Linux-Advocacy Digest #131, Volume #33 Tue, 27 Mar 01 04:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (Brian Rourke)
Re: What is user friendly? ("FM")
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (GreyCloud)
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (Brian Rourke)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 20:48:52 +1200
Na, I simply have a scheduled back up each night to back up all my work onto a Zip
Drive, hence, I have no need for any more than 2 partitions. The only people I
know, who need to back up their whole hard disk (including Software) and people who
pirate software, and don't have a back up copy of the pirated software.
Matthew Gardiner
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >
> > Lets call you Peter Peterson, just to make old Brian happy in the fact that you
> > have a name. I couldn't care less if your name was Fred Nerd, or John Jacob
> > Jingleheimer Smitt. The fact that Brian chose a really ancient, prehistoric
> > copy of Linux, and didn't even ask at the sales desk/news groups/friends/Linux
> > nerd at the local computer store, whether it was the latest version out, is his
> > fault. Also, why the fork does he have so many bloody partitions,
> > JUST HAVE ONE! (when using Windows) what does he do, take a woman out on a
> > date, and takes her back to his apartment to show off how many partitions he
> > has? Geeze, I just have two (when installing linux), / is a ReiserFS and a swap
> > parition, yes, I probably could be "Mr Special" and have hundreds of partitions
> > for virtually every folder, however, I want my life to be easier, hence, I have
> > stuck with two partitions.
>
> Actually, my LoseDOS game-playing box has oh gee...
> CDEFGHIJ....8 partitions.
>
> I keep the OS seperate from the apps seperate from the data.
>
> Swap, temp and Netscape cache have their own partition.
>
> Highly volatile data has it's own partition.
>
> Why? Because I don't trust Windows.
>
> >
> > Matthew Gardiner
> >
> > "." wrote:
> >
> > > Brian Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 26 Mar 2001 06:05:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM) wrote:
> > >
> > > >>Brian Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >>>On 26 Mar 2001 02:10:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>Brian Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >>>>> On 26 Mar 2001 01:01:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>>>> At least I can console myself, in my ignorance, that I am not the kind
> > > >>>>> of shameless usenet coward who hurls insults from behind a mask of
> > > >>>>> anonymity.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>As ive said dozens of times, you ignorant turd, I do not hide behind a
> > > >>>>mask of anonymity. It isnt rocket science to figure out exactly who
> > > >>>>I am.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Dozens of times to me? I don't think so. Have you been hearing
> > > >>>voices in your head again, schizo-boy? Yes, you do hide behind a mask
> > > >>>of anonymity in so far as you don't sign your posts.
> > > >>
> > > >>That you consider "Brian Rourke" less anonymous than "." doesn't
> > > >>change the fact that your email address, not your alias, is the
> > > >>key to your identification. Practically speaking from my point of
> > > >>view, you are just as anonymous as he is, insofar as I don't know
> > > >>which Brian Rourke (if any) wrote what you posted.
> > >
> > > > Well, this is probably getting into areas of semantics and usage that
> > > > aren't necessary, but Webster's defines "anonymous" as "having or
> > > > giving no name." It doesn't mention email addresses, nor does it say
> > > > anything about someone being anonymous if all you know is the name and
> > > > not which particular person it designates in a particular instance.
> > > > If he signed his SSN, it would still strictly speaking be anonymous
> > > > even if I could find out who it was if I cared to try.
> > >
> > > > It's always possible to use a fake name, I suppose, and it's always
> > > > possible to use a fake email address. So in a sense everyone is
> > > > anonymous on here, regardless of how he/she posts.
> > >
> > > > Nevertheless, in the few newsgroups I frequent, it's common to regard
> > > > those who use symbols or obvious aliases with a certain amount of
> > > > suspicion, particularly when they insult people. As a practical
> > > > matter, the convention of distinguishing signed from unsigned messages
> > > > hasn't died out yet. It's still a matter of common usage, and I feel
> > > > perfectly free in thinking that "." was being cowardly when he
> > > > insulted me without having the guts to put his name on it. I'm not
> > > > interested enough to find out who the little worm is.
> > >
> > > Id be happy to sock you in the mouth in real life if thats what it would
> > > take to convince you that youre an idiot.
> > >
> > > -----.
>
> --
> 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: Brian Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 02:04:17 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 10:48:39 +0400, "Alexander Nosenko"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Brian Rourke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I don't blame the for the technical problems but for their lack of
>> support and follow-through, plus some dishonesty. I think I was
>> pretty patient with them.
>
>Yeah... most of Linux distros catch that MS "don't worry, be happy" desease.
>Old Slackware96 set was far more honest about problems that can arise with
>disk partitioning. New ones don't warn user when they really can't handle
>the setup - they just go mad.
>
Yes, Windows invented this kind of lying...I was disappointed to find
it in distros supposedly marketing an alternative. The usual
"documentation" or "troubleshooting page" just rehash the most obvious
procedures, that any chimp could figure out intuitively, and then
leave one to twist in the breeze.
>> No, the Mandrake PM can't do that. I'm thinking about buying the real
>> thing. I never like buying software that I will only use for one job,
>> though.
>
>PM is a great utility, definitely worth having, esp. for Windows user. It's
>just too costly (not free :-)...
>
It's not cheap, especially for something that most people won't use
much.
>> Here's a thought. I have my big extended dos partition at the end of
>> my drive. The very last logical drive is empty, so if I just delete
>> it, then wouldn't that create free space for Linux within my extended
>> partition. I may run into the 8gb problem, though, if I try that.
>
>Will work perfectly. Just use Loadlin + .bat + .pif files on Windows and
>start Linux as Windows application. Dual-boot config always bites your leg
>later, when you upgrade/reinstall Windows.
>
I may have to look into this loadlin thing someday. I got rid of my
extended partitions today and tried again. No luck.
Brian
The late spring sunshine flooded,
like a bursted tepid star,
the pink Boulevard. The people
beneath crawled like wounded insects
of cloth.
Wyndham Lewis
------------------------------
From: "FM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
soc.singles,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 03:41:49 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FM wrote:
> > And stop mixing two different points together. The first point that the
> > closest CPU-specific optimizations don't necessarily yield the best
> > performance has nothing to do with the second argument that GCC's
> > CPU-specific optimizations are not optimal and possibly insignificant
> > for most applications.
>
> Which does NOT disprove my argument.
Of course, if you're talking about your original argument that
old shrink-wrap software suffers from performance problems due
to the lack of cpu-specific optimizations (you did not put
forward any argument after that) no one said it did. It simply
weakens your argument by making it your burden to prove its
significance.
Dan.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 00:52:22 -0800
Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 15:51:16 -0800, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Quite true. And the real problem is when you make your first kill.
> >Usually start
> >barfing afterwards. It usually gets a little easier after that.
> >(VietNam)
> >The Army pounded into our heads "Which are you? The quick or the dead?"
> >There really was no choice in the matter if you wanted to stay alive.
>
> Of course there was. You did the right thing and declared yourself a
> conscience objector (sp?) and did your time like a man of principle
> in Leavenworth, or you did the second best thing and leave for Canada.
>
> No need to go get killed or kill someone for no good reason.
>
> Now, I can't wait to see the vein bulging on Aaron's forehead when
> he reads this ;-)
>
> --
> Roberto Alsina
No one from outside this country really ever understood the situation.
When you are 18 you really don't know what you are getting into. Yes, I
saw it on TV. However, some are patriotic and will defend this
country. If the shoe was on the other foot wouldn't you defend? The
truly conscientious objector was one that was truly a religious man and
stuck by his religion. The others that used this excuse were very
definitely afraid and saw the war for what it was... a madmans' war with
no defining purpose. He felt no patriotism because we weren't directly
being attacked and took the only recourse and that was flight. I joined
the Army after careful thought. 1. I was penniless. 2. No money to get
an education. 3. I was given a test for my abilities and weighed the
various services that I could leverage to my advantage. 4. I went to
the various recruiters to listen to their hype and determine what was
between the lines.
The U.S. Army won out, because they offered the best training than the
other branches.
I was offered a hard to get billet in the intelligence agency and even
the recruiter signed the electronics training contract. Most never see
that happen. I did get the electronics training and of all the luck I
ended up in Panama as my first duty assignment. Vietnam came later and
it didn't bother me. The same hot, muggy place as Panama but I got
their already aclimated. War just plain sucks. It is a pschologically
damaging experience and really had wished our own gov. had the balls to
help a lot of us get readjusted to being normal people again. They
didn't, they just released us.
Then the public had no respect for returning veterans and spat on most
of us. At that point some felt like going to another country.
So, if one ran from this country to another country he would be living a
long life from home. Fortunately, they were pardoned. I give them no
blame. I risked my life, put my time in, got my education, escaped
being poor, and luckily I live a better life.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 21:00:44 +1200
Better yet, try QNX RTP (get.qnx.com), which is allows you to have a "virtual
hard disk" inside a partition up to the size of 2 gigabytes. I works
incredibly well, easy to use and install, and like Linux, there are quite a
few software packages (opensourced ones etc) available for download.
Matthew Gardiner
Brian Rourke wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 04:22:17 GMT, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> *snip*
>
> >
> >The best hope right now is BeOS, have you tried it? It installs onto fat
> >partitions and is pretty usable. The desktop is a little hard on the
> >eyes.
> >
>
> Thanks for the advice. I haven't tried it, but I'll have a look.
>
> >> I think that in the long run the chances will be better for Linux and
> >> other alternatives if the companies trying to market distributions
> >> were honest with people about as many of the headaches they may
> >> encounter as possible. Sure it might hurt sales in the short run, but
> >> in the long run irritated newbies will do more damage. I would love
> >> to be told up front how much work and learning will be required, and
> >> then I'm happy to do it. I remember back in the early days of the PC,
> >> when software and operating systems came with relatively thorough
> >> manuals. Now it's mostly slick, mindless crap. Even some good books
> >> have trouble dealing with specific problems or
> >
> >What's worth doing is rarely easy. You shouldn't go into to ANYTHING
> >thinking it will be a breeze! As Darth would say: "Never underestimate
> >the power of the Dark Side."
> >
>
> Well, Darth was right. And in my little areas of specialization I
> like to burrow into the difficult areas as much as anyone else, so I
> can understand the desire not to have something dumbed-down just for
> newbies.
>
> I don't expect it to be a breeze, but I do expect road-maps that
> non-specialists can understand. And I do expect full documentation
> from companies, as well as full disclosure of any limits to its
> function, especially when being installed on fairly common equipment.
>
> However, you make a very good point in that Linux is obviously
> something that requires the time, effort and money more commonly to
> people in the industry or to hobbyists. I already have enough
> hobbies, so maybe I need to throw in the towel for now.
>
> >You could not be more right about manuals. Remember when PC software
> >came with hardcover manuals and special boxes to protect them? These
> >days Windows comes a friggin' pizza box with just a CD and a teeny'
> >little pamphlet telling you how to cut and paste. Of course don't get me
> >started on the Mandrake manual (have people in France ever heard of
> >indexes?)
>
> I remember those days well. It was possible to become self-educated
> just by buying the software, without having to search for more and
> more books, websites, etc just to tell you what a good manual used to
> tell you before the Era of the Pizza Box in which we now suffer.
>
> Yes, that Mandrake manual is a monument to incompetence.
>
> >
> >> >> Your posts are contemptible.
> >> >
> >> >This is Usenet, home of accusations of contemptibility. I'm taking you
> >> >seriously. Really.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Touché. Well I guess I missed that you were taking me seriously at
> >> first. You're obviously a trained professional, and it may have
> >> seemed to you like I was dumping on your field. That wasn't my
> >> intention, and I'm sorry that's how it struck you. I hope you can see
> >> that I wrote my original post in response to much frustration over
> >> issues that probably seem childishly simple to you but are giving me a
> >> big headache.
> >
> >Calm down, it's just a computer. Excitable people generally don't live
> >too long, it's unhealthy. In the larger scheme of things computers
> >matter so little it's pretty amazing. But computer are fun and you
> >should enjoy them. People who like Linux generally enjoy the little
> >problems they run into configuring it, it's like solving a puzzle or
> >anything else related to technology (old cars, Harleys, that kind of
> >thing).
> >
> >Relax. Breathe. Be calm. Think of the moment.
> >
>
> Yes, Zen master. Actually, it's possible to be annoyed and disgusted
> while remaining calm, even when working with computers.
>
> >If you get bored go back to Windows. You just may not be that into
> >getting Linux to work, it's all right.
>
> With all of the glitches in Windows, it's never boring...
>
> I may check out these other distributions, or I may wait until newer
> versions come out that can deal with my hardware...
>
> >Also BeOS. Check it out.
> >
> >> As for your suggestion about assembling a new system with Linux in
> >> mind, I think it's a good idea. Alas, it's not an affordable option
> >> for me these days. I think that the way hardware is designed in a
> >> proprietary way (if that makes sense to say) is sinister.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Brian
> >
> >If you can afford a computer from Gateway you can afford a much better
> >homebuilt computer for the same amount.
>
> Ahem. Some people use computers that belong to their employers.
>
> Thanks a lot for all of your helpful advice.
>
> Brian
>
> The late spring sunshine flooded,
> like a bursted tepid star,
> the pink Boulevard. The people
> beneath crawled like wounded insects
> of cloth.
>
> Wyndham Lewis
------------------------------
From: Brian Rourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 02:17:37 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 12:32:11 +1200, Matthew Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Brian Rourke wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I'd be interested in hearing what you think is rude or uninformative
>> >> about the message below? It's probably not informative as it would be
>> >> if I were more of an expert, but I don't think it matches your
>> >> description at all. I posted to their group, to a usenet group and I
>> >> sent a message to Macmillan, who was supposed to be providing support
>> >> for Mandrake (they didn't, apparently) after I first had trouble.
>> >> I've been waiting for certain measures to be taken which weren't
>> >> taken, and now I'm trying RedHat. So you see, it's not so simple.
>> >>
>> >> As for why I had 7.0, it had not been pulled from the shelves as it
>> >> should have been. I found this out from Mandrake support staff when
>> >> they finally contacted me.
>> >
>> >Why didn't you goto their website, and study Linux BEFORE changing over to
>> >it? its like buying a car, then suddenly realising you don't have a license.
>> >Why didn't you look at ALL THE DISTROS? why didn't you try SuSE Linux? or
>> >Redhat? My Computer store STILL has Windows 98 on the shelf, even after
>> >Windows ME was released, so I don't accept that "it had not been pulled from
>> >the shelf" as a valid excuse.
>> >
>>
>> I'm not offering an excuse, just an explanation. If version 7.1 had
>> been sitting on the shelf next to 7.0, then I would have bought 7.1,
>> obviously. I did consult their website, which IIRC was out of date or
>> vague regarding the new release at the time I bought. What's more, I
>> said in my original posting that some of my initial problems were
>> probably my own fault. Can't you read?
>>
>> I did go to their website, but they hadn't announced the new version
>> yet. Furthermore, I don't have the capacity to download cdrom images
>> and burn cds. So I have to rely on what's in the stores. Someone
>> from Mandrake apologized to me for it. I looked at 3 different
>> distros. Yes, I probably made a mistake picking Mandrake, but I can't
>> just keep buying distros until one works out. And few people look at
>> every make of car before they buy.
>
>1. you half witt, http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/ the latest version is
>sticking out like a sore thumb.
If you knew how to read instead of just shrieking hysterically, Mr.
Holier-than-Thou-Blowhard, you'd know that I bought Mandrake back in
late summer. That page is totally irrelevant. Oh, and it's
"half-wit."
>2. Fair Trading Act and Consumers Guarantee Act allows you to return the software
>to the store if it doesn't do what it designed to do.
>3. Why did you read some reviews regarding it? there are SO MANY damming reports
>about Mandrake Linux, its not funny.
>4. Why didn't you post a question on one of the generic Linux support news groups
>explaining that you saw a copy of Mandrake Linux 7,, and whether you will
>experience any problems with it? Most long time linux users will be more than
>happy to suggest the best distro, or what problems you may face when installing
>and setting it up.
>5. Goto www.drfloppy.co.nz and purchase a copy their, they have great technical
>support when needed, and their prices are reasonable (btw, I have NOT affiliation
>with them)
I did do some of these things, rather casually, as I've made clear
over and over. The whole point of my posting, dolt, was not from the
point of view of an expert, but of a busy, non-technical, distracted
and narrow-minded consumer. I don't put nearly the time into computer
matters that you do, because I can't spare the time. Your conclusion
seems to be, well, I serves me right! I should just avoid Linux.
Perhaps. But my first post was about considering some of the
implications of that notion. How many times to things have to be
explained to you?
>
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> If you meant that my posting today was rude, then maybe you are
>> >> overlooking that I was describing my reactions to a series of problems
>> >> in what are admittedly strong terms, but without singling out
>> >> individuals. I was criticizing the practices of certain companies.
>> >> Is it now "rude" to criticize corporations, operating systems and
>> >> software? Also, my original posting today didn't contain information
>> >> about my system because it was less a request for help, which I'd
>> >> already done elsewhere, than an attempt to share my frank conclusions
>> >> after a frustrating, good-faith (IMO) effort.
>> >
>> >Is it the end of the world? NO! it is just a forking OS, not the cure for
>> >cancer for goodness sake! Simply expecting it to run like windows is short
>> >sighted, and ignorant at the most. GET OUT OF THE WINDOWS FRAME OF MIND!
>> >when I installed my first copy of Linux (version 5.2), it was when I was 15
>> >years old, I new it was going to be nothing like Windows, I followed the
>> >guide, and I was able to successfully install it, AT 15! geeze, what the heck
>> >are you doing? and this isn't the randy, dandy eye candy versions you're
>> >trying to install, I was installing the hard core, CLI version.
>>
>> This silly "end of the world" hyperbole is yours, not mine. I never
>> said anything about it's being more than an OS, and I agree that the
>> whole thing is relatively unimportant. Usenet in general is a highly
>> informal format. So what?
>>
>> Where did I say I wanted it to run like Windows? That's exactly what
>> I don't want. I do think it should be much easier to install, or at
>> the very least, the distributions I've used need to explain the
>> process much more carefully and fully? How hard can that be? Some of
>> the other, non-blowhard, posters here have managed to say clearly and
>> succinctly quite a bit that's not stated anywhere in the manuals I
>> have read.
>>
>> As for your accomplishments at age 15, whoopee. And it's well known,
>> even by me, that Linux often installs more easily on older machines.
>>
>> If you think that I'm the only person who has these problems, then you
>> are deluded. Yes, I work in a very non-technical field and no doubt
>> know far less than you. FWLIW, I am one of the more computer literate
>> people I know (yes, it's a scary thought). If people like me, and the
>> many people who know LESS than me, should just stay away from Linux,
>> that's fine. If I thought that was true, I'd be sure to pass that
>> advice along where I work. I don't think that is true quite yet
>> largely because some people responded substantively, if often sharply,
>> without just insulting me personally and bragging.
>>
>> If it's part of the Windows frame of mind to expect clear, thorough,
>> accurate and easily accessible statements about compatibility and
>> documentation, then maybe that's not such a bad thing? Actually,
>> Microsoft provides lousy documentation, and if their online help and
>> their support website is admired by some, I suspect that's because of
>> a lack of adequate competition. So it's not the "windows frame of
>> mind" I'm an example of so much as a throwback to the (very) old days
>> when good software often came with two thick notebooks full of info.
>
>I am not boasting, however, (I am guessing you're around 20-25 non-computer
>literate), I thought you would have the maturity to research something before
>going out and buying something. If I buy a new, upto date copy of Linux, I
>check reviews, the kernel version, news groups to see what joe and jane average
>thinks of it. What you literately did was buy a car with even seeing it first.
I'm releaved to hear that I don't come up to your standards of
maturity. I did some research, as I've explained. Clearly not
enough, as I've never denied. I also have a very limited amount of
spare time, as do many of the people who now run Windows and who
Linux's distros need to be able to sell to IF they plan to increase
their market share.
Brian
The late spring sunshine flooded,
like a bursted tepid star,
the pink Boulevard. The people
beneath crawled like wounded insects
of cloth.
Wyndham Lewis
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
