Linux-Advocacy Digest #467, Volume #33 Mon, 9 Apr 01 16:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Q:Windows NT scripting? (Craig Kelley)
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a (Chad Everett)
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised (Craig Kelley)
Re: Something like Install Shield for Linux? (Craig Kelley)
Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead. (Craig Kelley)
Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a luser... (was Re:
Chinese airforce adopted Win2k infrastructure) (The Ghost In The Machine)
Wall Street Journal: Linux gains corporate respectability (Chad Everett)
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... (GreyCloud)
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: XP = eXPerimental (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Basement Boy: Aka Aaron Koookis (Donn Miller)
Re: Inktomi Webmap -- Apache has 60% now. (GreyCloud)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Q:Windows NT scripting?
Date: 09 Apr 2001 13:13:22 -0600
667 Neighbor of the Beast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> LShaping wrote:
> >
> > Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >On Fri 06 Apr 2001 09:38, Stephen S. Edwards II wrote:
> >
> > > [Snip]
> > >> Of course the system will fail if the display
> > >> system fails. The GDI is an integrated part of
> >
> > >This is a good thing? :-/
> >
> > It is a good thing for 99% of users, if it means the whole will run
> > better. The question is not whether a GUI is necessary (that was
> > decided long ago), the question is how efficient and stable can it be.
>
> No it is not L. The GDI are the video drivers and there is really no
> sense at all in putting them in the kernel, except to make the system
> appear faster. OS/2 and Unix do not have the GDI in the kernel.
> Also, you are confusing the GDI with the GUI, and they are 2 separate
> things.
Hmmm:
*
* Hardware configuration
*
Floppy tape controllers (Standard, MACH-2, FC-10/FC-20, Alt/82078) [Standard]
defined CONFIG_FT_STD_FDC
Default FIFO threshold (EXPERIMENTAL) (CONFIG_FT_FDC_THR) [8]
Maximal data rate to use (EXPERIMENTAL) (CONFIG_FT_FDC_MAX_RATE) [2000]
/dev/agpgart (AGP Support) (CONFIG_AGP) [M/n/y/?]
Intel 440LX/BX/GX and I815/I840/I850 support (CONFIG_AGP_INTEL) [Y/n/?]
Intel I810/I815 (on-board) support (CONFIG_AGP_I810) [Y/n/?]
VIA chipset support (CONFIG_AGP_VIA) [Y/n/?]
AMD Irongate support (CONFIG_AGP_AMD) [Y/n/?]
Generic SiS support (CONFIG_AGP_SIS) [Y/n/?]
ALI chipset support (CONFIG_AGP_ALI) [Y/n/?]
Direct Rendering Manager (XFree86 DRI support) (CONFIG_DRM) [Y/n/?]
3dfx Banshee/Voodoo3+ (CONFIG_DRM_TDFX) [M/n/y/?]
3dlabs GMX 2000 (CONFIG_DRM_GAMMA) [M/n/y/?]
ATI Rage 128 (CONFIG_DRM_R128) [M/n/?]
ATI Radeon (CONFIG_DRM_RADEON) [M/n/?]
Intel I810 (CONFIG_DRM_I810) [M/n/?]
Matrox g200/g400 (CONFIG_DRM_MGA) [M/n/?]
# uname --release
2.4.2
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 9 Apr 2001 14:05:04 -0500
On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 19:02:37 GMT, Chris Street
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 9 Apr 2001 13:42:01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad
>Everett) wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 18:40:16 GMT, Chris Street
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 9 Apr 2001 13:22:27 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad
>>>Everett) wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 17:17:29 GMT, Chris Street
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>On 9 Apr 2001 09:08:26 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad
>>>>>Everett) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 11:55:52 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>Chris Street wrote:
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >Grep is your friend.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Twenty minutes with it will not reveal what you need though
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That's for sure. I found the reference to "X-Mailer" in a #define,
>>>>>>>but it wasn't used anyway else in the code! I found where a
>>>>>>>UNAME macro is used, and a few other clues, but still haven't
>>>>>>>found where the posting host string is assembled.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Will look later, when time allows.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Chris
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You're barking up the wrong tree. Just get slrn source on linux
>>>>>>and modify the headers it assembles and make it look like you
>>>>>>are runnning Mozilla.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Sorry.
>>>>>
>>>>>The point I was making, which seemd to be what was claimed was that
>>>>>the header is contained as a string in the build. It isnt - not even
>>>>>any part of it. For example, you can grep the entire release and Win98
>>>>>only occurs once - in a programmers remark. The string isn't there to
>>>>>be found, so aaron needs to tell use how he did it.......
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Problem is you are searching for the string Win98 in the "build".
>>>>
>>>>This was way too easy. In the source:
>>>>
>>>> mozilla/mailnews/compose/src/nsMsgCompUtils.cpp
>>>>
>>>>at approx. line #440, there is the following:
>>>>
>>>> nsXPIDLString userAgentString;
>>>> nsCAutoString cStr;
>>>> pHTTPHandler->GetUserAgent(getter_Copies(userAgentString));
>>>> cStr.AssignWithConversion(userAgentString);
>>>>
>>>> if (!cStr.IsEmpty())
>>>> {
>>>> // PUSH_STRING ("X-Mailer: "); // To be more standards compliant
>>>> PUSH_STRING ("User-Agent: ");
>>>> PUSH_STRING(cStr);
>>>> PUSH_NEWLINE ();
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>Replace the PUSH_STRING lines with something like:
>>>>
>>>> PUSH_STRING ("X-mailer: ");
>>>> // PUSH_STRING ("User-Agent: ");
>>>> PUSH_STRING("Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD {TLC;RETAIL} (Win98; U)");
>>>> PUSH_NEWLINE ();
>>>>
>>>>Recompile and you're all set. What was so hard about that?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Did I say it as hard? Don't recall that. I merely said that running a
>>>grep on the files as Kulkis seemed to suggest would not yield what you
>>>were after. I fail to see what the problem is
>>>
>>
>>Grep is all I used. He never suggested grep'ing for "Win98". He just
>>suggested using grep. Doing a "grep -i 'X-mailer'" on the source files
>>will find what you need to find.
>>
>
>I think he implied that you would find what you wanted by greping for
>the string. Obviously false. .........
Obviously true. Grep for the string "X-Mailer".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates...
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 19:15:54 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Goldhammer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 08 Apr 2001 14:56:45 GMT
<N__z6.56894$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Sun, 08 Apr 2001 14:37:23 GMT, WGAF <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>Luckily for Linux, there are people who
>>can see behind the hype.....
>>
>>http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/01/12/index3a.html
>
>
>This article presents the usual incorrect
>picture of the OSS movement as somesort of
>'corporation' or 'business' whose goal is
>to compete in the marketplace:
They are supported by corporations, and they *are* competing,
for mindshare, if nothing else. Whether they
are a corporation in themselves is unclear -- Debian, for
instance, is probably a non-profit, and can lift code
from RedHat, and vice versa, but the totality of
those working on open source certainly aren't doing it
under one umbrella. I, for instance, am working on stuff
that may never see the light of day, or that I might
distribute through my web site, or something. But I'm
not working for RedHat, Debian, Slackware, SuSE, etc. etc.,
nor for my current employer, on this particular project.
>
>"To stay competitive, open-source companies and
>communities must do a better job of courting a
>group for whom they seem to have little
>understanding or respect. Ironically, it's a
>group they should know very well."
That is very correct. Note that he says open-source
companies, not company; presumably, by that he means
companies supporting the open source model (most companies
are going to want to make money by proprietary products;
these open-source companies might use Linux as a foundation).
>
>Natually, with this incorrect mental picture
>of the OSS movement, it is easy to suggest
>that OSS will fail because it has no organized
>marketing department, no armies of PHBs, no
>telemarketers, no advertising deparment, no
>human resources management layer, or other
>bogosities irrelevant to loose groups of
>volunteers who do what they do because they
>find it interesting.
OSS may not fail, but without staying competitive, neither
will it succeed; it will just basically dwindle into a sort
of gray limbo. Microsoft succeeded through hard work
(unfortunately, it also used licensing, domination tactics,
and scare tactics); in the Win3.1 days it was the best in the
biz. It's still the most popular desktop option.
Even now, Windows has some advantages over X -- mostly in the
cut and paste area. Windows has many disadvantages -- one
Java program I use, for instance, spawns subprocesses
(Runtime.getRunTime().exec()); in Windows, these create
80x24 text consoles that pop up briefly, then vanish,
if the Java program is not run within a console (e.g., if
Borland's JBuilder is invoked from the Start menu).
Guess who gets keyboard focus? That's right -- the new windows!
Screws up the node something awful for a little while, from
a usability standpoint (it doesn't crash or fail, but it's
hard to get anything else done :-) ).
This may be a flaw in Sun's JVM, but it is illustrative of a flaw
in Windows as well.
>
>
>--
>Don't think you are. Know you are.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 3d:22h:09m actually running Linux.
This is the best part of the message.
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[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: 09 Apr 2001 13:16:29 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) writes:
> On 05 Apr 2001 23:22:41 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) writes:
> >> On 05 Apr 2001 09:38:42 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Of course not, but at least republicans go after Microsoft with the
> >> >intent of restoring a free market, and not with some loony class-war
> >> >redistribution of wealth fanaticism.
> >>
> >> No, that fanaticism would result in selling off Microsoft and giving
> >> the money to the poor. As opposed to the loony Republican turn the
> >> country into an corporate oligarchy fanaticism.
> >
>
> >Clue: Selling off Microsoft entirely would eliminate 27,000 jobs
> >directly and countless other thousands indirectly. They need to halt
> >their predatorial conduct, or be placed in a situation in which they
> >are unable to wield a monopoly club -- but they should not be sold off
> >(who would buy it? Time/Warner? Hmmmm.)
>
> Apparently fanatics have _no_ sense of humor and their knees jerk really
> hard when tapped.
Perhaps not; I still don't see anything particularly funny in your
post.
> Really, I was responding to your supposition that the Republicans
> somehow have more "pure" motives for wanting the MS monopoly under
> control in contrast to the evil strawman you seem to have erected over
> the other party's position.
It was a strawman for a strawman.
> If the Democrats were really into "loony class-war fanaticism" then
> they would be proposing my idea. But they aren't. Is my point clear
> enough now? Now, how about you and Kulkis go off and debate whether
> they want our bodily fluids or just an anal probe.
Only an anal proble, of course. :)
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Something like Install Shield for Linux?
Date: 09 Apr 2001 13:21:04 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) writes:
> On Fri, 06 Apr 2001 05:06:56 GMT, Kelsey Bjarnason
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> But the question is, can an end-user get that stuff as he can with
> >> RPM. And if he can, how? I for one would like to know how to at least
> >> get a list of files and registry keys that were installed.
> >
> >Depends. MSI - Microsoft's new installation file format, exposes a list of
> >everything which could be installed; you can snarf a copy of the MS "Orca"
> >tool to examine the MSI files.
>
> So the short but non-buzzword-compliant answer is "not with the tools
> they give the end user". You have to go get some utilities from MS,
> and they work on the new format but not the old.
>
> Which means that the answer is really "not for most current packages".
> Which explains why there are so many install spy utilities around I
> guess.
... and now you get to reboot *before* installing a product (after the
"Microsoft Installer" has been updated), and then again after you
install the product. Yay.
> >One big difference between this technology and previous install technology
> >is that "is installed" takes on something of a vague meaning; in a lot of
> >cases, while the product is "installed", perhaps only a meg or two of it are
> >actually copied to the machine - the rest can be faulted in as needed.
>
> Works great until the network is down or the disk is full. Then you've
> created a whole new class of errors.
Or if you have users that aren't on the WAN, in which case they are
prompted for the "XXXXXX" CD-ROM every time you access some particular
feature that wasn't explicitly installed (and even then, Microsoft
Office 2000 won't install everything even if you tell it to).
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead.
Date: 09 Apr 2001 13:31:07 -0600
kirk@do_not_spam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
> I can't believe this. why, I ask why, can't linux be as simple as windows?
>
> anyone who think this stuff will challenge windows must be on drugs, and
> I really mean that.
I didn't realize that you could burn CDs with Windows right out of the
box! We were always installing (paid for) 3rd-party software like
Adaptec Easy-CD to do it for us.
Please include details on how Windows is easier out-of-the-box.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead.
Date: 09 Apr 2001 13:33:01 -0600
Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 8 Apr 2001 21:29:24 -0700, kirk@do_not_spam
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >shutdown the PC, reboot to window, stick the same CD and it is there.
> >the directory I wrote on the CD is actually there.
> >
> >No rebuilding kernels, no telling windows any boot parameters, no
> >mounting, no trying to remember the device cryptic names. It is just there
> >to use. as an OS should be.
>
> Bet you change that tune in a year or two when you try to make a
> (legal) backup copy of a retail music or software CD, and Windows
> won't let you.
You mean *now*, right? Windows "media player" (boy, they have some
brilliant names: Word, SQL Server, Management Console, etc.) already
has code in it that does this.
Meanwhile, Apple has ads on the tele that go on about creaing your own
CD the way you want it.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a luser...
(was Re: Chinese airforce adopted Win2k infrastructure)
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 19:35:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ayende Rahien
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 8 Apr 2001 16:56:46 +0200
<9apuo5$56u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
>> (It'll be interesting to see what can be done against
>> infrared goggles, admittedly. Most likely they'll
>> have to develop a good light insulating material made
>> into a coat, or a thick insulating goo spread on the
>> face, hands, feet, etc. But I digress. :-) )
>
>*Bad* idea. You will be cooked to death in a short while. No heat
>dissapation. Especially when being physically active.
Heh...whoops, my bad; hadn't thought of that. One might be able to
strive for the "invisible man with gloves and shoes" effect, but
I think the enemy will, ahem, see right through that ploy....
Mind you, something will have to be done. The only thing I can think
of that might take care of the heat dissipation problem is piping
to a heat exchanger (think liquid-cooled thermal underwear); this
has certain obvious problems that limit its use. (Either the user
radiates very hot (bright) from his backpack, or he's attached to a
vehicle and/or structure with a limited radius of movement, and
that vehicle will radiate; target the vehicle, and the soldiers
might have to play "schuck the suit".)
I'm not sure if there's a safe endothermic reaction that might be
usable for this sort of thing; such would have a limited lifetime.
Or one just wears ice...
Of course, the soldiers could just do something extremely simple,
like setting up a camouflaged duck blind :-). Not sure how to
keep the pieces the proper temperature as they're setting it up,
apart from setting it up the night before. (And the soldiers had
better wear gloves, to avoid thermal handprints; it will also
be unheated for obvious reasons, especially if the soliders are
shooting from the blind, as the last thing they'll want are
well-"lighted" target windows! :-) ).
One might also get real esoteric and sport random-cooled wear; this wear
would have the same effect visually on inrared sensing devices as
current camouflage has on visual sensing ones, assuming it's not
horribly uncomfortable for the soldier ("dammit, Sarge, my one foot is
*freezing*!" :-)).
And then there are real far-out ideas, like transparent armor; this
armor uses tiny sensors all over and basically threads the light level
picked up to someplace on the otherside, rendering the wearer nearly
invisible, at least in theory. (Presumably, it would be a bit like
wearing a fiber optic cluster all over one's body, something along the
lines of various lit-up gewgaws occasionally purchasable at
high-tech shops.) I'm not sure this even comes close to defeating
infrared goggles, though -- and most likely the standard camouflage
works better, anyway. :-)
>s
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random heated discussion here
EAC code #191 3d:01h:12m actually running Linux.
It's a conspiracy of one.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Wall Street Journal: Linux gains corporate respectability
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 9 Apr 2001 14:26:35 -0500
Striking fear into the hearts of Windows groupies:
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2705804,00.html
(The Wall Street Journal is a subscriber-only Web
site, so this points to a reprint on ZDNet).
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates...
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 12:38:26 -0700
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> WGAF wrote:
>
> > Luckily for Linux, there are people who can see behind the hype.....
> >
> > http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/01/12/index3a.html
>
> Yet another example of a clueless tech moron who knows nothing about how
> the business world operates. No wonder half the dot-coms have failed
> with idiots like that column writer thinking they know how to run a
> business.
>
LOL!! A woman in Seattle saw for the first time a Turkey Vulture!
Some one on the news said its from all of the dead Dot.Coms!
> Matthew Gardiner
>
> --
> Disclaimer:
>
> I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
>
> If you do not like it go: [rm -rf /home/luser] and
> have a nice day :)
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 19:42:06 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 08 Apr 2001 11:30:57 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote
>> on Sat, 07 Apr 2001 18:53:21 -0400
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> : Martin Eden wrote:
>> >> : >
>> >> : > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis says...
>> >> : >
>> >> : > Jesus Christ on a stick, kook-boy; Are you still going at this?
>> >> : > I would have thought you'd have shut your fat mouth by now.
>> >> : >
>> >> : > You do realize that *everyone* with an ounce of intelligence has
>> >> : > seen you for who you are, don't you?
>> >>
>> >> : you keep telling yourself that.
>> >>
>> >> : ALL newsreader software that has an ID string has it embedded
>> >> : within the source code. It's a simple matter or editing it with
>> >> : vi and running make to disguise both the newsreader and the OS.
>> >>
>> >> : And since on Linux...you have the source code....
>> >>
>> >> : Well, I'll leave the rest as an exercise for the reader.
>> >>
>> >> : Clue for the clueless: make is your friend.
>> >>
>> >> Right Aaron. Just go ahead, and pretend that you're
>> >> some 'leet programming genius. We all know that you're
>> >> really just some luser with a PC. How can we make it
>> >> any clearer to you that you have absolutely nothing
>> >> on you to lead us to believe that you have one single
>> >> ounce of knowledge about anything?
>> >
>> >Actually, I have programmed in the following languages
>> >
>> >VSBASIC (IBM 370)
>> >APPLE BASIC (Apple ][ and ][+)
>> >Waterloo FORTRAN (IBM 370)
>> >6502 assembly language
>> >Fortran 77 (various BSD Unix systems)
>> >Pascal
>> >C
>> >PDP-11 assembly language
>> >VAX-11 asembly language
>> >IBM 370 assembly language
>> >Intel 8080 assembly language
>> >Motorola 6809 assembly language
>> >Motorola 680x0 assembly language
>> >Motorola 68HC11 assembly language
>> >csh
>> >ksh
>> >awk
>> >sed
>>
>> I'd be surprised if you didn't also program in sh/bash. (Did
>
>Most of my ksh code will run under sh/bash.
Oh, right -- forgot about ksh. I rarely use it, myself.
If I need something sh/bash/awk/sed can't handle, I pretty much
jump straight into PERL.
>
>> you touch VMS DCL at all?) Also, have you conspicuously
>> avoided x86 for any particular reason? I've dabbled in it
>
>Yeah..
>1. fucking HATE the x86 instruction set.
Can't say I'm thrilled with it either.
>2. I never had any reason to program in it.
Back in the late 80's, Apollo computers introduced a new computer (8800?)
with the then-advanced concept of pipelining, and at that point
somebody -- I forget precisely who -- made the statement that
compilers would probably optimize the code better than human
coders working in assembly. Of course, nowadays we are using G++,
whose back end may or may not be aware of issues such as pipeline
stalling and instruction prefetch for various microprocessors (I
don't know, offhand).
And then there's Java, which is about as far away from assembly/
microcode as one can get. :-)
Assembly might become a lost art....
>
>
>> myself -- bodgy processor! Even the 1802 had more sensible
>> register allocation -- and that's an old 8-bit micro which
>> was so slow a PDP-8 could probably beat it. :-) But it was
>> fun to work with for flashing LED's. :-)
>>
>> Mind you, the 6502 was even more quirky than the x86.
>> (Zeropage,X) and (Zeropage),Y? Sheesh.
>>
>> Hmm, maybe I answered my own question. :-)
>>
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 3d:01h:28m actually running Linux.
Yes, uptime & wall clock aren't in synch; I don't know why.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: XP = eXPerimental
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 19:47:12 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chris Ahlstrom
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 09 Apr 2001 01:32:20 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Goldhammer wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 06 Apr 2001 17:21:34 GMT,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >:> Naw...It means eXtra Profit...
>>
>> >eXtra Pathetic
>>
>> eXceedingly Perverse
>>
>> eXorbitant Price
>>
>> eXtraordinarily Purulent
>>
>> eXtraneous Procedures
>>
>> eXpect Pus
>
>Yum yum!
>
>> eXtreme Pain
>
>XenoPhobic
>Xanthoma Producing
>Xmas Present (for the kiddies)
The few screens I've seen do make it look like some sort
of silly-assed toy.
>
>
>Actually, this here dictionary has an entry
>for XP:
>
>"A monogram used to represent Christ or
>Christianity, composed of chi and rho, the first
>two letters of the Greek word for Christ."
>
>I guess that means Microsoft won't be donating
>this OS to any public schools <grin>.
Heh...I wonder how many people would think of that. :-)
>
>Chris
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 3d:02h:37m actually running Linux.
It's a conspiracy of one.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 15:48:30 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Basement Boy: Aka Aaron Koookis
WesTralia wrote:
>
> Well Aaron, the obvious has become VERY obvious. You my friend, are a
> Windows 98 only user. There is no camouflage, there is no security through
> obfuscation, there is no header string being changed, and there is certainly
> no truth to your shoddy claim.
I don't understand it anyways. How does changing your headers to make
it look like you're running Windows 98 provide more security? If
anything, it invites even MORE script kiddies to attack your box,
because in their minds, you're running an unsecured OS. All they'd have
to do anyways is telnet into your box, and look at the OS identification
there to find out what you're REALLY running. Oh wait, don't tell me
Aaron changed his login message to say "Windows 98 telnet server"? LOL!
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Inktomi Webmap -- Apache has 60% now.
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 12:52:03 -0700
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> Good news! Apache now has 60.33% of the total server market,
> compared to Microsoft-IIS's 25.26% share. Netscape-Enterprise
> is a distant third at 3.79%.
>
> http://www.inktomi.com/webmap/
>
> Unfortunately, there is no information regarding secure webservers.
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
> EAC code #191 3d:21h:47m actually running Linux.
> You were expecting something relevant down here?
I think IIS is not very secure. Suns news org said something about
Compaqs' servers were hacked into again. Doesn't sound secure to me.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
