Linux-Advocacy Digest #679, Volume #33 Tue, 17 Apr 01 22:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (silverback)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Charles Lyttle)
unicat gets bored (Re: Microsoft gets hard) (Franek)
Re: Microsoft gets hard (Franek)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:4 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
What's the point ("Eric")
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Franek)
Re: To Eric FunkenBush (Bob Hauck)
Re: Am I***? HP Photosmart C500 and Win 2000 ("Henry Brown")
Re: Perl and Tcl/Tk: How important are they? (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Franek)
Re: What's the point (mlw)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (mlw)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (silverback)
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: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 23:29:24 GMT
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 16:24:00 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Mathew wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, Gunner © wrote:
>>
>> > On 16 Apr 2001 21:00:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
>> >
>> > >>
>> > >>Sliverdick forgets that THE ENTIRE FUCKING PLANET WAS IN A DEPRESSION
>> > >>(INCLUDING HIS BELOVED SOVIET UNION!!!)
>> > >
>> > >Depression? Maybe you meant recession?
>> > >
>> > >--
>> > >Roberto Alsina
>> >
>> > Not in 1925-34
>>
>> The economy was not in a recession in 1925 to 1929
>>
>
>Everything was great until the Union-endorsed, PROTECTIONIST Smoot-Hawley Act.
idiot
>
>As usual, the greatest threat to workers' livelihood is "labor leaders"
wrong again moron.
>
>
>> >
>> > Gunner
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "So it was that four hours later, carrying two hundred cigarettes, completely
>drunk and with a
>> > half-naked, unmarried Filipino lady, I emerged, behind the writing desk in the
>Headmaster's
>> > study-simultaneously breaking a hundred and twenty-seven school rules. The
>Chaplain, now
>> > seventy-four and impatient to get his Archbishopric, had finished the tunnel just
>a hundred yards
>> > too early."
>> >
>> >
>
>
>--
>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.
***********************************************
GDY Weasel
emailers remove the spam buster
For those seeking enlightenment visit the White Rose at
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/whiterose.htm
*********************************************
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:28:40 GMT
I see the same thing. But NT is not often used where it could, due
either a crash or lack of timeliness, do any damage to the work process.
I have seem it tried several times. One crash shut down a process line
permitting liquid nylon to harden in pipes and valves. 15 minutes off
line cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars. Another caused
disruption of a refinery operation. It took several days to get the
plant cleaned up and back on line.
I build SCADA system also. Several US cities are running systems I
designed. But if the operator displays fail, the A-B PLCs and
specialized computers will still run everything OK. The operator, just
has to run around to check local controls like he did before the
computers were installed.
Jeff McWilliams wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Lyttle wrote:
> >Monte Milanuk wrote:
> >>
> >> Monte
> >I don't understand your comment. "SoftPLC" does run on x86 type
> >computers, but no factory I know is going to use consumer class PCs
> >running Windows. Think what could happen in your steel mill if a BSOD
> >stops everything in the middle of a pour. There are lots of PC type
> >modules for factories. PC-104 is just one standard form factor for
> >industrial use. There are lots of industrial OS around that can handle
> >industrial operations. Linux is just one of several.
>
> Just to add my two cents here. I do software application development for
> the industrial automation sector here in the Detroit, Michigan area.
>
> The acceptance of Windows NT as a platform to run software on the plant floor
> has become more accepted in recent years than you think. Mind you,
> most of the uses of the NT platform based systems are not necessarily
> critical to the production process per se. Rockwell Automation does
> produce the SoftLogix Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) software
> that almost exactly works like a standard Allen-Bradley PLC5 but runs
> under Windows NT. However, most of the automation integration I've seen
> being done at Fanuc Robotics (where I do a lot of work) still uses 99.99%
> Allen-Bradley PLC5 and ControlLogix 5500 series PLC's. And of course,
> the robots themselves are still run with proprietary OSs.
>
> However, a really important emerging area in industrial automation
> is to bring together Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)
> functionality and begin merging this with a manufacturer's ERP systems
> (like BAAN) to push production schedules down to the floor, and to pull
> production, downtime, and maintenance information up.
>
> Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) is a big buzzword these days.
> Everybody wants to identify production bottlenecks and improve the
> OEE number.
>
> Rockwell Software (part of Rockwell Automation) has an entire line of
> plant automation software that is entirely NT based, including
> Plant Metrics, Historial, and RSSql. GE Fanuc's CIMPLICITY software
> is similar. This software is designed to gather data from mainly
> PLC's and store it in a database (e.g. MS SQL Server) and used to
> generate reports, including OEE.
>
> We've been writing custom SCADA packages that run under Windows NT
> for years. Even in a place as dirty as the Ford Woodhaven
> press plant I've worked on Dell Optiplex PC's running 24/7.
> This was not my idea,
> by the way. They do have failures. The standard Western Digital IDE
> hard drives in the Optiplex series typically last about 3 years before
> they begin to malfunction. CD-ROM drives die an early death as well.
> I've been suggesting using IDE RAID mirroring for about a year
> now but this particular automation customer just doesn't seem to be
> dedicated to improving their reliability.
>
> You wouldn't normally think of data gathering as being as critical
> as the second-to-second process control that's handled by the PLC's is.
> However, gathering accurate OEE information is becoming more imporant
> all the time. I've been working with one customer who is going to install
> a dedicated Windows NT 2-node cluster to guarantee that production data
> is always gathered. The Compaq CL-1850 is sitting on a bench at
> the office right now.
>
> Some other interesting things:
>
> Rockwell Automation provides a set of devices called PanelViews.
> These have typically been small embedded devices running QNX or some other
> embedded OS, with a small touch-screen face. Proprietary Rockwell
> software runs on the device providing simple (circle, square, text)
> indicators and push-buttons that help control plant automation.
> Their newest PanelViews are Windows CE based. These devices
> boot up into Windows CE, then immediately load a Citrix WinFrame client
> and attach to a Windows Terminal Server server. Using this method,
> they run a full copy of Rockwell Software's RSView32
> plant visualization and control software for Windows NT. The architecture
> requires a decidated Terminal Server box as well as a dedicated
> RSView server to drive the PanelViews.
>
> When it comes to PC hardware for the shop floor, I would MUCH rather
> go with some standard off the shelf hardware in a 4 or 5U rackmount
> "industrialized" enclosure and provides some additional cooling fans
> and air filters and configure them with redundant IDE RAID mirroring.
> This would go a long way toward improving upon the reliability of those
> Dells I see being used. It's not my decision, however. I'm primarily
> a C++ software developer, the guy sitting in the corner shaking his head
> when he hears some of these silly things being discussed.
>
> Jeff
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: Franek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: unicat gets bored (Re: Microsoft gets hard)
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:29:33 GMT
Ah, quit trolling buddy. Windows isn't dying.
------------------------------
From: Franek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Microsoft gets hard
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:32:12 GMT
JS PL wrote:
> More than 6 million Linux developers! I think not. I submit that there are
> not even 6 million Linux USERS!!
Well, that's OK. It is quite possible that there are more linux programmers than linux
users.
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:33:15 GMT
Greg Cox wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > I thought that a few years ago, the U.S.Navy tried a computer
> > controlled battleship, and the computers ran Windows NT (probably 3.51
> > in those days), and it crashed so bad the ship had to be towed into
> > port. (I may not have the facts exactly correct, but it was pretty
> > much like this.) Maybe the computers were not exactly your
> > bargain-basement PCs, but the software must have been. If the U.S.Navy
> > is dumb enough to use Microsoftware in a battle-critical system, why
> > would not some private industry be just as dumb?
> >
> >
>
> The version of the story I heard was that the first ship of a new class
> of Navy ship was out testing a new ship's control system programmed
> using a custom database running on NT4 and the DB software crashed, not
> NT. I believe the story goes that the captain said in his report that
> the DB software crashed a couple of times and was successfully restarted
> but the ship was towed in on the third crash with the system left in its
> crashed state for later analysis by the developers...
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Essentially the version that was posted here. The DB crash, iirc, was
due to the cook entering too many items in a dinner menu. This crashed
the DB, the DB took down NT. It got restarted without anyone knowing why
it crashed, the cook did it again. When it crashed, it took out
propulsion. On the third try, the Captain decided to call for a tow
until the problem could be solved.
One joke was that it should be intuitive that entering 4 entrees in the
dinner menu will shutdown the ships propulsion. The Navy fixed the
problem by making a new regulation prohibiting more than 3 entrees at a
meal.
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:4 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:38:35 -0700
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > >
> > > "David L. Moffitt" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > %%%% AYE!!!!
> > > >
> > > > "Rob Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > <snip>
> > > > >
> > > > > Re:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Let's take a nice, Glen "Sliverdick" Yeadon style pure-democratic
> > > > > vote:
> > > > >
> > > > > All for putting Glen "Sliverdick" Yeadon up against the wall, and
> > > > > filling him full of lead, say "AYE!" All opposed, say "NAY"
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's see how much Sliverdick likes democracy now."
> > > > >
> > > > > > AYES:3
> > > > > > NAYS:0
> > > > >
> > > > > ABSTAIN:1
> > > > >
> > > > > An example of the dangers of pure democracy is all well and good,
> > > > > but I reject pure democracy even if Glen advocates it and wouldn't
> > > > > vote either way on the matter; there is no moral justification for
> > > > > the action or the mass decision behind it.
> > > > >
> > > > > _
> > > > > Rob Robertson
> > >
> > > AYE: 4
> > > NAY: 0
> > > ABSTAIN: 1
> > >
> > > Doesn't ANYBODY like Sliverdick?
> > >
> > > Hey, Sliverdick...not even your body Scott Erb will vote in your
> > > favor? Or maybe he doesn't want to get on the bad side of the
> > > majority in this little democratic society.
> > >
> > > Hehehehhehe
> >
> > I'm not registered to vote in this precinct, but since I'm a registered
> > Democrat does that matter? <G>
> >
>
> Since Democrats don't care about such niceties, you are allowed
> to vote AYE in the election, regardless of where you live.
I don't have to be dead to vote either? Oh, wait a minute - I don't
live in Chicago.
Sue
------------------------------
From: "Eric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: What's the point
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 21:10:51 GMT
After six years of Windows and one GPF too many, I bought Redhat7 and
installed it. I expected a learning curve, but nothing like I ended up
with.
I got my cable modem, printer, cdrom drives, and daily programs going, and
it took me endless hours - most of them spent trying to fix my display
resolution, only to find out the config file was XF86config-4 and not
XF86config. How the hell was I supposed to know that?
Then I started tackling my digital camera. I followed all the howtos I
could find - no joy. And I still dealt with crappy looking fonts on my web
browsers. And that's when I decided to throw in the towel.
After wasting 2 solid weeks of vacation time accomplishing half of what I
could do in a few hours under windows (even with the crashes and GPFs) I
wiped my hard drive slick and threw on Windows ME.
So my question is, for the home user, what's the point? Has anyone learned
Linux from the ground up just to use it at home? What's the advantage? I'm
convinced Linux is great if you want to run a server or whatever, but is
there a point in home users running Linux?
thanks - eric
------------------------------
From: Franek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:42:53 GMT
Charles Lyttle wrote:
> However there are a number of manufacturers who make PC equals for the
> factory floor. They are much lower cost than traditional factory
> hardware, especially HP or Sun systems. These systems cost lots more
> than CompUSA trash, but still are cost effective, *IF* they have a good
> OS loaded. Linux does have competitors in this market, QNX being one.
> But the cost of a single BSOD is high enough to keep Windows out.
er... I've done some work on the "factory floor" and I've used different operating
systems. First (I'll probably be crucified now) linux crashes just as well as NT,
especially with some of the crap that's out there (of course it doesn't show blue on
screen <g>, maybe that makes it preferable.) Second, NT is used an *awful* lot in the
factory environment, and again, it's not that bad, no Sir, not at all. Lastly, whatever
application you're running that *must* not abend, you won't run either on NT or linux,
or
anything else of the kind. For critical real-time control none of these will do. QNX
will
do, as will some specialized systems like DCSs or PLCs. General-purpose boxes normally
run
user interfaces, data collection, recipe loading, this kind of things, not the RT
control.
This stuff can be rebooted relatively harmlessly.
The problems with NT have rather something to do with:
- cost of licensing and idiotic conditions with artificial limitations
- goddamned size of it (linux can be chopped up and configured *exactly* for that task
you
need)
- related to the previous: a potentially higher cost of hardware--sometimes it's
important.
> --
> Russ Lyttle
> "World Domination through Penguin Power"
> The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
> <http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: To Eric FunkenBush
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:43:36 GMT
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:07:37 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sez you. Personally, I think the STL is a very well-engineered idea,
> although as usual Microsoft, by actually implementing it to spec,
> bodged it somehow. :-)
The VC++ STL libraries were, I believe, implemented by P.J. Plauger,
aka Dinkumware Ltd. An upstanding member of the C++ community.
> It turns out MSVC++ 6.0, or the header files compled thereby, want
> std:: everywhere, unless one wants 'using namespace std;' near the top
> of his programs. As far as I understand it, this is to perfect spec,
> but it is annoying.
Ergo, the C++ spec is annyong <g>.
Lets not complain about VC++ when it actually adheres to the spec.
Lets reserve complaints for the things it gets wrong. There are enough
of those to go around.
> Then again, g++ is freeware; just because it's freeware doesn't
> mean it's perfect. I'm not even sure g++ and gdb interact correctly
> on Linux yet -- I've had gdb think it's deep in string.h when it's
> actually somewhere else.
Welcome to the wonderful world of template debugging. You are in a maze
of twisty passages, all alike.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "Henry Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: rec.photo.digital,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Am I***? HP Photosmart C500 and Win 2000
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 09:45:54 +0800
And you repost the subject line???????
"Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ic5D6.2537$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> No, you are not f*****, but you are a jackass for posting a subject line
> like that. And the people who are defending you are bigger jackasses.
>
> --
> ---
> "Igor3489" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I bought an HP Photosmart C500 digital camera. I have Linux and Win2000.
> >
> > Guess what, the stupid camera does not work with Win2000 because HP did
> > not write a driver for it.
> >
> > It appears that the camera supports TWAIN.
> >
> > I have two questions:
> >
> > 1) Is there another TWAIN driver/app that would support my camera,
without
> > the need for HP drivers?
> >
> > 2) Can I use the camera with linux? That would be preferred as I do use
> > linux much more than win2000.
> >
> > Thank you!
>
>
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Perl and Tcl/Tk: How important are they?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:47:19 GMT
"Bryant Charleston, MCSE" wrote:
>
> Hey folks,
>
> I'm a Linux newbie and I'm reading through a few books and practicing
> hands-on to learn Linux -- then Unix. A couple of the books spend quite a
> bit of time addressing scripting languages like Perl and Tcl/Tk. As a newbie
> to Linux, I'd like to get some feedback on how important these (or any
> other) scripting languages are in the real world.
>
> 1) Should I skip these and continue to learn and master the basic CLI
> commands FIRST, or learn them along w/the CLI?
> 2) Which of these scripting languages are the most important?
> 3) Are there other important scripting languages that are also widely used
> that I should be aware of?
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
> --
>
> ...................................................
> Bryant Charleston
> A+ Network + MCSE (NT4)
> Linux (RedHat 7) Enthusiast
>
> ....................................................
Most important : PERL. I use it to do internet stuff, and to run
simulations under NT. Works everywhere. Better under *nix, though.
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: Franek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:48:18 GMT
Nah, it's an urban legend. I can't remember the details, but they got some database
glitch
or something of this sort. Not related to NT, but to the program that ran on it. But
it's
such an tasty story that NT is so bad it even incapacitated the Navy ship that it's
impossible to disbelieve it--even though it's not true <G>. Well, that's the stuff what
urban legends are made of ! ;^)
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 21:58:20 -0400
Eric wrote:
> After wasting 2 solid weeks of vacation time accomplishing half of what I
> could do in a few hours under windows (even with the crashes and GPFs) I
> wiped my hard drive slick and threw on Windows ME.
>
> So my question is, for the home user, what's the point? Has anyone learned
> Linux from the ground up just to use it at home? What's the advantage? I'm
> convinced Linux is great if you want to run a server or whatever, but is
> there a point in home users running Linux?
How quickly we forget how complex computers are. Not that Windows is any easier
or any better, it is just that people know enough about Windows to do the
basics, years of experience at novice level. In two weeks you expected
everything to be as you would expect for Windows on Linux.
It just isn't so. Those same features that make Linux great, also make Windows
gurus nuts because it works completely different. It works better than both
NT/2k and DOS/Windows, just different.
Learn to play a guitar, it is a lot harder than learning the difference between
Linux and Windows.
--
I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:05:45 -0400
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > It is well documented how Microsoft limited Borland's access to Windows
> > information.
>
> What are you talking about? Even if true, limiting access doesn't make your
> product buggy. Programs crash because they do something like dereference
> invalid memory. The IDE simply doesn't do what it's supposed to do in many
> circumstances, which is poor programming and nothing else.
When making a development environment, one needs all the lowest level
information available. In Windows, a debugger is not a trivial matter. Borland
did a great job with the information available. For a couple years, they had
the best compiler and environment.
--
I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
