Linux-Advocacy Digest #568, Volume #34 Thu, 17 May 01 04:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum: ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Win 9x is horrid ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Win 9x is horrid ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x.... (Matt McLeod)
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) (Donn Miller)
Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x.... (Matt McLeod)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 03:12:49 -0400
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> In article <1wFM6.1140$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In article <4AAM6.1112$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >> >"Sean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Dear Charlie
> >> >>
> >> >> Microsoft got DoD C2 Security for Windows NT by having it
> >> >> tested *without*any*network*connections*. Yes, that's right
> >> >> it's C2 certified, but only if it's not connected to anything!
> >> >
> >> >This is no longer true, and hasn't been for a few years.
> >> >
> >> >NT4 as of SP6a is both red and orange book certified.
> >>
> >> HI crap for brains.
> >>
> >> One year ago sir you absolutely denied the existance of
> >> secret back doors in anything MS owned.
> >
> >No, I didn't. Please provide a google link showing this, or shut the fuck
> >up.
> >
>
> Yes you did. You had virtual diahrea over the notion of a secret back door.
>
> Then you ask for a LINK to prove this? From a year ago?
> On a newsgroup? KISS MY ASS JERKWAD.
>
> How fucking stupid do you think we are here?
>
> >> Then you spent 3-4 months arguing that a back door existed
> >> at all when it was being talked about.
> >
> >This statement doesn't parse.
> >
>
> This statement doesn't parse?
> Like you butt going down a set of stairs sideways?
>
> >> Now that MS has admitted there was an illegal back door to
> >> the system and publicized the .dll to remove, your still
> >> acting like a superior knowit-all jerk.
> >
> >No, they have not admitted this. The article was reposted from a year ago.
> >MS originally thought it might be a back door, but retracted it after
> >studying the code.
> >
>
> You are absolutely a fucking loonatic!
>
> You would have been fighting with Hitler during the final days
> armed with nothing more than a butter knife.
>
> You are the most pathetic loonatic I think I've ever met!
>
> Do you drive a car? Are you loose on America's Freeways?
> Does the government know you exist?
I'll have to get an M1A rifle (.308 cal) and... save the pedestrians.
>
> You have almost the same logic as Jeffrey Dahmer!
>
> Oh no honey, that's not somebody shooting at us ---
> those are just very fast flies!!!!
>
> GET REAL YOU FUCKING LOONATIC!!!!
>
> --
> Charlie
> -------
--
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 03:19:54 -0400
Greg Copeland wrote:
>
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm bored of all these benchmarks, since benchmarks are just marks and
> > meaningless out of context. So Win2K served up an extra transcation per
> > second or Linux manages an extra web page per second? So what?
>
> I agree. At this point, it's pretty clear that Linux can keep up with
> Win's performance without problem. Likewise, Win is on the same page
^^^^^ ^^^
lose
you misspelled "lose"
> as Linux. Uptime is a different issue. A sustained, high average load
> is again, another issue.
>
> >
> > To get a better idea, you need to look at the real world.
> >
> > If you look in the real world, you see Linux having several spots in the
> > top 100 fastest supercomputers. If Win2K/NT is so great and so scalable
> > and gives such a great price/performance ratio, then why is there not a
> > *single* Windows cluster in the top 100 supercomputers list?
>
> Though I do believe that this somewhat makes your point, it's not entirely
> fair. Win doesn't really have a high-end distributed computing solution
^^^
Lose
> like Linux does (if one exists, please point it out to me). Likewise,
> it doesn't really support clusters like MOSIX does. So, saying that Win
^^^
Lose
> doesn't show up on the list, doesn't mean that it can't because of simple
> performance and scalability issues, but rather, Win doesn't really have
^^^
Lose
> the technologies to compete (no distributed computing and no clusters
> [hot fail-over/redundancy makes a true cluster not]). That makes, I think,
> another good point, but it is clearly a different point unto its own.
>
> --
> Greg Copeland, Principal Consultant
> Copeland Computer Consulting
> --------------------------------------------------
> PGP/GPG Key at http://www.keyserver.net
> DE5E 6F1D 0B51 6758 A5D7 7DFE D785 A386 BD11 4FCD
> --------------------------------------------------
--
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum:
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 03:22:52 -0400
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> Name:
> mike
> Email:
> Location:
> UK
> Occupation:
> Notes developer
>
> The real problem here is that most users are complete morons. They never
> understood DOS, Windows or Linux. Sure they seemed to achieve something
> with Windows but when it went wrong, they didn't have a clue and, as
> someone who worked on a help desk for some years, I got sick and tired
> of dealing with these cretins who shouldn't have been allowed anywhere
> near a PC.
> Like women drivers who don't know how to change a wheel, the technology
> is beyond them and they should leave it to the big boys who really
> understand it. Sorry guys - you are too stupid to have a computer.
>
Exactly why Linux is the SUPERIOR desktop solution.
It keeps the cretins from fucking up the configuration.
> -----
>
> Doesn't the above just summarise the problem with the populous.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
--
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: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 19:26:34 +1200
> > Also, the CEO of Work and Income New Zealand is accountable to the State Services
> > Commission. The CEO is on a 3 year contract, fails to live up to the contract, its
> > terminated at the end.
>
> For years, I've wished that the US would adopt a similar situation...
> ESPECIALLY for our burgeoning welfare bureacracies (which are rife
> with corruption...and the welfare bureacracy itself does NOTHING
> to police the recipients of those checks...because the more checks
> they are sending out, the more justification for increasing the
> pay grades of those within said bureacracy...as well as getting
> bigger offices, limousines, etc.).
>
Also, the State Services Commission goes head hunting for CEO's. For example, the new
IRD CEO
has been nabbed off the Australians after offering the guy a $200,000+ package
+performance
bonus's on top of that.
The CEO of Work and Income must meet the growth targets of the government, in that,
they must
find x number of long term unemployed jobs etc etc. This year, they achieved that
result 3
months before the due date of assessment. Many of the departments, such as MET
service, which
studies the whether, is a self funding authority that turns a profit for the crown,
which is
the same for NZ Post, TVNZ, BCL, Moving Pictures, and other state own assets.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:43:21 +0100
> What about binary distributed software? That is pretty much a big
> problem, because some dist has different FS layout, and (at least AFAIK,
> there is no
> (standard) way to find about this layout).
This really should not matter and the fault lies squarely with the
application maker.
The user should be able to (at his/her option) install either to a tree
entirely dependent on the application in /opt, install it in to the
existing bin,etc,lib,man tree in /usr or /usr/local, or whatever (these
are only examples). If the application uses a shell script warpper, then
the shell script wrapper can inform the app (by means of environment
variables) where the root of its install tree is.
I have no idea why this is not done more often.
> As for "incredibly portable as standard libraries are used", that is
> *pure bull*, if I use standard libraries, I can port code from windows
> to linux to unix to VMS to Mac to whatever you want, as long as it
> support the standard libraries (I mainly talk about C/C++ standard
> libraries, are you talking about something else?). There is a limit to
> how much you can do with those standard libraries, before you hit
> performance & usability limits. (Usability means that you just *can't*
> do some stuff using the standard libraries. Threading, GUI & networking,
> to name a few.)
I don't believe there is any completely portable way of doing OS
dependent stuff between such vastly differing OSs short of using Java or
a really cool toolkit.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Wed, 16 May 2001 01:14:21 -0400
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> > > Ditto, bigot.
> >
> > So, if I hold someone's felonious behavior against them, that makes
> > me a bigot, eh?
> >
> > You prove Joseph Sobran's point. When ever fags don't like someone's
> > Non-Politically Correct opinion, they trot out the "bigot" label.
> >
> > Too bad for you that most people have learned that "anti-gay bigot" should
> > be interpreted to mean "sane, healthy person that bigotted gays don't like"
> >
> >
>
> Aaron, GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! if a persons gay, who cares? I don't.
>
Niether do I...until they insist on giving me the gory details.
> Matthew Gardiner
--
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: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 10:01:56 +0200
In article <yyCM6.1126$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <XlAM6.1104$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In article <WrlM6.1009$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > MS uses encrypted data so that activation can't be spoofed.
>> >> > Otherwise, you could simply watch the data, and generate your own
>> >> > "activation".
>> >> >
>> >> > "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> >> Ok, from c't, issue #9 (23/4-6/5/2001), german edition:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Our attempt to use a man-in-the-middle attack to listen in on
>> >> >> the HTTPS connection between Windows-XP and Clearing
>> >> >> House...failed: not only does XP encrypt the data, but it
>> >> >> receives new certificates used for further communication...
>> >> >> Extremely questionable is why Microsoft would go to such lengths
>> >> >> to simply exchange a few numbers, especially since the numbers
>> >> >> are already tied to the PC hardware.
>> >> >> ...The amount of data exchanged during activation leaves all
>> >> >> possible options open in the light of the complexity of the
>> >> >> process: It is possible that aside from the necessary
>> >> >> data...other information is exchanged, it is also possible that
>> >> >> the bloat in the data traffic is caused by the certificates
>> >> >> alone. C't advises not to use the online activation until
>> >> >> Microsoft makes the process more transparent. In the meantime
>> >> >> you're better off using the telephone."
>> >> Yes, Erik,
>> >>
>> >> But that wasn't the point. Read it again, *please*?
>> >
>> > I don't see how any other point can be derived from this.
>> >
>> > It's complaining because the data is encrypted, then wonders why MS
>> > goes to such lengths to pass the data. The answer is obvious, and
>> > the one I gave.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> Uh no,
>>
>> Maybe because I have the German text beside me. They are complaining
>> that a) MS is sending new certificates, why are they necessary? and b)
>> the registration process is sending *too much* data to be the simple
>> hash that MS is telling us it should be (they do note that the amount
>> of data may be caused by the new certificates).
>
> Clearly they're sending certificates specific to activation, so that
> other certificates can't be used to spoof the activation process. I
> don't see the problem.
>
>
>
Now we are getting somewhere. The main beef c't has with the activation
process, is that Microsoft does not tell what it does exactly. The amount
of traffic is big enough to hide additional data in the activation
request, and unless the exact method is known, we only have Microsofts
word that that doesn't happen. You may trust them, c't apparently doesn't
and they seem to be justified based on past experiences.
Clearly the certificates aren't all that necessary if you can just pass
along your hardware key over the phone if you choose that method of
activation
Face it Erik, *nobody* trusts Microsoft on their word anymore. Well, you
do, obviously, so I'm curious if you can give a reason for that? You seem
to be too intelligent to trust anything on faith alone.
Mart
--
Gimme back my steel, gimme back my nerve
Gimme back my youth for the dead man's curve
For that icy feel when you start to swerve
John Hiatt - What Do We Do Now
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 10:05:30 +0200
In article <frFM6.1138$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Wed, 16 May 2001 17:13:39 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> > "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>
>> >> Maybe because I have the German text beside me. They are complaining
> that
>> >> a) MS is sending new certificates, why are they necessary? and b)
>> >> the registration process is sending *too much* data to be the simple
>> >> hash that MS is telling us it should be (they do note that the
>> >> amount of
> data
>> >> may be caused by the new certificates).
>> >
>> > Clearly they're sending certificates specific to activation, so that
> other
>> > certificates can't be used to spoof the activation process. I don't
>> > see
> the
>> > problem.
>> >
>> >
>> Eric, how can you claim that they are "clearly sending certificates",
>> when the data is encrypted ?
>
> The magazine SAID that certificates were being sent. I'm simply taking
> them at their word.
>
>
>
>
You can do that. C't is a very reputable and objective magazine. If they
claim something, they generally point to the source as backup so you can
do your own investigation if necessary. You can take them at their word,
any misunderstandings in this thread may partially be because I
translated a part of a sidebar to a whole article. You may be missing a
little context. I apologise for the inconvenience.
Mart
--
Gimme back my steel, gimme back my nerve
Gimme back my youth for the dead man's curve
For that icy feel when you start to swerve
John Hiatt - What Do We Do Now
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt McLeod)
Crossposted-To:
alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris,staroffice.com.support.install.solaris,comp.unix.advocacy,alt.os.unix,alt.unix
Subject: Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x....
Date: 17 May 2001 18:06:13 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 16 May 2001, Edward Rosten wrote:
>
>> > (gcc doesn't cut it for serious development, IMHO, especially
>> > for 64 bit stuff.)
>>
>> GCC isn't that good on RISC architectures, but
>> it still compiles code just fine. Why not develop on GCC and then get one
>> other compiler for the final compilation?
>
>Develop where you deploy. Also, that won't address 64 bit issues.
And, possibly more importantly, it means you have an "interesting"
time dealing with compiler incompatibilities. It's bad enough between
versions of Sun's stuff, let alone between the Sun compilers and gcc.
(Disclaimer: I am not a C/C++ developer, I just maintain the
development infrastructure and review designs for security foo.)
--
Errors have occurred.
We won't tell you where or why.
Lazy programmers.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 04:08:44 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Jon Johansan wrote:
> You are biased towards what you know and dislike what you don't. OK, I can
> understand that. But don't you think you are being unfair? how would you
> know scripting is easier on unix than Windows if you've never done it,
> really tried it seriously. I find scripting on windows to be effortless but
> don't often need it cause it's just as easy to fire up VB and write a quick
> app there as it is to use vbscript in wsh.
Well, it depends on what kind of scripting you're talking about. You
can still do the Bourne-shell and perl, sed, awk scripting on all Win32
platforms via Cygwin 32. But see, Cygwin 32 is much like Wine on Linux
or FreeBSD, i.e., you're trying to emulate another platform. Also,
Cygwin is an open source compiler, so I find that I can still develop
open source software on Windows, even though Windows itself is not open
source.
http://www.cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/are-free.html
So, I believe that a happy medium can be acheived there. Also what I
find interesting is the fact that gcc on Windows can generate both pure
WinAPI code and code that contains a unix-emulation layer, linked to
cygwin1.dll, or whatever the hell it is.
http://www.cygwin.com/faq/faq.html#SEC82
I've actually developed both WinAPI and Cygwin unix emulation-layer code
on Windows with gcc. With this set of tools, I think I've found myself
a happy medium here, because I really am a unix lover and Windows hater
trying to be more open-minded towards Windows.
For a long time, all I had on my machine was FreeBSD, for over a year.
Then, I decided that I would install Win ME as a dual-boot, because
although I hated Windows, I figured the diversity would help free my
mind as a C++ developer. Staying with one OS really is boring, although
I prefer FreeBSD and open source OSes most of the time.
> It's flat out not easier to add users in linux, W2K has a command line
> version for practically everything you would want to admin and you can add
> users from the cmd line too, as easily as any other OS. W2K uptime is rock
> solid. Anyone tells you different is lying. W2K is not NT and definately not
> W9x. None of those uptime stories applies. Please don't reduce credibility
> by trying to assail W2K uptime, cause it just won't fly with EVERYONE using
> it.
Actually, it depends on which distro. RedHat has that linuxconf tool
for adding users, and as far as I know, it's just as easy adding users
with that tool as it is with Windows NT, because it's 100% GUI driven.
I actually didn't like linuxconf, though, and I like the
follow-the-prompts "adduser" scripts that FreeBSD and Slackware
provide. And, adding users in FreeBSD is much easier than with NetBSD,
because NetBSD doesn't even provide a shell script to do with.
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt McLeod)
Crossposted-To:
alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris,staroffice.com.support.install.solaris,comp.unix.advocacy,alt.os.unix,alt.unix
Subject: Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x....
Date: 17 May 2001 18:07:25 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
somebody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> stands accused of saying:
>
>> (gcc doesn't cut it for serious development, IMHO,
>>especially for 64 bit stuff.)
>
>oh, you mean like the Linux and FreeBSD projects at the heart of billions of
>dollars worth of e-commerce and installed on millions of computers world-wide?
>google.com has 8000 Linux boxes all running 100% gcc-built software. ditto for
>yahoo.com, and many many other giant sites.
gcc on Solaris/SPARC doesn't do 64bit stuff (well?). That's
the main issue. Quit with the kneejerk reactions, eh?
--
"Don't put off 'till tomorrow, responsibilities.
They'll just come back to haunt you.
(Ignore them totally)"
-- TISM
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
