Linux-Advocacy Digest #895, Volume #32 Mon, 19 Mar 01 17:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: GPL not being free doesn't mean that the license is invalid. (Pat McCann)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (mlw)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (mlw)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:04:29 GMT
mlw wrote:
>> 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_?
>
> Unless you explicitly removed the previous version of KDE you should not
> have been able to install the new version without a -U.
>
> How do you explain that?
OK, I must have used rpm -U. My mistake.
> My only problem is that what you say could not have happened as you say it
> has. You may be running 2.1, I don't care, but the events, as related, are
> impossible in the context in which you say they happened. Thus I do not
> trust, either by intent or by inaccuracies, what you said happened.
Are you a lawyer or something?
--
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: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:02:23 GMT
J Sloan wrote:
>> 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"
>
> So some magazine used the phrase "windows killer"
> and you're now going to punish us all forever, eh?
For a while anyway.
>> But everyone is telling me how Linux is so much better than Windows!
>
> It is indeed much better. I have switched completely to
> Linux, and see little reason to futz around with windows.
I think I'll use both.
> However Linux does not suffer fools gladly.
Linux doesn't suffer anything.
> So while Linux does everything I need from an OS, and
> does it more reliably than windows, it is probably not
> right for you. Please go buy a mac.
Why?
--
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: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:06:02 GMT
J Sloan wrote:
>> 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.
>
> This is odd, you "have proof" that windows is very reliable,
> and that Linux is not.
No, it's just that Windows can work and stay up for long periods of time.
There are some here who say Windows won't stay up more than a few hours!
> Do we have an agenda, or what?
I have no agenda? Do you?
--
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: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:18:25 -0500
Shades wrote:
>
> > 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 do not understand this statement. Where is MS copying Unix on ease of
> use? All the newest GUI's I have seen on Linux look a lot like something
> I have seen before.
Ah..more like what you've seen before were copies of Unix GUI's already
in existance. For example, the Windows2000 GUI is a (faulty) implementation
of the unix/linux-land Enlightenment GUI.
Here's a Hint....
Neither Microsoft nor Apple invented the GUI. In fact, even the total
of their work COMBINED is only a small fraction of the work done on
GUI development.
Not only that, but Microsoft was the LAST operating system camp to
come up with a GUI (discounting IBM mainframes, which will probably
never have a GUI written for them...the exception being the System/390
to which IBM has ported Linux).
There have been GUI's for Unix going all the way back to early Sun
Microsystems products in 1984.
The first GUI was one that was developed in the late-1970's by the Palo Alto
Research Corporation (PARC), which, at the time, was owned by Xerox.
In the early 1980, morale at PARC was low, and Jobs was starting a new
project at Apple...and wanted a GUI...most of the people at PARC left
and hired in on the Macintosh project.
So..here's the timeline:
PARC's gui circa 1978
Macintosh 1983
SunWindows 1984
Atari GEM 1985
Commodore Amiga 1986
XWindows protocol 1986
QuarterDeck 1987 (first GUI for Mafia$oft machines)
Other DOS GUIs 1987-88 (Undermined by Mafia$oft's illegal bundling contracts)
NextStep 1988 NextStep (a Steve Jobs project)
Windows 1.0 1988 (widely regarded as unusable)
Windows 2.0 1990 (widely regarded as unusable)
Windows 3.1 1992 (first USABLE version of MS-windows)
CDE 1993 (Common Desktop Environment. Written by HP for HP-UX.
Adopted as industry standard for Solaris (Sun) and
AIX (IBM) unix platforms)
Windows9x 1995
NUMEROUS Linux GUIs 1996-1999 : afterstep (NextStep work-alike), amiwm, fvwm,
fvwm95 (MS-Windows work- & look-alike), blackbox,
cdesim, ctwm, enlightenment, GNOME, icewm, KDE,
mlvwm, mwm, olvwm, olwm, qvwm, scwm, twm,
Windows ME 2000 (won't run DOS programs)
Windows 2000 2000 (won't run DOS programs, poor support for Windows9x programs,
supports very very little hardware)
>
> >
> > >
> > > > > 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.
> >
>
> You know ragging on guy who has been using an OS for years and is not more
> productive is not something I would think a Unix person would rag on. I
> would disagree about the argument that the Windows OS has not evolved and
> helped increased productivity. Embedding documents and and being able to
> link embedded spreadsheets with actual data somewhere on a server is very
> useful for businesses. Also the Knowledge management feature coming out
> from MS makes working with these documents much more productive.
>
> > > 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.
> >
>
> Yes and Man pages have always been great too.
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > > > 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.
> >
>
> Why not everyone laughs at DOS and Early versions of Windows.
>
> >
> > 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.
> >
>
> Hmm.. you know almost all colleges send out Comp Sci majors and engineers
> that know Unix at some basic proficient level. If your statement is true
> then "why" is Windows still so damned popular. I mean your statements do
Pointy Haired Bosses who *insist* upon buying Windows products because
they are heavily invested in Microsoft stock.
Many of these middle managers are starting to find themselves
INDICTED for felonies, on the basis that they allowed their personal
financial investment in Microsoft to determine their (poor) decisions
to WASTE millions of their employer's assets on Microsoft "solutions"
that never work as advertise...not once or twice...but as a systematic
pattern of behavior.
*Wasting* corporation (i.e. stockholder's) money for the purpose of directing
money to corporations in which YOU hold stock violates numerous laws.
> not have any empirical proof that you can base it on. For the case of
> Microsoft you have people from all over the world who have to focus on
> getting their job done(not knowing the intricacies of the OS) and they do it
> mostly on Microsoft Windows. Why it seems odd that if everything works so
You have the EXACT same pointy-clicky functionality on Linux and Unix...in fact,
it has been available on Unix for FAR LONGER...
> much better on Unix then where is it? Why is it not on everyone's desktops?
Because Dell, Compaq, etc. were specifically PROHIBITED by Microsoft
from offering operating systems sold by vendors other than Microsoft.
> I mean Unix has been around for a long time you would think people would be
> using it like crazy? I know one answer everyone says and that is MS is a
> monopoly, yada yada yada but Unix had a lightyear start. It never made much
> of a dent. I am not trying to be a dick I just want you to answer it
> honestly with some real empiracal data as proof.
The one sentance answer: Microsoft is a criminal organization, which uses
racketeering, extortion, and other techniques of intimidation to keep
competitors products OUT of vendors' catalog pages.
Microsoft has been *illegally* holding the threat of SUBSTANTIALLY
increased licensing costs for selling even a SINGLE computer with
any operating system that is not written by Microsoft.
Substantial as in DOUBLE. When your profit margin on a product line
is only $50/machine, then you are utterly unable to compete if the
price of the operating system is increased by $200. No established
PC manufacturer can take this risk.
This is why these contracts have been deemed CRIMINALLY anti-competitive,
and which is why Gates and other Microsoft officers spent so much time
squirming and COMMITTING PERJURY in their testimony before the court.
Talk to Judge Jackson, 20 States' Attornies General, and the officers of
HUNDREDS of corporate complainants in the Microsoft case....By the time
the Nov. 1999 trial was over, even the most arden Microsoft cheerleaders
in attendance were utterly DISGUSTED with the methodical, systematic,
CRIMINAL practices which Microsoft uses to *DENY* consumers the ability
to even discover the existance of alternatives to Microsoft products,
let alone to be able to get a hands-on test in retail stores. At the
head of this list is the Operating System product itself.
Does the phrase "illegal leveraging of a monopoly" mean anything to you?
--
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: "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: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:19:21 -0500
Shades wrote:
>
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Anonymous wrote:
> > >> > unix: user hostile
> > >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > >> Microsoft propaganda.
> > >
>
> > It's also equally clear that Linux is running 50% of the WWW
>
> Yes but most of those web servers aren't doing too much. Check out
> Netcraft to see the MS is running most of the SSL severs. Most
> of those are Ecommerce machines.
>
> >
> > Linux not only IS doing it, it's actually beating Windows
> > on the desktop. W2k professional or ME appears like a pancake
> > peice of low performance shit when you compare it to a modern
> > Gnome or KDE2.
> >
>
> Um... the statement that Linux is beating MS is not even close to true.
> Check the numbers.
The numbers show that, as usual, MS operating systems are dog-slow
on identical hardware.
>
> > Xwindows has had such a powerful affect on Microsoft they
> > are trying to emulate it with their BRAND NEW XBOX product.
> >
> > Now what the fuck are you going to say?
> >
>
> I am going to say this has to be a joke. XBox is a W2k machine
> running video games. The X stands for X generation or something
> like that not X Windows. XWindows has had not effect on MS.
> They think it is a goofy clunking GUI that has been around for
> years and has only minimal economic impact. Sorry dude...
--
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: "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: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:20:00 -0500
Shades wrote:
>
> >
> > You obviously haven't worked on any HP, Sun, or SGI machines with
> > version 1990 or later versions of Unix.
> >
> > The learning curve for these systems is SHALLOWER than windows.
> >
>
> Well then I suppose Sun/HP and SGI are going to be winning the desktop
> anyday? Hmm?
In the same way that the gasoline engine ripped the guts out of
steam-powered automobile manufacturers.
--
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: "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: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:21:46 -0500
green wrote:
>
> > better performance.
> >
> > Considering that Windows9x, Windows NT (Neutered Technology), and
> > Windows2000 are all compiled for 80386 or VERY early Pentium processors
> > (Windows 2000 only)....I fail to see the disadvantage of being
> > ALLOWED to do something that is, quite frankly, not even an option
> > on the Mafia$oft platforms.
>
> nt/4 was compiled for the 486.
Which really sucks if you own a Pentium III, doesn't it....
>
> most linux distros are still compiled with programs that are 386 compat.
That's only for installation.
As part of the installation process, the install program RECOMPILES the
kernal to optimize it for YOUR specific generation of CPU.
> (not that im complaining!!! :) I run older computers to. I can't even run
> windows 9x on them.
--
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.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: GPL not being free doesn't mean that the license is invalid.
From: Pat McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 19 Mar 2001 13:20:04 -0800
"JD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Paul Colquhoun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> > I have yet to see installation or use that modifies the source code to an
>application.
> > Care to provide an example?
The FreeBSD "ports" system contains hundreds of examples.
Try it; you'll like it.
I wouldn't be suprised if Debian does too, and even Red Hat SRPMs do it.
(I've only noticed this for "installation", but I can imagine that it
might be useful for dealing with scripting-language code at run time.)
BTW, please don't use "use" for "run"; "installation" is a use too (and
the only use for some users).
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:29:01 -0500
Mig wrote:
>
> mlw wrote:
>
> > Jon Johanson wrote:
> >
> >> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > Andy Walker wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Blue Screen of Death" has a whole new meaning.
> >>
> >> Fortunately that's not an issue with any properly configured system,
> >> especially not a W2K system hardened for military use - silly boy...
> >
> > Look who is being silly. According to Microsoft's sponsored tests, by
> > NSTL, Windows 2000 has a MTTF of 2839. That's 118 days. So, just before
> > they enter battle, they should reboot. Or they should never be out at
> > sea for more than three months. Give me a break.
>
> Silly you - you just forgot that those 2839 hours without failure are only
> achieved by turning the PC off when the users go home.
Yes, you are absolutely right. I didn't forget, however, I was giving MS the
benefit of the doubt.
I keep the NSTL report on my wall by my desk, every now and then, I glance over
and laugh.
--
I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:29:50 -0500
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> mlw wrote:
> >
> > Andy Walker wrote:
> >
> > "Blue Screen of Death" has a whole new meaning.
>
> Nah. Isn't the new feature to sopntaneously reboot?
>
> I'm sorry, but your aircraft carrier has crashed.
>
> Please return to the US and start the war again.
>
Game over?
--
I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
