Linux-Advocacy Digest #613, Volume #34 Fri, 18 May 01 22:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux takes Hollywood by storm! ("Paolo Ciambotti")
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Terry Porter)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ray Fischer)
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Mandrake 8 sets the standard - for Desktop users anyway. (Terry Porter)
Re: Mandrake 8 sets the standard - for Desktop users anyway. (Terry Porter)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Paolo Ciambotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux takes Hollywood by storm!
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 18:47:54 -0700
IYou really should read the article, it was quite informative. Just to
save you some time, though, I've pasted a comment posted to Slashdot (it
was covered there yesterday) by one of the PDI engineers.
==========================================================
"I work in the R&D department at PDI. We do use some SGI Linux boxes in
our renderfarm, but not on the desktop. The SGI's probably comprise about
10% of the renderfarm and less during Shrek production. Despite what you
may hear reported in the press, we only used Linux boxes in our renderfarm
during Shrek. We are just starting to deploy desktop Linux boxes now."
"About 80% of our pipeline is proprietary software. The other 20% is
largely made up of Maya, which works on our Linux boxes (so to speak) and
things like PhotoShop where we generally use Macs. We are lucky that we
use proprietary software since it made it feasible to get the renderfarm
ported to Linux quickly. The GUI based tools were also relatively easy,
but it took us about a year to get everything totally ported and ready for
desktop production. Of course our staff of 16 programmers was also doing
production support at the same time."
"For the details on our Renderfarm setup, check out my webpage at"
http://www.flarg.com/
"Also, during Shrek, our animators used desktop SGI O2s (yes, O2s, not
Octanes) running IRIX. About half to three-quarters of the renderfarm was
made up of Linux boxes. Of that, only about 10% were HP boxes. We also had
a spattering of V/A Linux, SGI and Atipa boxes. HP just gets the press."
Daniel Wexler
R&D Staff, PDI/DreamWorks
============================================================
Copyright 2001, Daniel Wexler, PDI/DreamWorks
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: 18 May 2001 20:44:09 -0500
"Ayende Rahien" <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9e3d09$12n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >>>>> "Ayende" == Ayende Rahien <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Ayende> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > Ayende> news:9e0eeo$qc9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > >> Doesn't VB cost money? Also, VB is one language only. Every
> > >> language has strengths and weaknesses and no one language is
> > >> best at everything. UNIX bydefault comes with quite a few. A
> > >> decent modern installation of Linux comes with loads. I can
> > >> think of many taskls where VB would be totally inferior to AWK
> > >> and many tasks where the oppersite would be true. For really
> > >> good scripting a good choice is needed.
> >
> > Ayende> Windows comes with WSH, which come with VBS & JS support.
> > Ayende> You can add Perl & Python from activestate.com (free).
> > Ayende> C#, VB.NET comes with .NET beta, and there are also other
> > Ayende> languages that you can hook there, I believe.
> >
> > Does any of WSH, C#, VB.NET, .NET provides support of regular
> > expressions?
>
> AFAIK, no (except maybe Perl)
> There is a regex COM object, RegExp I think, that is accessible to just
> about anytihng in Windows, inclusing WSH lanaguages.
Actually - yes it does:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/dotnet/cpguide/cpconintroductiontoregulare
xpressions.htm
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: 18 May 2001 20:44:06 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>>>> "Ayende" == Ayende Rahien <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Ayende> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Ayende> news:9e0eeo$qc9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> Doesn't VB cost money? Also, VB is one language only. Every
> >> language has strengths and weaknesses and no one language is
> >> best at everything. UNIX bydefault comes with quite a few. A
> >> decent modern installation of Linux comes with loads. I can
> >> think of many taskls where VB would be totally inferior to AWK
> >> and many tasks where the oppersite would be true. For really
> >> good scripting a good choice is needed.
>
> Ayende> Windows comes with WSH, which come with VBS & JS support.
> Ayende> You can add Perl & Python from activestate.com (free).
> Ayende> C#, VB.NET comes with .NET beta, and there are also other
> Ayende> languages that you can hook there, I believe.
>
> Does any of WSH, C#, VB.NET, .NET provides support of regular
> expressions?
>
YES
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/dotnet/cpguide/cpconintroductiontoregulare
xpressions.htm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 19 May 2001 01:31:18 GMT
On Fri, 18 May 2001 04:41:44 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 17 May 2001
> 17:02:12 GMT;
>>On 17 May 2001 04:16:02 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Umm ... why yes, Max is my clone brother, from the Linux advanced
>>>bot labs!
>>
>>>Kind Regards
>>>Terry
>>
>>Naahhh.
>>
>>You guys are the prototypes that somehow got loose from the lab.
>>
>>flatfish
>
> Terrorized. That's the word you're looking for, Steve/Clair. That is
> what you feel. Terrorized.
>
> Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Hahahahahahahahaahhahah LOL!!!!
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 01:47:21 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > They buy what "everyone else" has. Thats the whole point of
> > > monopolizaiont, you know. To make sure you are THE vendor.
> >
> > I think you need to sit down and think that
> > through again. Are you *sure* the whole point of
> > monopolization is to appeal to herd instincts?
>
> Yup. People buy "what everybody else has". micro$oft made sure what
> everybody else had is micro$oft.
You sure it isn't to deny consumers any alternative
choices?
[snip]
> > > I given my students a choice between cards and a computer to play
> > > solitaire. None of them has taken the cards.
> >
> > They must think you are very silly then. :D
>
> No, they dont. BTW, you can stopped that idiotic grinning. You dont
> drool too, do you?
Why no! :D....
> > I doubt they have to pay for that computer;
>
> They dont.
>
> > if they did they'd take the cards.
> >
>
> Really?
.. and spend the different on beer. Students. :D
[snip]
> > Are you suggesting that x86 computers are *not* the cheapest?
>
> They are percied as the chepest becasue most people only look at intial
> purchase price. The dont include cost of ownership.
Oh, that old line.
[snip]
> > > And. therefore, you support one of the moet immoral and unethical
> > > companies in existance.
> >
> > Yes, yes, we *know* you don't like them.
>
> And you support one of the most immoral and unethical companies in
> existance.
You don't have to keep telling us. We already know
you don't like them (and that I do, for that
matter).
[snip]
> > > > It is the *best* OS for the desktop.
> > >
> > > No, its not.
> >
> > Is so. :D
>
> Is that drool coming out of that idiotic grin?
No, *this* is drool coming out
of my idiotic grin: :D....
[snip]
> > > .. so window$ just got moved to "good enough" status, again?
> >
> > It's the best.
>
> no. Its not.
Is so!
(Sorry, sorry, I really should resist
the temptation to do that. :/ )
> > Being the fasted on meager hardware
> > is not important. The feature set *is*.
>
> Feature set? window$ has the best? AHAhahahahahhaaha. BAhahahhahaha.
Oh yeah. Heck, Windows 95 has just about every
feature useful for a desktop app that anyone has
thought of, plus a bunhc of stuff that's mostly good
for server side apps, to boot.
[snip]
> > Developers *do* develop for platforms that
> > aren't the market leader. They do it if they
> > can produce a better product thereby.
> >
> > Remember way back when when Illustrator
> > came out? The market leader was DOS then,
> > wasn't it? Quite convincingly, no?
>
> The Macintosh and Pagemaker produced a whole new market. Desktop
> publishing. THATS why Aldus programmed for the Mac.
Okay, lets talk Pagemaker.
Pagemaker could, in theory, have created
the desktop publishing market on the PC;
they could have created a PC version of
Pagemaker instead of a Mac one. On DOS.
DOS was clearly the market leader. It had
the marketshare.
But they didn't. They didn't because it
would have been vastly harder to do it on
the PC. The Mac made it feasible- or at
least feasible without Herculean efforts-
so they wrote to the Mac.
And users came to them; they bought
Macs for desktop publishing. Just like
that!
[snip]
> > There are quite a few apps like that. They had
> > to migrate to Windows, when it became strong
> > enough to support them. But that took quite
> > some time.
>
> They migrated -from- the Mac becauee, when the app came out, the Mac
> would have been the dominant platorm... in that area.
Well, yes. *Exactly*. People who needed
that app used Macs, period. It didn't
matter that all their friends used DOS.
I think that shows that your notion of
users running Windows out of herd
mentality, and developers having to follow
their lead, is mistaken.
[snip]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 01:47:49 GMT
Rich Soyack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > >> http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/faq/faq21.htm
>> > >>
>> > >> Can I get HIV from having vaginal sex?
>> > >>
>> > >> Yes, it is possible to become infected with HIV through vaginal
>> > >> intercourse. In fact, it is the most common way the virus is
>> > >> transmitted in much of the world. HIV can be found in the blood,
>> > >> semen, pre-seminal fluid, or vaginal fluid of a person infected
>> > >> with the virus. The lining of the vagina can tear and possibly
>> > >> allow HIV to enter the body. Direct absorption of HIV through
>> > >> the mucous membranes that line the vagina also is a possibility.
>> > >>
>> > >> The male may be at less risk for HIV transmission than the female
>> > >> through vaginal intercourse. However, HIV can enter the body of
>the
>> > >> male through his urethra (the opening at the tip of the penis) or
>> > >> through small cuts or open sores on the penis.
>> > >
>> > >What was left out of this statement was the fact the there would have
>to
>> > >be vaginal lessions for the AIDS virsus to be effectively transmitted
>to
>> the
>> > >male in vaginal intercourse.
>> >
>> > Indeed? So you too know better than the US CDC and all of those
>> > medical researchers? A woman needs a vaginal lesion in order
>> > to lubricate. Another thing I never knew.
>>
>> LOL. Perfect.
>
>Well, if you read what you posted, Ray,
That was jet.
> Ray, it says "The lining of the vagina
>can tear..."
It's amazing how many times you fools can completely ignore what's
written. Is it because you cannot deal with the truth or is it a
general problem with reading comprehension?
Here, read this:
HIV can be found in the blood, semen, pre-seminal fluid,
or vaginal fluid of a person infected with the virus.
> If that is the usage then they are
>referring to a
>tear or lesion, since a tear is indeed a lesion.
It is. Why are you focussing on an irrelevant detail?
HIV can be found in the blood, semen, pre-seminal fluid,
or vaginal fluid of a person infected with the virus.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: 18 May 2001 20:49:11 -0500
"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9du0tl$gol$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Jon Johansan wrote in message <3b0274d0$0$97230>
> >MS hasn't bother to post a better result since it owned the category. Why
>
>
> Interesting choice of words - "owned the category". It's amazing what you
> can do with enough money and the influence it brings - you can buy all
sorts
> of benchmark results.
Well, given this is a benchmark committe that has members known to be quite
hostile to MS and in daily direct competition with MS - I think it's more
than safe to assume these tests are not buyable by anyone.
>One aspect is that lower-end Linux solutions just
> cannot compete because they can't pay the entrance fees - $10k is a drop
in
> the ocean for MS, but a great deal more for cash-strapped free software
$10K? Redhat spends that much on bandwidth for losers to take it's warez for
"free"
> companies. The other aspect is that the companies with the money make the
> rules. MS (and other big commercial companies) prevent publication of
> benchmarks that do not go their way, and they also heavily influence the
> conditions of benchmarks to improve their own standing.
Totally untrue and completely without any foundation. There isn't a
comercial db maker that doesnt' include a clause to prevent publishing
unverified benchmark results. Otherwise, what would stop oracle from making
up some hacked benchmark showing Oracle smoking past SQL 2000 ?
Hiding behing the "MS bought it" defense is really quite desperate and lame.
>
> W2k and MS SQL Server may well make a reasonable solution for medium-sized
> solutions - you can pay more for faster and more solid high-end unix
systems
> which have a significantly higher cost per transaction.
Not sure I follow you here. You can pay a lot lot more money to get much
less performance from a "solid high-end" unix system?
> But you could
> almost certainly make an open source solution at a fraction of the price p
er
> transaction, even though it may be slower than the MS solution.
It's been proven over and over and over and especially in this thread - the
cost of the OS is nothing. The cost of the software is not significant to
the overall cost of the entire project. The "free" open source project would
not make any "fractions" appear.
Besides - tell me what company is going to trust their multi(b|m)illion
dollar operation to software created by someone as a hobby?
> But such
> solutions are excluded from these type of benchmarks because of the
entrance
> fees - and there is little point in producing seperate, free benchmarks
> because the commercial competitors will refuse to compete.
You are terribly misinformed.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!!
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 01:49:47 GMT
On Fri, 18 May 2001 22:11:12 GMT, wendy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I tried to install Mandrake 8.0 on my Athlon based system and it
>virtually destroyed all of my data.
>
>It overwrote my Bootmagic bootloader with some "grubby" thing and
>rendered my win 2000 partition useless.
>
>I lugged the entire system to CompUSA where I bought it and they got
>it back for me thank goodness without any data loss.
>
>They also told me that they get many customers in there who try to
>install Linux and it trashes their systems....
>
>
>What a piece of crap this Linux garbage is...
>
>And before you tell me everything I have done wrong I told Linux to
>install on the Linux drive, not the mbr. It still put that grubby
>thing in there.
>
>Good name for a linux program..
>
>
>wendy
Have you been reading How-To's for the last 6 months or so?
If not, then don't even think about trying Linux because you will be
sorely disappointed. You see, Linux is not an operating system it is a
religion that will take over and consume your entire life and your
entire existence. If you are not ready to make that kind of commitment
to Linux then it is no surprise that you failed.
flatfish
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: 18 May 2001 20:51:03 -0500
"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9du5h6$ika$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This makes the situation even clearer. Thing what sort of profits MS
makes
> per copy of W2k Advanced Server + SQL Server. I don't know the prices or
> the profit margins, but lets guess $5,000. In effect, entering a machine
> for such benchmarking is advertising - for it to make sense for MS to
enter
> a machine (sponsering the hardware) at $500,000, they would have to reckon
> that their entry would lead to 100 more sales.
>
> For the SGI/IBM solution, the profit margins on the hardware and software
> (DB2) would be very large - they might need just ten customers who want
> those sorts of speeds regardless of the cost per transaction.
>
> But consider the case for Red Hat entering a solution based on PostGres or
> MySQL. At $79 per software pack, they make maybe $10 profit. If they
pick
> low-end hardware (relative to the others here) for $20,000, they have a
cost
> of $30,0079 (hardware, entry fee and their own software). That means they
> have to gain 3,000 new customers because of their benchmark entry. Given
> that a hefty proportion of people seeing these results will be just as
> likely to use a free copy of Red Hat, or another distribution, or use the
> same copy on several machines, they are going to have to impress something
> like 30,000 potential customers. They need to impress 300 times as many
> potential customers as MS, using hardware for around 5% of the price,
before
> they can afford to enter the benchmark. And every dollar they spend on it
> helps their direct competition (i.e., other Linux distributers) just as
much
> as themselves.
There is a significant problem with all this: PostGres and MySQL totally
suck as databases and can't come close to competing with the lies of DB2 and
SQL Server 2000. I doubt they could even complete the benchmarks. So your
scenarios is fictional
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: 18 May 2001 20:52:11 -0500
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 16 May 2001
> >"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:9du5h6$ika$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >> Ayende Rahien wrote in message <9du459$qed$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >
> >
> >> This makes the situation even clearer. Thing what sort of profits MS
> >makes
> >> per copy of W2k Advanced Server + SQL Server. I don't know the prices
or
> >> the profit margins, but lets guess $5,000. In effect, entering a
machine
> >> for such benchmarking is advertising - for it to make sense for MS to
> >enter
> >> a machine (sponsering the hardware) at $500,000, they would have to
reckon
> >> that their entry would lead to 100 more sales.
> >>
> >> For the SGI/IBM solution, the profit margins on the hardware and
software
> >> (DB2) would be very large - they might need just ten customers who want
> >> those sorts of speeds regardless of the cost per transaction.
> >>
> >> But consider the case for Red Hat entering a solution based on PostGres
or
> >> MySQL. At $79 per software pack, they make maybe $10 profit. If they
> >pick
> >> low-end hardware (relative to the others here) for $20,000, they have a
> >cost
> >> of $30,0079 (hardware, entry fee and their own software). That means
they
> >> have to gain 3,000 new customers because of their benchmark entry.
Given
> >> that a hefty proportion of people seeing these results will be just as
> >> likely to use a free copy of Red Hat, or another distribution, or use
the
> >> same copy on several machines, they are going to have to impress
something
> >> like 30,000 potential customers. They need to impress 300 times as
many
> >> potential customers as MS, using hardware for around 5% of the price,
> >before
> >> they can afford to enter the benchmark. And every dollar they spend on
it
> >> helps their direct competition (i.e., other Linux distributers) just as
> >much
> >> as themselves.
> >>
> >> The SGI/IBM solution is a large, proprietry, commercial
> >results-at-all-costs
> >> solution - the fact that it ran on Linux was almost incidental. Had
they
> >> chosen Irix or Aix, there would not have been more than a few percent
> >> difference on either the price or the performance - it is totally
> >> unrepresentative of typical Linux and free software solutions.
> >
> >
> >Software needs to pay for the advertisement and the development costs,
after
> >that, it's mostly all profit.
> >And RH doesn't make 10% of the stuff they stuff into their distribution,
> >btw.
> >
> >You bring important points, but forget something, this isn't OS contenst,
> >this is *solutions* contenst.
> >This mean that it *isn't* RH or MS that submit those benchmarks. It's
> >CompaQ, Dell, IBM, SGI, etc.
> >Those guys *have* the money to put up more than decent boxes.
> >IBM doesn't care if it sells Win2K or Linux, as long as it makes its
profit
> >from the hardware.
> >If the SGI solution could've done as well on P-SQL, they would've used
it.
> >However, I doubt that P-SQL can handle datasets that large.
>
> A very rational and well-reasoned analysis, Ayende. But by that same
> logic, just as rigorously but reasonably applied, IBM doesn't have any
> need to put up a Linux system on such a benchmark, nor does anybody
> else. You forget, Linux has the "low cost" approach nailed down, and
> that is all the competitive advantage it should or does ever need. It
> would simply make no sense to put up a concerted effort to place on a
> commercial benchmark, either way.
Oh we get it - it's SOOO obvious that Linux is the perfect "low cost"
solution that there is no need to prove it to anyone eh? SO IBM would rather
spend a million dollars proving something it doesn't need to cause everyone
already knows the secret that Linux rox...
... funny how sales of linux continue to be unimpressive and it continues to
make no inroads in the enterprise... hmmm....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Mandrake 8 sets the standard - for Desktop users anyway.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 19 May 2001 01:34:56 GMT
On Fri, 18 May 2001 14:11:06 +0100,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> Its nice to see yet another truthful account of what REALLY happens when
>> installing Linux.
>
> It must be the exception rather than the rule.
Its not tho, Mandrake installed easily for me as well.
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Mandrake 8 sets the standard - for Desktop users anyway.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 19 May 2001 01:42:57 GMT
On Fri, 18 May 2001 14:23:12 +0100,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I installed Mandrake 8.0 on my old PC166 - it went ok. I see the
> installer has improved. I'm still mystified by the 'select % of packages
> you want installed' - how can you install 45% of gcc, I wonder? 8)
Mandrake just doesn't install smaller apps or games, in that case
I assume.
I installed Mandrake on a small hard drive, and it only had room
for about 45% of what I'd selected. I had selected GCC, and that
installed fine, as later compiles proved.
> I've not tried it on my dual network AMD Duron 850MHz, the one with SuSE
> 7.1 and the manually started DHCP. Why should I go through yet-another-
> install for a package that didn't work too well with 7.1 and 7.2?
Fun ;-)
>
> It installed yet-another-flavour-of-LILO that proceeds to die unless I
> hit return to make it boot. For some reason the default timeout is
> broken.
Find out why, and fix it ?
>
> I have tried a Linux upgrade in the past. Boy that was _badly_ _broken_.
Neither have I, tho a friend recently upgraded his Redhat7.0 to kernel
4.2and only had to change a couple of things.
> I've seen recommendations elsewhere to _not_ do this.
Yeah, I think that seamless upgrades are just not possible, either with
Linux OR Windows.
At least with Linuxits as easy as saving your /home dir,then just
installing the new version from scratch.
Thats what I do, and then after the install, I just load the saved
/home stuff, and my email, newsgroups, and Wm configs etc are
**exactly** the same as before.
Thank Linux for simple, text based, /home dotfiles for configuration!
>
> --
> ---
> Pete Goodwin
> All your no fly zone are belong to us
> My opinions are my own
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 02:05:07 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > Well, I still don't see the need to be uncivilized.
> >
> > I much prefer the witty reparte of civilized
> > flamewars, don't you? :D
>
> When have you been involved in witty reparte?
Weeeeell....
I can always hope, can't I? :D
> You merely disregard
> anything that conflicts with your point fo view, and then add that
> idiotic grin thing.
See! I make a contribution to the thread after all!
[snip]
> > > Reason. It smacks of reason, not childish word games such as you play,
> > > you pathetic fool.
> >
> > Well, yes, that too.
>
> You agree you area pathetic fool?
:D
[snip]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
