> > > > where the problem was. Once they knew where it was, solving it was
>> > quite
>> > > > easy.
>> >
>> > > So how often do they have to make changes to their software? How many
>> > > changes had to be backed out to get the working configuration back?
>> > > What exactly was the change that caused the problem? If it wasn't the
>> > > fault of MS software, why isn't the change published with a "DON'T DO
>> > > THIS" warning?
>> >
>> > One more time. It was a router configuration problem with the router
>> > (probably a CISCO). MS didn't notice the problem internally because the
>> > router was only failing to route incoming packets, and local packets
>> > were routing just fine.
>> >
>> > A site as big and busy as MS is has hundreds or thousands of changes
>> > done
>> to
>> > it daily.
>>
>> That doesn't leave much excuse for putting both nameservers on the
>> same subnet, does it?
>>
>> > Figuring out a problem requires testing an awful lot of things
>> > before even narrowing it down to a specific piece of hardware, and a
>> > specific configuration. You don't know if it's a hardware failure, a
>> > configuraiton failure, a NAP failure, etc..
>>
>> Traceroute tells you where the packets stop. Fix that box and you
>> are usually done.
>>
>You wouldn't expect a Microsoft techi to know about traceroute.
>After all, it's hot a shiny GUI-Proggy, got no Icons to click on, so it's
>not worth to use. We are in the year 2001, so microsoft-people will
>steadfastly refuse to use anything without at least 3 icons.
>
>All these excuses from Eric F. are just plain bullshit. Anyone with a
^^^^^^^ is ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>little bit of working knowledge about networks recognizes this quite
>easily, but Eric just won't let go. Under no circumstances he would
>acknowledge that microsoft made a mistake or just plainly goofed.
>Everone else, but not MS.
>Eric, you're an idiot. You know that stuff like that is unbelievable, but
>you still do it. Just stop it, otherwise you'll loose that last little bit
>of credibility and play in the same league with Chad Myers and Conrad
>Rutherford, who can already be recognized by repeating the same lies
>over and over again.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Progeny Debian...
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:07:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Travis wrote:
>And on Tue, 30 Jan 2001 07:51:32 GMT, "Kyle Jacobs"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke unto us:
>
>>Well, Corel hit, ah, and then Stormix tried. Stormix is so outdated and
>>there are stability incompatibilities with offical Debian packages (which
>>are also somewhat outdated, unless the 'unstable' sources are used...)
>
>You really should stick to FUD about the more common(ly bitched about)
>distros. Storm (hail) was a full potato release, a few days before Debian
>layed it out. There weren't any incompatibility problems with Debian
>proper. They didn't "tweak" anything like Corel did. I even updated to
>Woody from the Rain release. The admin tools in SAS were pretty nice as
>well. The "outdated" release was CLOS 1.2, still being almost entirely
>slink based (minus libc6 and a few other potato packages). Corel has made
>so many stupid decisions on every platform they deserve whatever they get.
>
>>Being on the beta team, where are all the "administration" tools, all I saw
>>was a GUI interface for dpkg and the debian task-based package system. Are
>>they also "coming soon"?
>
>That's the rub. If I don't tell you, you'd never know. The main admin
>stuff is reminiscent of debconf on steroids. The only stuff I have used
>was for setting up networking, my printer, time zone (just because
>everyone bitches about it being hard), etc. All of which worked quite
>well, making the tasks trivial (even for morons). There are frontends for
>pretty much everything else (X, Grub, etc.), in various states of
>completion. They are using a slightly different approach for "package
>sets." Either one works quite well. I want kde2...I type "apt-get
>install task-kde." Nothing the average BDU couldn't handle, they can even
>do it from one of several available GUIs if they want. Obviously as a
>beta there are still some things to work out, and certain things I would
>like to see that probably won't make it into 1.0. All in all it's an
>interesting project, considering it's roots. Their Linux NOW project is
>promising as well.
>
>just my .02,
>
>jt
>
>________________________________________
>Alternative Computing Solutions...
>Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org
Despite these facts, I am still not diswaded
from recommending RedHat base their distribution
from Debian.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Who was saying Crays don't run Linux?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:12:47 GMT
In article <p_vd6.349$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>Why are you people so incapable of sticking to a topic?
>
>The topic, is someone stating that Linux is running on Cray supercomputers
>based on a link. The real fact is that it's not a Cray supercomputer, it's
>a Cray cluster of average computers. Yet in your hurry to slam everything,
>you don't bother to understand what you're commenting on.
>
Appearently you don't either. A Cluster of average computers?
Are Alpha's average?
You treat this as if Cray has done themselves a dis-service by
clustering ***average computers***.
Of course, if you only could, you'd point out that clustering
with W2k would be a much saner deal. But since you can't,
we won't go there.
But we can say that your a shit head one more time.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 30 Jan 2001 13:16:56 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Harlan Grove) wrote in <94si7f$7nq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Absolutely true. It's how we define 'freedom'. For those in the US of
>Libertarian bent, Microsoft can do what it wants to within certain
>legal bounds (which it's overstepped, IMO).
Microsoft has a centrally planned, state granted, exclusive monopoly.
That's not very libertarian.
Americans are so busy watching and being suspicious of their government,
they've missed the big corporations sneaking up behind them, until it's too
late and there's nothing left to do but bite the pillow.
Europeans have the opposite problem.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: 30 Jan 2001 13:12:46 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert:) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The main reason why just about all the software and high-technology
>items originate from the U.S. is we are free.
Yeah, those chains they slap on our wrists make it damn hard to use a
keyboard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jasper)
Subject: Re: Linux headache
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:13:55 GMT
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:18:09 -0600, "Robert Morelli"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>3. Because the Linux/Unix paradigm is designed for multiuser
>client/server environments, and this paradigm is totally useless for the
>typical home user. For instance, the root user under Linux can do
>things you should never do, while the non-root users can't do ordinary
>things you need to do. The root/non-root distinction in Linux is a
>nuissance which has no purpose for the home user.
You're quite correct. The fact that people are currently attempting
to use a thin client system like Unix as a desktop OS is nothing short
of bizzare. I can only assume this has come about through blind
hatred of MS without any consideration of the nature of Linux/Unix.
Not only is Unix thin client it also has it base firmly rooted as a
CLI driven OS. Each time I attend to a Windows PC and open a DOS
prompt the immediate (and somtimes hostile response) from the user is
"You don't expect me to do this do you?"
I for one will be amazed if Linux succeeds on the desktop in a
networked environment. Especially when all you need do is have one
single powerfull Linux server and simply install xwin32 on your
Windows based clients. At a keystroke you can have the best of both
worlds. Any half decent administrator should realize this and guide
their users in this direction. It is simply non-sensical to go around
installing an OS like Unix which is designed to support thin clients
on client PC's.
Perhaps the home user may be able to justify Linux on the desktop.
However with the advent of faster and faster modems an indusrious ISP
may be able to serve this need with a cluster of Linux servers
connected to Windows based X clients. Imagine how easy it would be
for the ISP to trouble shoot home user problems with this type of
configuration? However I cannot imagine the demand for such a service
would be great.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:13:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then you didn't kill the process. If you still had keyboard service,
> then no reboot was necessary. If you lost i/., then what you are
> describing sounds like you lost mingetty on your various devices. In
> which case, a reboot or opening a telnet session into the system are the
> only things that I know of to get everything going again.
True but I had no telnet server running.
> you said something to mlw about it in this thread. Something like not
> having many apps besides opening CLI's in multiple terminals. This is
> simply untrue. Mandrake Linux comes out of the box with better word
> processing applications, better text editors, games, etc. than
> windows.
You're kidding right?
Except for the CLI tools, none of the GUI style tools are out of beta
yet. StarOffice you only get with a deluxe version of Mandrake.
> You've also said that the desktop is less reliable than the windows
> desktop. In my experience, this is also untrue. Again, x crashes can
> and will occur. But usually, you do not lose services, and startx will
> get you going again 99% of the time. And so we are clear on this
> point... I have had 1 crash in the last week running X. I'd have that
> at least once per day on windows.
I don't recall if I said that - however, I'd say Linux + X + KDE is
buggy and is sometimes less usable than Windows.
> "Linux is simply a fad that has been generated by the media
> and is destined to fall by the wayside in time."
Maybe...
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:18:39 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There were other options - I'm willing to beleive your
> distro is not configured for it, but from all accounts,
> others are using USB devices with Linux and loving
> it. Granted, these are the more technical users...
I went looking for support in Linux for USB Hubs. Nada. Zip.
> > Because "Linux lags behind Windows".
>
> In server ability, windows lags way behind Linux.
> in desktop cuteness, windows is ahead. However,
> I prefer Linux anyway, since I prefer functionality &
> reliability to cute knick knacks.
I'd use Linux for the same reasons but it lacks the things I need.
KDE 2.1Beta has some of these features, but I can't install it due to a
dependancy problem.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:41:53 +1000
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Looking for quotes for article about migrating from Windows to Linux
Look at www.opensource.org for a few examples.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I'm working on an article for PlanetIT.com, about migrating from a
> Windows NT/2000 network to a Linux network. Right now, I need to
> hear from people who have actually moved all or part of their
> networks from Windows to Linux (or other open source OS).
>
IanP
--
"Dear someone you've never heard of,
how is so-and-so. Blah blah.
Yours truly, some bozo." - Homer Simpson
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[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: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:21:12 +0200
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > Chris proposed this "hack" for NT/2K as though NT/2K was the only
> > OSen vulnerable to this type of attack.
> >
> > Must I repeat the entire thread, or does your newsreader not thread?
>
> Never ass|u|me! Merely pointing out the NTFS is very vulnerable.
> Chad's the one that made the inductive leap.
Why do you think that NTFS is very vulnerable?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:29:02 +0200
"Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 04:02:20 +0200, "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
> > > Posted from OE 5.6 using Whistler AD 2296, Uptime 17 hours 33 minutes
51
> > > seconds, 1 user @ console, 3 users via TS, 2 diconneted user sessions.
> > > The low uptime is just because I'd to just install the system.
> > ^^^^^^
> >
> > Typo, should say, I'd just installed the system.
>
> As opposed to "just re-installed the system" as per the usual Microsoft
fix
> for anything that goes wrong???
>
> Only kidding...... or am I?
No, I just got the CD, and installed it for the first (& only) time.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:32:40 +0200
"Conrad Rutherford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3a75c06d$0$52683$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > I didn't read the whole 160-odd pages, but it looks like you're right.
> > Orange book C2 is purely access control and logging for the OS on a
> standalone
> > system. Red book adds networking.
> >
> > >
> > > SO, read and remember - certification is for the OS, NOT the hardware.
> > >
> > > http://www.radium.ncsc.mil./tpep/epl/entries/TTAP-CSC-EPL-99-001.html
> >
> >
> > The earlier C2 stuff I saw around the time of the NT 3.5 certification
> > and much of the later material indicated that it's the *system*, not the
> > OS which is certified. For example, is a dual-boot PC (Linux and NT 4)
C2?
> > If only *you* have the NT partition's Administrator password and *I*
have
> > the Linux root password I can reboot the system and read data and/or
> > alter any log files.
>
> Not necessarily true. The NTFS partition supports encryption.
True, and you can do it the other way around as well.
Read from ext2 and bypassing permissions on NT.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:35:33 +0200
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Linux Weekly News (daily updates) is reporting this new small piece of
work
> > by Microsoft about Linux. It appears Microsoft can no longer concentrate
on
> > the technical capabilities of Linux so it's fantasy reporting from here
on.
> >
> > Here's the link:
> > http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/serverappliance/kempin.asp
> >
> > I don't want to spoil the surprise. Suffice to say that Windows is far
> > better advocated in this forum than by Microsoft.
>
> I hope the X-Box is a wild success.
>
> Yes, you heard me right. I hope it becomes the best next-generation
> console out there.
>
> The X-Box is a great machine, to be sure. It has 64MB of unified
> architecture RAM and a ton of secondary storage space (hard disk);
> virtually unlimited save space compared to other consoles and it's
> made by a newcomer to the field that isn't deathly afraid of piracy
> (Nintendo is going to die with this next round). Oh, it can also push
> 4 times the polygons and anywhere from 8-12 times the textures as
> compared to the PS2. It's a game programmer's dream.
>
> But MORE IMPORTANTLY -- it would take Microsoft's focus away from the
> operating system arena. If they had a reliable revenue stream that
> wasn't associated with Windows, they would stop this silly nonsense
> and do something productive instead. They could make cool games,and
> who doesn't enjoy that?
You don't understand how big corporations work, then, MS would think it's
nice & important to have the X-Box generating cash for them, they will also
think that it's nicer and more important to increase the cash flow from
windows toward them.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[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: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:57:49 GMT
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >> It has now moved on from that.
> >
> > Actually, the situation hasn't changed. I'm still ignoring Malloy like
> > I was at the beginning of the thread, and Malloy is still posting his
> > ridiculous responses like he was at the beginning of the thread. He
> > hasn't moved on.
>
> That part of the situation has changed, but Marty has since joined in,
> which means that some parts of the situation have changed.
Actually, the situation hasn't changed. I'm still ignoring Tholen, and have
been for over a month. Dave is still posting his ridiculous response like he
had in other threads. He hasn't moved on.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
