Linux-Advocacy Digest #793, Volume #32 Tue, 13 Mar 01 21:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Middle Aged Fat Asses (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux Joke (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Jeffrey Siegal)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Sam Holden)
Re: Linux is like Pizza (Mark Robinson)
Re: The Double Fucking ala MS... ("Dale Curran")
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (David Masterson)
Re: Linux is like Pizza (Chad Everett)
Re: Middle Aged Fat Asses ("Paolo Ciambotti")
Re: The Double Fucking ala MS... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Dividing OS to groups. (.)
Re: What does IQ measure? (.)
Re: Linux Joke (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux Joke (Salvador Peralta)
Re: No problem with multiple GUI's (Salvador Peralta)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Middle Aged Fat Asses
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:11:23 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Donn Miller wrote:
>Tim Hanson wrote:
>
>> Especially troubling about this going on about MAFAMs is that I happen
>> to be one!
>
>I think he's ranting about the MAFAM's that only want to use NT for all
>workstations.
>
>
>-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
>http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
>-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
At any rate ladies and gentlemen.
I guess we don't have to go very far to PROVE the existance of MAFAM!
When ever they are mentioned, they react quickly.
It is a very secret organization which IS NEVER MENTIONED IN PUBLIC!
But BY-IN-LARGE they support Microsoft Windows products.
And they seem to stick together!
Now! Let's see if we can get that out the door!
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:14:33 GMT
In article <ovpr6.56117$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Myers wrote:
>
>"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > "T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Said Chris Ahlstrom in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 08 Mar 2001
>> > > 00:12:41 GMT;
>> > > >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> IMO the reason why Linux boxes tend to get compromised is because the
>> > > >> "admins" are often not professionals.
>> > > >
>> > > >The situation is a little better for RedHatters. RH 7 makes it a
>> > > >little easier not to run those nasty exploitable services like
>> > > >wu-ftp and the r* commands. I got hacked when I had that crap
>> > > >running; learned better.
>> > >
>> > > Well, you simply *must* fill us in on *every last detail*, please!
>> >
>> > Just a brief. I got digital cable, and finished installing the
>> > access on NT (which Comcast didn't support at that time, but asking
>> > for NT support did get me a static IP). I knew a little about insecurity,
>> > so I didn't leave my machine on much.
>> >
>> > A few days later I got Linux networking running on the cable.
>> > I still didn't leave the machine on. In the meantime, bought a friend's
>> > PC to use as a Linux server. I worked pretty hard at learning
>> > how to build firewalls using ipchains. Thought I was set.
>> > Started leaving the computer on. One day I heard the hard drive
>> > thrashing. It was thrashing so bad the computer wouldn't
>> > respond. I took the damn thing off line, and explored. The system
>> > log was about 25 Mb in size! It was filled with DENY entries
>> > from various IPs and on incrementing ports.
>> >
>> > This crap kept on happening, and starting happening the instant I
>> > powered up. One day I telnetted in from work and found "wzap"
>> > in /var/log.
>> >
>> > Reinstalled from scratch, rebuilt the firewall, and then disabled
>> > all those freaking services: ftp, telnet, rsh, portmap, etc.
>> > Once someone took down the firewall (I think), but other than
>> > that, no problems. However, I had a nice server box that was
>> > offering no services.
>> >
>> > Finally bought a cheap router, and now the server can offer
>> > the "fundamentally flawed" [according to Chad "The Cad" Myers]
>
>For the record, asshole, it was Tatu Ylonen from SSH.com himself
>who labelled SSH v1 as "fundamentally broken"
>(sorry, I have been saying flawed, but broken was the word)
>http://slashdot.org/articles/01/02/14/1120247.shtml
>
>According to Tatu:
>"OpenSSH is doing a disservice to the whole Internet security
> community by lengthening the life cycle of the fundamentally
> broken SSH1 protocols."
>
>Which was basically my whole argument: Why is OpenSSH continuing
>this disservice? Why aren't they attempting to educate their
>users not to use SSH1?
>
>> > ssh service with no problems, as far as I can detect. I'd rather
>> > have a Linux firewall (the logging is much better), but at
>> > least I got my server back.
>
>Have you seen any other firewall?
>
>Considering you've been hacked several times, why in the world
>would you trust Linux's a-security?
>
>-Chad
>
>"Has your linux box been used in a DDoS attack lately?"
>
>
Chad,
Your a big breasted MAFAM.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Jeffrey Siegal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:18:30 -0800
Austin Ziegler wrote:
> > Les Mikesell wrote:
> >> The ability to also distribute under the GPL simply
> >> removes the otherwise pervasive problem of combining anything
> >> else with GPL'd code.
> > That's not the only effect of such dual licensing.
>
> It is the *primary* effect of such, and the one which is most meaningful.
Effects are effects. I don't believe it is possible to measure and
categorize such effects in this manner.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam Holden)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: 14 Mar 2001 00:19:42 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 13 Mar 2001 20:53:01 GMT, Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 15:23:04 -0500, David Masterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>>>>>> "Jay" == Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 17:55:41 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> One profiteer of BSD software can make future *licenses* of all future
>>>> software more restrictive ("non-free"); this cannot happen with GPL,
>>>> which is the entire point.
>>> Pure unadulterated horse exhaust.
>>> There is *NOTHING* that M$ can do that will prohibit me from running
>>> NetBSD, now or ever.
>>If you're going to quote someone, make sure you understand what he
>>said. This is _*not*_ what he said.
>
>(I normally trim quotes, but I left it in place to make following the
>argument simple.)
>
>I deon't see how what I argued is not a response to his statement that I
>quoted. The point is simple: TMax is a GPV zealot, based on what, according
>to his own words, is a flawed understanding of the situation. He's not
>educable, having said the same wrong thing over and over and over...but
>perhaps I can help others not follow the same yellow brick road.
>
>Quite aside from his repeated bleating about how profits are evil, his
>argument - along with many other GPV zealots - is that someone can come
>along and remove software from the real of being freely available. This is
>demonstrably false, as my counterexample dcemonstrates.
But that isn't what he wrote. Possibly that is what he believes, possibly
it is not. It is not what was stated and thus it is not what you were replying
to...
>
>>> If people wouldn't repeat this utter falsehood, I wouldn't be
>>> compelled to keep pointing out its falsity.
>>You haven't shown what he said to be false. You've only shown that
>>what you *believe* he said is false. The two do not agree.
>
>So you claim. How are the two different?
Notice the word 'future'.
'can make future *licenses* of all future software more restrictive'.
In other words nothing to do with current software such as NetBSD, but
the software created by the profiteer derived from the free software would
not be free.
This does not change the state of the existing free software, or any free
derivatives of it. That is not the argument. No one disagrees with you
on this. I don't understand why you keep attributing points of view to
people who don't hold those points of view.
My take on the whole stupid argument:
GPL supporters don't believe it should be possible to take free software and
create non-free software out of it. (This is commonly refered to as 'making the
software non-free - if you didn't know that, then now you do - feel free to
argue about the term being misleading. Don't pretend that you don't
understand what the other person is saying though - since now you know...)
anti-GPL people (is their a way of saying 'GPL anti-supporters' in English
without using such cludgy made up language?) believe is should be possible
to take free software and create non-free software out of it.
GPL supporters thus consider that the GPL is freeer than the BSD license since
it prevents the creation of non-free software derived from free software. It
also causes some collateral damage - it prevents the creation of free software
under a BSD style license (for obvious reasons). But that can't be helped
due to using copyright law for something it wasn't designed for.
anti-GPL people consider the BSD more free than the GPL, or even consider the
GPL non-free (depending on how they interprete the loaded word 'free') because
they think you should be free to create non-free software from free software.
GPL supporters do not think the creation of non-free software from free
software makes the original software non-free (they may argue the orignal
wasn't free - but that is just a definition of free again)
It's a bit like politics you have the (I'll try not to use real political
domains since that will cause more problems).
blue wing people who believe that software is only free if it is not
possible to derive non-free software from it - call them the extreme GPLers.
center blue wing people who believe that software if more free if it is not
possible to derive non-free software from it, but is still free if you can -
call them the center GPLers.
center people who beleieve different licenses make sense in different
situations.
center green wing people who believe that software is less free if it is not
possible to derive non-free software from it, but is still free if you can't -
call them center BSDers.
green wing people who believe that software is only free if it is
possible to derive non-free software from it - call the extreme BSDers.
There are of course the extreme ends as well (people who think that the only
free software is that in the public domain for example).
When arguing it would appear both sides assume the other people are of the more
extreme persuasion of their camp. Which means al that is done is the
argument of the 'is free', 'is not', 'is', 'is not' style....
Here's a take on what this all achieves:
I put myself in the center of the above spectrum. I get involved in these
discussions sometimes - usually when a particular post leaves me dumbfounded
at someone arguing something completely pointless.
In my office I tend to argue the anti-GPL side when we discuss this topic.
On this newsgroup though I seem to always end up arguing the GPL side. I think
because the anti-GPL people come across as much too extreme in their arguments.
I can honestly say that the previous round of arguing causes me to use the GPL
for something. It was the anti-GPL arguer that convinced me to do so by being
such a pig-headed moron (he is not involved in this round).
In this discussion the poster I'm replying to has made me favour the GPL
even more - since the GPL people seem more reasonable. So I guess I'm center
with a leaning to the blue. Still to the green side when compared with others
in my office though...
You might be having fun arguing, but if I'm not to abnormal you are
turning people towards the GPL by not sticking to rational arguments and
resorting to what appears top be intentionally avoiding some points and
replying with irrelevant points - a bit like watching politicians debate -
which also turns me away from whoever is speaking at the time...
Then again the extremists of any point of view tend to drive rational
people away from that point of view. Extreme right wing politicians drive
people to the left side of center - then the extreme left wing politicians
drive them back over to the right - it's almost humourous to watch. At least
in this domain, where it doesn't matter so much it is humourous...
Anyway back to the scheduled pointless arguing over semantics....
--
Sam
The very fact that it's possible to write messy programs in Perl is also
what makes it possible to write programs that are cleaner in Perl than
they could ever be in a language that attempts to enforce cleanliness.
--Larry Wall
------------------------------
From: Mark Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is like Pizza
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:24:44 GMT
Ralph Miguel Hansen wrote:
> > WAITER!!!!! What are these bugs doing in my pizza?? :)
> >
> It's not a bug. It's a feature.
It's not a bug. It's a topping.
Mark
>
> Cheers
>
> Ralph Miguel Hansen
> Using S.u.S.E. 5.3 and SuSE 7.1
------------------------------
From: "Dale Curran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Double Fucking ala MS...
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 11:33:30 +1100
My friend,
you sit there in ultimate judgement upon the Gates product as an all knowing
computer god.....
what you fail to recognise is what windows does it does better the linux
......... AT THE MOMENT.
i am a newbie to the worlds most awe inspirring O/S and many years ago I was
a newbie to windows .... which one was easier to set up and even more
importantly KEEP going .... windows thats what it is designed for .... sure
it crashes like a bitch but when you reboot your computer in the morning at
least you know everything is (90% of the time ) gonna be there
HAVING said that, I want the Linux community to show me the error of my
ways.... show me and all the newbies out there that Linux IS better will GET
better and will utterly decimate the crap that is MSWindows !!
Let me give you a chance .... I have just installed Linux-Mandrake 7.2 to a
partition of my HD. It seemed to set up fine .... SEEMED ... when i rebooted
and entered for the first time I perplexed to find that I (as any user on
the system) have NO ACCESS RIGHTS to ANY removable media (floppy and 2
CDROM's) even though they were mounted. I investigated only to find that I
couldn't change any access rights for a few reasons ...
One very big one is I cannot in any way open a terminal in KDE2 as every
single time I try the machine turns into your so hated Windows machine and
god forbid locks up...completely.
So I try's the GUI setup interface .... nothing ! It won't let me change a
thing....
aghhhhhhhh ... I love the idea of Linux and when it is working it really
does live up to its name AND MORE.
So please help this newbie see the light
Thanks
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 19:32:47 -0500
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
From: David Masterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> "Jay" == Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 15:23:04 -0500, David Masterson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Jay" == Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 17:55:41 GMT, T. Max Devlin
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> One profiteer of BSD software can make future *licenses* of all
>>>> future software more restrictive ("non-free"); this cannot happen
>>>> with GPL, which is the entire point.
>>> Pure unadulterated horse exhaust. There is *NOTHING* that M$ can
>>> do that will prohibit me from running NetBSD, now or ever.
>> If you're going to quote someone, make sure you understand what he
>> said. This is _*not*_ what he said.
> (I normally trim quotes, but I left it in place to make following
> the argument simple.)
I trimmed it some, but I hope I didn't change the intent.
> I don't see how what I argued is not a response to his statement
> that I quoted.
The one word he used that tells me that he is talking about something
different than what you're talking about is "future".
> The point is simple: TMax is a GPV zealot, based on what, according
> to his own words, is a flawed understanding of the situation.
This may be true. From my point of view, you're both zealots at
opposite ends of the spectrum. But, then again, these are "advocacy"
groups that this was posted to, so what should I expect?
>>> If people wouldn't repeat this utter falsehood, I wouldn't be
>>> compelled to keep pointing out its falsity.
>> You haven't shown what he said to be false. You've only shown that
>> what you *believe* he said is false. The two do not agree.
> So you claim. How are the two different?
My reading of his statement above is that he is *not* saying that (to
use your example) NetBSD will ever become "non-free", just that
M$-NetBSD (or IBM-NetBSD or Sun-NetBSD...) could become "non-free"
because the BSDL allows it. He'd like that to not be a possibility
(for many possible reasons [like code fragmentation]) whereas you seem
to think this could be a good thing (again for many possible reasons
[like greater business involvement]).
Personally, I think there are plusses and minuses on both sides.
--
David Masterson ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Rational Software (but I don't speak for them)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: Linux is like Pizza
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:40:17 GMT
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001 00:24:44 GMT, Mark Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Ralph Miguel Hansen wrote:
>> > WAITER!!!!! What are these bugs doing in my pizza?? :)
>> >
>> It's not a bug. It's a feature.
>
>It's not a bug. It's a topping.
>
It's not a bug. It's a proprietary enhancement added by Microsoft after
kindly offering to help pay for the pizza.
------------------------------
From: "Paolo Ciambotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Middle Aged Fat Asses
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 18:13:22 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Charlie Ebert"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> At any rate ladies and gentlemen.
>
> I guess we don't have to go very far to PROVE the existance of MAFAM!
> When ever they are mentioned, they react quickly.
>
> It is a very secret organization which IS NEVER MENTIONED IN PUBLIC!
>
> But BY-IN-LARGE they support Microsoft Windows products.
>
> And they seem to stick together!
>
> Now! Let's see if we can get that out the door!
>
> Charlie
>
Actually, we're all aliens from the planet Trafalmador. You can only see
us as we really are only if you have the special sunglasses.
I can get you a pair of the special sunglasses if you'll just take your
medication. You do want to be cured, don't you?
--
This sig left blank to compensate for Aaron R. Kulkis.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: The Double Fucking ala MS...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:16:53 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dale Curran wrote:
>My friend,
>
>you sit there in ultimate judgement upon the Gates product as an all knowing
>computer god.....
>what you fail to recognise is what windows does it does better the linux
>......... AT THE MOMENT.
>
>i am a newbie to the worlds most awe inspirring O/S and many years ago I was
>a newbie to windows .... which one was easier to set up and even more
>importantly KEEP going .... windows thats what it is designed for .... sure
>it crashes like a bitch but when you reboot your computer in the morning at
>least you know everything is (90% of the time ) gonna be there
>
>HAVING said that, I want the Linux community to show me the error of my
>ways.... show me and all the newbies out there that Linux IS better will GET
>better and will utterly decimate the crap that is MSWindows !!
>
AMEN!
>Let me give you a chance .... I have just installed Linux-Mandrake 7.2 to a
>partition of my HD. It seemed to set up fine .... SEEMED ... when i rebooted
>and entered for the first time I perplexed to find that I (as any user on
>the system) have NO ACCESS RIGHTS to ANY removable media (floppy and 2
>CDROM's) even though they were mounted. I investigated only to find that I
>couldn't change any access rights for a few reasons ...
>
>One very big one is I cannot in any way open a terminal in KDE2 as every
>single time I try the machine turns into your so hated Windows machine and
>god forbid locks up...completely.
>
>So I try's the GUI setup interface .... nothing ! It won't let me change a
>thing....
>
>aghhhhhhhh ... I love the idea of Linux and when it is working it really
>does live up to its name AND MORE.
>
>So please help this newbie see the light
>Thanks
>
>
Extremely hard to say. After having done probably 50 Mandrake installations
I can safely say I've never seen this.
I would have to say attempt to re-install again and use the novice
installation section.
Don't attempt anything other than that.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Dividing OS to groups.
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:23:25 +1300
> It was a little Atari humor "The Tramiel Operating System". Sigh,
> in its day, the Atari ST was much more fun than any PC,
I fully agree! So many games and demos... and coding 68k asm with GenST
and MonST was some of the coolest stuff I've done. If only PC assemblers
could have been that good...
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:34:41 +1300
> No one can answer that question
I know. This was my only point. I hate it when people state something
as absolute truth.
> because no one has ever seen an alien
> and there is no evidence that aliens exist. So, if you recognize
> things like a head, a skull and a body, it's a pretty damn good bet the
> critter is native to earth, and you'd be well served to understand what
> happened to it lest the same thing happen to you. Oh, and the creature
> is dead and that's the truth.
I agree, if I found a mangled body, even something I had never seen
before, I would most likely jump to the assumption that it was dead, or
badly hurt and dying.
But just because I see something, and all my prior experience suggests
only one particular explanation (perhaps even all prior experience of the
human race), doesn't automatically make it THE TRUTH. To believe
otherwise is arrogant.
This is my stance. Nothing will change it.
I prefer to believe humans are not infallible, based on all evidence
provided by said creatures. If others want to think to themselves that
we cannot possibly be wrong, it can be on their own head.
For the record, I still don't claim the IQ test means nothing, only that
we can't be sure of it.
I wont be adding any more to this thread. I've already had to repeat
myself too many times, and I'm sure others are getting as bored with it
as I am.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 01:46:12 GMT
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 23:27:45 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Bob Hauck wrote:
>>
>> On 13 Mar 2001 01:16:42 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Great, so it's only useless to C++ developers. That includes me -- all
>>> my real work is in C++.
>>
>> That's a generic reason to avoid C++...binary incompatibility due to
>> different name mangling schemes.
> That's why our Linux systems have a compiler for us!
I guess. How long do you suppose it would take to compile KDE on my
P-120 laptop? Much better to do it on the faster machine, as long as
they both have the same compiler & libraries. Kinda sucks for
commercial software though.
>> Unless you use templates heavily...then you can just put everything into
>> the headers and wait until tomorrow for it to compile.
>
> I haven't noticed that problem in Visual C++, Borland C++, and in
> gcc-2.95.2 with STLport.
Isn't it nice to have a fast computer? It is almost a requirement for
using C++ these days.
>> I actually don't dislike C++ that much, but using a language that's
>> changing at warp speed is always a challenge.
> You mean like with Java <grin>.
I'm not a big fan of Java either, actually. I started to be, but
various things have put me onto a different path. I like the language
ok, but am not so hot on the JVM concept (all the speed of an
interpreter, all the flexibility of a compiler) or the politics.
> I think C++ is pretty settled right now... especially gcc -- when the
> HELL is gcc 3 coming out!!!???
Isn't the main reason for gcc 3 to get gcc to be compliant with the
standard?
>> -| http://www.codem.com/
>
> "You modem, we codem."
The funny thing is that I've been doing some system integration that
involves v.32 modem code running on a DSP board. Kind of a fun project.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 17:51:56 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chad Myers quoth:
> Which was basically my whole argument: Why is OpenSSH continuing
> this disservice? Why aren't they attempting to educate their
> users not to use SSH1?
The security warnings and fixes have been available for years. Can you
reference a single instance in which someone has been financially hurt
by using openssh.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/8/17456.html
You spend months railing about a flawed implementation that has hurt
exactly no one and stick your head in the sand when it comes to NT
vulnerabilities that have actually hurt people. You can live your life
in Redmond colored glasses, Chad. But don't expect anyone here to
recognize you as anything other than a troll.
--
Salvador Peralta -o)
Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No problem with multiple GUI's
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 17:52:08 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pete Goodwin quoth:
> In article <98gs8t$6jl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> > Now that I've switched to SuSE,
>>
>> All that tells me is that you still don't get it.
>
> What's to get?
Switching from distribution to distribution is a waste of time.
Spending your time learning how to use the tools is not.
>> Given the same kernel version and the same package manager, linux is
>> linux.
>
> Linux 2.2 is the same as Linux 2.4?
Which part of "given the same kernel version" did you fail to
understand?
> Linux is Linux is it? All distros are created equal, is that it?
Nope. Some distributions are easier to install than others. Once you
have it installed, linux is linux ( again with the caveat that not all
package managers are created equal ).
> Is that why a number of people are less than happy about Linux
> Mandrake and are switching away from it?
Which explains why Mandrake is the fastest growing linux distribution
and why it has accounted for 20-30% of all distribution sales since
December. Mandrake might be a poor choice for someone who has been
using Debian or Slackware since 1994 ( then again I know plenty of
admins who have been using linux for a long time who love mandrake, and
I am one of them )
>> If you were serious about using it, you'd be spending your time
>> learning how to use your toolsi nstead of figuring out new ways to
>> break a perfectly
>> good desktop. All you are doing right now is trading one consumer
>> cycle for another.
>
> I have not been "figuring out ways to break a perfectly good desktop".
> It was already broken!
Most of the problems that you have encountered are related to operator
error. The majority of those that were not, have been fixed in newer
rpm versions of the KDE environment.
--
Salvador Peralta -o)
Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
