Linux-Advocacy Digest #863, Volume #32 Sun, 18 Mar 01 05:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Russ Allbery)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (J Sloan)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (J Sloan)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (J Sloan)
Re: the truth about linux (Martigan)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! ("Adam Warner")
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (-kn)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:11:55 GMT
Roy Culley wrote:
>> I installed KDE 2.1 incorrectly. Am I hearing you correctly. I get a
>> crash, and it's _my_ fault!
>
> Yes it is because you don't even attempt to learn how unix/linux works.
> Have you sussed out what ']$' is yet or what 'tr' does (for those who
> don't subscribe to alt.destroy.microsoft these things seem to confuse
> PG)?
And what to ']$' and 'tr' have to do with KNode?
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:13:33 GMT
mlw wrote:
>> I installed KDE 2.1 incorrectly. Am I hearing you correctly. I get a
>> crash, and it's _my_ fault!
>
> If you don't install the pieces right, yes. There is plenty of
> documentation.
I did rpm -i *.rpm and it all installed with no errors. What else is there
to do?
>> This was the version of KDE that was for SuSE.
>
> SuSE is shipping a distro with KDE 2.1 on it? I thought 7.1 only had KDE
> 2.0.
7.1 has KDE 2.0.1. I upgraded to KDE 2.1 with the SuSE RPM's.
> Funny how no one sees the bugs you claim.
Just because noone else sees them does not mean they do not exist - this is
true of Windows as well.
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:14:17 GMT
Ralph Miguel Hansen wrote:
> You are right. SuSE 7.1 is shipped with KDE 2.01. He claims to use KDE
> 2.1; he must have downloaded it from somewhere. I use SuSE 7.1 with the
> KDE 2.1 downloaded from kde.org and it works fine -as usual. There are
> some bug's in the Beta-stuff and the developers ask for bug-reports. If he
> didn't want to write bug-reports to the developers, why in hell does he
> write these reports to this newsgroup ?
I did write bug reports.
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Russ Allbery <[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: 17 Mar 2001 23:14:43 -0800
In gnu.misc.discuss, JD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (That is, unless the copyright message has been removed from it, but
> that is not allowed under the copyright law itself.)
Could you please point me at where in the copyright law it says this? I
don't remember seeing this when I read through it, but it's quite possible
that I've missed it.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:15:49 GMT
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Shove off, troll, and fix your computer. If you're machine isn't
> broken you obviously logged in as root and fucked up your
> configuration. Whiner.
There's nothing wrong with my computer. There are serious problems lurking
in KDE 2.1. I did not log in and seriousl "fuck" my configuration.
Pathetic aren't you?
If you really want Linux to be seen as a decent replacement OS to Windows,
this kind of crap will have to go.
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:18:09 GMT
Gary Hallock wrote:
> Your logic is laughable. The fact that so much of KDE seems to be
> failing along with the fact that no one else sees this should tell you
> something. You installed KDE 2.1 incorrectly, you got a bad
> build of KDE, or you have severe hardware problems. The general
> consensus is that KDE 2.1 is very stable. Why do you always insist on
> making these drastic generalizations?
Since when has the "edit" control of KDE been "so much" of KDE?
I did _not_ install KDE incorreclty, it installed just fine. You want to
blame me for it, fine! I'm amazed by the fact your in denial.
Just because noone else sees these problems does _not_ mean they don't
exist.. I saw similar problems with drag and drop in KDE 2.0
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:19:28 GMT
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> Here, Here!, I must agree with you on that issue, before getting my SUN
> b0x, I was running Redhat Linux 7 w/ KDE 2.1, and it was very stable, I
> have never had
> the problems Pete is claiming. I find that 90% of the cases, when a
> computer has crashed under Windows or Linux, normally, I have found that
> the memory was defective, however, with that being said, Linux has crashed
> on faulty memory, but not as much, as most hardware quirks can be sorted
> out at the kernel level, and since Microsofts code is closed, not all
> hardward quirks can be addressed under a closed source scheme.
If my hardware was faulty, I'd see problems with Windows. This is a dual
boot system. However, I see no problems at all with Windows, but I see more
problems with Linux. What does that tell me? That Linux is the unstable
one, which gives the lie to "WIndows killer"!
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:20:47 GMT
Jim Richardson wrote:
>>And lo it came to pass that I left running a Windows machine with Personal
>>Web server on it and it has been running now for several months without
>>rebooting or crashing.
>
> wanna give out the ip addr?
It's behind a firewall - you can't get to it.
>>It's still way ahead.
>
> for you maybem more power to you, for me? windows is a PITA that isn't
> worth the hassle when I can easily get better performance and reliability
> from linux, and when I consider the apps that *I* use, linux is way ahead.
That's great but that's _your_ perspective. Unfortunately, what you want,
and what the majority wants isn't in sync.
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:29:14 GMT
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> Jim Richardson wrote:
>
> >>And lo it came to pass that I left running a Windows machine with Personal
> >>Web server on it and it has been running now for several months without
> >>rebooting or crashing.
> >
> > wanna give out the ip addr?
>
> It's behind a firewall - you can't get to it.
Ah, so that's the secret of keeping a windows
web server up - make sure it gets no hits!
jjs
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:33:32 GMT
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> I am a developer, and I've been one a long time now.
>
> If the Linux crowd can't take criticism, but love to dish it out for
> Windows, then I'll call you a hypocrit.
That's silly, if you ever looked at the kernel mailing
list, you will see plenty of frank discussion of bugs,
limitations and the things that linux still needs,
You have no idea about "the linux crowd" since you've
never had any contact with them. (no, cola does not
count)
> I don't see it as my function to fix other people's software.
You claimed it was your kde that's acting up.
Yet most other people seem to be having no
such problems, so I can only conclude that
Linux is not meant for you.
Why not go buy a new G4 and run MacOS X?
Regards,
jjs
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:36:18 GMT
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> Adam Warner wrote:
>
> > Pete do the honourable thing, shut the **** up, and submit a bug report.
>
> I've submitted a bug report, and as long as people bill Linux distros as
> "Windows killer", no, I won't shut up.
I'm not sure what you;re on about there.
Linux is indeed a windows killer in the server room.
Nobody has ever said that about the desktop. All I
ever hear is that Linux is catching up (in ease of use.
availability of apps and so forth)
Until it does, I counsel you to stay away. and
let the technical and power users work it out.
Go buy yourself a new Mac.
Regards,
jjs
------------------------------
From: Martigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the truth about linux
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 07:48:41 GMT
"Public wrote:
> Here are some humorous snippets from a site located at
> http://members.aol.com/erichuf/Linux.html
>
> Finally! somebody willing to tell the truth!
My official respones is....what....what did he just.....oh well must
not have been important.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 02:00:40 -0600
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> > What's there to gloat about? This means they won't use Linux either,
since
> > they claim they won't use *ANY* software developed in America, and much
of
> > Linux is developed in American by Americans.
>
> Linux has a decidely international flavor, as many of the key
> kernel and package maintainers are outside the US. What's
> more, Germany has one of the highest concentrations of Linux
> developers in the world.
That makes someone a liar then, since the article states they won't use
*ANY* american software.
Either the german military is lying, or the reporter is lying.
> > Sure, they could examine the source themselves, but it doesn't sound
like
> > they're making informed decisions based on actual evidence, so I doubt
they
> > would disect Linux to prove to themselves that there aren't back doors.
>
> On what basis do you make that claim?
Well, they are claiming ther are backdoors without any real evidence. That
means they're believing what they hear, rather than what they know to be
fact.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 02:06:22 -0600
"CR Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The real truth is that Germany is still pissed that MS included
Diskeeper
> > technology whos CEO is a scientologist.
> Already forgotten the "NSAKEY" backdoor? That was the "backup" key that
> MS put in the OS in case they (they being MS) "forgot" the primary key
> and needed to update your software.
That would be the backdoor that one of the top cryptologists in the world
says he doesn't believe exists.
Bruce Schneier, author of Applied Cryptography and considered a formemost
expert in cryptogrophy chimed in on the entire NSAKEY incident saying that
the paranoia mongers arguments simply didn't make sense.
http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-9909.html#NSAKeyinMicrosoftCryptoAPI
"But it's not an NSA key so they can secretly inflict weak cryptography on
the unsuspecting masses. There are just too many smarter things they can do
to the unsuspecting masses."
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 22:20:17 +1200
Hi Pete,
>> Even though I have never used knode to post a message, help tells me
>> that the project home page is knode.sourceforge.net. There is a place
>> to submit bug reports and a mailing list. The FAQ may also answer some
>> queries.
>
> I submitted a bug report to bugs.kde.org
That's great. I hope the problems are resolved.
Regarding your point that KDE 2.1 is a stable release, so applications
shouldn't crash: yes the core components of KDE are supposed to be stable.
But unless an application to be used on top of KDE is in an advanced state
of development (very near a genuine 1.0 release) you shouldn't expect it
to be fully stable.
So in future just check the version number to see how advanced that
particular application is. After all you don't rely on the fact that
Windows has a relatively stable GUI to determine whether any application
released for Windows will be not crash.
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: -kn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: 18 Mar 2001 11:20:05 +0200
.-
|||| Thanks for all your freaking help, man. No wonder the RMS wrote the GPL.
||| RMS committed the GPV well before M$ became the behemoth it is today.
|| "Committed the GPV". Christ; why not just put up a banner in your sig that
|| says "ignore what this putz says; he wouldn't know an argument if you handed
|| to him."
|
| Only to an unreasoning zealot. Others will at least listen.
|
| Now, how about answering the argument? What possible connection can M$'s
| monopolistic tactics have had on RMS' creation of the GPV when they happened
| AFTER HE DID IT?!
`
are you trying to say that the rms' creation of the GPL is the reason of
Microsoft monopolistic tactics?
--
n
++k
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 09:36:24 GMT
J Sloan wrote:
>> I've submitted a bug report, and as long as people bill Linux distros as
>> "Windows killer", no, I won't shut up.
>
> I'm not sure what you;re on about there.
> Linux is indeed a windows killer in the server room.
> Nobody has ever said that about the desktop. All I
> ever hear is that Linux is catching up (in ease of use.
> availability of apps and so forth)
http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reviews/3052/1/
What's the headline in this article?
"Pack It Up and Go Home: SuSE's Created a Windows-Killer"
> Until it does, I counsel you to stay away. and
> let the technical and power users work it out.
But everyone is telling me how Linux is so much better than Windows!
> Go buy yourself a new Mac.
What? I've already got a PC!
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 09:39:03 GMT
Adam Warner wrote:
>> I submitted a bug report to bugs.kde.org
>
> That's great. I hope the problems are resolved.
So do I.
> Regarding your point that KDE 2.1 is a stable release, so applications
> shouldn't crash: yes the core components of KDE are supposed to be stable.
> But unless an application to be used on top of KDE is in an advanced state
> of development (very near a genuine 1.0 release) you shouldn't expect it
> to be fully stable.
I hadn't realised KNode was 0.4 and hence not release quality (which begs
the question - what's it doing in KDE 2.1 if its _not_ release quality?).
However, the problem didn't seem to be in just KNode but every KDE
application that had an edit control.
> So in future just check the version number to see how advanced that
> particular application is. After all you don't rely on the fact that
> Windows has a relatively stable GUI to determine whether any application
> released for Windows will be not crash.
Yes, which is why it's worrying when I tried drag and drop from Konqueror
and took out the entire desktop. Konqueror is V2.1
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 09:40:34 GMT
J Sloan wrote:
>> If the Linux crowd can't take criticism, but love to dish it out for
>> Windows, then I'll call you a hypocrit.
>
> That's silly, if you ever looked at the kernel mailing
> list, you will see plenty of frank discussion of bugs,
> limitations and the things that linux still needs,
>
> You have no idea about "the linux crowd" since you've
> never had any contact with them. (no, cola does not
> count)
I meant the linux crowd here on COLA.
>> I don't see it as my function to fix other people's software.
>
> You claimed it was your kde that's acting up.
> Yet most other people seem to be having no
> such problems, so I can only conclude that
> Linux is not meant for you.
Huh? I get problems and you say its not for me? What kind of rationale is
that?
> Why not go buy a new G4 and run MacOS X?
Why should I want to spend so much moneny?
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 09:42:44 GMT
J Sloan wrote:
>> It's behind a firewall - you can't get to it.
>
> Ah, so that's the secret of keeping a windows
> web server up - make sure it gets no hits!
But of course!
No, its used as a file server. I put a web server on it a long while ago to
test something out. The web server keeps a record of how long the machine
has been up - handy when I find people claiming Windows can't stay up for
long, when I have a machine that gives the lie to their statement.
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
