Linux-Advocacy Digest #429, Volume #33 Sat, 7 Apr 01 05:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism (Roberto Alsina)
Re: IA32, was an advocacy rant (Brian Inglis)
Re: IA32, was an advocacy rant (Brian Inglis)
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin (Bloody Viking)
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin (Roberto Alsina)
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin (Roberto Alsina)
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin (Bloody Viking)
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin (Dave Martel)
Re: Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB? (GreyCloud)
Re: IA32, was an advocacy rant ("Ben L. Titzer")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (GreyCloud)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (GreyCloud)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Graham Murray)
Re: Chimp in TV program downloads Linux to talk ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? ("Kelsey Bjarnason")
Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised ("Sam Morris")
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Richard L. Hamilton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: 7 Apr 2001 06:05:36 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 07 Apr 2001 01:57:44 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> On 6 Apr 2001 15:34:43 -0500, Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >On 6 Apr 2001 20:39:40 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>Example: "The tooth fairy doesn't exist".
>> >>
>> >
>> >What?! The Tooth Fairy doesn't exist!? I don't think there is any
>> >way you can prove or support that with facts. If you try to, I'll
>> >argue with you forever and never let you have the last word.
>>
>> Well, I agree that my position in impossible to prove :-)
>>
>> >Sheesh! It's no wonder 30K civilians were killed by their own countrymen.
>> >They were trying to shut each other up.
>>
>> Well, I wouldn't make fun of such a thing. It most certainly was
>> not funny while it was happening!
>
>What country was this?
My country. Didn't I say that already? And before you say it: no, the
assassins were not communists. They were big on the free market idea.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Brian Inglis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.arch
Subject: Re: IA32, was an advocacy rant
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 00:07:50 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 04 Apr 2001 16:46:03 -0700, Eric Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Craig Kelley wrote:
>> Too bad IA32 chips run faster than Alphas now. :)
>
>Alexis Cousein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Too bad they're IA*32*, though, and can't address more than 4GB.
>
>Only a per-process virtual memory limit. And it might be possible
>to circumvent that. Remeber how on the PDP-11 big programs used separate
>I&D space (64 Kbytes each)? Well, IIRC on the x86 (x>=3) you can have
>multiple segments that are up to 4G each. So you could easily have
>a 4G instruction segment and a 4G data segment, without requiring
>nastiness in C code like near and far pointers.
>
>Probably not enough of a win to be worthwhile, though. Personally, I have
>yet to encounter an executable bigger than 1.5G.
MS W2K or XP perhaps?
Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca)
use address above to reply
------------------------------
From: Brian Inglis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.arch
Subject: Re: IA32, was an advocacy rant
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 00:07:51 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001 14:46:55 -0500, "Ben L. Titzer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>
>> >> Well, the physical address bus is 36 bits these days, which means 64gb,
>> >While arguably you could use these to support a kernel that handles more
>> >than 4GB, I doubt many *applications* would actually be able to use more
>> >than 2 or 4GB, at least not without another ILP model than that normally
>> >used (ILP32).
>>
>> I doubt there are any kernels that would need more than 4GB. But as
>> far as accessing more than 4GB in an application, that is very easy.
>> Most "data warehouses" (I hate that term) are much larger than 4GB.
>> They could benefit from the speed enhancements over a strictly hard
>> drive system.
>>
>
>Compaq has several Xeon based servers (4x, 8x, and even more) that have up
>to 32 and 64gb of physical RAM. Any kernel running on those machines
>wouldn't "need" that much memory; it would of course, have to manage it,
>though, for user applications. Versions of Windows 2000 server have
>support for these large memory spaces, and I *think* there may be Linux
>support. Plus whatever OSes companies like Compaq and HP have running on
>their "big-iron" Intel boxes probably have PAE support as well.
Their big-iron boxes are not Intel - Alpha and PA-RISC
respectively. They'd probably not push PCs competing with their
high end machines, although they'd probably sell you one if you
wanted to give them that much money. How much cache goes with
your 64GB, and how long does it take to load/save that memory on
a real PCI/UDMA drive?
Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca)
use address above to reply
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin
Date: 7 Apr 2001 06:52:00 GMT
Tim Kelley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: incredible amount of packages. Slackware's packaging system is a mess to
: me, it's fine if you're the sort who likes to compile a lot of your own
: software, since it doesn't ever get in your way. This is great for a
: developer but a headache for a sysadmin. Besides, it is bsd-style init
: which I personally do not like.
Slackware is my favourite distro. If what you mean by "BSD style init" the
setup to install process, I like that method better than, say, Red Hat. One
time I downloaded the BSD boot disk images out of curiosity, and yes it's like
Slackware.
If I was going to switch from Slackware, I'd probably go with BSD instead of
the other Linux distros. It wouldn't surprise me if the initial install method
of Slack is copied from the BSD method. The Slack/BSD method offers the best
flexibility but with the caveat of making the install harder for new users
with non-flaky computers. If your computer is flaky, the more difficult
install is vastly better than the install made impossible due to bad hardware.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Subject: Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin
Date: 7 Apr 2001 07:00:08 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 7 Apr 2001 06:57:38 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 7 Apr 2001 06:52:00 GMT, Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Tim Kelley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>>
>>: incredible amount of packages. Slackware's packaging system is a mess to
>>: me, it's fine if you're the sort who likes to compile a lot of your own
>>: software, since it doesn't ever get in your way. This is great for a
>>: developer but a headache for a sysadmin. Besides, it is bsd-style init
>>: which I personally do not like.
>>
>>Slackware is my favourite distro. If what you mean by "BSD style init" the
>>setup to install process,
>
>Er, no. The BSD init is what slackware does when it boots. As opposed
>to a SysV init, which is what everyone else does.
>
>Here's a description of a System V init: section 11.13.2
I hate when this happens, I forgot the URL!
http://www.redhat.com/support/manuals/RHL-6.0-Manual/
install-guide/manual/doc096.html
>
>BSD init is what you have in slack, so look there ;-)
>
>--
>Roberto Alsina
--
("\''/").__..-''"`-. . Roberto Alsina
`9_ 9 ) `-. ( ).`-._.`) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(_Y_.)' ._ ) `._`. " -.-' Director técnico
_..`-'_..-_/ /-'_.' Conectiva SA
(l)-'' ((i).' ((!.' Buenos Aires - Argentina
KDE Developer (MFCH)
Futuaris nisi irrisus ridebis. (Carlton, De rerum comoedia)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Subject: Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin
Date: 7 Apr 2001 06:57:38 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 7 Apr 2001 06:52:00 GMT, Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Tim Kelley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>: incredible amount of packages. Slackware's packaging system is a mess to
>: me, it's fine if you're the sort who likes to compile a lot of your own
>: software, since it doesn't ever get in your way. This is great for a
>: developer but a headache for a sysadmin. Besides, it is bsd-style init
>: which I personally do not like.
>
>Slackware is my favourite distro. If what you mean by "BSD style init" the
>setup to install process,
Er, no. The BSD init is what slackware does when it boots. As opposed
to a SysV init, which is what everyone else does.
Here's a description of a System V init: section 11.13.2
BSD init is what you have in slack, so look there ;-)
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin
Date: 7 Apr 2001 07:03:37 GMT
PhOeNiX ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I'd take FreeBSD's system over rpm any day. pkg_add or make install
: clean from ports..
I like Slackware's package system. There's the "pkgtool" thing, but it's all
in *.tar.gz (.TGZ) which gets to the point. The Red Hat method is one of them
maddening unnecessary file formats, of course only good for Red Hat.
With .rpm you have to find a special software package that was not packed in
.rpm by some moron. With .tgz the tools pre-exist on your box. To use a
mechanical analogy, .tgz is like parts removable with normal tools and .rpm is
like parts that take some special wrench you have to scour the Big Apple for
only to find it most of the time in a package only openable by having the
special wrench.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 13:23:05 -0600
On 7 Apr 2001 06:52:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking) wrote:
>The Slack/BSD method offers the best
>flexibility but with the caveat of making the install harder for new users
>with non-flaky computers. If your computer is flaky, the more difficult
>install is vastly better than the install made impossible due to bad hardware.
Plus there's the matter of control. I despise the Windows approach to
applications installation, where applications can tromp all over your
system with neither notification nor permission for their actions and
usually leaving no record of what they've done.
RPM isn't nearly as bad but it still doesn't provide enough control to
suit me. Even so, I'd give in and use RPM on the more complex packages
if it weren't an all-or-nothing system. (All-or-nothing meaning that
you have to use RPM for _all_ your software installations, or it can't
track what's been installed for purposes of dependency-checking)
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB?
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 01:35:27 -0700
Alan wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2001 13:24:04 -0400, "JS PL" <jspl@jsplom> wrote:
>
> >
> >Yeah right. You meant download from your CDROM drive. Excuse me...I need to
> >download a program from my D drive.
> >
> >You don't think anyone is dumb enough to believe your "I meant download from
> >my cd" bullshit do you?
> >
> >In case you actually DONT know the correct way to use the term "download"
> >here you go:
> >
> ><paste>
> > download v : transfer a file or program from a central computer to a
> >smaller computer or to a computer at a remote location [ant: upload]
> >Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University
> ></paste>
> >
> Thanks for pointing that out. I believe I had mentioned, if not in my
> original post on this thread, at least in some other thread on ADM is
> that I am not a programmer, just a user. A very frustrated MS user.
>
Hi Alan. I'm curious... what experiences with MS that is frustrating?
My wife is very frustrated with it as well.
> Now, why are you still trying to obfuscate? The original point was
> that I, a non programmer, was able to troubleshoot a video card
> without throwing away the video card because I installed IE. BTW, how
> much did you pay for the Viper550? I understand they were going for
> about $150 in early 99.
>
> Try to shift the thread as much as you want, you still haven't
> answered the question. Why did you throw away a perfectly good $150
> video card (at the time) rather than do a simple amount of research to
> find the solution to the problem for free? You spent more time
> looking up the word "download" off of wordnet, so you are obviously
> not as stupid as your previous posts indicate.
>
> ** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
>distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only. ***
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Ben L. Titzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.arch
Subject: Re: IA32, was an advocacy rant
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 02:39:14 -0500
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2001 14:46:55 -0500, "Ben L. Titzer"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> >
> >> >> Well, the physical address bus is 36 bits these days, which means 64gb,
> >> >While arguably you could use these to support a kernel that handles more
> >> >than 4GB, I doubt many *applications* would actually be able to use more
> >> >than 2 or 4GB, at least not without another ILP model than that normally
> >> >used (ILP32).
> >>
> >> I doubt there are any kernels that would need more than 4GB. But as
> >> far as accessing more than 4GB in an application, that is very easy.
> >> Most "data warehouses" (I hate that term) are much larger than 4GB.
> >> They could benefit from the speed enhancements over a strictly hard
> >> drive system.
> >>
> >
> >Compaq has several Xeon based servers (4x, 8x, and even more) that have up
> >to 32 and 64gb of physical RAM. Any kernel running on those machines
> >wouldn't "need" that much memory; it would of course, have to manage it,
> >though, for user applications. Versions of Windows 2000 server have
> >support for these large memory spaces, and I *think* there may be Linux
> >support. Plus whatever OSes companies like Compaq and HP have running on
> >their "big-iron" Intel boxes probably have PAE support as well.
>
> Their big-iron boxes are not Intel - Alpha and PA-RISC
> respectively. They'd probably not push PCs competing with their
> high end machines, although they'd probably sell you one if you
> wanted to give them that much money. How much cache goes with
> your 64GB, and how long does it take to load/save that memory on
> a real PCI/UDMA drive?
>
I wasn't referring to their Intel boxes as their high end, only referring
to them as "big-iron" Intel...check the original quotation. I meant it
referring to high-end Intel based systems, not high-end systems in
general. Sorry for the confusion.
> Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca)
> use address above to reply
>
>
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 01:39:50 -0700
Russianbear wrote:
>
> Bah humbug to the religious twaddle.
>
> God doesn't exist - and even if he did he's an evil git who is not worthy of
> worship.
I take it that life has not been easy for you.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 01:42:35 -0700
Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"Roberto Alsina"
> >
> >> Almost nothing in the bible is "suitably confirmed". Or you believe they
> >checked
> >> for historical references on the parting of the red sea?
> >
> >Yet you use it.
>
> Where did I use the parting of the red sea for anything?
>
> >If you truly believe what you just posted above, you use of
> >the Bible in an attempt to bolster your arguments speaks volumes about you.
>
> I'd say it speaks louder about anyone that bothers about what the bible says,
> really.
>
> --
> Roberto Alsina
I dunno... I really can't trust anything in the bible. Especially the
King James version. After all, wasn't King James a pedophile?
--
V
------------------------------
From: Graham Murray <[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: 06 Apr 2001 22:38:49 +0000
In gnu.misc.discuss, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Nothing needs to be copied to violate copyright. That's what 99% of
> the copyright law is all about.
If this is true does it not indicate a fundamental flaw in copyright
law? Going back to first principles, what is copyright if not "the
right to control copying"? So copyright law has no right (pun
intended) to concern itself with anything other than copying. If it is
true that 99% of copyright law is "off-topic" then is it not in urgent
need of reform to bring it back "on-topic"?
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Chimp in TV program downloads Linux to talk
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 08:10:00 GMT
"Martha H Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Just seen on television, and this is so good I have to share it around.
> The program appears in the TV schedule as,
>
> The Lone Gunmen: "Maximum Beyers" 62887
>
> and since I don't follow television much, I can't put it into any
> perspective. The program seems to be a slightly wacky / corny kind of a
> spoof. Tonight's piece has a chimp who can't talk because chimps don't
> have the vocal apparatus for it. So someone gives him a laptop, and he
> downloads a Linux and a text-to-speech program, which he then uses with
> amazing effectiveness. Notice: *Linux* not messydos or winblows.
So let's put this in context. Who are the Lone Gunmen? They're a group of
socially inept ultrageeks with an extreme paranoia about business and
government being "out to get" them, and the little guy in general. Now
certainly not all Linux users fit that category, but if you look around,
there do seem to be a few vocal ones who do. You draw the conclusion about
the choice of picking Linux for the show. :)
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 08:14:45 GMT
[snips]
"Lex Spoon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Now it's true you can't, say, read someone's nicely-aligned columnar
text
> > which they developed with a fixed font, if you're reading with a
variable
> > font, but that, if anything, suggests that there are probably better
ways to
> > produce documents containing layout information, ways that don't require
> > that the recipient happen to use your particular choice of font type.
HTML
> > is one answer, although its layout capabilities may be less than ideal
for
> > many uses. PDF is another. I'm sure there are more.
>
>
>
> None of the alternatives you suggest is as portable or as easy to
> obtain as "use a fixed-width font". PDF is certainly nice and
> portable, but it's not *as* portable, and it's not as easy to obtain.
>
> If you read Internet messages with a variable width font, you'll find
> life a lot easier if you at least figure out how to switch to a
> fixed-width font at need. Also, it *is* a lack of judgement on the
> part of software *writers* to make variable width fonts the default,
> because not all users will know how to change it. Not all users will
> even realize what is going on.
That would be a fault of the person writing the columnar text in the first
place. Rule #1 of portablility: don't assume everyone uses the same setup
you do.
No, PDF isn't _as_ portable as ASCII. You make a trade-off. On the one
hand, you have a tool where you can control layout, but which not everyone
is going to be able to read. On the other, you have an almost universally
readable format, but which lacks real layout control.
As I said, this really indicates a lack of a useful method of handling
layout. There just aren't any decent, reliable and
sufficiently-widely-available tools for it. In time, perhaps.
------------------------------
From: "Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 09:44:20 +0100
Now you're just being Edwin.
--
Cheers,
Sam
"Welcome to my barbeque! Run, run, run, or you'll be well done!!"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard L. Hamilton)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 09:03:28 -0000
In article <9al9lm$mk9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
User Bobkeys BSD Bob the old greybeard BSD freak
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In comp.unix.advocacy Roy Culley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> receive can be opened and intelligible. Since everyone uses Word, this can
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> Where do I find ``Word'' on my UNIX box? I must be missing something?
>
>> strings file.doc | less
>
>> Removes all the formatting crap and leaves you with just the text. I find
>> out about this from a guy who posted an article to some newsgroup a while
>> ago. He was a Unix contractor and received a word document from the boss
>> of the company he was contracting for. The boss obviously used the same
>> word document each time. He presumably just deleted the old contents and
>> typed away. Unfortunately for him he used fast save or whatever it is
>> called. When he ran strings on it he got loads of stuff including employment
>> details of employees including salaries etc. Don't you just love
>> Microsoft. :-)
>
> (love....no, not really....)
>
> strings is what I do quite often, if I really do have to recover the ascii.
> strings can do a lot, properly used. Then I can pipe the ascii as I
> need to, through whatever is appropriate.
>
> The kids love Gatesware.... but, the ol' man still gets good mileage out
> of the basics....ed/vi/ntgroff/TeX, and company. Much better output,
> and easier to work with..... and less wear and tear on the fingers
> compared to the mouse-clenchfist bang-on-the-mouse-like-a-madman
> pray-it-does-not-crash-in-midstream syndrome. But, I keep one
> mandated ``thou willst!'' NT box in the office, so I can, if need be,
> return the content in to the sender in the approprate garbage format.
> It is painful though, since it ain't UNIX......(:+{{.....
Agree preferring some of the old to some of the new. But I really _hate_
the cruddy, almost unreadable fonts one typically sees in TeX generated
PostScript. They don't look quite so bad on paper, but at mere screen
resolutions, they're dreadful.
--
ftp> get |fortune
377 I/O error: smart remark generator failed
Bogonics: the primary language inside the Beltway
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.smart.net/~rlhamil
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
