Linux-Advocacy Digest #989, Volume #33 Fri, 27 Apr 01 10:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Bill Hudson admits that he, Dave Casey, V-man and Redc1c4 are liars.
("billh")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (chrisv)
Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised (T. Max Devlin)
Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Re: e: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Re: Women's rights and responsibilities.
Re: Women's rights and responsibilities.
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (Chronos Tachyon)
Re: Unwelcome changes in Linux advocacy. (David Neary)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:38:59 +0200
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:55:56 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >So any random arrangement of code will support any API you imagine?
> >Somehow, this doesn't seem like its going to work. Somehow, I think the
> >implementation details are related to the API, if it is written first,
> >and the API reflects some of the implementation details, if it is
> >documented last. In other words, an API is a sketch of the facade, not
> >an architectural diagram, however complex that facade may be, and
> >however it may limited where the beams can or must go.
>
T. Max, implementation has rarely anything to do with the API.
Consider this code:
template <class TData> class array{
private:
TData *m_pArr;
unsigned int m_size;
public:
TData & operator[](unsigned int pos); // get/set the value on pos. Throws
exception on index too high
TData & operator=(const array<TData> & other);
unsigned int size() { return m_size; }
void reSize(unsigned int newSize);
array(unsigned int size); //throws exception on error
array(unsigned int size, TData initialize); //set the initialize size of
the array
array(const array<TData> & other); //copy constructor
~array();
};
In case you don't know C++, this is a specification of a class that acts as
a safe array.(You can't overflow)
How do I implement this system is irrelevent.
This mean that I can implement this as a C array, linked list, binary tree,
hell, I could implement it as a database object, and anyone using this
wouldn't have a clue how I do it.
I hope this example will help you understand how meaningless the API is when
you try to understand the implementation.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles,soc.men,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.military.folklore
Subject: Re: Bill Hudson admits that he, Dave Casey, V-man and Redc1c4 are liars.
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:39:36 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >
> > > > Mr. "expert" wannabe, tell us how this makes it a strategic asset.
Do
> > you
> > > > think an F16 is strategic too? How about an the spec ops
helicopters
> > which
> > > > can refuel in flight and self deploy? Are they strategic too? The
C130
> > has
> > > > in flight refueling capability so it can self deploy to the theater
of
> > > > operations.
> > >
> > > And so, Because that is hte only STATED use for the in-flight
refueling,
> > > Bill Hudson maintains that in-flight refueling for ANY other purpose
> > > is absolutely forbidden.
> > >
> > > Your problem, Bill, is that you are utterly uncreative when it comes
> > > to matters where maximum creativity counts.
> > >
> > > Ever hear the saying "If it's a stupid idea and it works, it ain't
> > > a stupid idea"
> > >
> > > The marines say "Innovate, Overcome, Adapt"
> > >
> > > Bill Hudson says, "I better not try it, becuase it wasn't specifically
> > > spelled out in my field manual"
> > >
> > >
> > > Good thing you never lead a unit into combat, Bill. As soon as the
> > > fight deviates from the plan, your men would be dying in droves.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > You truly are pathetic. LOL!!! Keep it up, dolt. This is
> > > > fun.
> > >
> > >
> > > Most idiots are both blind to, and amused by any argument where
> > > their ass is getting thoroughly trounced because they can't even
> > > comprehend the fundamental issues.
> >
> > Nice cover, wannabe. The fact remains that the C130 is a tactical
airlift
> > asset. You state it is strategic. You are wrong as usual. You think
you
> > know more about this than the USAF. You simply can't be a man and admit
> > your mistake. Again here's the USAF official site
> > www.af.mil/news/factsheets
> > You are a wannabe. You are a liar. You are a pathetic excuse for a
man.
> So says Bill Hudson, USA (disgraced); a man who refuses to acknowledge
> that the Germans, Japanese, North Koreans, Chinese, Viet Cong, and North
> Vietnamese troops all shot properly-marked American medics and medical
> facilities.
LOL!!! Why do you always revert to this pathetic statement when ever you
are proven either wrong or a liar? Just more proof of how truly pathetic
you are. It would be sad, truly sad, if this wasn't so much fun. Keep it up
This is fun.
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:40:04 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>yes, your only TRUE purpose is to pass your
>DNA on to the next generation
That's secondary to just getting laid. 8)
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:40:15 GMT
Said Scott R. Godin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 24 Apr 2001 22:31:55
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> | Said Scott R. Godin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 13 Apr 2001 12:32:15
> | >In article <9b5akf$eq7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> | > "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | >
> | > | not to demand that
> | > | the government steal from me at gunpoint to fund programs whose actual
> | > | purpose is not to help, but to create dependency on those programs.
> | >
> | >Hear hear. Pleasure to meet another reasonably self-aware thinking
> | >rational Human being :)
> |
> | And it doesn't bother you at all that you are exhibiting fascist
> | behavior, does it?
>
>hmmm let's see.. fascism vs democracy vs republic.. no, I don't think
>they mesh.
It isn't any 'mesh' that I was referring to, but your belief that only
your philosophical understanding is valid; the fascist view. To claim
that taxation is 'stealing at gunpoint' is just a bit of lunacy; you
have no right to demand that the government not provide for the welfare
of all citizens (and the Founding Fathers authorized no minimal
productivity requirement to qualify, or they and all other rich people
simply wouldn't make the grade) by suspending taxation, simply based on
your rhetorical flum-flummery. I would like to see lower taxes as much
as the next guy, but I find that, whether I'm making a lot or a little,
I tend to whine less than he, because I'm not as greedy or envious by
nature and practice.
>Websters: "a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the
>Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and
>that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a
>dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and
>forcible suppression of opposition"
>
>In our Republic here in the USA, the individual IS the Sovereign.
Maybe in theory. In the real world, only the federal government enjoys
sovereignty. The individual is simply free.
>I completely fail to see how recognizing another individual who can
>think for himself is even remotely considerable as facsist.
Claiming that someone deserves the label "reasonably self-aware thinking
rational Human being" only if they agree with your opinion on an issue
is about as fascist as it gets, I'm afraid.
> | >Welfare, Social Security, Minimum Wage... the list goes on and on..
> |
> | Yes, it sure does. Welcome to the real world, Mr. "Self-aware thinking
> | rational monkey with a brain".
>
>Welcome to America -- the only socialist country that can't admit it. :P
So much for your brief foray into the real world. If you're more
comfortable in your little private fantasy land, well, that's your
problem.
>Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner --
>Liberty is two wolves attempting to have a sheep for dinner and finding
>a well-informed, well-armed sheep.
>
>Whatever you're smoking isn't working anymore.
Obviously not, if the previous sentence was supposed to mean anything.
I'll go burn a blunt, and try again.
Nope. Still no joy.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:40:16 GMT
Said "JS PL" <hi everybody!> in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 25 Apr
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Scott R. Godin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 13 Apr 2001 12:32:15
>> >In article <9b5akf$eq7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> > "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > | not to demand that
>> > | the government steal from me at gunpoint to fund programs whose actual
>> > | purpose is not to help, but to create dependency on those programs.
>> >
>> >Hear hear. Pleasure to meet another reasonably self-aware thinking
>> >rational Human being :)
>>
>> And it doesn't bother you at all that you are exhibiting fascist
>> behavior, does it?
>
>It doesn't bother you that you are using words without knowing their
>meanings again?
No more than it bothers me that you use words without knowing their
meaning. Meaning is what happens to words when you understand them, not
something built into them because somebody wrote them down in a
dictionary. There were words before there were dictionaries, JS PL, did
you ever think about that?
IOW, I understand perfectly what the word fascism means, though
obviously you do not understand why it applies to the previous
statement. Doh!
>Opposing (or endorsing) welfare has nothing at all to do
>with fascism.
It does when you claim it (whichever) is the only opinion a "reasonably
self-aware thinking rational Human being" could have on the issue. It
'has something to do' with fascism because that's practically a
definition of fascism. The idea that one "should not" differ with a
particular philosophical perspective or political opinion.
Think harder.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:40:17 GMT
Said Dave in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 24 Apr 2001 11:52:53 -0600;
>On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:14:59 GMT, T. Max Devlin
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Its called "reasoning". It doesn't matter if I was there, it is still
>>merely an illustration of your point, not prove of it. I doubt that
>>most Windows PCs could run 255 programs without fail at all, let alone
>>every time or all the time. Split it up how you want, quibble about
>>threads and processes, but it comes down to the Real World, not the
>>theoretical world of computer programming. Windows actually does suck
>>that much.
>
>I'm not sure you could even install that many programs, let alone run
>them, without Windows becoming unstable.
That's a very good point. It is the registry's tendency to turn into a
"mountain of spaghetti made from feces" when a number of different
packages are installed that makes Windows so remarkably unstable in many
cases.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:45:24 GMT
Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 25 Apr 2001 20:34:22
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 05 Apr 2001 19:09:52
>> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> >> Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 05 Apr 2001 03:40:29
>> >> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> >> >> Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 04 Apr 2001 03:00:58
>> >> >> [...]
>> >> >> >Any computer that has a multi-tasking O/S can run over 255 programs...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In theory or in reliable practice? Any OS but Windows, maybe. Monopoly
>> >> >> crapware, I'm not so sure about.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >In reliable practice... Back around 1965 a navy facility had a large
>> >> >computer system. [...]
>> >>
>> >> 'In this here example one did,' is hardly what I call "in reliable
>> >> practice", regardless of how unlikely the one that did seems to be. I
>> >> mean can you guarantee that any and every computer (functioning
>> >> hardware) running Windows will reliably run over 255 programs ever time
>> >> you attempt it without fail? Then you're talking "in theory".
[...]
>> >How would you know... you weren't there.
>>
>> Its called "reasoning". It doesn't matter if I was there, it is still
>> merely an illustration of your point, not prove of it. I doubt that
>> most Windows PCs could run 255 programs without fail at all, let alone
>> every time or all the time. Split it up how you want, quibble about
>> threads and processes, but it comes down to the Real World, not the
>> theoretical world of computer programming. Windows actually does suck
>> that much.
>>
>> --
>> T. Max Devlin
>> *** The best way to convince another is
>> to state your case moderately and
>> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>
>I know what you mean... but back then it was done in a more primitive
>but easy to understand format. Each user back then was lucky to get a
>4k chunk of memory.
With a Unix OS, I would imagine you could easily load and run 255
programs in a 4k chunk of memory. Slow and painful, and frequent use of
swap, but nobody who tried this and had a Unix system fall over would
hesitate to declare the Unix being used was sub-standard.
[...]
>That old navy machine did batch mode processing. Actually, everyone
>submitted computing jobs in this manner and came back sometime the next
>day for the results. But it did indeed run these programs without any
>hitches.
But not all at the same time, surely.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:45:03 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>>
Aaron> Ray Fischer wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >Ray Fischer wrote:
>> >> >> nunnayabidniz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >> >homosexuality is not genetic, it is a choice.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why did you choose to be heterosexual?
>> >> >
>> >> >because successful DNA are those that reproduce.
>> >>
>> >> That isn't an answer. Why did YOU CHOOSE to be heterosexual?
>> >>
>> >> >There are only two explanations for homosexuality
>> >>
>> >> That you are capable of accepting. Given your obvious bigotry and
>> >> scientific illiteracy, I'd hardly consider your opinion to be worth
>> >> anything.
>>
Aaron> You're either born with it (genetic), or you choose it (for whatever
Aaron> reason).
>>
Aaron> So, homosexuality is the result of either a genetic defect, or a choice.
>>
Aaron> There are *NO* other options.
>>
>> Either you are born left handed (genetic), or you choose to be left handed (for
>> whatever reason).
>>
>> So, left-handedness is the result of either a genetic defect, or a choice.
>>
>> There are *NO* other option.
Aaron> Clue for the clueless.
Aaron> Homosexuality is a defect, as it interferes with the organism's ability
Aaron> to successfully reproduce (yes, your only TRUE purpose is to pass your
1) loads of homosexuals do reproduce. There is no correlation between infertility
and sexual orientation.
Aaron> DNA on to the next generation)
2) No, if that were true then the naked mole rat would not exist. Evolutionarily
the purpose is to assure your traits go on to the next generation. This can be
done by helping the offspring of close relatives (see Naked Mole Rat). As there
is homosexuality in virtually every advanced wild animal, it seems to be a natural
and widespread item. It is possible that having a small minority of a population be
gay increases the ratio of mature members of the species to immature members and this
increases overall chances of survival.
3) With respect to the issue of equal rights for gays, none of the above is relevant.
As being homosexual in no way intrudes on the rights of others, homosexuals deserve
equal rights.
Aaron> Left-handedness is a benign variance, which has little or no effect on
Aaron> the ability to reproduce, or anything else, for that matter.
Homosexuality is also a benign variance.
Aaron> Hope that helps.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: e: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:46:22 GMT
>>>>> Brent R writes:
Brent> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>>
Aaron> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>> >> >>and that that somehow prevented young girls from entering
>> >> >> into Math/Science.
>>
>> >> >Barbie dolls didn't stop me.
>>
>> >> Personally, I wonder who the dumbass was who programmed in the
>> >> "Math is haaaaaaard" into them at one point.
>>
Aaron> A realist.
>>
>> Math is not harder than any other topic. That it is
>> is a self perpetuating myth. Thankfully for my daughters,
>> my wife majored in math and is an actuary.
>>
>> Both daughters love math and do great at it. My twelve year
>> old wants to solve the Twin Prime Conjecture (she also wants
>> to cure cancer using molecular biology, so we will see where
>> she ends up).
Brent> People who brag about their kids irritate me.
I do not think she will solve the twin prime conjecture. My
main point was as she is not frighten of math, she does well
at it.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.men
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Women's rights and responsibilities.
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:48:06 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>>
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>> >>
>> >> >> And I was under the impression in the cases of questionable
>> >> >> paternity that a DNA sample could be demanded.
>> >>
Aaron> Nope. Paternity is still judged on English common law: whoever
Aaron> the mother CLAIMS is the father *IS* the father, until proven
Aaron> otherwise.
>> >>
>> >> Can you cite a single state that has a law like this?
>>
Aaron> All 50, as they have no statutory law to supercede the common law.
>>
>> You failed to provide a single citation.
Aaron> How can you cite a law which doesn't exist, MORON.
Good for you to concede you were wrong.
Aaron> Hope that helps, leftist feeb.
>> Please name a leftist position of mine.
Aaron> Name some marxist policies you disagree with.
All of them.
Now name a single leftist position I hold.
Aaron> And no editing the word "disagree" this time, forger.
You are a lying forger.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Women's rights and responsibilities.
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:49:06 GMT
>>>>> Donovan Rebbechi writes:
Donovan> On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:37:17 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> You failed to provide a single citation.
>>
>> How can you cite a law which doesn't exist, MORON.
Donovan> While Kulkis' displays his usual manners (ie none), he is right.
Donovan> Search the web, it's not like it's hard to find. It's common law,
Donovan> not legislation.
Donovan> OTOH, remedies to challenge paternity is (state) legislation.
Name a state in which a man cannot challenge paternity with a DNA
test.
Mr. Kulkis falsely claims that a man cannot do that in any state.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 09:50:15 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Joseph T. Adams in alt.destroy.microsoft on 24 Apr 2001 23:05:42
> >In comp.os.linux.advocacy Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> >: Are you guys planning on starting any revolts in order to restore the
> >: lawful government of the US?
> >
> >You are free to believe whatever stereotypes you want.
> >
> >However, the Ohio Unorganized Militia is and always has been a
> >law-abiding organization. It exists to protect the life, liberty and
> >property of every U.S. Citizen and legal resident alien.
>
> You can believe any delusions you want, but we already have more
> trustworthy organization than your private band of supposedly peaceful
> thugs to take of that for us, thanks.
Who would you trust first, Max, Joseph, or me?
--
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.
------------------------------
From: Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:51:41 GMT
On Fri 27 Apr 2001 02:55, Ayende Rahien wrote:
[Snip]
>
> I just came from a computer where Linux would kernel panic if it was on
> anything but primary master.
> It said it can't mount root.
>
Was /etc/fstab set up to reflect the changes in what partitions were called?
--
Chronos Tachyon
Guardian of Eristic Paraphernalia
Gatekeeper of the Region of Thud
[Reply instructions: My real domain is "echo <address> | cut -d. -f6,7"]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Neary)
Subject: Re: Unwelcome changes in Linux advocacy.
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:52:11 GMT
robert bronsing wrote:
>
> But if you come here yelling how
>difficult linux is, or that windows is the best around for any
>job...well then, maybe you ought to get an asbestos suit and face the
>flames....
Three typical situations, with possible replies....
1) "I hate linux! It's impossible to configure! I have no idea why
it's so popular."
"What problems are you having, exactly? Maybe there's some way we
can help you out. At least, if we know what the problem is we
might be able to tell you where to get help with it. I'm sure
you'll find it's not as difficult as you think."
2) "Windows rocks, Linux sucks - why don't all you linux people get
a real operating system?"
"What sucks about linux that's better in windows? I know there
are a few things I have here which are pretty cool, and are
impossible to do under an MS OS."
3) "I wouldn't use Linux if you paid me - all slashdotters &
linux users are aggressive, rude, fanatical shits who know
nothing about computers. You're all just sheep following a trend
that has no merit."
No response is good to this one.
> This is an advocacy
>group. People come here to tell you how wonderful linux is. Others come
>here to persuede you to come back to using windows. Yet others come here
>to troll. That's nice. You have all kinds of people here and I don't
>think you should expect too serious postings here.
It'd be nice if the "how wonderful" posts were a little more
frequent, and the trolls/flames were a little less so, though.
A little higher on the SNR would be no harm at all.
>Well, I think you should lighten-up a bit about this group. Of course,
>it's always a good thing to also be serious at times (and many threads
>are serious to a point). Well, maybe I'll be flamed for saying all this
>as a non-regular using a win98 box...see you.
Windoze sux. Linux rulez. Use linux. Or Bill gets it.
I'm light - just a bit depressed at seeing a community I like on
a slippery slope. It's a shame.
Dave.
--
David Neary, E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Palamon Technologies Ltd. Phone +353-1-634-5059
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
