Linux-Advocacy Digest #692, Volume #33 Wed, 18 Apr 01 18:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux = CHOICE! (Pete Goodwin)
Slackware bites the dust. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: What's the point ("David Coto")
Re: Slackware bites the dust. (Mig)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: What's the point (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Ted Clayton)
Re: What's the point (Nigel Feltham)
Re: hmm getting tired of this! (Tim Hanson)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Tim Hanson)
Re: Microsoft: Closed source is more secure (Tim Smith)
Re: What's the point (su's safe with no telnet) (At150bogomips)
Re: What's the point ("Mart van de Wege")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux = CHOICE!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:45:50 GMT
Ed Allen wrote:
> We are looking forward to changing away from monopoly crapware.
The only crapware I'm seeing is on Linux.
> It is only the Win32 development parasites who are afraid of the
> change.
That's why I'm using Linux right now.
> The only difference is where the code and libraries get placed.
>
> You write a post install script putting links to where the real
> code was placed.
You still have to do extra work for each distro.
> Vendors getting money for crap is what I call easy times and it
> has to stop.
Why? Why shouldn't I be paid for the fruit of my labours? How am I supposed
to eat if I do not receive money for what I've created? Become a
free-loader and sponge of the rest of society?
> They have gotten fat and lazy. They need to work to earn our money.
That's funny, that's what I thought I was doing.
>>Seems to working for Microsoft.
>>
> Robbing banks and other criminal activities can be very profitable
> before a conviction.
>
> They are not tolerated afterwards.
But Microsoft are not about to be convicted, are they?
>>Yes, I want a system that works. I've tried Linux + KDE, oh dear, it's not
>>as stable as it's hyped up to be. I choose Windows instead.
>>
> Yes you seem to be one of the very few who cannot do anything which
> requires you to think before you charge off ignoring the directions.
I see, drag and drop wiping out my desktop requires me to think does it?
> Funny how you seem not to remain in your Windows cocoon though.
Because I'm willing to try something different?
Because I used something _before_ Windows. Like Ultrix? Like OpenVMS? Like
RISC OS? Like Digital UNIX?
> After a short while you come back here with another tale of how you
> just cannot manage to do what eight year olds have been reported to
> have few troubles doing.
That's because you're living in a dream world where there are no bugs, and
what I'm finding must be a lie.
> All of the regulars here know how difficult thinking about and
> making choices are for you.
No they don't.
> Your repeated tribulations are entirely at your own volition. Do
> not feel that we will think less of you if you elect to forgo the
> pain and just stick with Windows.
Ah, the old cry, "Go back to Windows and leave us alone"! I'm sorry, but I
refuse to let you wallow in your own sewage.
>>Do you seriously believe I turn off my brain when I use Windows? Ever
>>tried programming it? Oh yeah, you don't need a brain for that? HAH!
>>
> Whatever you do with your brain it is not what we Linux people call
> thinking.
What you Linux people call thinking I would not like to make any comment
about.
> Different opinions are what makes horse races.
What 'opinion'? How long has this court case been dragging on? For crying
out loud, every KNOWS Microsoft is a monopoly, why can't the courts see it?
> Just as with the horses we can only wait to see what the outcome
> will be.
And wait... and wait... and... zzzzz...
> If you agree that they wield monopoly power then you must agree that
> they are guilty of monopolization under the Sherman Act.
Yes.
> They are objecting to being broken up not the conviction.
Yes.
> Whatever the courts decide on for remedies the monopolization cannot
> be allowed to continue. That would be allowing criminal acts to
> continue in spite of the law.
Except the court case appears to be failing.
>>It looks as though there will be _nothing_ done.
>>
> The courts have a duty to see that the laws are obeyed so the
> monopolization will be stopped.
Unless they decide there is nothing to answer for, which could happen.
> It may not happen quickly but it must stop or the law must be
> repealed.
Why 'must it stop'? Who's going to stop it?
> Several of them are working for RedHat, SuSE and other Open Source
> companies.
And get paid?
> Linus works for Transmeta. Writing their customized version of
> Linux.
And get paid?
> Open Source is a great way to demonstrate to an employer exactly
> what you can do.
And a great way to demonstrate how _bad_ you are. You do realise that just
because they write Open Source code does not mean they write great code?
> Even the ones not being paid to develop their projects full time have
> the very best of resumes.
That's dogma.
> Preying on the ignorance of your customers is profiteering at best
> and could extend to fraud charges if you are keeping them ignorant
> on purpose.
Who are you talking about?
> DEC started out as a hardware company but somewhere along the way
> they decided they should sell software but they have made a poor
> showing of it because they were not willing to fleece the ignorant
> masses.
That's not what happened. Their equipment was overpriced; they failed to
spot oppertunities and they tried to continue with OpenVMS.
> I hope their hardware sales will flourish again.
Unlikely, since Digital as a company ceased to exist. It's called Compaq
now.
> They are at least bright enough to know better than to pay money for
> crap when they are not forced to by preload contracts.
What 'crap'?
> Each successful, as opposed to any of your, installation of Linux
> opens the eyes of more people as they see that the successful ones
> are free of the crapware.
I suspect the number of people who are finding Linux as bad as I am are in
the majority. Why do you think the Linux desktop has not taken off yet?
> Once they taste that freedom they will not meekly submit to the
> chains of monopolization again.
What freedom?
> The pool of Linux users keeps growing every year.
And the number of desktop users is still predominantly Windows NOT Linux.
> This year or maybe next more will join the Linux community than fall
> under the oppressive yoke of Emperor Bill.
I fail to see much oppression.
> I see the group of enlightened people growing each year and none of
> them seem eager to take up the burden of Windows again.
Windows is not a burden. That's your dogma again.
> Perhaps you can point us to some who willingly return to the Windows
> fold.
Me.
> I see no alt.destroy.linux only alt.destoy.microsoft
That's just a popular fad.
> The closest you can come is alt.linux.sux where crybabies whine
> about how they cannot get it to work.
Ah, I see, label the ones who don't meet your standards with insults.
> Windows has lots of those.
And Linux is full of morons.
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
Kylix: the way to go!
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Slackware bites the dust.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:47:20 GMT
What's this? Slackware distro has collapsed?
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
Kylix: the way to go!
------------------------------
From: "David Coto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 21:23:12 +0200
> Note: Now I have a dual 650Mhz PIII System at home running Linux that
> still runs faster than my dual 650Mhz PIII system at work running WinNT
> w/SP6. On top of that, my home system doesn't crash (unless I mess with
> the kernel which I'm known to do).
Which measures are you doing to prove that ? Math calcs ? CAD design ?
What to say so absolutly that 1CPU performs better than 2CPU's ...
obviously
they are not CPU intensive tasks.
> Yes. Even my wife who isn't computer saavy sits down at my Home System
> and uses Applixware when I'm not on my computer....She chooses my system
> although she could use Word97 on her own WinME computer.
That does not prove she works better, just that you are a good
advocate :-) and that she likes new things (all women I know do that).
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Slackware bites the dust.
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 22:10:17 +0200
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> What's this? Slackware distro has collapsed?
>
Did they??
Well if they did then there are enough for you to test..
http://www.lwn.net/2001/0412/dists.php3
I thing Fried Chicken Linux may be replacing Slackware :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
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: 18 Apr 2001 20:16:26 GMT
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 16:46:43 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>> As I understand it, capitalism is an economic system, fascism is
>> a political one. Therefore, the two terms are mostly independent.
>
> No. Fascism is an economic system which is USUALLY accompanied
> by a police state and/or totalitarian government.
The following would seem to support that it's first and foremost a
political system, though it'd also be worth checking a
business/economics dictionary.
Note the origin of the word ... seems to indicate authoritarianism (though
its common usage tends to refer only to nationalist rightists)
===
how can I help you? >dict fascism
Concise Oxford Dictionary, 8th Ed., Copyright 1991 Oxford Univ. Press se>
/Fascism/ <<"f&SIz(@)m>> n.
1. the totalitarian principles and organization of the extreme right-wing
nationalist movement in Italy (1922-43).
2. (also fascism)
a. any similar nationalist and authoritarian movement.
b. [disp.] any system of extreme right-wing or authoritarian views.
/Fascist/ n. & adj. /(also /fascist/)/. /Fascistic/ <<-"SIstIk>> adj.
/(also /fascistic/)/.
It. fascismo f. fascio political group f. L fascis bundle: see /fasces/
===
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 21:37:38 +0100
> ZX-81 and a TI-99/4a) but never did I use UNIX or OS's like that. In
Gosh, the talk of the Texas TI-99/4a brings back memories of my second
computer (the first was a Sinclair Spectrum) - this was a bit of a joke of
a machine. It was the first 16 bit home computer yet it was slower than
most 8 bit machines around at the time due to a stupid design where all
user memory was controlled by the display chip and this chip passed
commands a few at a time to CPU memory. The CPU is also the only one I know
which stores it's memory registers in external RAM - the only internal
register is a memory pointer to these registers which allows you to
effectively push all registers onto the stack instantly by changing this
pointer and later pull them back by resetting it - must have made debugging
a bit of a nightmare though.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 16:58:08 -0400
From: Ted Clayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 16:46:43 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >>
>
> >> As I understand it, capitalism is an economic system, fascism is
> >> a political one. Therefore, the two terms are mostly independent.
> >
> > No. Fascism is an economic system which is USUALLY accompanied
> > by a police state and/or totalitarian government.
>
> The following would seem to support that it's first and foremost a
> political system, though it'd also be worth checking a
> business/economics dictionary.
>
> Note the origin of the word ... seems to indicate authoritarianism (though
> its common usage tends to refer only to nationalist rightists)
>
> ===
> how can I help you? >dict fascism
> Concise Oxford Dictionary, 8th Ed., Copyright 1991 Oxford Univ. Press se>
>
> /Fascism/ <<"f&SIz(@)m>> n.
> 1. the totalitarian principles and organization of the extreme right-wing
> nationalist movement in Italy (1922-43).
> 2. (also fascism)
> a. any similar nationalist and authoritarian movement.
> b. [disp.] any system of extreme right-wing or authoritarian views.
>
> /Fascist/ n. & adj. /(also /fascist/)/. /Fascistic/ <<-"SIstIk>> adj.
> /(also /fascistic/)/.
>
> It. fascismo f. fascio political group f. L fascis bundle: see /fasces/
You won't get anywhere with this crowd by doing things like quoting
dictionaries, especially if the dictionary points out that fascism is a
right-wing ideology. All this proves to them is that the radical
left-wingers who control academia and do things like create
dictionaries, study history and politics, etc. are lying about fascism
so that they can advance their own fascist agenda.
But I guess you'll find this out on your own soon enough.
Ted
> ===
>
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
> elflord at panix dot com
--
Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not necessarily
those of CMU.
Altogether, I think we ought to read only books that bite and sting us.
If the book does not shake us awake like a blow to the skull, why bother
reading it in the first place? -- Franz Kafka, letter to Oskar Pollak,
January 27, 1904
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 22:02:26 +0100
Todd wrote:
>
> Welcome to Linux.
>
> It takes endless hours to do simple things that under Windows is done
> automatically.
>
> And they say it is a conspiracy.
>
OK - Name one thing that Windows does automatiaclly that Linux takes hours
to do.
At my last employer one of my regular jobs was to do a backup evey friday -
Under windows I had to make a new CD-R burning project each week and spend
up to 2 hours going through the server to work out what was new and needed
backing up, under linux I spent under half an hour writing a shell script
to create the CD project for me (using the 'find' command to list all
directories created in last 3 weeks to give some overlap between backups).
The result of this is instead of wasting 2 hours every friday morning on
the weekly backups I could just click an icon on the KDE desktop and wait
about 5 seconds for the CD-R software to appear - from last september when
I set up the system until the end of last month when I was sadly made
redundant I saved well over a week of wasted work time due to dumping the
inefficient steaming turd that is windows and switching to Linux.
It takes under half an hour to automate tasks on linux once (they then take
seconds) which take hours under windows each time they are needed to be
achieved.
And they say windows makes tasks easier and quicker - what utter bullshit.
This is not even counting the blank CD-R's saved by not having any more
buffer-underrun errors or bluescreens during burning.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 19:45:17 -0700
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: hmm getting tired of this!
Fred K Ollinger wrote:
>
> Matthew Gardiner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : So, in otherwords, they over employeed and they first set up in the US,
> : now they are just rationalising there business. Hmm, so, Microsofties
> : have no basis of using SuSE as the "Linux Failure Poster Child".
> : Matthew Gardiner
>
> If someone thinks that linux 'failed' b/c of one buisness then they don't get
> it. It's a paradigm shift people. If you apply an old paradigm to a new idea
> you get nonsense. The buisness failed, but the os lives on. Now if MS went
> under then there goes the OS. Unless the jackbooted thugs open source it.
> God, jackbooted thug sounds so cool, btw. Where can I get some jackboots. :)
>
> Fred
Despite the economic and market downturn, Linux is more popular than
ever. The companies with sound business plans are making it.
--
It is Texas law that when two trains meet each other at a railroad
crossing, each shall come to a full stop, and neither shall proceed
until the other has gone.
______________________________________________________________________
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
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 08:22:11 -0700
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
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]
That's not true.
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/19.88.html
--
Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong.
-- Oscar Wilde
______________________________________________________________________
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: Microsoft: Closed source is more secure
Date: 18 Apr 2001 14:08:57 -0700
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>`By contrast, Microsoft does extensive testing on every product, and on
>>every patch, said Lipner. "People ask us why our security patches take so
>>long. One of the reasons they take so long is because we test them."'
>
>Ah yes, extensive testing, which is why such glaring boners as the
>ILOVEYOU/Melissa vulnerability got out the door.
Let's see, on the one hand we have Microsoft, that tries to do things
that are ambitious (perhaps foolish, but ambitious) like provide
scripting and executable attachments in email, and has security bugs
because of it.
On the other hand, we have Unix, where people try to do something as
routine and unambitious and trivial as write an FTP server, and it takes
them *YEARS* to get rid of the buffer overflows...something any
competent programmer would not have put into the code in the first
place.
Something about glass houses or pots and kettles comes to mind...
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (At150bogomips)
Date: 18 Apr 2001 21:37:22 GMT
Subject: Re: What's the point (su's safe with no telnet)
What good is a root password going to do if your system does not run telnet?
(What isolated desktop needs telnetd?)
Paul A. Clayton
Just a former McD.'s grill worker and technophile
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:44:15 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "spicerun"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> A word of advice....when dealing with Redhat make certain you read the
> HOWTOs written especially for Redhat....In this case, that is how you
> would have found out that Redhat uses XF86config-4. You would need to
> get the HOWTOs from your distribution disk (If you bought a Redhat Box
> Set) or you need to read the HOWTOs on Redhat's site (www.redhat.com).
>
> Again, Redhat is notorious about doing minor 'tweaks' to the Linux
> configuration that nobody else knows about.
>
>
I *have* to interject here, because I get a little tired of the constant
RH bashing that is going on. This is *not* an RH thing; Debian configures
X the same way, using XF86Config-4. The point? It allows you to install
X4.0 in parallel wiht X3.3.6, a great advantage when you're trying to
upgrade, or just don't know whether or not your graphics hardware is 100%
supported by X4.0.
Note that this is not a personal attack, but in my opinion RH gets a lot of
undeserved flak, just because they are the most visible distro as market
leaders.
Mart
--
Write in C, write in C,
Write in C, yeah, write in C.
Only wimps use BASIC, Write in C.
http://www.orca.bc.ca/spamalbum/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
