Linux-Advocacy Digest #198, Volume #32 Wed, 14 Feb 01 21:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: T-birds eat Intel for lunch (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: WindowsXP - Pay us to solve our bugs (Ray Chason)
Re: WindowsXP - Pay us to solve our bugs ("Joel Barnett")
Re: XP - The meaning.... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: KDE Whiners ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Ethernet card for UNIX/Linux ("mmnnoo")
Re: Linux and the 21st Century Boom - Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop
(Charlie Ebert)
Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable? (Ray Chason)
Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable? (Ray Chason)
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant (Marten Kemp)
Re: The Windows guy. (Brent R)
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant (Marten Kemp)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 00:52:08 GMT
In article <96edak$7f1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Todd wrote:
>
>"jtnews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I just saw a news piece on Windows XP!
>> Microsoft claims that it can run for days
>> without crashing! Anyone have any real
>> world experience with Windows XP?
>> Is it really reliable?
>
>No way to tell until its been out for a couple of years...
>
>However, NT was more stable than 9x and 2000 is more stable than NT...
>
>So, I guess one *could* conclude that XP will be more reliable than 2000.
>However, I wouldn't bet my life on it.
>
>2000 is pretty darn stable. I've had almost zero problems with it, and it
>runs DirectX 8 ! What more could you ask for? hehe... I know I'm gonna get
>quite a few responses here... :)
>
It's like a series of nets in the shape of a pyramid.
When a process falls out of one .net it lands in another.
And thus we have solved two riddles.
The mystery of why Microsoft's OS is gradually improving
and what .net really is.
>-Todd
>
>>
>> I already have 5 PC's at home all running
>> Linux. I don't see why I need a new OS.
>
>
At this rate, Microsoft will have achieved the stability of Debian
2.2 R2 by 5-14-3007
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: T-birds eat Intel for lunch
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 00:53:42 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
>
>Charlie Ebert wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:07:53 -0500, jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>I just saw a news piece on Windows XP!
>> >>Microsoft claims that it can run for days
>> >>without crashing! Anyone have any real
>> >>world experience with Windows XP?
>> >>Is it really reliable?
>> >
>> >Just days? Hardwired russian apple II clones were more reliable.
>> >
>> >Bill gates deserves a house that burns to the ground every few days.
>>
>> What's totally hillarious about XP being announced is that
>> Windows 2000 professional was a total flop in the sales
>> department.
>>
>> There are thousands of companies who are setting on NT for
>> two reasons. #1, it would simply cost them too much to
>> buy new PC's and upgrade. #2. They don't want to buy
>> 32 bit CPU's when they know 64 bit is on the way.
>>
>> I think #2 is poetic justice for Microsoft and Intel
>> as they both decided to delay the release of this
>> technology even though Linux has a 64 bit OS already
>> tested and ready for use.
>
>At this rate, AMD is going to eat Intel for breakfast.
>:-))))))))
>
I totally AGREE AK. They are going to release the 530 chip
set soon and the T-birds will be leaving the nest in pairs.
>
>>
>> --
>> Charlie
>>
>> **DEBIAN** **GNU**
>> / / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
>> / /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
>> /_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
>> http://www.debian.org
>
>--
>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.
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 00:58:39 GMT
In article <onCi6.519$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>"Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> At this rate, AMD is going to eat Intel for breakfast.
>> :-))))))))
>
>Intel realizes they can't compete with AMD today, though they do have a new
>version of the PIII coming out later in the year which will take much better
>advantage of DDR and RDRAM, and when the "real" Pentium 4 (currently code
>named NorthWood) starts shipping later in the year, it will put AMD in quite
>a squeeze.
>
>When I say "real" pentium 4, I mean what the P4 was supposed to be. The P4
>was rushed out the door to compete with AMD and they disabled all the
>features that weren't finished yet, causing it to be the mess that it is.
>When the real one goes out the door, AMD should be shivering in their boots.
>
When you compare the development cycle between Intel and AMD,
AMD is not hindered by secret contracts with Microsoft.
If anything, you will hear a slosh in the boots of Intel as they
walk away from the next encounter from AMD.
If I was the president of Intel, I would tell MS to just fuck off.
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WindowsXP - Pay us to solve our bugs
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 00:59:23 -0000
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Did I read this wrong or do you have to pay for beta software these
>days?
We've been paying for Microsoft's betas since DOS 1.0.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: "Joel Barnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WindowsXP - Pay us to solve our bugs
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 17:05:50 -0800
"Bloody Viking" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:96f1ta$1r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> pip ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : Did I read this wrong or do you have to pay for beta software these
> : days?
>
> : http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/preview/default.asp
>
> Looks like you read it right. You get to pay for the beta of Windows Pay
Per
> View.
>
Looks like MS is taking a hint from the Apple playbook. The beta of OS X
cost $ also.
> : What _is_ the world coming to?
>
> An end. Won't be fast, like an asteroid hit, but a slow agonising collapse
of
> civilisation as the fossil fuels run out. (see http://www.oilcrisis.com
for
> details)
>
> --
> 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.
jbarntt
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: XP - The meaning....
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:01:19 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, spicerun wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Sevatio"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hey, don't miss the presentation Billy and the boys are having on this
>> XP!
>>
>>
>> I've learned a lot so far. For example, the XP's start-button remains
>> on the bottom-left corner to help lessen the learning curve.
>>
>> ;-)
>
>XP screenshots that I've seen look like Gnome's Desktop with really large
>fonts.
X stands for replicant of X windows, and a sad replicant it is.
Not capable of remote windowing. One desktop instead of many.
P stands for playskool! Targeted at the user audience who
simply doesn't give a damn whether they have an adult OS or not.
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE Whiners
Date: 15 Feb 2001 01:07:22 GMT
Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: As usual in this little (and I do mean little) skirmish, those who
: previously used KDE exclusively will not be spending a penny on Ximian
: products in the future, thank you. GNOME users are totally disgusted
: by the immaturity of the KDE team and nothing will ever coax them into
: dreaming about using KDE, by golly. So what else is new?
I'm both a GNOME and a KDE user. For the most part I have nothing but
admiration and respect for both teams. The childish behavior I
commented on - thankfully short-lived and now resolved - should be
viewed as the actions of the specific individuals and/or companies
involved, and not necessarily reflective of the entire camp.
The problem is that they *will* be seen as reflecting on the broader
community, which is why both individuals and companies need to try
harder to act in an unquestionably honorable and ethical fashion.
Joe
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ethernet card for UNIX/Linux
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:18:27 GMT
I think it's ironic that you would suggest the RTL 8139. The linux
driver is broken! (Or maybe it's the hardware, I don't know).
Anyways, it periodically (about every 20 days for me on
average) completely ceases to function. If it's a module
you can rmmod it and then re-enable it to get it working.
This is a major pain on my home server because I normally
have only network access (through the 8139 card) to it.
I have two of these cards and have had this problem
with both under linux. I am not the only one, either... a
web search shows that others have the exact same problem.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "John Travis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 07:33:14 GMT, "Martin Eden"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Hi everybody.
>>
>>I need an ethernet card for my new system. I'll dual boot Linux and
>>FreeBSD. Any advice on which one to get?
>>
>>Thanks in advance.
>>
>
> Realtek (RTL) 8029. Great cheap cards. I haven't had problems with the
> 8139 (not the 8129!) either. I also like the 3Com 3C900s (Tornado's I
> think). I would avoid Linksys as they seem to give a lot of people
> fits. But the Realtek 8029 is the only one I have used for _both_
> GNU/Linux and FreeBSD. Free picked it up, and my dhcp server, without
> any problems. It's an ne2k-pci clone sold under several names. I think
> mine was branded a Focus Networks EtherLAN PCI adapter of something (it
> said it worked for Novell, SCO UNIX etc. so I wasn't too woried :-).
>
> jt
>
> ________________________________________
> Alternative Computing Solutions... Debian GNU/Linux
> http://www.debian.org FreeBSD http://www.freebsd.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Linux and the 21st Century Boom - Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the
desktop
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:20:31 GMT
In article <3a8b076c$0$11263@reader5>, Mart van de Wege wrote:
>In article <97Ci6.515$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm still not quite sure what you're looking for. You're
>> looking for an OEM to provide legal sworn testimony of "We have
>> not been coerced by MS"?
>>
>> What it boils down to is this, OEM's want every price advantage
>> they can get when it comes to their competition. Any testimony
>> by an OEM would be viewed as MS giving that OEM financial
>> incentives to do so. I think MS rightfully didn't include any
>> OEM testimony to avoid the appearance of that.
>>
>>
>>
>Quite frankly: yes, that's exactly what I am looking for.
>
> I do however see your dilemma here: it is impossible to prove
> that anyone saying anything positive about MS is doing so
> without financial incentive from MS in any form. Quite frankly
> MSs business practices have made it likely to assume that anyone
> speaking in their favour is somehow financially dependent on
> them, thus making any kind of MS advocacy in objective company
>useless, let alone in biased company as here. It is however quite
>easy to prove, with verifiable facts, that MS has screwed over *a
>lot* of people and companies.
>
If one has been using USENET groups as long as I have, I can't
remember the last time I saw a truely positive responce about
Windows from anybody on either comp.os.windows.advocacy or the
weird NT group either.
> This means that your MS apologism, although quite reasonably
> stated and obviously open to discussion, has given you a less
> than zero credibility in this newsgroup (and yes, I do admit
> that I took some of that bias in flaming you). Yet another thing
> to blame them for eh?
>
I think that for Windows advocacy to be posted *HERE* on COLA
is proof positive of motive. Otherwise why don't they just
post the dribble on a Windows newsgroup?
>Mart
>
>--
>Happily running Debian, posting with Pan
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable?
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:29:13 -0000
Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From what I have read, VAX was a very well designed piece of hardware, esp. in
>terms of reliability. When compaq stopped selling VAX based servers, alot of
>people were sad that they could no-longer buy them, however, from what I have
>heard, Alpha Chips are quite good, however, I would never consider buying one
>unless the price is reduced to a normal price (say $1000 above the PeeCee price
>and I would be happy).
The one big problem with VAX was that Digital patented the connector
that it used for its bus, and refused to license the patent. You could
not get peripherals except from Digital.
This strategy proved short-term wise and long-term foolish; one reason,
perhaps, why Digital is no longer with us. (ObMSBashing) May Microsoft
profit from their example.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable?
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:36:23 -0000
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 64 bits operating systems are extreme overkill (have you any idea how
>> big 2^64
>> is?) for anything but corporate databases... *large* corporate
>> databases.
>
>32 bits are underkill. 64 bits is the next logical step.
>
>2x as wide bus, 2x as much data per clock cycle.
Another point is the problems Intel has had with the Pentium 4. Intel
is resorting to more and more complexity to get more speed out of their
chips. The result is more bugs and more heat to dissipate.
Something's got to give.
>IA64 runs IA32 code like a P100, so they really, really need a 64 bit
>OS in order to run at a decent speed.
The reason for this is the way certain operations are implemented, such
as loading a segment register: you get a fault, and the fault handler
actually loads the segment descriptor.
But the fault handler doesn't have to follow the rules. It could point
the segment at another part of memory. Virtual Pentiums! Load Linux
on one, NT on another, switch between them with a hot key or the mouse...
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: Marten Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:44:23 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 04:02:12 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
> >on Tue, 13 Feb 2001 01:07:05 -0000
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 14:33:22 +0000, pip
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>Lloyd Llewellyn wrote:
<<snippage>>
> >OSF/1, VM/CMS, RSX-11M, TOPS-20. Closer to home -- home PC, that is --
> >there was CP/M, Apple ][ OS, Apple /// OS (DOS?), the IBM PC's built
> >in BASIC (one has to squint a bit), AmigaOS, Atari's TOS, C64's
> >built-in BASIC (one has to squint even more), Tandy's TRS-80's Basic,
> >and last (well, not quite, but I don't know any more OSes) but most
> >certainly not least, MacOS.
>
> Yes, and all of these went the way of the dodo due to the fact
> that supporting multiple operating systems is more expensive
> than just supporting one. Buying an OS that isn't "used by
> everyone" can also seem to put you at a disadvantage.
<<snipage>>
VM - mainframe OS that can run other OSes, host for Linux/VM
CMS - interactive component of VM, a single-user OS in its own right
MVS - mostly batch OS
Linux/390 - our favorite OS on real hardware
Yes, there are about three orders of magnitude more PCs than mainframes
and not many mainframes run Linux (yet), but these dinosaurs never
became extinct. Linux/VM systems are beginning to replace NT farms. BTW,
dodos became extinct because people killed and ate them AFAIK.
-- Marten Kemp
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:45:45 GMT
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
> Mike wrote:
> >
> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I got a co-worker that is big into Windows. He complains that Windows has
> > all
> > > the tools he needs and Linux is too primitive. He is sure that Windows
> > does all
> > > he needs.
> > >
> > > He is working on a Linux web server. He wants to do a global replace in
> > VI. I
> > > tell him to use sed. He whines a bit, then tries it. I hear from his cube.
> > > "Sweet!"
> > >
> > > Just a few more incidents like this and he will start to think his Windows
> > > platform isn't so easy to use.
> > >
> > > The people that say Windows is easier to use haven't put the effort in to
> > > learning some simple tools. Like a person that has an adjustable open-end
> > > wrench and knows nothing about socket wrenches. Life is simpler with one
> > > wrench, sure, but work is easier with a wide selection of tools.
> >
> > Windows is easier to use.
>
> Only if "reinstalling software regularly, and the whole fucking OS
> every 6 months" is part of your definition of "easier"
>
> > And, I have all those things on my Windows machine
> > (vim, awk, sed, etc, etc) - and so should your coworker (if he's any good at
> > tracking these things down, he will have in a few days). So, then what?
>
> REAL soft links
> REAL memory protected multi-tasking
> REAL pipes
> REAL multi-user capabilities
> REAL remote usage
Let's not forget re-direction, a very useful UNIX attribute!
--
Happy Trails
-Brent
=============================
http://rotten168.home.att.net
=============================
ICQ# 51265871
------------------------------
From: Marten Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:58:37 GMT
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> In article <K5wi6.20982$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> >"Paul Colquhoun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 06:03:37 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
> >> |
> >> |"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> >message
> >> |news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> |> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
> >> |> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> |> wrote
> >> |> on Tue, 13 Feb 2001 02:09:05 GMT
> >> |> <5H0i6.30249$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> |> >
> >> |> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> |> >news:96998r$9v6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> |> >> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> |> >>
<<<snip>>>
> >
>
> Notice how the Wintroll totally discounts the IBM effect
> on the popularity of DOS.
>
> It was the IBM effect of introducing the worlds first PC
> which made DOS popular.
>
> It didn't have a fucking thing to do with DOS.
>
> If it is possible for you to completely comprehend one
> thing in your life Chad, let this be the one.
>
> --
> Charlie
DOS took over the *IBM* PC world due to what I call the 'preload
factor'. There were lots of competing PC designs before the IBM (I can
remember when the PC was announced). Most users don't have the technical
expertise nor the interest *YET* to replace their preloaded OS and
software suite. Therefore they continue using Windows and other
Microsoft products. Once the major PC manufacturers start offering Linux
preloads at competitive prices this may change. I say 'may' because how
many people have been taken in by the MSN 'rebate' (you can fool some of
the people...).
-- Marten Kemp
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
