Linux-Advocacy Digest #620, Volume #33 Sun, 15 Apr 01 03:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Mathew)
Re: Linux = CHOICE! (Ed Allen)
anti-spam tag (Was: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Brent R)
Re: Has Linux anything to offer ? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: To Eric FunkenBush (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: To Eric FunkenBush (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Microsoft: Closed source is more secure ("mmnnoo")
Re: To Eric FunkenBush (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: there's always a bigger fool ("mmnnoo")
Re: t. max devlin: kook (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: t. max devlin: kook (Tim Hanson)
Re: So much for modules in Linux! ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Michael Ash)
Re: Windoze is dying.... (Tim Hanson)
Re: So much for modules in Linux! ("Tom Wilson")
Re: there's always a bigger fool (Tim Hanson)
Re: So much for modules in Linux! (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
From: Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 14:59:17 +1000
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Kurt Lochner wrote:
> >
> > silverback wrote:
> > >
> > > Kurt Lochner was having a laugh at the absurdist revelations proselytized by:
> > > >
> > > >Fraud Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> again twisted the meaning of:
> > > >>
> > > >> silverback wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > silverback wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> <etc,... snip>
> > > >>
> > > >> > >> wrong again liar. Fascism is corporate rule. The Nazis allowed the
> > > >> > >> corporations to write the laws.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >So, then, you agree that it's bad to let the Sierra Club and similar
> > > >> > >groups write environmental law, and that it's a bad idea to let
> > > >> > >those with a vested interest in the welfare bureacracy to write
> > > >> > >welfare laws.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > nope, the Sierra club is hardly a corporation buttfuck.
> > > >>
> > > >> From http://outingleaders.sierraclub.org:8082/Common/ins_manual/index.asp;
> > > >>
> > > >> [...]
> > > >>
> > > >> The Sierra Club, which includes the chapters, groups, and sections,
> > > >> is considered one corporation under California corporation law.
> > > >
> > > > <sigh> I let the disengneuous fraud out of my kill-file, and he's
> > > > still trying to misrepresent even the simplest of concepts as some
> > > > kind of defense for his intentional ignorance..
> > >
> > > I wonder if the stupid lying fraud knows that California's 1849
> > > constitution made a clear distinction between a for profit corporation
> > > and a non profit corporation?
> >
> > He tried to appear cognizant of that, by way of innuendo..
> >
> > --Notice how quiet he got about the California electric utilities? <chuckle>
>
> Oh, you mean like PG&E, which went bankrupt because they were forced to
> operate under a Marxist economic model......
Well proove it.If they thought they would not be able to have a profitable
business,then they should have not gotten into it.
They could always sell it and start up another type of business.
Bankruptcy is a misnomer as well.
I remember when Continental Airlines filed for bankruptcy,and were able
to reorganize after this. This was done under the CEO at the time Frank
Lorenzo,and was done to get rid of employees.
>
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
> can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
> 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.
>
>
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux = CHOICE!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 05:01:05 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That is laughable. I hate the configuration tool and shit-house
>packages included with Redhat, however, I like the configuration tools
>and packages included with SuSE Linux 7.1, hence, I can move from one
>vendor to another without any problems.
>
>As for you snide comment, "That's because with Windows it just works and
>there's no need to hop vendors", I booted my copy of SuSE Linux,
>followed the wizard, computer rebooted, all configured. No needing to
>drop into CLI or anything, so I don't know what your problem is because
>Linux works straight out of the box for me. Some people prefer using
>Redhat, whilst there are, what I call, "Linux Purists" who like using
>Debian. Its all about what you prefer working with rather than what
>Bill Gates wants you to work with.
>
The choice of multiple alternatives at several different levels like the
installer, the GUI admin tools, the users desktop, the group of apps in
a particular distribution, the mixture of GPL vs proprietary, the focus
of the patches and tunings applied to the standard kernel.
All those choices at those and many other points are why we will always
have multiple distributions and will eventually see multiple offerings
from each distribution vendor.
The combination of those choices leads to the ability for a single
source tree to be used everywhere from appliances to Beowulf clusters
large enough to grab several slots in the "Top 100 Supercomputers" list.
We have seen only the tip of the diversity landscape so far. The 2.5
kernels will bring with them a language allow opening up whole new
territories of combinations which would have required advice from a
kernel developer before.
When it shows what can be achieved for kernels then it will begin to be
applied to other portions of the software which makes up a given
distribution.
All these choices require that a given customer either trust what
decisions a vendor makes or that they discuss their options with friends
that they trust and customize their distribution to fit their needs.
What terrifies the WinTrolls is that knowledgeable choices by consumers
means that they cannot be forced into three to five piles like the
ignorant ones can.
That means that to sell anything to non ignorant customers they must
*work* to find out what some of those customers want to buy and they
must worry every day that somebody else will entice *their* customers
with a different combination of options that they have not tried yet
or even their own combination but at a lower price.
In other words, competition scares them because they won't be able to
leech a small amount from the monopoly like they have been doing.
That is why they are so adamant that MS is not really a monopoly,
because their complicity in fleecing the public might get noticed.
How can they explain to their children that the rich life that they have
enjoyed has come from perpetuating the ignorance of the public at large ?
Yes the WinTrolls are strongly attempting to deny that their gravy train
is about to end and they will need to *work* for a living. Anything but
that !
--
Linux -- The Unix defragmentation tool.
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: anti-spam tag (Was: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 05:10:49 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
<snip>
> L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
> can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmm that's actually a pretty good idea. I'll include that in my .sig and
add to it as I discover more spam sources.
The spammers may eventually code a routine to not mail to those places
(if they haven't already).
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Has Linux anything to offer ?
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 05:13:06 GMT
"Neil Cerutti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> --
> Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> *** Your mule was judged "best built" at the colony fair. You
> won $250. ***
That brings back memories!
Great game!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: To Eric FunkenBush
Date: 15 Apr 2001 05:28:05 GMT
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 23:52:22 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> > VC7 will conform in almost all ways except Partial Template
> Specialization
>> > and the export keyword.
>>
>> Which makes it almost useless in a general production environment.
>
> For some, but as of today, very few people even use the STL, much less their
> own templates.
I'd have to beg to differ there -- templates are widley used in some form
or other, and if you're not using them directly, you're probably using
someone elses.
However, if the export keyword was so important that compilers not supporting
it were "useless in a production environment", we simply wouldn't use C++
at all (do *any* compilers support export ?)
Partial specialisations would be nice though.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: To Eric FunkenBush
Date: 15 Apr 2001 05:32:49 GMT
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 16:51:09 -0700, GreyCloud wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> "Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Why do you bitch about MS? *NOBODY* has released a fully conformant
>> compiler yet.
>>
>> VC7 will conform in almost all ways except Partial Template Specialization
>> and the export keyword.
>
> Which makes it almost useless in a general production environment.
How many compilers support export anyway ? If that's your criteria, the
vast majority of compilers are "almost useless in a general production
environment". BTW, does g++ support partial specialisation ? IIRC it
doesn't.
It certainly doesn't support export. BTW, does export have any tangible
benefits ? (the main thing that would be nice would be a way around the
"dependency bloat" that template code produces, which one usually needs
to bypasse using various "firewalling" idioms)
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft: Closed source is more secure
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 05:34:32 GMT
Didn't you see that latest MS bug? Just put the right mime-type
on the attachment and outlook runs it automatically, without
asking the user at all. Apperently you can't even select it
to delete it without running the attachment.
In article <xh0C6.3468$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Kelsey
Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "David Utidjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9b9ome$r22$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ray Chason"
>>
>> > Ah yes, extensive testing, which is why such glaring boners as the
>> > ILOVEYOU/Melissa vulnerability got out the door.
>>
>> I think those vulnerabilities were "designed in"... aren't they
>> embedded VB scripts in email? If they are then... I am sure MS did
>> extensive testing to make sure that VB works well with Outlook and all
>> their other apps. Windows will, as long as they allow the simple
>> opening of an email to execute arbitrary attached code, allwyas have a
>> security problem by design.
>
> Depends what one means by "security problem", though. If I hand you
> off an executable file or a script and you run it on your Linux box
> without even looking at it, can it not, at the least, wipe out or
> corrupt any and all of your personal files - i.e. anything you have
> write access to?
>
> Of course it can. Which means Linux also has a "security problem by
> design" and always will. However, the problem isn't the OS, it's the
> _users_.
>
> The only significant difference I see (and yes, it is a big one) is that
> with Win9x versions, you can also trash things other than your personal
> files.
>
> This is, of course, one reason why businesses should have been running
> NT or
> 2K on the workers' desktops; with those, you can prevent users doing
> such
> damage.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: To Eric FunkenBush
Date: 15 Apr 2001 05:37:16 GMT
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 16:50:01 -0700, GreyCloud wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Go back and look at the provided code... namespace is supported.
g++ supports namepace, but namespace std is just treated as global
namespace. This feature is very annoying -- it makes it easy to
write nonstandard code.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 05:43:57 GMT
The real reason you're asked to close all other programs
and reboot after installing is because installshield scripts
default to that behavior. Of course not all reboots
can be blamed on that. For some reason genuine MS
products don't use installshield and generally require
at least 2 reboots. I just installed office 2000 on
WinNT at work. 2 reboots per machine. WHAT?
In article <PeUB6.2149$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Kelsey
Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> Umm... the registry is not the reason apps require reboots. Generally
> speaking, there are three reasons an install wants to reboot:
>
> 1) It has attempted to update a locked file, such as a system file.
> 2) It has installed something expected to run during the startup phase
> of
> operations
> 3) It is installing a service (not in the NT sense, but in the sense of
> a
> background application or library) which needs to be launched in order
> to work
>
> One might suggest that in the case of #3, a better approach could be
> used. I agree. In the cases of #2 and #1, I'm not sure how, given such
> an application being installed, Linux would handle this any better; how
> exactly does Linux handle live patching of the kernel, for example,
> without rebooting?
<snip>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: t. max devlin: kook
Date: 15 Apr 2001 05:46:38 GMT
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 21:37:56 +0100, Peter Hayes wrote:
> On 8 Apr 2001 23:21:26 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
>> Real user-friendly GUI scenario for a newbie, eh?
>
> When *is* M$ going to develop a journaling file system?
>
> Peter
Since we're talking about Reiser, is anyone using this
with NFS and/or RAID in a production environment ?
I'd like to move some RAIDs over to this, but I'm concerned
about NFS (which seems fragile enough as it is -- my approach
with NFS is to find something that works, then don't touch it !!!)
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 22:57:24 -0700
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: t. max devlin: kook
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 21:37:56 +0100, Peter Hayes wrote:
> > On 8 Apr 2001 23:21:26 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
>
> >> Real user-friendly GUI scenario for a newbie, eh?
> >
> > When *is* M$ going to develop a journaling file system?
> >
> > Peter
>
> Since we're talking about Reiser, is anyone using this
> with NFS and/or RAID in a production environment ?
>
> I'd like to move some RAIDs over to this, but I'm concerned
> about NFS (which seems fragile enough as it is -- my approach
> with NFS is to find something that works, then don't touch it !!!)
>
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
> elflord at panix dot com
I'm just starting to play around with it on a spare computer, Reiser but
not RAID. So far so good; Everything seems to map just fine. 2.4
kernel.
--
Acquaintance, n.:
A person whom we know well enough to borrow from, but not well
enough to lend to.
-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So much for modules in Linux!
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 06:09:59 GMT
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Thats the US. NZ, most computer stores have ATLEAST one distro being
> sold. Also, in the book stores, they sell software too, such as
> Dymocks, Benettes, Books and More (a subsidery of NZ Post), Paper Plus,
> London Book Shops. Also, many of these computer shops will answer any
> queries you have regarding how to install linux, or how to do this or
> that.
>
Asking anyone in a chain store for advice here yields blank stares. High
school (and local college) graduates are as dumb as mud anymore. Losing a
finger, for those folks, consitutes more of a threat to their math skills
than their motor skills.
American book stores and the like (even chain stores like KMart) used to
sell software back in the 80's when the initial PC boom hit. Most stopped
when they realized it wasn't a money making venture. It dried up about the
same time the C64 did.
--
Tom Wilson
------------------------------
From: Michael Ash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 06:10:30 GMT
In article <9bart8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter da Silva)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Michael Ash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ironic that you'd mention Transmeta, given that what is probably MS's
>> largest competitor was created by someone who now works for them.
>
>Apple? Jobs is back there, and WOz is a school teacher.
>
>Or do you mean UNIX? That was Kernighan, Ritchie, Thompson, Pike, they all
>still work for Bell Labs/Lucent last I heard.
I'm sure you realized I was talking about Linux.
The domain is Intel PC operating systems, therefore Apple is out.
The merits of Linux versus other UNIX workalikes on the Intel-based PC
are highly debatable, and also irrelevant. Linux is easily the most
popular of them, and therefore the most direct competitor to Microsoft.
--
"From now on, we live in a world where man has walked on the moon.
And it's not a miracle, we just decided to go." -- Jim Lovell
Mike Ash - <http://www.mikeash.com/>, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 23:15:48 -0700
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windoze is dying....
Todd wrote:
>
> "Ray Chason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"Ray Chason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > >message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/04/13/1236215&mode=thread
> > >>
> > >> Well, well, well. It seems the almighty Redmond Empire can't get
> > >> its Xbox out on time.
> > >
> > >Did you bother reading the article?? There was *nothing* from any
> official
> > >sources (not even unofficial for that matter) that claimed XBOX would be
> > >late.
> >
> > Does it matter? Suppose the Xbox did ship late, or not at all.
> > Would this have any bearing on the future of Windoze?
> >
> > No?
> >
> > So why is Linux "dying" because of what happened to Indrema?
>
> Ahhhh... now I see the point :)
>
> I think what you are seeing is the Linux hype dying down in the press and
> reality starting to hit companies. Companies that try to make a profit off
> of Linux are failing or their stock almost completely devalued. Some
> projects that used Linux are also failing (Indrema), etc.
I agree about some of this but disagree about other things. The hype
might be dying down, but Linux is moving into the server market faster
than ever. Moreover, those Linux companies with solid businesses are
weathering the uncertainties of the economy well. It seems to me the
only ones hurting (more than anybody else who's warning this month) are
companies without a business plan, without revenue, with only the money
from their VCs to burn through. It should come as no surprise to anyone
that those companies haven't found continuing sugar parents to keep them
alive. The implication that tough times like these make a statement
about the overall viability of Linux is absurd.
As to Indrema, it hasn't earned a dime in revenue, just spent all the
money raised from mortgaging the farm, and now wants some VC to ignore
Microsoft and Sony. They may have been born in the dark, but it wasn't
last night.
> Not to say that *everything* is going bad... some of the embedded stuff is
> very successful.
>
> > >Here is a quote from the article:
> > >
> > >"As with most rumors, there is little hard evidence backing up the theory
> > >that Microsoft will miss it's fall launch, and Microsoft itself has said
> > >that the Xbox is right on schedule if not slightly ahead of production
> > >goals. "
Whether they do or they don't says nothing about Windows. M$ has an
uphill climb if it wants to avoid turning this into another money hole.
The managers at Sony are _not_ stupid. Microsoft's hardware advantage
will buy it about six months, and it has zero leverage from its Windows
business. Experience has shown that M$ doesn't do any better than
anyone else when it can't leverage its monopoly. If they compound that
by launching late, they're screwed. That box has to go on the market
and have a gangbuster holiday season, or they will be underdogs from now
on.
> > >
> > >> Guess Windoze must be dying.
> > >
> > >Dream on.
> >
> > Yes, I realized as soon as I gave the command to post that I should
> > have included some kind of explicit sarcasm marker.
>
> Or something that ref`ed the original Indrema article... :)
>
--
Acquaintance, n.:
A person whom we know well enough to borrow from, but not well
enough to lend to.
-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So much for modules in Linux!
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 06:19:42 GMT
"Tim Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote:
> >
> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> > > As for SuSE Linux. I have SuSE Linux 7.1 running, and compared to
> > > Redhat, SuSE is awsome. Hence, the reason I donot understand why SuSE
> > > has not made bigger inroads into the US market.
> >
> > It's absence on store shelves had a lot to do with it, I'm sure. That's
> > changing though. I picked up mine from OfficeMax a while back. (And,
without
> > a doubt, Red Hat could take some lessons from them. Fantastic distro!)
> >
> > --
> > Tom Wilson
>
> I've been a SuSE user since 5.? (1, I think). My first try was
> Slackware out of a book, then Red Hat, finally settling on SuSE because
> in my compleat newbieness it was the only one I could actually get X to
> work on and connect with my (at that time) dial-up ISP. I'm up to a few
> boxen plus a laptop on SuSE 7.1
> My only complaint is that they're too KDE-centric.
They, like Mandrake, are simply adopting the most popular desktop out there.
Its' definitely the best choice for a newbie (My opinion, of course).
Personally, I use FVWM2 most of the time. The only SuSE complaint I have is
their decision to place floppy and cdrom mount points directly off of the
system root instead of off the /mnt directory where they belong. An
aesthetic gripe, that's all.
--
Tom Wilson
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 23:31:00 -0700
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Nomen Nescio"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > the real reason is right in there - the idiot ignored the message you
> > get with every installer telling you to shut down all other programs
> > before continuing with the install.
> > if you think that guy would have got any further with linux you're
> > living in a fucking fantasy world.
> > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> >
> >
>
> I've chuckled over this since I read it. Microsoft has done a great
> job of brainwashing: Hey, if you don't follow the directions on that
> installation dialog and shut down other applications, your entire
> OS get wiped out and you deserve it! Makes perfect sense! The fact
> that someone would even try and defend this is just hilarious.
This is comical. Microsoft lore. First do a complete backup. Then,
defrag your hard drive. Boot your computer and close everything except
what you absolutely need to install the software. Install the software,
intently watching the screen for the half hour it takes. On failure,
repeat. Boot the computer.
--
Our documentation manager was showing her two year old son around the
office. He was introduced to me, at which time he pointed out that we
were both holding bags of popcorn. We were both holding bottles of
juice. But only *__he* had a lollipop.
He asked his mother, "Why doesn't HE have a lollipop?"
Her reply:
"He can have a lollipop any time he wants to. That's what it
means to be a programmer."
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So much for modules in Linux!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 06:19:26 GMT
Jim Richardson wrote:
> I suppose it has changed since SuSE 7.0 and all previous versions I have
> used (6.0 through 6.4) but boot.local is not in /etc/init.d, it's in
> /sbin/init.d. Can anyone else using 7.1 confirm this? If it has indeed
> changed, ok, if not, then Pete's claim is rather suspect...
Wha'ts a configuration file doing in /sbin? Now you're looking suspect!
On my SuSE 7.1 it's in /etc/rc.d/boot.local
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
Kylix: the way to go!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
