Linux-Advocacy Digest #888, Volume #31 Thu, 1 Feb 01 09:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Linux headache (Hans Adams)
Re: The 130MByte text file (John Travis)
Re: Whistler predictions... ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The 130MByte text file (Mig)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Mig)
Re: Yup, it's definatly Mandrake (Stuart Krivis)
Re: How long does your box run for? ("Richard J. Donovan")
Re: LOL now the BIND story hits mainstream News (Stuart Krivis)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The 130MByte text file (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Chad Myers")
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Peter
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Storm Linux & Applixware (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 10:56:58 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> nuxx wrote:
> >
> > "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > > Do you have a link for that? Because that's *just* over 5 minutes a
> > > > year, and for all the bleating MS does, I've never talked to a 2k admin
> > > > (that I trust not to lie... newsgroups? ha!) that would claim they only
> > > > need to reboot their machine once or twice a year.
> >
> > Here's one.
> >
> > > Due to the intrinsic crappiness of MS software, and its
> > > chronic inability to cope with real world events, it happens
> > > that situations slowly build up so that finally you're
> > > forced to reboot. You're not dealing with random events, but
> > > with predictable ones. If you use statistics, you're wrong.
> > >
> > > Therefore if you succeed in keeping up 100 servers for 5
> > > days (which is not so bad for Win2k), and stop your test at
> > > the first crash, you may claim an average uptime of 500
> > > days, but it's not correct.
> > > The average uptime is just 5 days, because all the other 99
> > > will crash in a short time, for the same reason.
> > >
> > Do you really believe this? If the best you can do is keep W2k Server up
> > for 5 days then you have no business being anywhere near it. Perhaps being
> > in charge of a Playstation would be more appropriate.
>
> I guess the same thing should be said for Microsoft, as even they
> can only keep Lose2k up for 7 days...
>
Now you're being a little hard. They manage to keep the site
up for an average 15/18 days.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.microsoft.com
------------------------------
From: Hans Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux headache
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:02:34 +0100
Paul Colquhoun wrote:
>
> |3) According to benchmarks with L4 based Linuxkernels, one has to accept
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> What are these? I havn't heard of them before. Where can I find more information?
>
http://l4ka.org//
http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/L4/LinuxOnL4/
best, Hans Adams
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Travis)
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 11:04:26 GMT
And Pete Goodwin spoke unto the masses...
:Someone here tried to tell me that AbiWord was a wonderful package and
:that I can't compare it to anything on Windows.
Who in the shit told you that AbiWord was the end all and be all of text editors
for GNU/Linux or any other platform? And why did you believe them? Use vi(m)
or emacs or wordperfect or SO or... (the first two ARE better than any text
editor offered for windows IMO, textpad is pretty nice though).
jt
--
Debian Gnu/Linux [Sid]
2.4.1|XFree4.0.2|Nvidia .95 drivers
You mean there's a stable tree?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler predictions...
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 13:19:32 +0200
"Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:18:59 +0200, "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > > You mean you *still* have to reboot when you upgrade an application?
Just
> > > the job for a "floor-to-ceiling NT/2000 shop" - change a printer
driver on
> > > a server and the whole place grinds to a halt.
> >
> > Yes, and strangely enough, most (all?) of the software that *require*
reboot
> > comes from MS.
> > For 99% of the other software, you wouldn't need to reboot.
> >
> > You don't need to reboot to install new drivers.
>
> I thought you did, but in any event, don't you need to re-install the
> latest service pack plus all the hotfixes if you make any alteration to
the
> configuration. ISTR that's the jist of the warning message you get when
> applying a service pack.
Not as far as my personal experiance with 2K has shown.
------------------------------
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: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 13:20:57 +0200
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Is it true that windows 2000 finally got filesystem quotas
> > > somewhat similar to what Linux has had for years?
> >
> > Yes.
> > Is it true that Linux finally got the SMP support that NT had for years?
>
> Linux has had smp support since version 1.1.31.
And it was *bad*.
> That was ~1995.
NT had it since 3.1 (from the start, that is).
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 12:47:58 +0100
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> Someone here tried to tell me that AbiWord was a wonderful package and
> that I can't compare it to anything on Windows.
Whos the idiot? Abiword is pretty much alfa with lots of features lacking..
just select some features like Insert->Pagenumbers and see the result
> Imagine my surprise when I load a 0.5MByte file into it and it has the
> heebie-jeebies. It redraws incorrectly, it hangs, it redraws etc. Then
> I press CTRL-A to select everything, and... it redraws incorrectly, it
> hangs and so on. I even took snapshots of it that I may post if y'all
> start calling me a liar.
But its alpha software...... BTW.. does the Windows version show the same
problems or is it more stable? :-)
> And then I'm told PFE can't load a 100MByte file, in fact not even
> close to that. So I tried it, and what a surprise! Not only does it
> load more than 100MBytes it goes on to create a 130MByte file, reload
> it all with no problems!
PFE=FTE??
> I then tried Linux with this stupendous file. VIM handled it with no
> problems - though I question why PFE and VIM took so long to load it.
> Editors used to work by only loading what was needed, not the whole
> file.
Who the heck uses a GUI based editor to edit 130 MB files. Everybody with 3
braincells less than you - that makes everyone with 24 braincells or more -
would use a stream editor like sed for that kind of work or write a script
to do it.
> So I tried KEDit of KDE 2.0. Oops! It crashed.
Agree... its a preoblem with Kedit. It should control if the file is too
big for it to handle.
> So I tried the Advanced Editor... oh dear, my desktop is hung! Mouse
> stuck, terminal stuck, the whole shebang has frozen!
I agree that this is a problem. I have only experienced this on Mandrake
(RH users have same problem?). It seems you go into Swap-heaven when i
tryed to open a 1200 MB file :-)
> As I have no TELNET access, I'm stuck (and so is anyone else who only
> has one PC and no network access).
Youre to poor to use Linux.. or youre lying.. didnt you have several
machines in a network.. I do remenber you had Linux and Windows machines
connect... Does the windows box not have telnet?
> This is the wonderfully stable system that is Linux folks!
Yes.... it is wonderfull stable when not deliberately trying to breadk
it... Actually i tryed this on Windows with wordpad and i got a
bluescreen..
> Now, I must try a few GNOME editors and see if they fare any better.
> How about StarOffice, what will it do with this file? Or what about
> Microsoft's word? Will it barf, do you think?
I think Word will read it but it will take some time to load.. or very long
time. But offcourse who uses any editor/text-formatter on a 130 MB file..
only idiots.
> --
> ---
> Pete
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
--
Cheers
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 12:49:22 +0100
Bruce Scott TOK wrote:
> In article <95b9al$6c1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I then tried Linux with this stupendous file. VIM handled it with no
> >problems - though I question why PFE and VIM took so long to load it.
> >Editors used to work by only loading what was needed, not the whole
> >file.
> >
> >So I tried KEDit of KDE 2.0. Oops! It crashed.
> >
> >So I tried the Advanced Editor... oh dear, my desktop is hung! Mouse
> >stuck, terminal stuck, the whole shebang has frozen!
>
> Stuff like that is windows-imitation crap. Try emacs or vi on big files
> like that. I do it routinely.
Correct.. tryed EMACS on a 29MB file.. no problems whatsoever and displays
the first part instantly. Tryed EMACS on a 1200 MB and it refuses to load
it because its over a limit... Thats the way to do it :-)
--
Cheers
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart Krivis)
Subject: Re: Yup, it's definatly Mandrake
Date: 1 Feb 2001 06:56:35 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 05:37:57 GMT, Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ok, I've herd a lot of comments about Linux Mandrake being the biggest pile
>of shit Linux available, and a lot of commentary exclaiming otherwise, I
>think I've landed on: get this...
>
>I install Mandrake 7.2, finish & reboot. Upon starting KDE2, I ran
>"mandrakeupdate" because I knew that there were a lot of things "out of
>date".
>
>Ok, downloaded all the RPMS out of date (from "normal" list) and reboot.
>What happens just minutes later? My Debian style KDE2 menus (part of
>Mandrake 7.2) are MISSING. My "office" section, my "networking" sections
>are both eradicated from the list. I figure it was a glitch, so I rebooted.
I didn't have this happen to me...
I do prefer Debian, but Mandrake is pretty well done IMO. My home machine is
running 7.2, and I liked being able to use reiserfs with no muss or fuss.
I also like Mandrake because it seems to be RH with less flaws.
YMMV :-)
--
Stuart Krivis
------------------------------
From: "Richard J. Donovan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How long does your box run for?
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 12:10:06 GMT
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Richard J. Donovan"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > No -- I didn't know any better!
>
> That really is snipping to excess!
>
> -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
LOL -- But the important part was the question, not the answer (even for
my own purposes, now that I know the answer).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart Krivis)
Subject: Re: LOL now the BIND story hits mainstream News
Date: 1 Feb 2001 07:15:47 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 01 Feb 2001 01:43:42 GMT, Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:27:06 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1142000/1142572.stm
>
>>Linux - lol, dead before the general public even knew about it...
>
>Hmm...the article is about BIND, which runs on a lot of operating
>systems, not just Linux. In fact, I don't see any mention of Linux in
>the article at all.
>
>
>> sure, big in geek circles, but to joe soap? HA!
>
>Does "joe soap" run a DNS?
Yep. :-)
I'm hostmaster for a regional ISP in Ohio. We run BIND on Solaris.
Contrary to the FUD that someone was trying to spread, this is a BIND issue, not
a Linux, Solaris, or Windows issue. BIND is not unix. (BNU)
I got the CERT advisory, and then upgraded BIND. No problem.
--
Joe Soap
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:42:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If they have a Linux or other Unix system, a dumb terminal
> can be hooked up to a spare serial port.
What did I say? I said "they have one PC and no network access". They
don't have a spare dumb terminal. Hint: this is yer typical home user.
What are they going to do?
Reboot of course!
> Yes, well, while you are clowning around figuring out how
> to further hork up your poor little box, people in the real
> world are seeing quite different results - for instance, all
> my production Linux internet servers have been up for
> precisely 228 days - ever since having upgraded the
> kernel from 2.2.14 to 2.2.16 last June.
And what happens if you try loading a 130MByte text file into any GUI
editor? Care to share the results? Or afraid to try?
> But then again, I've got work to do, and don't have time
> to try to create a broken system just to I can "counter
> linux advocacy" - is that why I don't get your results?
Perhaps because you haven't tried it?
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 14:40:01 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Solaris isn't based on BSD, its based on System V. SunOS was based on
> BSD.
To be precise:
Solaris 1.x (SunOS 4.x) based on BSD
Solaris 2.x (SunOS 5.x) based on SysV
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:48:19 GMT
In article <95bilm$t3d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whos the idiot? Abiword is pretty much alfa with lots of features
lacking..
> just select some features like Insert->Pagenumbers and see the result
It's in one of the currently active threads in this group.
> But its alpha software...... BTW.. does the Windows version show the same
> problems or is it more stable? :-)
I know, hence my surprise.
> PFE=FTE??
Programmers File Editor.
> Who the heck uses a GUI based editor to edit 130 MB files. Everybody
with 3
> braincells less than you - that makes everyone with 24 braincells or
more -
> would use a stream editor like sed for that kind of work or write a
script
> to do it.
So, what should a KDE user use (other than a CLI based editor)?
> Agree... its a preoblem with Kedit. It should control if the file is too
> big for it to handle.
Agreed.
> > So I tried the Advanced Editor... oh dear, my desktop is hung! Mouse
> > stuck, terminal stuck, the whole shebang has frozen!
>
> I agree that this is a problem. I have only experienced this on Mandrake
> (RH users have same problem?). It seems you go into Swap-heaven when i
> tryed to open a 1200 MB file :-)
Agreed, but it's such a simple thing to try, isn't it?
> Youre to poor to use Linux.. or youre lying.. didnt you have several
> machines in a network.. I do remenber you had Linux and Windows machines
> connect... Does the windows box not have telnet?
My Linux box has a broken telnet server, hence I can't login. I suppose
I could wire up a serial port but they're both already in use.
> Yes.... it is wonderfull stable when not deliberately trying to breadk
So all the statements about Linux are, what, false?
> it... Actually i tryed this on Windows with wordpad and i got a
> bluescreen..
I'll try WordPad.
--
---
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: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:54:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, your endless woes and "stepping on the rake and
> whacking yourself in the forehead" type of adventures
> pretty much guarantee that this is no normal Linux
> system. Mandrake would be out of business is it
> were anything like the sad affair you have been
> complaining about....
So I'm making this all up then? So, you can ignore all these problems,
is that it?
Ah, but I wish it were true.
--
---
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: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:50:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon) wrote:
> Every Unix system in existence supports telnet from inetd. In simpler
> language, the telnet server is an integral part of your TCP/IP
sub-system.
Funny, I managed it, therefore it is possible.
> The only way that what you claim could be true is you don't have
TCP/IP on
> that machine. If you have TCP/IP installed, that's all you need for your
> system to serve telnet clients. There is no "telnet server" to install,
> that's the Microsoft paradigm.
Telnet daemon then. Who care's about the terminology! It doesn't work. OK!
> Your claim to have tried and failed to install the telnet server
package is
> - to put it charitably - mistaken. You might as well be claiming the
driver
> for your keyboard's "A" key won't install. People will laugh at you for
> saying it.
I'm laughing at you because that's what happened! HA! HA! HA!
--
---
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: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:51:47 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If it's not there, that means you said "no" to telnetd,
> and most likely a lot of other things during the install.
> It is possible to install a "workstation" with no services
> whatsoever, as you likely did.
I said yes to telnet, I made sure of that. Still not there.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[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: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:47:36 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > The SMP design still (in 2.4) lacks behind most other
> > SMP implementations out there.
>
> Such as?
NT 4.0, Windows 2000, most higher grade Unixes such as Solaris and
AIX, and several others. Basically, the big boys.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 15:04:11 +0100
J Sloan wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what you're up to, but you are indeed on
> a mission to fabricate difficulties, so as to "counter
> linux advocacy".
>
Also he stated a few days ago that he can't install several things
because of dependency-problems.
Sounds very fishy.
If he had used really that Mandrake, he shouldn't have any.
But naturally you con "configure" your system into a state
where there's no more way out short of reinstall, espacially
when you have to "prove" a point
--
Linux is simply a fad that has been generated by the media
We are Borg. Resistance is futile (Borg Gates)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Storm Linux & Applixware
Date: 1 Feb 2001 14:08:05 GMT
J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." wrote:
>> J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > "." wrote:
>>
>> >> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>Now hold on, thats particular to every flavor of unix; there is not
>> >> >>consistent /etc between UNIXEN, especially not between the sysV
>> >> >>varieties. HP/UX did the same thing, as did Solaris/SunOS, SCO and
>> >> >>UNIXware.
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >> > You wantem sysV, go RedHat.
>> >>
>> >> My god man. Redhat is so incredibly broken that I dont even want to talk
>> >> about it. :)
>>
>> > Red Hat works like a champ for me -
>>
>> > I've tried em all, and keep coming back to big red.
>>
>> I admit, from a desktop point of view its lovely.
> Nah, I don't like RHAT desktop, first thing I do is install
> helix gnome - Any distro would do as a desktop as
> long as it's kept up to date. The real strength of Red
> Hat is in the server room, and we've standardized
> on RHAT here, and are very happy with it.
>> But from a production
>> server point of view, its just AWFUL. With comments like "this is broken"
>> and "dont use this!" in etc rc files, debian is a far, far better choice.
> Huh?
> What rc files are those, I'd like to have a look.
Pull the comments out of the startup stuff; youll see...:)
Also, whats with mounting every possible filesystem and FSCKing when booting
into single user? Thats terrible.
=====.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
