Linux-Advocacy Digest #988, Volume #31 Mon, 5 Feb 01 13:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: My open-source quote (sfcybear)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Linux is awful ("Dichotimus Grok")
Re: Paul Thurrott reports: "Microsoft Executives Trash Linux" (sfcybear)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (G3)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (G3)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (G3)
Re: Storm Linux & Applixware ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Wintrolls ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Wintrolls (Ralph Miguel Hansen)
Re: Linux is awful ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Paul Thurrott reports: "Microsoft Executives Trash Linux" ("InBiz")
Re: Linux is awful (.)
Re: The Wintrolls ("Lloyd Llewellyn")
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Karel Jansens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My open-source quote
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 15:55:46 GMT
MS software is like a seat without a bicycle. Yeah it *may* be
comfortable (Only because it's what you learned first) but you are not
going to get anywhere.
I would rather have a good bike and get a seat that works for me than
have a seat (that does not work for me) with no hope of getting a good
bike.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Dan Hinojosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Open source is like a bicycle without a seat. Sure it works like
other
> bicycles, but the comfort using it is not there."
>
> --Dan Hinojosa, Java Developer
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:18:05 GMT
In article <NHEe6.36969$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> > I'm curious: where did you find kedit in KDE 2.0? Last I checked
that
> > didn't exist.
>
> [goodwin@xxxxx goodwin]$ kedit --help
> Usage: kedit [Qt-options] [KDE-options] file
>
> A KDE Text Editor
>
> Generic options:
> --help Show help about options
> --help-qt Show Qt specific options
> --help-kde Show KDE specific options
> --help-all Show all options
> --author Show author information
> -v, --version Show version information
> --license Show license information
> -- End of options
>
> Arguments:
> file File or URL to Open
> [goodwin@xxxxx goodwin]$
Weird. There is no kedit in KDE 2.x sources. I wonder where that came
from.
> > Try KFTE. I have opened larger files.
>
> Not heard of that one.
What can I say, now you did.
> > Install the joistick reboot daemon.
>
> Is that the same as the plastic chicken daemon? You know, the one you
wave
> at the screen when everything goings wrong?
No, itīs an actual piece of software. Donīt be a moron. I canīt find it
right now, but this one is close enough for government work:
http://linux.umbc.edu/~mabzug1/jsd.html
Use it, and you can start a shutdown by wiggling your joystick.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "Dichotimus Grok" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:29:57 GMT
It is almost cerstainly MacMillan. I bought Mandrake 7.2 "complete" from
Wal-Mart for $25.00. Turns out by "complete", they mean without almost all
the tools you need for development!!! There ought to be a class action
lawsuit filed against MacMillan for calling it "Complete", in my opinion.
Still, it *is* enough to get you going so that you can go to
linux-mandrake.com mirrors and get the stuff you need. As far as being
buggy, I find it to be very stable. Just be sure go to linux-mandrake.com
and register, so Mandrake will send you the update CD. Not that I had any
problems without the Update CD, but better safe than sorry, and it has KDE2
if I recall correctly.
Jim D.
William D. Tallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:hM4e6.89879$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The cool thing is that it is, what, $25 at Walmart?
>
> Which may very well be one of those MacMillan rip-off distros with all the
> buggy beta stuff.
> They packaged pre-release versions just to hit Walmart's sales window, so
> we're told.....
>
>
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Paul Thurrott reports: "Microsoft Executives Trash Linux"
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:24:25 GMT
Yes, Even MS can no longer ignore the growing power of Linux! I remember
the Winvocates posting post after post about MS saying that Linux was
nothing. That Linux was no threat to MS, Blah, Blah, Blah... Well they
were wrong then and even MS has had to belly up to the table and tell
the truth about Linux and it's ability to compete with MS products!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=19818
>
> "Steve Ballmer recently revealed the not-so-surprising notion that
Linux was
> his company's number-one threat. For any other company, this would be
a sure
> sign that it was finally taking the Linux threat seriously. But for
> Microsoft, you can only tell they're worried when the trash-talking
starts.
> And Microsoft is trash-talking Linux big time."
>
> ...
>
> "The company is convinced that it will win its lawsuit on appeal, and
if the
> Linux movement hopes to be more than just the latest in a long list of
> competitors that have been run over by the Redmond giant, it needs to
come
> up with a better response than its peers from the past did."
>
> Paul Thurrott's Wininfo is an authoritative source for Windows news.
Having
> followed his reporting for a long while, Paul Thurrott provides fair
> Windows-centric reporting (he also manages to come up with a number of
> exclusives).
>
> Regards,
> Adam
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
From: G3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:27:07 GMT
in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Aaron R. Kulkis at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote on 2/5/01 7:44 AM:
>
> If the Linux install software has such problems detecting common ordinary
> keyboards and mice, then how do you think it got to be the number one
> platform for web-serving on the net?
I think that one came up a few times in my cursing.
>>
>> Fact of the matter is in your quest to replace intellectual debate with
>> mindless gibbering insult you've conveniently run kicking and screaming from
>> your point about Linux being consumer friendly. I have a DEGREE in
>> programming, and work with UNIX daily and it took me forever to get linux to
>> work, and it had NO uses when it finally did. It is NOT a consumer OS,
>> period end of story.
>
> Should have studied Engineering rather than CS.
> Engineering is all about getting things to work. Most CS people have dealt
> with have their heads in the clouds, consider hardware to be "someone else's
> responsibility" and pout whenever there is anything less than an infinite
> amount of resources.
>
> Maybe you're diffent.
>
>
> But so far...you fit right into the mold.
All the Engineering majors I've met can't program their way out of a paper
bag and waste resources left and right.
> I've done several installations of Linux:
>
> Redhat 4.x
> Redhat 5.2
> Mandrake something or other.
> Suse 6.2
>
> Never had a problem. What's your excuse?
Having better thing to do with my time then jerk off over the look and feel
of text?
>
>>
>> Thank god the PC industry grew up even if you sad saps didn't.
>>
>
> For someone with a BS in CS, you should be ashamed of yourself if
> you can't do a RedHat install.
>
> That's right....ASHAMED of yourself...oxygen thief.
Hey bud, if the makers can't provide an installer that recognizes simple
things like PS/2 keyboard, 12 X IDE CD ROM, and a pretty run of the mill
video card it ain't MY fault. (Of course if PCs had any standards at all
that'd be at least a feasible task, still even the ABIT motherboard is
pretty normal so I'm fairly disappointed the thing didn't go smoother than
it did.)
-G3
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
From: G3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:35:11 GMT
in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Aaron R. Kulkis at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote on 2/5/01 8:11 AM:
> No...I'm pointing out your inconsistancy.
>
> You *claim* that the GUI is so necessary, and yet, you spend so much time
> telling us how happy you are that the tools have *finally* been provided
> to you so that you don't need to use it.
Well maybe your right about carpal tunnel being bullshit, seems like you'd
know it if you see it you certainly come up with enough of it.
For the last time, and I hope your tiny little brain gets it this time using
a keyboard doesn't preclude using a GUI. I hit Command-W it closes a WINDOW
thatđs STILL a GUI you FOP. I hit command A it selects all files in the
window I then hold the control key and drag them to the hard drive; popup
window opens, I navigate down to where I want em, release and voila their
copied, or even aliased. Lets see your precious CLI symlink 200 files with
one user action.
> This contradicts EVERYTHING in the usual song-and-dance routine about how
> poooooor users can't learn key-bindings.
Key binding? I'm talking about obscure commands and numerous counter
intuitive 2 letter abbreviations.
> The fact of the matter is this: People will learn whatever they have to
> learn.
> When you have drop-down menus, they have to learn what is contained within
> each (not-displayed-until-you-select-it) drop-down menu.
If I run a company I'm not going to expect a learning curve of a month to do
simple things like move, copy, delete and otherwise manage files.
> No matter WHAT you do on a computer, you *WILL* have to learn something.
Ideally no. The whole POINT of object oriented GUIs is that you take REAL
WORLD objects and make interface elements analogous to them. This makes it
easy for a 50 year old secretary to start using her PC.
> Trying to make this go away by holding up the GUI as the end-all and be-all
> of computing productivity is a fool's errand.
The only fools are the idiots proclaiming that after 10 years working with
every obscure UNIX command under the sun that CLIs are easy to use. This
has been proven false in study after study. The CLI is a silly little
dinosaur interface for silly little dinosaur users.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
From: G3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:44:48 GMT
in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Billy White Jr. at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2/5/01 9:20 AM:
> Wrong. They saw a dog and pony show *AT* PARC, seeing the actual
> machines in use.
A privelege they got after Apple bought some stock in xerox.
> They never saw code, but they saw working machines
> running the code. The work was similar to the computer Jeff Raskin
> envisioned, and Raskin used the meeting to sell Jobs on the concept, who
> was *against* the Mac, and the GUI concept, until the PARC demo.
You're wrong on that one Raskin wanted a very low powered machine for the
Mac, he thought the GUI was neat but did NOT want it on the Mac because it
would increase the cost to well beyond his dream machine of under 1000
dollars. It was JOBS who orchestrated the PARC visit.
> And
> several elements and concepts from Xerox's work appeared in the MAC GUI
> - if it was imitation or concurrent development is up for debate.
Most of the concepts in PARC had already been pioneered just never done.
There are plenty of books dating back to the 50s on the concept of GUIs.
> Many at Xerox feel Apple ripped them off - some at Apple feel justified
> with what they did, and claim that they did'nt.
Apple did what Xerox had no intention of doing:
1: they saw that it could be marketed and they did it, and they did it in a
machine people could afford (at least compared with what SmallTalk cost.)
2: Apple added things like direct object manipulation (Small Talk didn't let
you click or drag windows, you used menu commands to move them, similarly
you couldn't move icons around directly either. It was really very limited.)
> Apple also paid for the
> demo, but it's unclear if there was an injunction implicit in the
> agreement for Apple not to use what they saw. Make your own judgement.
> Xerox did sue Apple, but they lost - clearly the judge thought Apple was
> innocent.
By the end of it the same people that pioneered SmallTalk went to the Mac as
the next step, some also moved on to NeXTStep. Xerox didn't own the ideas
(you can't own ideas only implementations and PARC was a very early attempt
at implementing the GUI but it didn't have most of the things that made the
Mac really easy to use. Also Tesler would frequently, after his signing on
at Apple, invite non computer using employees (janators etc) in for ease of
use testing. This made a lot of things possible that PARC wouldn't have,
and even Windows never got to. Things like Menu placement (top of screen
left, right bottom on each window etc), mouse buttons, command locations etc
were all tested and Apple went with the solutions most people found easy to
use. This is why Mac OS is still leaps and bounds beyond Windows 2000.
If you consider taking a broken project and making it work with a LOT of
development, and highering the original designer to aid in the task to be
stealing then it was theft.
-G3
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Storm Linux & Applixware
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 17:16:01 GMT
On Mon, 05 Feb 2001 01:41:14 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Evidently, you're unaware of the auto-industry's "platform" methodology.
I'm fully aware of it, I was just keeping it simple.
>You make a base structure, as in this case, the "C Platform", and then
>put different sheet metal, instrument panels, and decorative trim on
>according to which nameplate the individual machine is being sold under.
>A lot of the basic guts (structural components, steering and suspention,
>brake systems, etc) are common throughout any one platform..thereby
>reducing costs. Each individual division within the corporation then
>customizes the platform according to that segment of the market to which
>they are trying to sell (based on target personality type, etc.)
That's true.
>Another common platform that comes to mind the Pontiac Thunderbird/Chevy
>Camaro. Not sure if they still use the same platform, but for years,
>they did.
That's Chevy Camaro and Pontiac Firebird.
Thunderbird is a Ford and is a twin to the Mercury Couger.
>
>So, since Citation and Cimarron were the same "C car" they were essentially
>the same thing. Sometimes you hear the word "sister car" or something.
>The Chrysler "K-cars" were just the three implementations of the Chrysler
>"K" platform, as fleshed out by the Dodge, Chrysler and Plymouth divisions.
True.
>If you want to know the equivalences, just ask the salesman which
>platform a car is, and then ask him what other divisions of the corporation
>are using the same platform, and what those cars are.
>Some vehicles, of course, don't have any cross-division platforms
>(example: Chevy Corvette)
>
True
>
>
>
>
>> was Chevy's first attempt at a front wheel drive car. The squared off
>> Caddy's (shorter ones) were garbage as was the front wheel drive
>> Seville.
>
>
>
>> Mine was the standard rear wheel drive Coup De-Ville that they had
>> been making since the 1970's. Ran for 298,000 miles before it was rear
>> ended by some 90 year old man in a Ford Wagon.
>>
>>
>> Flatfish
>> Why do they call it a flatfish?
>> Remove the ++++ to reply.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The Wintrolls
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 17:25:21 GMT
On Mon, 05 Feb 2001 15:29:12 +0000, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Has anyone ever noticed how the wintrolls seem to have absoloutely vast
>software libraries in their homes? Only the other day, flatfish claimes
>to have 4 encyclopedias. Who the hell needs 4 encyclopedias?
You obviously don't have school age children.
Two of the four came as freebies with hardware I bought and the other
two were OEM's I picked up at computer shows for $5.00 or so.
Lexmark is great for free software.
>Mabey they buy every bit of software on sale just to find stuff that
>doesn't work under Linux?
You don't even have to buy it, just read the box haven't seen too many
that say supports Linux.
>
>Also the range of problems the trolls have is, quite frankly, vast.
>What's odd about these problems is that they rarely seem to make it on to
>he serious news groups, and no one else ever seems to suffer from them.
I suggest a little reading in the Mandrake group for some interesting
laughter.
>
>Finally, you have people like Goodwin, Flatty and EF who hate linux and
>seem to have is crashing the whole time and can't run software they want,
>yet they keep on using it.
I don't USE it I just keep it installed to try things when the
Penguinista's make wild claims.
> Why? No sane person would carry on using
>something if they had so many problems with it (usless it was forced on
>them).
No sane person would use Linux on a home desktop system as their
primary operating system.
>Just my Ģ0.02
>
>-Ed
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: Ralph Miguel Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Wintrolls
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 18:31:40 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Edward Rosten wrote:
> Has anyone ever noticed how the wintrolls seem to have absoloutely vast
> software libraries in their homes? Only the other day, flatfish claimes
> to have 4 encyclopedias. Who the hell needs 4 encyclopedias?
>
> Mabey they buy every bit of software on sale just to find stuff that
> doesn't work under Linux?
>
>
> Also the range of problems the trolls have is, quite frankly, vast.
> What's odd about these problems is that they rarely seem to make it on to
> he serious news groups, and no one else ever seems to suffer from them.
>
>
> Finally, you have people like Goodwin, Flatty and EF who hate linux and
> seem to have is crashing the whole time and can't run software they want,
> yet they keep on using it. Why? No sane person would carry on using
> something if they had so many problems with it (usless it was forced on
> them).
>
> Just my Ģ0.02
>
> -Ed
>
I don't believe that these "wintrolls" do realize that for sure each
pro-linux-guy in this group has made his funny to bitter experiences with
M$-Systems ? Ever got a crash in Excel when trying to save a file and lost
all data ? Ever wrote a 400-pages document and Word 97 didn't agree with
your layout ? I know, Excel and Word are applications and not the OS, but
they are as unreliable as W3.1*/95/98/ME.
Mostly the trolls are amateurs in computing -nothing bad, I am too-, got
problems with configuring such easy stuff like mandrake, trying to open a
130MB textfile with the wrong editor, complain about fonts and buy hardware
like winmodems which sometimes won't run with Linux. If you put Diesel in
the wrong car, who is the idiot ?
Cheers
Ralph Miguel Hansen
Using S.u.S.E. 5.3 and SuSE 7.0
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 17:27:42 GMT
On Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:29:57 GMT, "Dichotimus Grok"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It is almost cerstainly MacMillan. I bought Mandrake 7.2 "complete" from
>Wal-Mart for $25.00. Turns out by "complete", they mean without almost all
>the tools you need for development!!! There ought to be a class action
>lawsuit filed against MacMillan for calling it "Complete", in my opinion.
Somebody in the Mandrake group has already propsed doing just that.
The "Support" they mention on the side of the box is misleading as
well.
The package also does NOT include a server install.
It also says USB supported, which turns out to be a mixed bag.
>Still, it *is* enough to get you going so that you can go to
>linux-mandrake.com mirrors and get the stuff you need. As far as being
>buggy, I find it to be very stable. Just be sure go to linux-mandrake.com
>and register, so Mandrake will send you the update CD. Not that I had any
>problems without the Update CD, but better safe than sorry, and it has KDE2
>if I recall correctly.
I would avoid using that update CD because that is the one that
trashed my entire system a couple of weeks ago.
>
>
>William D. Tallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:hM4e6.89879$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > The cool thing is that it is, what, $25 at Walmart?
>>
>> Which may very well be one of those MacMillan rip-off distros with all the
>> buggy beta stuff.
>> They packaged pre-release versions just to hit Walmart's sales window, so
>> we're told.....
>>
>>
>
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "InBiz" <sl@theplanetdotorg>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Paul Thurrott reports: "Microsoft Executives Trash Linux"
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 12:34:35 -0500
"Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=19818
>
> "Steve Ballmer recently revealed the not-so-surprising notion that Linux
was
> his company's number-one threat.
snip
What else would anyone expect Steve Balmer to say in public. In private he's
probably laughing his ass off at the 'Linux threat".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: 5 Feb 2001 17:45:55 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:29:57 GMT, "Dichotimus Grok"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>It is almost cerstainly MacMillan. I bought Mandrake 7.2 "complete" from
>>Wal-Mart for $25.00. Turns out by "complete", they mean without almost all
>>the tools you need for development!!! There ought to be a class action
>>lawsuit filed against MacMillan for calling it "Complete", in my opinion.
> Somebody in the Mandrake group has already propsed doing just that.
> The "Support" they mention on the side of the box is misleading as
> well.
Obviously these people do not understand what linux is. The pay-for-
version of mandrake contains development tools AND just about everything
else that any idiotic windows user could possibly understand.
What exactly is it missing?
> The package also does NOT include a server install.
> It also says USB supported, which turns out to be a mixed bag.
As ive said before, it works just fine for me and truckloads of other
people.
> I would avoid using that update CD because that is the one that
> trashed my entire system a couple of weeks ago.
YOU trashed your entire system, because you dont understand linux.
Hey claire, just for the sake of argument, try installing FreeBSD 4.2.
It has full USB support, etc. Id love to see what happens when you
attempt to install another flavor of UNIX.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Lloyd Llewellyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Wintrolls
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 17:46:04 GMT
> No sane person would use Linux on a home desktop system as their primary
> operating system.
They all said I was mad.
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 15:14:24 +0100
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Translation: Pete didn't allocate enough swap space for what he's
> > trying to do.
> >
> > Conclusion: Yet another deliberate sabotage by Pete Goodwin.
>
> What? Linux cannot grow its swap space beyond what is allocated? What a
> limitation!
>
You're both right and wrong. When linux uses a dedicated partition as
its swap space, it can - quite obviously - not allocate more swap than
the size of that partition (I seem to hit upon a lot of "duh"
experiences lately), although one can overcome this (if it turns out
to be a recurring problem) by simply creating additional swap
partitions.
OTOH, linux can use a file as swap. This is in effect a dynamic swap
area, but it has throwbacks (speed being one of them).
The reason to give an upper limit to swap is system integrity. Hard
disk space is often not as easy to measure, especially on a running
system, and one of the easiest ways to fry an O/S is when it tries to
use swap space that isn't there.
On a sidenote: OS/2 has IMHO a rather elegant solution for this: It
uses dynamic swap, but let's the user set upper limits to the size of
the file, or even how much of the remaining disk space the swapper.dat
file is allowed to munch up. And it warns you, when you get near those
limits, that you're on your own from now on. (It's not perfect,
though: sometimes the swap file refuses to shrink back. Probably
cosmic radiation).
Regards,
Karel Jansens
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
