Linux-Advocacy Digest #871, Volume #32 Sun, 18 Mar 01 16:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Mindless suicide! Rediculous Dumbasses! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Here's a load of horse crap (GreyCloud)
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: Humbled (GreyCloud)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: IBM adapting entire disk storage line to work with Linux (GreyCloud)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 20:07:20 GMT
Said Les Mikesell in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 17 Mar 2001 06:58:05
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> >> Yea; you have to share. Some restriction.
>> >
>> >No, no one is ever forced to share. The restrictions prevent
>> >sharing under all circumstances except those specifically
>> >described.
>>
>> OK, so, how did what you say contradict what I said? Since the only
>> restriction is you have to share, both statements can be true, making
>> yours meaningless.
>
>You must have some imaginary version of the GPL. The real one
>says nothing about having to share or redistribute in any way. It
>says much about conditions that prohibit any form of sharing.
Yea. That's what I said. Are you *sure* you're smart enough to be a
programmer? Are you *really* too dumb to understand the difference
between literal text and the effect of a licenses literal text?
>> >> No, unless you're willing to share yourself. You obviously aren't
>> >> willing to share.
>> >
>> >Don't be silly. I want to share without restrictions on combinations.
>>
>> Combinations of what? Where you share, and where you don't share?
>
>You can't combine components with any existing restrictions that
>differ from the GPL's with anything with the GPL restrictions
>and redistribute it.
IOW: where you don't share, you don't share.
>> Sorry; the rule is you have to share.
>
>No, the rule is that only under certain conditions are you allowed
>to share.
Yes, and the ONE and ONLY "certain condition" is, you HAVE TO SHARE.
You're really don't get this, do you?
>> > But, even though all the parts were freely available
>> >separately and I did not want to add restrictions to my work,
>> >distributing the result would be a violation of the GPL.
>>
>> Well, obviously the author of GNUtar didn't want you doing that with his
>> code. It can be "free software" and still belong to the author; maybe
>> that's the issue you're having trouble with.
>
>I don't dispute the author's right to impose whatever restrictions
>he wants. The issue I am having trouble with is calling it free software
>when
>in fact it is so restricted that you cannot share improvements that
>include any other work that actually is free.
The issue you are having trouble with is calling it free software when
it is free for EVERYONE except YOU. And you don't seem to understand
that is on purpose.
>> Regardless, the practical
>> loss to the world of your combination is regrettable, but I'm pretty
>> sure that GNUtar isn't the only implementation of tar available, so
>> perhaps you're just confusing what's good for you with what's good for
>> your potential users.
>
>In those days it was the only one with several features needed as
>a real portable backup solution. (The --listed-incremental mode
>and multipart archives among others).
So you figure you'd incorporate that little benefit into your own work,
huh? And you figure if GNU software says "its free", that means you
should be free to do that. I folla, I folla. Couldn't figure out how
to do with with some other tar, and couldn't use someone else's work
without their permission. What a shame.
>> >> When it has been proven quite clearly that those choices cause a great
>> >> deal of problems for everyone, yea.
>> >
>> >Why would anyone think that giving away code, already freely
>> >available but now working correctly would cause problems?
>>
>> The suspicion raised in one's mind by the phrase "now working
>> correctly", given any experience at all with Microsoft.
>
>I am talking about separate components of freely available software
>being integrated into something with new capabilities, and the one
>with the most outrageous claims about being free is the one that
>prohibits redistribution.
That's why its the only one that makes a serious claim about being free.
The others are just zero cost. Free beer, not free speech; you know how
it goes....
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Mindless suicide! Rediculous Dumbasses!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 20:13:21 GMT
Said J Sloan in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 18 Mar 2001 01:11:16 GMT;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>> The preferred method, in RedHat 7 at least, is to change the default run
>> level from 3 to 5 by editing the appropriate text file (init.conf?)
>
>Actually, line 18 of /etc/inittab
Thanks. I didn't have the book at hand.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Here's a load of horse crap
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 12:13:39 -0800
Shades wrote:
>
> That pic it is bizarre. What is it with him? There is a lot one can see in
> that pic and it is all negative. I cannot see what it is even suppose to
> mean from an MS perspective.
>
> "Ray Chason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Shades" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
Probably trying to figure out how to slip out from under the Anti-Trust
suit!
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 20:01:52 GMT
Roy Culley wrote:
>> And what to ']$' and 'tr' have to do with KNode?
>
> Let me repeat you have all these problems because 'you don't even attempt
> to learn how unix/linux works'. If you can't work out how to do simple
> things then how can you expect to upgrade major packages?
I see - I need to understand ']$' and 'tr' to understand how to do
rpm -i *.rpm
do I?
Do you not see the idiocy in your statement?
--
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 20:03:03 GMT
mlw wrote:
> If you did an rpm -i, you would get errors because you had 2.0.1 alread
> installed.
I saw none.
--
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 20:03:52 GMT
Roy Culley wrote:
> Unlikely as he would need to read some documentation to know about
> --force. He says he did 'rpm -i' and he has told us many times he doesn't
> lie so we have conclusive evidence that he screwed up ... again.
Then why did it work with no errors? Why am I using it _right now_???
--
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 20:03:21 GMT
Gary Hallock wrote:
> Unless, of course, he used the --force option. In which case he deserves
> what he got.
Nope, I did not use --force.
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Humbled
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 12:15:30 -0800
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> GreyCloud wrote:
> >
> > Mike Martinet wrote:
> > >
> > > mlw wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It is all smoke and mirrors. Truth be told, we are all jr high school students,
> > > > smoking pot in a basement.
> > >
> > > Ha!
> > >
> > > Hell. I thought I knew something. But exchanges here have left me
> > > numbed. I've saved over 20 posts from this group explaining things I
> > > need to do/know/learn. Excellent.
> > >
> > > I guess I posted this thread because I didn't want to appear to have
> > > come on the scene, talked shit and then disappeared. I did talk shit,
> > > but when I found out it was excrement, I shut up and started reading.
> > >
> > > This is good.
> > >
> > > MjM
> >
> > Well, you're not alone in this respect Mike. Ages ago (1966) I argued
> > with an Electronics Tech about how good RCA products were. I never
> > heard of Tektronix or HP then. The Army changed that for me. Then 1969
> > while in the Army near Arlington,VA,
> > I was attending Fortran training in a security facility by Adm. Grace
> > Hopper. She came just to deliver the software and intro the class and
> > then leave. I looked at a deck of fortran cards and asked the question
> > "What are these numbers over on the far right?" with which Grace dumped
> > the contents of the tray on the floor and said "In case this happens!".
> > Good straight training.
>
> And the Navy wonders why their retention rate sucks.....
>
LOL!! Thats why I went Army.
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
> Special Interest Sierra Club,
> Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
>
> 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....
>
> 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
>
> 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"
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> 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.
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 20:04:59 GMT
mlw wrote:
> He said he did:
>
> "rpm -i *.rpm"
>
> And got no errors. Given the context of the thread, one should conclude
> that he would be making an honest attempt at displaying the problem, which
> would require some diligence toward accuracy of the steps taken and the
> results observed. Since we know that what he said he did could not have
> produced the results he claims, we can safely conclude: He is either an
> idiot or a lying.
I did what I said, and I got no errors.
Maybe you're the one who's lying.
If I'm lying, how come I using KDE 2.1 _right now_?
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM adapting entire disk storage line to work with Linux
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 12:17:42 -0800
Ed Allen wrote:
>
> In article <cCOs6.82336$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >It's alright, laugh it up. I know you're really just jealous
> >because you know that I'm right. You know that the only company
> >who really takes Linux seriously (if that's what it really is)
> >is IBM, and IBM has a poor track history with desktop and
> >small-server OSen.
> I suppose that is true if you have a secret definition for
> "seriously" like Erik likes to do.
>
> How many more millions does Intel need to invest to qualify in
> your private definition ?
>
> Lets not forget that AMD is encouraging Linux developers to use their
> coming 64-bit chips. They don't qualify, why ?
>
> SGI does not qualify either. Why not ? They are planning to add
> their NUMA technology and sell Itanium cluster machines.
>
> Then too, all the universities using Linux to put together their
> own Supercomputers are not companies either.
> http://www.vnunet.com/News/1113447
>
> What do you think the graduating students will recommend for use
> at their new jobs ?
Yes, a very excellent point!
> This $150 million seems "serious" by my definition:
> http://computerworld.com/cwi/story/0%2C1199%2CNAV47_STO56666_NLTpm%2C00.html
>
> And Conoco seem happy with what they are doing:
> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-2654463.html?tag=st.ne.1430735..ni
>
> Do you concede that your statement will not stand up or do I need to
> dig up more links ?
>
> This poor showing will not please your sock-puppet handlers. They
> may want to retrain you. Again.
>
> I have you killfiled so I won't see your response to this unless
> somebody else responds to your response like happened on the one I
> am responding to so don't take a lack of response to your blather as
> anything other than personal distaste.
>
> --
> GPL says
> "What's mine is ours,
> If you make *OUR* stuff better the result is still ours."
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 20:06:14 GMT
Gary Hallock wrote:
> I hope you mean rpm -U *.rpm. Or did you uninstall the previous version
> of KDE first? When updating, did you do it when KDE was running (bad
> idea) or did you first do a telinit 3?
You may be right, maybe it was rpm -U *.rpm. I did it from a CLI with X
shutdown (I'm not _that_stupid!)
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 15:23:43 -0500
Anonymous wrote:
>
> Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > unix: user hostile
> > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > Microsoft propaganda.
> > >
> > > no, personal experience.
> > > a generally impassable learning curve = user hostile.
> >
> > UNIX learning curve isn't impassable. I passed it easily.
>
> i said generally.
> the exceptions do not make the rules.
The average person sticks with the GUI. The various Unix GUI's
are all FAR more consistant, even from one to another, than is
the Windows GUI within itself.
On the other hand building a system with the NOVICE in mind,
and providing nothing more than novice-level functionality
means that all users MAX-OUT at novice-level productivity.
Unix has half a dozen GUI's that are so good that Mafia$oft
copied (in their own, usual, less-than-elegant way) as much of
this functionality as they could.
Now....if Unix is supposedly soooooooooo difficult to use, then
please explain why Mafia$oft is copying Unix ON THE BASIS OF
EASE OF USE.
>
> > > i was using windows to get work done ten minutes after installation.
> > > u can't touch this
> >
> > So you are saying that you were doing useful work on windows after never
> > having used it before and having had no training? LOL!
>
> no formal training whatsoever.
You have used Windows for years.
You are saying that, when you were an absolute novice with windows,
you are just as productive as you are right now, years later?
How .... sad.
> i'd fucked around with it a bit tho. a friend of mine showed me the basic
> stuff and i think i took one page of notes - various basic control panels,
> stupid right mouse button tricks, the standard menu layout in office.
> and most important of all - where to find help. (it's usually cleverly
> hidden in the 'help' menu)
The Help menu mainly leads to such highly informative information as
"The font button is use to select what font you want to use."
If you need help to figure that out, then you're probably not
intellectually capable of using a computer in the first place.
>
> > > > Unix has had fully functional GUI's since the mid 1980's.
> > >
> > > xwindows?
> > > nerdo please...
> >
> > What is wrong with X. WTS is begining to emulate some of the
> > functionality, over 15 years late.
>
> as i recall it consisted of a bunch of barebones windows where you
> could punch in command line stuff and occasionally show a peecture.
> real user friendly.
> not.
No.. X windows is a PROTOCOL upon which you can write GUIs.
The first X window managers were just a proof-of-concept.
This is like berating internal-combustion engines because the
first diesel engines ran on coal dust.
>
> > > > Not only that, but Unix is very very very consistant; in contrast, DOS and
>Windows
> > > > both have lots of arbitrary rules with even more exceptions.
> > >
> > > why, if that is the case, are they so much easier to use?
> > > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> >
> > I find DOS and Windows much harder to use than UNIX. Where possible I
> > use UNIX because it is easier to get useful work done.
>
> define 'useful work'
Word Processing
CAD/CAM
data-base front-end tools
*ANYTHING* you do on a desktop is more easily implemented in Unix
than in Windows....ANYTHING.
And if it's easier for the programmer to write a sophisticated,
high-quality application, then the sooner, and more cheaply
you are going to get it.
It's pretty funny when the demo-system is written on Linux, and
12-months later, they still can't get a working implementation
on Windows, so they revert back to Linux and get it up and running
in 7 days...
and that kid goes HA HAW
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
> men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
> more even than death
> - bertrand russell
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 20:08:00 GMT
mlw wrote:
> The issue is I am using KDE 2.1 right now and the edit box is fine.
And it's working fine for me, so it's one of those "fly-by-night" bugs.
> If you are see blatant problems with it, and you did an install of it, one
> can only conclude that you did it wrong.
Or there are bugs in it.
> It is easy to understand how one *can* mess it up, by not installing all
> the required packages or the wrong versions. This is not a usability issue
> since 99.9% of Linux users would not perform this procedure. They would
> use what comes with the distribution or have someone qualified do it.
I would have seen an error when I installed it. I saw none.
> My suggestion to you is uninstall ALL KDE and QT files and reinstall them.
Since it appears to be working just fine right, I don't think I'll do that.
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
All your fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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 15:25:18 -0500
GreyCloud wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > mlw wrote:
> > >
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > > This also means they won't use any Sun or Oracle product, or any of a
> > > > thousand others. I guess they did a good job martyring themselves,
> > > > but it's a pretty stupid move in general. Microsoft, Sun, and Oracle
> > > > all make very good and useful products.
> > > >
> > > > I suppose if they had conclusive proof of it, it would make sense,
> > > > but they don't, so it doesn't.
> > > >
> > > I think there is a confusion of who needs proof of what.
> > >
> > > It is perfectly reasonable, and correct, to require proof that something is
> > > secure. It is stupid to assume something is secure unless you have "conclusive
> > > proof" it is not.
> > >
> > > Microsoft provides no proof that its products are secure.
> > >
> > > Should a military organization use software which it has no proof is secure?
> > >
> > > I bet Microsoft shows the source to the US military, I would also bet the same
> > > is not said for the german military.
> >
> > I would also bet that, if that is the case, that M$ is required to give
> > the source to the Department of Defense in electronic form, AND give the
> > military the right to modify the source code for their own internal use.
>
> Yep, we do! When we purchased some VAXes we got source code,
> schematics, the whole works. Same for microsoft stuff. Of course
> agreements of non-disclosure and security protecting their proprietary
> software were in place. After reviewing their source code all I can say
> is that the mil. now calls it messy-dos!
>
What's microsoft's favorite keyword in C?
"goto"
> > If they don't, then there should be some demotions in the Pentagon.
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
> > > ------------------------
> > > http://www.mohawksoft.com
> >
> > --
> > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > Unix Systems Engineer
> > DNRC Minister of all I survey
> > ICQ # 3056642
> >
> > K: Truth in advertising:
> > Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
> > Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
> > Special Interest Sierra Club,
> > Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> > Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> > The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> > Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
> >
> > 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....
> >
> > 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
> >
> > 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"
> >
> > G: Knackos...you're a retard.
> >
> > F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> > adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
> >
> > E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> > her behavior improves.
> >
> > D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> > ...despite (C) above.
> >
> > C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 20:14:41 GMT
Edward Rosten wrote:
> No, GIMP or MDK Oopsie says it. Is it any wonder you get so many flames
> with an attitude like this? This has _nothing_ to do with Linux. It can
> happen under _any_ OS.
Mandrake is only available as a Linux OS.
Linux is perceived by many as a whole collection of things, not just
including the kernel.
>> It's not worse, it's just interesting that nothing else uses Postscript
>> in that way.
>
> Incorrect. Many high end printers use postscript in this way, as well as
> a large family of operating systems.
UNIX systems?
Other than UNIX systems, which ones use postscript in this way? OpenVMS
doesn't. RISC OS doesn't. Windows doesnt'.
> But this not really interesting. If it was, it would be interesting that
> Windows is the only system to use the Windows Print System. It would be
> even more interesting that RiscOS uses its won print system.
RISC OS had its own.
> Why is it interesting that UNIX is the only one to use PS for meta data
> wen $OS is the only one to use $OS_PRINT_METADATA for its metadata?
It says something about the complexity of postscript compared to raster
graphics.
> It looks to me like you are using a very wooly argument in an attempt to
> make UNIX look bas.
I'm not trying to make UNIX look bad for using Postscript.
--
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
******************************
