Linux-Advocacy Digest #699, Volume #32 Thu, 8 Mar 01 02:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux Joke ("Chad Myers")
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("GreyCloud")
C# ("GreyCloud")
Re: Mircosoft Tax ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux Joke (J Sloan)
Re: Mircosoft Tax ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux Joke (J Sloan)
Re: Linux Joke (J Sloan)
Re: C# ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: GPL, an open mind, options? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux Joke (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Windows API (Was Re: Mircosoft Tax) ("Mike")
Re: Linux Joke ("green")
Re: I am looking for a newsreader (Yatima)
Re: Mircosoft Tax ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Anyone else get this Konqueror error? (Salvador Peralta)
Re: Windows API (Was Re: Mircosoft Tax) (Ray Chason)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 05:09:04 GMT
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2001 13:56:35 GMT, Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> >>I've always maintained that Linux must have an EZ-HACK feature, judging
> >by the ease in which "hackers" compromised entire university computer
> >labs for their DDoS assault on Ebay, Amazon, Microsoft and several
> >others last summer. It was reported that a large majority of the
> >machines used in the attack were compromised Linux boxes.
>
> Put up or shut up. The box is smith203-1.rutgers.edu.
I never said that I was a hacker or possessed the skills. However,
it doesn't seem like it's that difficult seeing as how there were
fields of Linux boxes compromised within a short period of time
for these attacks.
I could set up a Windows box that you wouldn't be able to hack
either, but it wouldn't prove anything.
The fact of the matter is, unless you actively pursue updates
and patches and keep up on your security, your OS is a sitting
duck.
Linux isn't magically secure just because it's Linux, as you
would have us to believe.
You make it seem like Windows is inherently unsecure and Linux
is inherently secure, which is a pile of dog shit.
-C
------------------------------
From: "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 21:26:03 -0800
"Paolo Ciambotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >> Well, I have had four different linux distros install flawlessly on my
> >> machine until I bought OpenLinux
> >> 2.4 from Caldera. I popped in the CD and all I got was a kernel panic!
>
> I've installed Caldera on several different machines without a problem.
> Caldera, as a matter of fact, has one of the best installers around.
> I've been able to install Caldera on systems that choke and die on a
> Win98 install. To paraphrase the Winvocates, you must have had bad
> hardware.
Hardware is fine. Actually, try getting solaris to install on a
billy-box... now thats
a hair yanking experience. After some reflection, I think caldera paniced
because
I tried to get it to install over Solaris. I should have used linux fdisk
to get rid of it
and reformatted that partition. Web-min... jury is out here... don't know
if its really
that good or is better suited in a large work group. Some of it seems to be
confusing
at first. One program I wanted to use as an ordinary user was xterm. It
started and
then gave excuses why it wouldn't run.
I may eventually go back to Suse 7.x.
------------------------------
From: "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: C#
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 21:28:38 -0800
I've looked into ms's C#... looks like the spitting image of java to me!
Looks like trouble on the horizon. I wonder if Sun will sue them again??
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 23:38:43 -0600
"Bloody Viking" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9851dh$jqt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Let me guess. You fell for the Office 97 Trojan, err... I mean demo and
got
> your files corrupted. Only Microsoft can get away with charging victims
for a
> copy of destructive software.
Anyone that saves over their original data files with a demo version of a
newer product is stupid. This is not something unique to MS. For instance,
Adobe Illustrator's formats change for every version as well. If you're
using a demo of Illustrator 9 on your Illustrator 7 data files, you'd be
stupid to save over then then revert back. Your data would be unreadable.
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 05:42:55 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
> "Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> > Put up or shut up. The box is smith203-1.rutgers.edu.
>
> I never said that I was a hacker or possessed the skills. However,
> it doesn't seem like it's that difficult seeing as how there were
> fields of Linux boxes compromised within a short period of time
> for these attacks.
What?
Please post some evidence of these "fields of linux boxes"
which were attacked through the "fundamentally flawed ssh".
Or were you talking about the lame "try the default password
and catch those lamers who enabled the service without
setting a password" kind of hack? (The dot product of that
and linux, or that and ssh is approximately zero!)
> I could set up a Windows box that you wouldn't be able to hack
> either, but it wouldn't prove anything.
Ah, but you threw down the gauntlet by claiming that ssh is
"fundamentally flawed" - why not admit it?
> Linux isn't magically secure just because it's Linux, as you
> would have us to believe.
Nobody claimed it was magic, just good peer review and
attention to details.
> You make it seem like Windows is inherently unsecure and Linux
> is inherently secure, which is a pile of dog shit.
It is clear that Linux is more secure than windows. Even though
the market share of Linux and other Unix web servers is much
higher than that of windows, windows nevertheless sustains the
bulk of the hacking damage done over the net.
jjs
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 23:46:21 -0600
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Did you ever look into those API's? Well, I did. I was used to special
> purpose real-time OS's, but customers wanted nice GUI's, so I considered
> trying to use Windows environment, and I started looking into Windows
> not by a casual user point of view, but by a developer's point of view.
> After that I had no other idea than to find an alternative solution.
> I've never seen such a mess of inconsistent idiotic things, with no
> plan, no design philosophy, no logic behind. Lots of different API's to
> do the same thing, just because the first one takes some parameters from
> global data (forgetting the multitasking environment), the second one
> just provides a flag to tell apart two different cases out of 50
> possibilities, then 48 more to cope with the other possibilities, and so
> on.
I have no idea what you're talking about here. Yes, there are many API's
that do the same thing, but generally, the newere API completely replaces
the older API. For instance, SleepEx() completely replaces Sleep() and you
can use SleepEx() anywhere you would use Sleep(). Of course SleepEx has
more parameters, and you might not need them, so you would probably use
Sleep() to make your code clearer.
But then again, look at Unix api's: open, fopen, fdopen, execl, execlp,
execle, exect, execv, execvp, sleep, nansleep, usleep...
It's a programmer's nightmare. Beginner programmers with some talent
> turn out much better software than what you clearly understand to lie
> behind those API's. That way you may produce tens of thousands of API
> calls (that's the number reached up to now, if I understand properly)
> without providing a fraction of the functionality of a well designed
> system with just a few hundred system calls.
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 05:46:21 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
> There are those in COLA who would have you believe that Linux is
> the most secure OS every invented and silly things like auditing
> and DAC are not necessary in Linux because it's simply OpEn S0uRcE
> and it's l33t or some other bullshit nonsense.
This is all in your mind - Do you feel better inventing ridiculous
caricatures of the Linux community and then attacking those
caricatures to prove your cleverness?
> They are spoonfed from /. that Linux is somehow superior than
> all other OSen so they feel safe in bashing everything, including
> Windows because Linux isn't a glass house.
Again, nobody has ever said this, you are attacking another
caricature. Feeling smarter now?
> I'm merely making an effort to educate these rather clueless
> individuals that Linux is no better than anything else and that
> there are easily as many (percentage-wise) vulnerable Linux
> systems as there are NT/2K boxes.
Actually one would have to conclude from website defacements
and hack statiistics that windows is much less secure.
jjs
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 05:49:42 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
> com...
> > Why does the average windows user replace all his software everytime
> > microsoft releases a new major version of their operating systems?
> >
> > Because the old software will run like shit.
>
> Kinda like why everyone is clamoring for Linux 2.4 because 2.2
> runs like shit.
If Linux 2.2 ran half as bad as you say, folks would not
have been ditching windows to run Linux.
Our 2.2-based mail/dns/ftp servers have been up for 170 days
of contiunuous heavy churning. Prior to that day last June when
I upgraded the kernel, they had been up since the previous Oct.
Yes, 2.4 is better in a lot of ways, is that a crime?
jjs
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C#
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 23:50:15 -0600
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I've looked into ms's C#... looks like the spitting image of java to me!
> Looks like trouble on the horizon. I wonder if Sun will sue them again??
Actually, it's not. There are a lot of differneces. The first being that
it's not interpreted.
Second, even if it were an exact clone of Java, it's already been ruled in
court that doing so is legal, and there's noting Sun can do about it other
than enforcing their Java trademark.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 05:51:32 GMT
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > You goofed up by not reading the manual, which would instantly give you
> > the answer to the problem and how to fix it. Yes, it is also a Mandrake
> > "oopsie" for setting the wrong default. But you _did_ goof up.
>
> No I did not. It is not my fault that an application picked the wrong
> default. Please don't lay this one at my door.
Postscript is the right default. Why do you think anything else
should be the default?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GPL, an open mind, options?
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 00:00:13 -0600
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> So, what do we do?
>
> I really like the idea of protecting free software. I think BSD does not
do
> this, it is too easy to take free software and capitalize on it and leave
the
> community uncompensated. But the degree with which RMS seems to take the
GPL
> seems way too extreme to be reasonable.
>
> Is there a sufficiently protective public license which both protects the
> rights of the individual developers but still allows a program to be used
in a
> non-free system?
Well, you can create your own license, or modify existing licenses. For
instance, it's legal to GPL code, but also include a specific grant of
license to do certain things. On example of this is what the FSF calls the
"The license of Guile", which they still consider to be "Free Software" and
compatible with the GPL, but still looked down upon. Basically, this
license gives you the right to link to non-free software, but you still must
follow the GPL for modifications to the code.
There are lots of licenses out there. I like the X11 license and the
FreeBSD license.
The kind of license you seem to be after is not a "freedom" oriented
license, but rather a "quid pro quo" license. I'll scratch your back by
letting you use my code if you scratch mine by publishing your modifications
to my code. There just might be a market for such a license. Why not
create one yourself?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Date: 8 Mar 2001 06:16:46 GMT
On Thu, 08 Mar 2001 05:09:04 GMT, Chad Myers wrote:
>> Put up or shut up. The box is smith203-1.rutgers.edu.
>
>I never said that I was a hacker or possessed the skills. However,
>it doesn't seem like it's that difficult seeing as how there were
>fields of Linux boxes compromised within a short period of time
>for these attacks.
Like I said, it boils down to incompetent admins.
>
>I could set up a Windows box that you wouldn't be able to hack
>either, but it wouldn't prove anything.
But it would if I claimed that a particular Windows service was
insecure, and you were running that service.
>The fact of the matter is, unless you actively pursue updates
>and patches and keep up on your security, your OS is a sitting
>duck.
Depends on what services you're running. With ssh, you're actually
pretty safe from outside attacks. IIRC ssh1 has some potential
issues if someone malicious is on the same network. The exploit in
question is very difficult.
The reason I put the challenge to you is because I'm pretty confident
that you can't simply get root remotely on ssh (or even get in)
>Linux isn't magically secure just because it's Linux, as you
>would have us to believe.
I wouldn't have you believe that at all. Some distributions have used
attrocious default configurations (only recently, distributions have
started tightening up after complaints about cracked machines)
What I am saying is that ssh is pretty secure. ssh really doesn't have
anything to do with Linux besides the fact that it runs on that platform.
Note that it also runs on NT (clent and server) and most probably is
equally secure on thoase platforms.
>You make it seem like Windows is inherently unsecure and Linux
>is inherently secure, which is a pile of dog shit.
Do I ? Where did I say anything like this ? I'm not saying anything about
Windows, and in this thread, I'm not even saying anything about Linux.
I'm just pointing out that ssh is one of the most secure remotely accesible
services that you can run on and UNIX (certainly the most secure that allows
remote shell access) and your claims to the contrary are wrong.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: 8 Mar 2001 06:17:48 GMT
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 21:07:33 -0800, GreyCloud wrote:
>
>Now one can go to sun.com and download solaris 8 for intel for free.
>Better have a fast connection tho! Sun uses an application builder program
>thats very similar to mickeysoft, where one just picks and chooses what one
>wants in their gui. After that you have to program the core of the program
>like everybody else has to. I'm beginning to think that sun is getting a
>little
>scared about linux.
Yes, it's certainly getting better. Linux has a bunch of such things
available too. But they're quite new on Linux.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: 8 Mar 2001 06:25:22 GMT
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 22:27:33 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>"cheap" is a relative term. I also know lots of H1B's, and while their
>salaries are generally not too far out of line with the average entry level
>salaray, they live under lots of restrictions. For instance, they're not
>allowed to switch jobs.
This is untrue. They can switch jobs, but they need to file for another
visa. H1B applications for current holders are processed very quickly.
> If they lose their job, they get deported. That
This is not true at all. If they lose their job, they need to file another
visa application immediately.
The main problem I have with the system is that IMO they should retain their
status for a short time after they lose their job. As it is, they have little
recourse (for example, what if they're dismissed unfairly?)
>means a company can work their H1B's 10, 14, 18 hour days and the H1B has to
>put up with it or go back.
This isn't true either. The reason they do this is because the company
sponsors them for a green card. the problem is that if you get a different
H1B visa with a different company, you need to restart the green card
application process.
>While i'm certainly not the blather protectionist, I have seen first hand
>how a company that hires mostly H1B's goes quickly to pot.
Sometimes this can happen, at my SO's workplace it didn't.
IMO the biggest problem is that it's very difficult for them to change
employers if they are dismissed without fair notice.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Windows API (Was Re: Mircosoft Tax)
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 06:28:14 GMT
"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:986e6q$dd6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Since an OS can be partially judged by the state of its development tools,
> and those of Linux far exceed Windows, it is difficult to argue that
Windows
> is "modern" in those terms. Indeed, Windows has taken a step backwards -
at
> least DOS used to come with QBasic (not the world's best development tool,
> but good enough for making start-up menus and the like). With Win95 it
was
> an option hidden away on the CD, and with newer Windows it is missing
> entirely.
Hmmm....
e:\>ver
Microsoft Windows 2000 [Version 5.00.2195]
e:\>which qbasic
C:\WINNT\system32\qbasic.exe
e:\>
It's still buried on the CD.
But, still, I'm not sure I'd ever have considered QBasic to be a development
system.
On your other points, since Perl, Python, Tcl, Tk, and various other
scripting languages are all readily available for Windows, it seems to me
that by judging the system only by what is included with a distribution
disk, you're just trying to exclude Windows. Sure, this is an advocacy
group, but you'd serve the purpose better by making the case that Linux is
superior because of something other than the distribution disk.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: "green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 16:36:36 +1000
some of the links are broken at least from when I tried the page
eg advanced extranet homepage one.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yatima)
Subject: Re: I am looking for a newsreader
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 06:37:28 GMT
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 20:59:20 +0000, Richard Thrippleton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Amen to that! Now, as one slrn-er to another, could you help me
>with a little something or two....
I'll give it a shot :)
>Problem 1 is that read posts disappear next session; I'd rather see them
>next time with a 'D' next to them.
enter a newsgroup using <ESC> 1 <Enter>. This should give you what you want.
>Problem 2 is that it objects to text flowing beyond so many characters
>on a line from the editor (can't remember the number). Can't it do that
>automatically?
Do you mean wrap text automatically? If so, you need to set this in your
editor. For example I use vim as my editor and this is indicated in my
.slrnrc:
set editor_command "vim -rv +%d '%s'"
and my .vimrc contains the following which will autowrap things for me:
let TextFiles = "*.txt,/tmp/pico.*,.article,.followup,.letter, \
*/News/Postponed/*,/tmp/mutt*,*.tex"
set formatoptions-=t
set formatoptions+=2
set textwidth=76
execute "autocmd BufEnter " . TextFiles . " set textwidth=76 formatoptions+=t"
execute "autocmd BufLeave " . TextFiles . " set textwidth=76 formatoptions-=t
Note: if you are using vim you can use gqap to wrap paragraphs as well.
You can also use pico (which I believe autowraps) or Nano (pico clone) which
definitely does if you don't feel like tinkering with vim.
--
yatima
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 00:40:11 -0600
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 22:27:33 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> >"cheap" is a relative term. I also know lots of H1B's, and while their
> >salaries are generally not too far out of line with the average entry
level
> >salaray, they live under lots of restrictions. For instance, they're not
> >allowed to switch jobs.
>
> This is untrue. They can switch jobs, but they need to file for another
> visa. H1B applications for current holders are processed very quickly.
Uhh.. define very quickly. See below:
> > If they lose their job, they get deported. That
>
> This is not true at all. If they lose their job, they need to file another
> visa application immediately.
In theory. In reality, the visa application process usually takes longer
than they have to stay in the country. Friends of mine that are H1B's have
tried to do what you are talking about, and found it takes a minimum of
about 18 months to reprocess your H1B application.
> >While i'm certainly not the blather protectionist, I have seen first hand
> >how a company that hires mostly H1B's goes quickly to pot.
>
> Sometimes this can happen, at my SO's workplace it didn't.
>
> IMO the biggest problem is that it's very difficult for them to change
> employers if they are dismissed without fair notice.
Which is why the H1B's will do *ANYTHING* to keep on the good side of their
employer.
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Anyone else get this Konqueror error?
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 22:45:33 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From the location bar in Konqueror v 1.98, bundled with Mandrake 7.2,
type http://www.ibm.com<enter>. On my system, this yields a
server-side redirect to wireless.ibm.com which in turn produces the
following error:
This browser is unsupported.
The current supported browsers are:
UP.Browser (HDML)
Nokia (WML)
AvantGo (HTML)
HandWeb (HTML)
Palmscape (HTML
I have used IBM.com for months with this browser with no problems. No
one in the kde mail group that I subscribe to gets the error on their
versions. Can anyone confirm the error on their machine?
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Windows API (Was Re: Mircosoft Tax)
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 06:57:04 -0000
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>While creating and managing windows under the raw API isn't nearly as easy
>as using a framework, it's certainly nowhere near the headache that X is
>when you do it raw.
I find direct hand-coding of MFC to be little easier than using the
Windows API directly. IMHO the value added by MFC is not in MFC but
in the tools provided by Visual C++ to generate MFC code. MFC is
really little more than a thin layer of C++ over the API. Likewise
for the Borland tools and OWL.
Xlib, OTOH, is simply inadequate for GUI programming of any kind.
You really need that widget set. From here springs the great weakness
of X as a user interface. We have GTK+ and Qt, and they don't look
the same and they don't interoperate seamlessly. From this springs
the whole KDE/GNOME dichotomy and all the user interface bogosities
that result.
What to do? In the short run, neither KDE nor GNOME is going away;
providing a consistent user interface is a matter of application
availability. If the platform includes the GUI, so that we compare
apples to apples when Windows is part of the equation, then Linux+KDE
is a distinct platform from Linux+GNOME. Inconsistent user interface
arises mainly from using Qt-based apps on GNOME or GTK+ apps on KDE,
but often the "right" app isn't available for your desktop.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
