Linux-Advocacy Digest #510, Volume #33 Wed, 11 Apr 01 13:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Something like Install Shield for Linux? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Something like Install Shield for Linux? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Sam A. Kersh)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Sam A. Kersh)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Sam A. Kersh)
Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message (Chad Everett)
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Phillip Lord)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a (Goldhammer)
Re: Windows in space...... ("Patrick McAllister")
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Peter da Silva)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (Goldhammer)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Randall Parker)
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Randall Parker)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Something like Install Shield for Linux?
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:07:57 GMT
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 04:59:32 GMT, Kelsey Bjarnason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bob Hauck"
>
> > Do you usually use apt and rpm on the same machine? No. Do you usually
> > use the whole collection of old formats on the same machine? Yes.
>
> Right; I use HTML and TXT and DOC and MDB, and not a one of them is
> interchangeable.
I am unclear on the relationship between those formats and the variety
of proprietary package formats on Windows.
> I also use Wise and InstallShield and MSI and not a one
> of them is interchangeable. Not surprising, they're all from different
> vendors. Big deal.
Way to miss the point. If you use apt to manage your system, you have
_one_ place to look for information and it works in _one_ way.
Further, the package formats are open and documented. There is no need
to run around asking different vendors if you can pretty please have a
tool to translate their format.
> > Do both apt and rpm give you tools to find out what is installed and
> > where it is? Yes. Do the Windows installers give you these tools?
> So complain to InstallShield and Wise; they're the ones who made the
> installers.
How about I complain that Microsoft hasn't figured out how to build a
standard system installer for all these years? They have managed to add
fading menus and drop-shadowed cursers, yet they haven't managed to do
anything about package management. Shows where their priorities are I
guess.
> > However, to answer your other questions, you can in fact install both
> > apt and rpm on the same machine if you want to.
> Yes, but that wasn't quite the question; it was whether I could use apt
> tools to install, edit, and so on RPM packages and vice-versa - whether
> they're interchangeable. See, if they're _not_, then we have the MSI +
> InstallShield + Wise situation all over again, with incompatible
> installers.
Not true. Most packages are available in both formats, and there are
converters to go from one format to the other. You are not forced to
have multiple tools on one system. Windows _does_ force you to have
multiple tools because there is no system-level package management at
all.
> > On Linux, all of the package managers can give you this information
> > without the need of add-ons.
>
> This is now true of Win2K, WinME, Win98, NT4 and, IIRC, Win95 as well,
> with MSI. See, the logic was to provide a standardized installation
As I said, nice to see they're catching up.
> > I'm sure that if you buy the developer kits from these helpful vendors
> > that you will get the utilities. However, that does not help end-users
> > manage their systems.
>
> Nor would it; prior to MSI, installs were not, generally, built to be
> managed, ubt rather, to be installed.
Which is basically solving only part of the problem. That which is
installed will need to be uninstalled or updated or inventoried at some
point. There are problems with rpm and apt, but none of them are that
you have a dozen incompatible install/uninstall programs laying around
fighting with each other.
> MSI is based on the concept of product management, rather than merely
> installation, so it offers a lot more.
Why do you keep acting as if this is a revolutionary new concept? This
is exactly what rpm and apt do. The only thing revolutionary about MSI
is that MS can force it to be on all new Windows machines, which Red Hat
and Debian can't do for all Linux machines.
> Which part of the job? I've never seen a third-party product that will
> examine an InstallShield proprietary installation package and allow you
> to extend it, alter it, or do anytihng useful with it.
The part of the job of watching which files are installed, what registry
changes are made, etc. I am well aware that the third party tools don't
allow you to do anything useful with proprietary packages.
> "I've chosen to only install a portion of the available packages.
> Therefore I am surprised when they're not actually all there."
Ok, if this is optional then there's no issue. Another poster claimed
that Office, at least, does not install everything even if you ask it
to. That's bad.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Something like Install Shield for Linux?
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:14:23 GMT
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 05:03:31 GMT, Kelsey Bjarnason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Considering RPM's track record around here, it would be very difficult to
> do even _as_ poorly as RPM, never mind worse.
That comment rather reminds me of the way in which Creationists take
disagreement among biologists about the mechanism of evolution as
evidence that biologists disagree about whether evolution takes place.
People argue about ways to make rpm better, and about problems with rpm,
but few ever contemplate replacing it with the Windows way of handling
installation.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam A. Kersh)
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:22:42 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (silverback) wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 22:35:21 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Mathew wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Sam A. Kersh wrote:
>>>
>>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (silverback) wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 01:24:34 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>>> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >>Goldhammer wrote:
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 13:33:15 -0400,
>>> > >>> Rob Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> > Right. Fascism is characterized by the *state-directed* control of
>>> > >>> >the economy,
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> Hmm. Sounds like communism.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>Precisely.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>Communism and Fascism are merely different sides of the same coin.
>>> > >
>>> > >bullshit you lying sack of shit. Fascism is the polar opposite of
>>> > >communism. They have nothing in common.
>>> >
>>> > both are built on state control of the economy and setting certain
>>> > groups up as elitists leaders. Germany had Hitler; Italy has Mussolini
>>> > and russia had Stalin.
>>>
>>> So notorious Latin American, fascist dictators, such as Pinochet,were
>>> really communists.
>>
>>Spot the strawman....
>>
>>You don't seem to get it, do you
>>
>>Communism and Nazism are ideological "kissing cousins".
>
>nope
>
I've come to the conclusion based on silverback's posts over the last
year that he is a closet communist. He touts "welfare" aka
redistribution of wealth through "progressive taxation." Falsely call
Nazism "capitalism," etc.
>>
>>
>>That doesn't meant that they are the same...it means that they
>>are closer to each other, in ideology, in form, and in practice,
>>than either one is ANY other form of governance.
Sam A. Kersh
NRA Patron Member
TSRA, JPFO
http://www.flash.net/~csmkersh/
===============================================================================
"The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary
government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote
in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible."
-- Senator Hubert H. Humphrey (D-Minnesota)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam A. Kersh)
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:22:47 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (silverback) wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:22:56 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam A. Kersh)
>wrote:
>
>>Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>
>>>> Goldhammer wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 13:33:15 -0400,
>>>> > Rob Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Right. Fascism is characterized by the *state-directed* control of
>>>> > >the economy,
>>>> >
>>>> > Hmm. Sounds like communism.
>>>>
>>>> Precisely.
>>>>
>>>> Communism and Fascism are merely different sides of the same coin.
>>>
>>>And Capitalism has state-directed controls on the economy too.
>>
>>True capitalism is a laize faire proposition. And the prime rule is
>>buyer beware.
>
>and a totally unworkable system
And your beloved communism is? Like where?
Sam A. Kersh
NRA Patron Member
TSRA, JPFO
http://www.flash.net/~csmkersh/
===============================================================================
"The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary
government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote
in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible."
-- Senator Hubert H. Humphrey (D-Minnesota)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam A. Kersh)
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:22:45 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (silverback) wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:22:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam A. Kersh)
>wrote:
>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (silverback) wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 01:24:34 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Goldhammer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 13:33:15 -0400,
>>>>> Rob Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Right. Fascism is characterized by the *state-directed* control of
>>>>> >the economy,
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm. Sounds like communism.
>>>>
>>>>Precisely.
>>>>
>>>>Communism and Fascism are merely different sides of the same coin.
>>>
>>>bullshit you lying sack of shit. Fascism is the polar opposite of
>>>communism. They have nothing in common.
>>
>>both are built on state control of the economy and setting certain
>
>wrong you lying sack of shit. The Nazis let the corporations write the
>laws.
>
>>groups up as elitists leaders. Germany had Hitler; Italy has Mussolini
>>and russia had Stalin.
>>
The depths of silverbacks ignorance is amazing... Look at his
diatribes on capitalism and backing of redistribution of wealth aka
"welfare." Yessir, he's a pinko commie... and a foul-mouthed child.
Sam A. Kersh
NRA Patron Member
TSRA, JPFO
http://www.flash.net/~csmkersh/
===============================================================================
"The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary
government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote
in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible."
-- Senator Hubert H. Humphrey (D-Minnesota)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 11 Apr 2001 11:15:01 -0500
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 01:58:57 +1000, jaymz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>fuck, talk about geeks !
>
Your two to-do items for today needs to get submitted
to your daily planner, not COLA
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: 11 Apr 2001 17:28:59 +0100
>>>>> "Gamma" == Gamma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gamma> 10 cents of disk space, sure, but 8 bucks worth of memory
8M of memory. Good gods the expense.
Gamma> and about 15-50 cents of startup time per startup! Which is
Gamma> fine if you're set up to where you can run it once when you
Gamma> log in in the morning and then leave it up all day,
Gamma> granted...
Gamma> And this is just for bare emacs; multiply all numbers by
Gamma> around 8 or so for xemacs with news, ftp, fried okra, mashed
Gamma> potatoes, etc...
You want the additional functionality you have to pay
something for it. Given that the VI user probably also has a news
reader, an ftp client, a mail reader, uses CVS an so on as well, then
I am not sure that the memory usage is that significant.
Gamma> And 120 more bucks worth of install time if you're in a
Gamma> consultant position and your client doesn't have emacs
Gamma> installed, or has the wrong version.
It takes me about 2 minutes to install a new emacs on
my local system. Thats because I have taken care to write my emacs
customisations (which are pretty extensive) well.
If you move machines a lot then the advantage of VI clearly
gets greater. In the same way people who swap machines rarely
customise their desktop, or even their shell.
Or alternatively you get organised and take around what you
need on a cd-rom, or put it somewhere that you can get hold of it
easily.
The problems are not large, although you do need to be more
organised. The flip side of it of course is that I can work on an IRIX
box, a Sun box, linux, bsd or even windows. Once I have set up my
emacs, I get the same interface and all the functionality that I
require. I can read news/mail, I can browse the file system, and so
on. From within emacs you can do anything. With VI of course you have
to use what the OS provides you with, which is different.
Emacs and VI are not directly comparable, because they do
such different things.
Gamma> Bare vi has virtually zero install cost, since it's
Gamma> everywhere. Gvim will cost less in install time than a
Gamma> similar xemacs counterpart. Starts up instantaneously (even
Gamma> gvim). 2 cents of disk space. :-) less than a buck
Gamma> o'memory.
Gamma> Vi's not what I would consider full-featured, though. Either
Gamma> we can compare bare vi and bare emacs, or gvim and xemacs.
Gamma> Either way... Feature-wise, they're practically identical.
A bare emacs and a bare vi? Version control, mail, calendar,
and diary, a find and grep interface, compile buffers, ange-ftp
(transparent ftp editing). Even a "bare" emacs is pretty functional.
Phil
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:29:47 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, silverback
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 11 Apr 2001 04:08:47 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[snip]
>take a good look around. The republiCONs are the fascists, they have
>the same agenda.
So give me some specifics? I'm curious.
[snip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 5d:17h:19m actually running Linux.
This space for rent.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
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: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:34:52 GMT
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 03:46:30 GMT, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>He's almost as funny as Derek Smart.
I hear Derek is busy porting BC3000AD and
BC Millenium over to Linux.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
------------------------------
From: "Patrick McAllister" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows in space......
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 12:32:10 -0400
Fixpack??? Sounds suspiciously OS/2 like! :)
"Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Roy Culley wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett) writes:
> > > On Mon, 9 Apr 2001 10:31:53 -0400, Patrick McAllister
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>Probably a duplicate post, but if not, makes for a
funny....kinda.....read.
> > >>
> > >>http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,42912,00.html
> > >
> > > This is worth a short quote, don't you think?:
> > >
> > > 2:00 a.m. Apr. 7, 2001 PDT
> > > .....
> > >
> > > The space station, which has been operational for less than five
> > > months, experiences almost daily computer glitches, according to
> > > the commander's log recently published on the Web.
> > >
> > > Most of the problems appear to be related to Microsoft's Windows NT,
> > > while Russian-made software seems to be more reliable.
> >
> > Did Microsoft ever state that their SW would function in micro-gravity
> > conditions? :-)
>
> Isn't there a fixpack for that?
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Karel Jansens
> ==============================================================
> "You're the weakest link. Goodb-No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!!"
> ==============================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter da Silva)
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: 11 Apr 2001 16:24:34 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[I wrote]
> > [Microsoft] started out producing
> > competant software development tools for CP/M and a mediocre but well
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> You mispelled "BASIC interpreters stolend from DEC"
I would never have referred to M80 and L80 as "Basic Interpreters".
--
`-_-' In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
'U` "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: WWFD?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:44:56 GMT
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 03:38:35 GMT,
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>NT could support 2GB files years ago.
Only after they fixed it:
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q171/4/58.ASP
"Windows NT May Fail On Request to Open Large Files
"The information in this article applies to:
Microsoft Windows NT Workstation versions 3.51, 4.0
Microsoft Windows NT Server versions 3.51, 4.0
Microsoft Windows NT Server version 4.0, Terminal Server Edition
"SYMPTOMS When an application tries to open large files
(over 100MB), the open request may fail with one of the
following error messages: Insufficient Resources - or -
Invalid Handle. The actual error returned varies depending
on the application being used to open the file.
"RESOLUTION The allocation for paged-pool memory was
modified to correct any problem that might occur on
systems that have large files (greater 100MB) that
are repeatedly opened sequentially, updated, and then
closed. Ntoskrnl.exe and Ntkrnlmp.exe have been updated
to correct this problem.
"Microsoft has confirmed this to be a problem in Windows NT 4.0
and Windows NT Server 4.0, Terminal Server Edition. This problem
was first corrected in Windows NT 4.0 Service Pack 4.0 and Windows
NT Server 4.0, Terminal Server Edition Service Pack 4."
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:48:50 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, silverback
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 11 Apr 2001 04:10:11 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:22:56 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam A. Kersh)
>wrote:
>
>>Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>
>>>> Goldhammer wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 13:33:15 -0400,
>>>> > Rob Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Right. Fascism is characterized by the *state-directed* control of
>>>> > >the economy,
>>>> >
>>>> > Hmm. Sounds like communism.
>>>>
>>>> Precisely.
>>>>
>>>> Communism and Fascism are merely different sides of the same coin.
>>>
>>>And Capitalism has state-directed controls on the economy too.
>>
>>True capitalism is a laize faire proposition. And the prime rule is
>>buyer beware.
>
>and a totally unworkable system
I will agree on this point, 100% pure capitalism (with no regulation)
would lead to a very foul system indeed, as the top cats start
cutting sweetheart deals to shut out the lower echelons of society;
the lower echelons will in turn shut out even lower echelons, and
the poor will end up dead (pick your poison: air pollution, water
pollution, ground soil pollution, radioactivity, drive-by shootings
by caring individuals using Tommy guns, ... :-) ). Ultimately, one
will get a set of communes, each one a separate business, cartel, or trust.
This is not to say communism is better; it leads to its own problems.
The ideal system is a mix. A gasoline engine (standard 4-stroke,
2-stroke, jet turbine, whatever) cannot run on pure fuel or pure air;
the trick is to adjust the mix in the combustion chamber for
optimum throughput.
Similarly with economies. The trick is to get the mix right.
(It's actually a lot more complicated than that, with issues such
as overshoot and ringing being thrown into the mix -- an overreactive
regulatory system can "flood the engine", or lead into an oscillatory
motion of the economy as the gain of the "amplifier" is too high,
depending on which metaphor one desires. :-) I am of the opinion
that the Fed needs to be more reactive and more precise, although
I'm not sure how the Fed can accomplish same without a lot more
economic data, reported more frequently that it is now.)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 5d:17h:22m actually running Linux.
I'm here, you're there, and that's pretty much it.
------------------------------
From: Randall Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:06:06 GMT
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:45:48 -0600 esteemed Dave Martel did'st hold forth thusly:
> >Have you tried Visual Slick Edit's Brief emulation? Its excellent.
> >
>
> So I've heard, but they're out of their freaking gourds if they think
> I'll pay $300 for a linux programmer's editor.
Well, I spend much larger amounts on hardware and on other software development tools.
Then there is what I get paid for doing stuff. I see that people don't want to pay a
lot
for an editor. But at the same time, editing is the one thing that many of us spend
the
bulk of our time doing.
Some people want to be totally dedicated to Open Source only and that is fine. But for
those of us that are willing to buy commercial dev tools I really don't think $300 is
too much for the most important tool we use.
------------------------------
From: Randall Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:07:26 GMT
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 15:42:45 -0500 esteemed Duane Bozarth did'st hold forth thusly:
> She reported back that "Brief technology (!) has been
> incorported into the Borland integrated development enviornment"! and
> "which version did I wish to purchase"?
If only it had been incorporated completely. I was using Brief and BCW and other
Borland
IDEs and wanted to strangle the IDEs in Brief emulation mode when various things
didn't
work right.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
