Linux-Advocacy Digest #154, Volume #32 Mon, 12 Feb 01 17:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: IDE v. SCSI: Long-Term Review. (WAS: Crappy CDROM?) (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Answer this if you can... ("Edward Rosten")
Re: linux is dieing (Henry_Barta)
Re: Interesting article (.)
Re: GODDAMNED STINKING PIECE OF SHIT KULKIS (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant (Karel Jansens)
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant (Karel Jansens)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (ZnU)
Re: Security bug in mozilla on multi user system [linux] (Thorsten Moellers)
Re: Interesting article (Jerry McBride)
Re: Laptop and linux. Which one??? (Karel Jansens)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IDE v. SCSI: Long-Term Review. (WAS: Crappy CDROM?)
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 19:23:15 -0500
Bloody Viking wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : No... I mean that the IDE bus protocol is absolute CRAP compared to SCSI.
> : The reason it's limited to two devices is because even ONE device easily
> : floods the entire bus.
>
> : The main reason is that an IDE device stays on the bus for the entire
> : time that it's doing it's read/write operation,...INCLUDING the seek-time
> : in between initial I/O request and once it actually gets carried out.
>
> No wonder IDE sucks if you attempt to use it in a server. Classic "get what
> you pay for".
>
> : In contrast, SCSI disks take an initial r/w request, and then disconnect
> : from the bus....do the head seek, and then re-connect to the bus, and
> : ask then either ask for the data to be written, or send the data that
> : was read.
>
> : During that disconnect time, OTHER devices on the same bus can do their
> : own data transfers and I/O initializations.
>
> : Compared to sending a few 1k data blocks...which takes under a millisecond
> : on a SCSI bus....the typical head seek takes 5-15 milliseconds.
>
> Like I said, SCSI is the way better system. Without a money constraint, I'd
> gladly use it. IDE is a sucky protocol, but an anorexic wallet can twist your
> arms to make you use it!
>
> : On the LoseDOS machine, I use IDE disks, because LoseDOS is completely
> : unable to handle multiple disk accesses simultaneously....but on the Linux
> : machine...all of the main "active" disks are SCSI. I only use IDE for
> : things like Jaz drives, etc. on the Linux box...and as a cheap,
> : low-performance
> : place to hold not-used-very-often "archive" stuff like MP3's.
>
> Good strategy. It's like the backup strategy I proposed for a SCSI machine.
> You'd use SCSI normally but use IDE for archival like those big old tape decks
> on old mainframes.
Exactly.. Online archiving.
Also...in that capacity, IDE is best used as a simple raw block device
(no filesystem...just huge block of storage...like a tape).
>
> --
> FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
> The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
> The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
--
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: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Answer this if you can...
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:47:32 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "John Muir"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to take the opportunity of thanking the few souls who kept
> a level head and even tried to help and to damn the others who were
> simply abusive. They do no good to the name of Linux.
Sorry for being a bit rude, but the first message v=was very troll like,
and quite insulting. However, when I realised that you weren't trolling,
I posted a sensible reply.
-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
------------------------------
From: Henry_Barta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux is dieing
Date: 12 Feb 2001 20:51:41 GMT
Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Replace it! NOW!!!!!!! If you have to, get another drive, set it up as slave
> and back it up to the slave drive, remove the bad drive and set the new drive
> as master.
Relax! (NOW!!!!! :) It started making noise as I was leaving
for the weekend. There was no time to deal with it immediately.
I told my son to pull the power if it started to smoke or
stopped firewalling, but upon my return it was still working
fine. I have since discovered that with the disk mounted R/O
it will spin down eventually. The disk isn't totally toast as
I can still run commands like 'uptime'. No masters and slaves
in a laptop, and I can't reliably read the entire drive anyway.
As far as firewalling goes, how far could a cracker get w/out
the ability to create a disk file. (Note, this is *not* a
challenge! :)
I have another disk upon which I can install a minimal Debian
setup and thanks to the 'kernel package' I have a .deb for my
custom kernel ready to go. When the time comes, I can swap to
a good drive and have it back up in about an hour. In the mean
time, I'm curious to see how long it'll run. At the moment,
that appears to be as long as Commonwealth Edison can supply
reliable power.
--
Hank Barta White Oak Software Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Predictable Systems by Design.(tm)
Beautiful Sunny Winfield, Illinois
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:54:39 +1300
> > You shouldn't have to know what consisits of sending a foo in order to
> > use it, of even to add extra functionality. If you want to change how
> > the foo is sent, you'll only have to know what the results of sending
> > a foo should be.
>
> How in hell do you know to even use sendFoo in the first place if it's not
> documented what it does?
Trying to comment on the purpose of an imaginary function is of no use.
Post the name of the function with poor documentation that you want to
know more about and maybe someone can help.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[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: GODDAMNED STINKING PIECE OF SHIT KULKIS
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:50:53 -0500
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> "Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > Mike Byrns wrote:
> > >
> > > If only you had a four year life span. Or better I was a Blade Runner
> sent
> > > to retire you. :-)
> >
> > You're not Harrison Ford.
> > So solly.
>
> Nah, but it would still be fun watching you trip through a dozen or so plate
> glass windows anyway :-)
Too bad you are....woefully unable.
wimp
--
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: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:53:05 +0100
Jan Johanson wrote:
>
> let me reply by simply quoting yourself back to yourself.
> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:966pdg$em5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Not one of you statements has said anything about Linux making inroads
> > at the enterprise Level.
>
> I have heard NOTHING about linux making gains anywhere past the frustrated
> hobbyist level...
Do you equate "I didn't hear about <insert subject>" to "<insert
subject> is not happening"?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:50:44 +0100
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Bill Shine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:hkHh6.215231$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > and editor
>
> Word Pad is decent for small tasks. Many are freely downloadable,
> taking about 10 minutes or so to download on a modem.
>
> Finding a decent document editor in Linux takes... well, there is
> none. Applix? Joke. Star Office? Don't make me laugh. Emacs? Well,
> it take a novice a year or two to learn it. Vi? right.
>
I usually don't bother replying to obvious garbage, but... OK just
this once:
Since you used the term "document editor", you should be warned that
Windows doesn't have one at all. Windows comes with oodles of
wordprocessors (some of which are quite usable, s.a. WordPro or
StarOffice Writer, and others which suck vacuum - in which category
Micorsoft Word occupies a prominent first place), but the domain of
document editors (aka TeX) is the *nices. But because most *nix
programmers are such nice people, they ported it to Windows as well.
And for the tag-impaired (like me), there is LyX, which goes out of
its way to make it as hard as possible to produce ugly documents.
Why do you consider Applix a joke?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:03:26 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 00:52:03 GMT, ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 11 Feb 2001 14:36:44 GMT, ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> <...>
>
> > > > > As a beta, OSX hasn't shown itself to be anything more than
> > > > > glitz, the usual Mac style of form over function - Gates'
> > > > > quote in reverse, make it look good then everyone will assume
> > > > > it IS good. All I've ever seen quoted about OSX is how
> > > > > wonderful Aqua is.
> > > >
> > > > Quoted where?
>
> <snip quote>
>
> > You claimed that _all_ the quotes you've ever seen have focused on
> > Aqua. Clearly, posting a single quote doesn't prove that.
>
> You asked "Quoted where?"
It was a rhetorical question to lead into my comments about why people
frequently focus on Aqua when talking about OS X.
> I posted a quote by way of example. Clearly I can't prove that
> everything I've seen has focussed on Aqua, like proving a negative.
So what was the point of saying it?
> > I explained in my
> > previous response why _many_ quotes focus on Aqua.
>
> I haven't gone looking, just reading what's come my way. One gets
> more objective comment that way.
Depends on what comes your way. If you're just talking about the
mainstream media, obviously you're going to see a focus on non-technical
issues. That was my point.
[snip]
> > This is, of course, total nonsense. The typical user benefits much
> > more from a good user interface than from something like preemptive
> > multitasking. Please note, I don't say this applies to _all_ users.
>
> I suggest it doesn't apply to _all_ users when their machines lock
> solid losing them their work, such that even the attic is fruitless.
> Suddenly they'll rather have their data than a "good user interface".
> Particularly in a creative environment rather than in a data entry or
> memo writing environment.
>
> Clearly you don't use your Mac for creative work where recreating
> after a crash what you had before the crash can be very difficult or
> well nigh impossible. Or perhaps this is covered by your caveat
> "Please note, I don't say this applies to _all_ users".
With reasonable saving habits, a user isn't likely to lose more than 15
minutes of work due to a crash. Mac OS 9, used rather heavily for web
design work, crashed about twice a month on me. The benefits of a good
UI more than make up for the ~5 minutes of time per month I lost
rebooting.
> <snip stalemate>
>
> > > And 90% of Linux apps can paste with the middle mouse button,
> > > even between apps. And not just in X.
> >
> > 90% is pretty bad.
>
> Linux has been around as a desktop OS for maybe 5 years at most.
> Before that it was very much a server OS. MacOS has been around 16
> years. Linux is catching up fast.
It shouldn't take 5 years to get copying and pasting of plain text
working 90% of the time.
> > And how about styled text? Bitmaps? Vector graphics? Movie clips?
> > 3D? Can I copy and paste those between apps yet? How about
> > drag-and-drop?
>
> Drag and drop works fine.
...Between apps written with the same toolkit.
> Cut and paste works fine.
...Between apps written with the same toolkit.
> 3D ranges from Blender (free) to Houdini (very expensive). Movies?
> Broadcast 2000 (free). And so on. The Gimp, etc.
I'm not talking about content creation software, I'm talking about
copying and pasting. Can I copy a movie clip out of Broadcast 2000 and
paste it into StarOffice? I was doing things like that 8 years ago in
Mac OS.
> > > The Gimp has a unique UI, but 5 minutes work and it becomes
> > > second nature. Right click in the image you want to adjust and
> > > the image manipulation menu appears. No desktop space wasted with
> > > menus and certainly better than Macs' single menu for all open
> > > apps. Dragging a mouse from bottom right on the right hand 21"
> > > monitor to top left of the left hand 21" monitor *every* *single*
> > > *time* can get physically and mentally exhausting after a while.
> > > I guess there's a key-binding for it somewhere...
> >
> > If it's getting exhausting, it's probably in your head. The Mac has
> > a little thing called mouse acceleration,
>
> That is **HORRIBLE*** I tried it and dumped it within minutes. Only
> one person I know uses it.
I don't know what OS you tried it on, but if you dumped it, it wasn't
Mac OS. You can't turn mouse acceleration off in Mac OS.
X11, as far as I've seen, has horrible support for this. There's just a
threshold over which the mouse suddenly gets much faster. Mac OS uses a
smooth curve. Perhaps there's a way to do this in X. Most people don't
even notice it in Mac OS, even though it's saving them quite a lot of
trouble.
> > and hitting the top of the screen is very, very easy, since you
> > can't overshoot. I find Gimp's UI awkward and inconsistent
> > (although in Linux there's nothing to be consistent with). It's
> > certainly no Photoshop.
>
> A reasonable substitute, and several hundred dollars a seat cheaper.
> Excellent for making 3D textures, logos, etc.
It doesn't come close to being a reasonable substitute for print work.
--
This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
occurred during shipment.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thorsten Moellers)
Subject: Re: Security bug in mozilla on multi user system [linux]
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:05:06 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At Mon, 12 Feb 2001 07:53:52 GMT T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote in comp.os.linux.advocacy:
> Precisely. So like I said, you need to get the environment, not just
> the permissions, of the new user. So use 'su - user' instead of 'su
> user', and see if it works. If so, its a work-around, even if its
> inconvenient or even simply annoying.
>
> >If I forgot any other possibility wich might lead to this result, I
> >would be very interested to hear about...
>
> TBH, I'm not really following the details you're posting, but I think I
> understand the basic issue you're describing, and it does seem odd
> behavior. Its just that, based on a few years experience with Unix, I'd
> try 'su -' in this situation. Let me know if it works.
I already triead
'su - peek',
'telnet -l peek localhost'.
I even tried
'su -l peek',
all with the same result.
And the last thing to mention about the behavior is:
If another user can access my read-protected bookmarks just by
setting up his environment like mine is, it is a security
hole also.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:11:04 GMT
---snip---
>I know a ton of OS/2 users who have tried to go over to Linux. Almost
>every single one of them has come back to OS/2. Most of those who do
>not miss OS/2 every day. OS/2 exceeds Linux in the following ways:
>speed, multimedia, resource use, multitasking, multithreading, TCP/IP
>stack, GUI, Java and ease of use. Linux is better in a few ways,
>especially stability. I think OS/2 could use the memory mapping and
>symlinks, too.
>
Well... hold on partner.
As a longtime OS/2 user, soon to be a total Linux mover...
My relationship with Linux has been a real eye opener. IMHO, Linux has
os2 beat in all regards except one... the Work Place Shell.
Once I got use to the incredible linux sticks-n-stones GUI's... I got to be
very impressed with what's beneath the covers. I think of linux like a real
fast sports car with a so-so paint job. It'll definitely get better after a
real good detailing and polishing...
Linux, in my use of the os, has beaten the pants off of OS/2. Everything from
simple tcpip configurations, to how well the tcpip stack peforms. I can even
run linux on hardware that would make OS/2 seem like it was standing still. In
fact, that's what I am doing now. I've dragged out an old micronics motherboard
and tossed together a server for my home lan. OS/2 would seem like DEATH on
this computer, so would windows, but linux runs like a top. All this server
does is support a small number of clients and provides NFS, SAMBA and currently
inet over ppp. I don't think OS/2 would be worth a damn on this hardware as a
server... in fact, I know it would be hell. It's a 166mhz pent, 64meg and
500meg hard drive...
As for OS/2 being the multimedia king... you gotta' be kidding? Right? Not only has
MMOS2 be unchanged since it's conception, 6 or so years ago, it still remains
riddled full of bugs and gotcha's that can drive an experienced OS/2 guru to
insanity. My god... with a bit of skull-duggery... you can play dvd's on
linux... can't do it on os/2...
As for resource use... that's probably where the wps falls down, BIG. On a
typical 32meg os2 box, the wps can swallow as much as 8 to 12meg and never give
it back to user space... I haven't found ANY linux GUI that's as memory hungry
as the WPS is... Although KDE2.xx comes pretty close... But hey! If I don't
like it, guess what? I don't HAVE to use it. I can backlevel to 1.12 or try
ANY of the other 10 or 12 GUI's that are available for Linux. Try doing THAT
with OS/2. You can't. Your choice is limited to MSHELL or TSHELL... which are
both fathoms below anything available for Linux. Remember, you can't multitask
worth a damn, without OS/2's workplace shell running...
Try setting OS/2 up as a simple router... How many 10's of megs will it take?
I can do similar router operations under linux in as little as 11meg and
probably a lot less once I weed out some of the support I don't need. And
that's the greatest strength of Linux. If you don't need it... delete it. Try
that with OS/2 some day and see what happens. ;')
I've tried it... believe me, I have.
Java? On liunx I have something that no OS/2 user has; a choice. I can run Sun's
jvm, IBM's jvm or BlackDown... Under OS/2 you're stuck! IBM will give you a
free 1.1.8 jdk or... if you like working with truely beta level code, you can
BUY a copy of the 1.30 jdk... Hmm... Seems odd that I can get an IBM 1.30 linux
JDK for FREE, when I have to BUY a copy for IBM's own "flagship OS".... Odd...
OS/2 was "The Shit", until Linux evolved into the later kernel versions and
the GUI's got more polished off. Right now, with a 2.2.18 kernel and the likes
of KDE 2.01... you're almost on par with OS/2 in usability. If I may crystal
ball a bit... once the 2.4.x kernel ships with greater hardware support and
the KDE crew get's a 2.x version out that doesn't feel like an elephant
wallowing in the mud... I'll bet there's going to be a LOT MORE os/2 users
jumping ship... After all, any OS/2 veteran has applied a multitude of patches,
upgrades, systems settings, editings, etc... Moving over to Linux will be
seem natural. Maybe a bit odd at first (no drive letters????), but more and
more will come.
>> I've NEVER seen anything which comes even close to the
>> speed of an OS/2 server if you use SMB protocol. OS/2 runs
>> rings around Win(everyVersion) and Samba.
>>
I can't make this comparison! Believe me, I've tried like all the dickens, but
I've NEVER got OS/2's file and printer sharing to work. Never! But under Linux
it was a breeze.
>> OS/2 also has a quite decent implementation of TCP/IP, different
>> from that MS-shit.
I was and still am running the tcpip 4.3 stack. Yeah, it's far faster and more
feature rich than the previous versions... but still WHAY too buggy for my
likes. Until I made a netmask change from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.255.255
when doing a simple dial-up... PPP would trapdump and sometimes lock the
computer up so hard that a reset was neccessary. Is that state of the art? I
don't know... but I can say that I've never had a similar problem under linux.
When I decided to setup a home lan, so as to support a number of clients over
a cable inet hookup... I dearly wanted to run OS/2 as the server. I wanted to
support file-and-printer-sharing, nfs and inet over cable. I was able to get
NFS on OS/2 running and that was it. To get OS/2 to ip-masq, you need to buy
into some third party software... I'm tired of buying anymore "stuff". Once I
got NFS up and running (came free with my pruchase of the 4.3 tcpip stack) I
really begain to appreciate how SLOW OS/2 was over the network. NFS maynot be
OS/2's strong point, but it sure is one of it's weaknesses. As for f-n-p? I
finally gave up... Anyone want to make some money? Show me HOW to setup OS/2
to serve f-n-p and I'll pay you for your time... :')
Anyway... after spend whay too much time twiddling OS/2... I decided on a whim
to give linux a try. And guess what? It's now my server of choice. Fast, easier
to setup and... not a single problem or bug to pester me into submission.
> IBM got lots right with OS/2, their marketing sucked big time.
>
That, I totally agree with. If IBM had BIGGER BALLS and pushed a lot harder
when MicroSoft started their BS, I think all this crap with the DOJ and MS
would never have been an issue. IBM missed this target, BIG TIME. But then
again maybe Linux wouldn't be the same as it is now.
As for me and OS/2? The days are numbered... maybe another month or so and
it'll be relagated to "the dusty shelves". For now though... it's good client.
Anyone want to buy my copy of WSEB? ;'0 Cheap... only $1500.00....
--
*******************************************************************************
* Registered Linux User Number 185956 *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Laptop and linux. Which one???
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:11:31 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 12:12:54 +0100, Karel Jansens
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Translation: "Mommy! That big bully boy dared to disagree with me! I
> >don't know what to say anymore! Boohoo!!"
>
> If you followed the thread you would realize that mlw was the first
> one to tell people to get lost, not me.
>
> I'd suggest he get lost as well, but I believe he has already done
> that already.
>
You erroneously presume I am engaging in dialogue with you while I am
merely laughing at you.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:44:49 +0000
T. Max Devlin wrote:
> >Which has got nothing to do with what I was talking about.
>
> Then why did you make it the subject line of your post?
Ah, I see what you mean now. You know, I lump Linux together with The Gimp
as a complete package. I could make it a series of discrete packages but it
seems easier not to.
Ah but I keep forgetting. Linux isn't a large amorphous, it's the base
system. On top of which you have, The Gimp, KDE, GNOME, etc. All pulling in
different directions, all following their own thing...
> >Are all your posts just so much noise?
>
> Are all your posts so vapid?
Are all yours so stupid?
--
---
Pete Goodwin, running Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:46:57 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ive been posting to COLA for yea unto 4 years, you pasty
> bitch.
>
> YOU go away.
You've had your proof. Now, you could be gracious about it and concede, or
you could be a complete prick and continue as you are.
Which is it?
(I can guess, BTW).
--
---
Pete Goodwin, running Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
