Linux-Advocacy Digest #804, Volume #34 Sun, 27 May 01 12:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Mandrake 8 sets the standard - for Desktop users anyway. (Deep Geek)
Re: Opera (flatfish+++)
Re: Opera (flatfish+++)
Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly (Peter Hayes)
Re: Time to bitc__ again (Richard Thrippleton)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (Zsolt)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the (Donn Miller)
Re: ease and convenience (Peter Hayes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rick <[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: Sun, 27 May 2001 10:15:29 -0400
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > You never used it. So you dont know what youa re takking about when
> you
> > > > talk about the Apple II desktop.
> > >
> > > My dear Rick, I was not talking
> > > about this Apple II desktop at all!
> >
> > Thats because you continually try to change the subject.
>
> I've no idea what subject it is you
> wish to talk about, at this point.
>
> [snip]
More context removing snips, so that you can legitimately seem to be
confused. Actually, you can be legitimately confused, since you dont
know what you are talking about.
> > > > So answer the question. Were control panels and accessories accessible
> > > > from GS apps or not?
> > >
> > > I don't quite know what you mean by this.
> >
> > If you dont know what I mean, how can you answer the question...
>
> I can summarize what I know about Apple IIgs
> DAs, and let you pick the answer out for youself.
>
If you dont understand teh questions, its a pretty good idea to ask for
clarification instead of just spouting off.
> It's a good trick to know on Usenet. :D
>
Yes, you a very tricky. BTW, that is an insult, grinning dolt.
> > > The situation was just like on the Mac at
> > > the time; desk accessories (the control panel
> > > included) were usable if the app created
> > > an Apple menu and used the appropriate
> > > API to put desk accessories in there.
> >
> > SO, here you are syaing they ARE accessible.
>
> Yes; they are accessible to users who are
> running applications.
>
> [snip]
> > > > GS apps? They didnt? Are you sure?
> > >
> > > They had indirect access through
> > > APIs, just like on the Mac.
> >
> > Now you are saying.. indirect access. Trying to cover your bases?
>
> I find it difficult to answer questions
> clearly when I don't know their intent;
> so I am answering this question rather
> unclearly; you'll have to pick out what
> you want to know for yourself.
>
... so are they accessible or only indirectly accessible? Hmm? Dont you
know? I do. Let' see what your squirmy answer is.
> [snip]
> > > > So you are saying accessoried are not acessible from GS apps?
> > >
> > > Hung up on desk accessories for some reason?
> >
> > Note: no response. Try to give the same concrete answers to the same
> > questions when they are asked.
>
> That's hard to do when I don't understand
> the question very well.
>
Then its better to keep your mouth shut.
> I really, truly don't know what you are
> trying to get at.
>
> [snip]
> > > The launcher is faster; but the fastest
> > > way is to do neither, and boot the app
> > > directly, with no desktop, no finder,
> > > and no launcher.
> >
> > Users rarely booted apps directly from floppies as IIe users did.
>
> Sure they did, except for those few who
> had hard disks.
>
Mo, they didnt, especially after GSOS 5.x and 6.x came out.
> Remember, the IIgs was pretty much exclusively
> a home machine. Most of its apps were actually
> games.
>
Most of its apps were ... games? Care to give some sort of evidence for
that?
> [snip]
> > > You seem to think it was stuck with 8 bit
> > > system software, and that would put it
> > > at the level on a DOS-clone of the day-
> > > except for being slower and not having
> > > a hard disk.
> >
> > I never said it was -stuck- with 8 bit system software. I was speaking
> > of the original system disk, which you never seem to understand. You
> > keep switching time frames to cover you ass.
>
> Until you make it clearly what it is
> you are asking about, or trying to
> prove, I will continue to be unable to
> give direct, useful, answers.
>
No, your dishonest context removing snips remove context.
I said the ORIGINAL desktop was 8 bit.
> [snip]
> > > ProDOS 8 was really just a DOS; it didn't even go
> > > as far as MS-DOS did towards being as OS. And
> > > MS-DOS didn't go all that far itself.
> >
> > ProDOS 16 is really just a DOS. ProDOS 8 was really just a DOS. You are
> > making no points here.
>
> I'm just flappin' my virtual lips as it were,
> hoping to chance on somethign relevant to
> your point, whatever that turns out to be.
>
> [snip]
> > > But other than that, you are right. 8-bit programs
> > > could not take advantage of the 16-bit system
> > > software the IIgs offered.
> >
> > Duh.
>
> Well, it's not quite Duh;
Yes it is. Duh. Its a fact.
> there are good technical
> reasons why it should be so on the IIgs, but
> bear in mind that 16-bit software on an NT
> PC *does* take advantage of 32-bit system
> software.
>
> The DOS and Win16 APIs just turn around
> and thunk up into the Win32 APIs, you see.
>
> So when I say that 8-bit programs could
> not take advantage of-16-bit system software
> on the IIgs, I am actually saying something.
>
yeah, and it ends with.. duh.
> [snip]
> > > No, I didn't.
> >
> > Yes, you did. There have been a couple of * bit GUIs available for the
> > IIs.
>
> I suppse you mean by this file managers again.
>
You really are a one track person arent you. I suppose you think the c;
prompt is a file manager too. That pretty picture thing you use to
launch apps, print, get to the calculator.. you know that stuff. That
just a file manager?
Was GEOS a "file mangager"? (oops, did that scare you?). Was Catalyst?
Mouse desk? All file managers?
Do you actually get paid to work with computers?
> > > You just don't understand that the
> > > Apple II Desktop program is not the same thing
> > > as a GUI toolbox.
> >
> > I didnt say it was a GUI toolbox. Mousetext is. Somewhat. Ever hear of
> > it?
>
> Yes. Mousetext is closer, but it's really just
> a sort of font, not a GUI toolbox. It's usable
> from applications, yes, but it does not give
> you much.
>
It gives you the building blocks to put together an interface for the
user. Its graphical. You make a graphical user interface.
> > > If you want to, you can say that anything
> > > that has a UI drawn in pixels instead of
> > > in text mode is a "GUI"- it's graphical, it's
> > > a UI.
> >
> > Execpt when various items are used as text to make a GUI... like
> > mousetext.
>
> I think it's quite a strech to call mousetext a GUI,
> and not just because it isn't graphical.
>
We know what you an "think" and dont think you think too well.
> [snip]
> > > > You said there was never a GUI like the Mac's for the 8 bit machine.
> > >
> > > Well, unless you count GEOS. But that's not all that
> > > Mac like, even next to GEM or Windows, still less
> > > the IIgs.
> >
> > Squirm, squirm, squirm.
>
> Were you thinking of GEOS, then?
>
> I'm thrasing about because I've no idea
> what you are trying to talk about; I can
> only guess whether GEOS is relevant.
>
If you dont know what you are talking about, stop talking.
> [snip]
> > > There's still a little 8 bit code left to bootstrap with,
> > > actually. But there *is* less than there is with
> > > Windows 95, even so.
> > >
> > > Nevertheless, no shipping version of GS/OS was
> > > free of 8 bit code- is that not what you were
> > > asking?
> >
> > You can reomve the ProDOS 8 with no ill effects. You couldnt do that
> > with window$.
>
> Actually, there ill effects; you can't launch 8-bit
> ProDOS programs if you do that.
>
If you hadnt snipped some much of the context, you would know that I
already stated that, other then not being able to run 8 bit apps. If you
run 16 bit apps, you didnt need ProDOS 8, under the "real" GS OS.
Removig ProDOS 8 didnt cripple ProDOS 16.
> But perhaps you could connect the dots for me
> and explain why being able to remove ProDOS 8
> at all is *important* to you?
>
1. Go back and read all the stuff you snipped.
2. You have no idea what the real GSOS was about, or when it came into
being.
3. You have no idea about the hybred GSOS 1.x abd why ProDOS 8 became
less and less important to GSOS.
> [snip]
> > > Perhaps it is more like OS/2, needing a copy of
> > > Windows to run Win16 apps. Would that
> > > satisfy your taste for exactitude?
> >
> > No. Not until you admit your squirming and lack of knowledge of th IIs.
>
> Hmmmm.
>
> Sounds like you are not interested in discussing
> the facts of the case, then. Is that right?
No. It is not right. You are wrong, as usual.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: Deep Geek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mandrake 8 sets the standard - for Desktop users anyway.
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 14:21:10 GMT
Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Charlie Chan wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 19 May 2001 19:09:51 GMT, Pete Goodwin
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >What about the system configuration stored in /etc? Is that compatible
>> >across different distros?
>> >
>>
>> Why would it be compatible? Distros sometimes use different config
>> methods. Certain files can be copied, hosts for example, but why would
>> you expect different distros to have the same exact config? There
>> would be no difference if everything is the same. I know that sounds
>> basic, but that's where you seem to be at.
> You expect configs to be the same becasue you are using the same basic
> OS. Distrbution differntiation should be expressed in configuration
> files, but in applications and utilities present. There should be a
> basic set present in all Linux distros.
> --
> Rick
Pardon my butting in, but configuration for the masses is precisely the reason that
WinDoesn't has ballooned into such a behemoth. The one-size-fits-all model is causing
the world's computing population de-evolution into buffalo -- stampeding
nose-to-asshole into a chasm of inoperability.
The *only* good common configuration is a void configuration.
-- Woody
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 14:34:32 GMT
On Sun, 27 May 2001 12:59:23 GMT, "Paul Dossett"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ah, yes, all the flaws, none of the frills. Makes sense to me.
Not really, just none of the Active-x and Java scripting stuff.
It's rare that I find a page that won't load with IE 5.0 in that
configuration.
Compare that to Opera which always seems to be missing some plug-in or
another, and that is with the full version.
Compare to Konquerer which seems to have lot's of troubles with pages.
Compare to Netscape which under Linux is awful and under Windows is so
bloated that the entire machine grinds to a halt just loading the
beast :)
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 14:36:27 GMT
On Sun, 27 May 2001 13:43:58 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
wrote:
>On Sun, 27 May 2001 02:57:16 GMT, flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I liked Opera when it fit on one floppy disk, now it's just another
>> bloated browser and to pay for it?
>
>Yeah, what a bloat-monster. 2.5 MB for the Windows version.
With Java it is 9.96 meg.
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 15:46:17 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 May 2001 15:00:18 +0100, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter Hayes"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 27 May 2001 11:55:03 +0100, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> The great thing about the home computers is that they had the OS in ROM
> >> and the reset key on the keyboard (the Break key on the BBC was wired
> >> to the reset pin of the 6502), so if a program crashed you reset and
> >> 1/2 a second later is was running again.
> >
> > And amazingly, if you typed "old" you got your app back even after the
> > reboot.
>
> indeed, since the reset went in to the CPU only, not the memory. In fact
> you could put a hook in memory that would trigger when the key was
> pressed.
> *KEY 10 ...
> was the easiest.
>
> Ctrl+break (as long as ctrl was released after) would override this, but
> there was yet another hook avaliable. One word processor (Folio) was
> capable of munging the system so badly that a power cycle was needed to
> stop it.
It was a pity that they were priced just too high for their intended
market, £400 was a lot of money in those days for schools and parents to
fork out. The Spectrum filled the gap that really belonged to the Beeb.
I bought a Beeb in 1984, when I should have bought a PC instead.With 20/20
hindsight, I should have known that 8-bit machines had had their day.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Thrippleton)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake,linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Time to bitc__ again
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 15:35:55 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mart van de Wege wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Richard Thrippleton"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, daniel wrote:
>>>
>>>Basically this is so upsetting because late last year people were
>>>talking about Linux on the desktop and at that point things were
>>>beginning to work great. Mandrake 7.1 in my opinion was a work of
>>>near-perfection and worked almost flawlessly. Why do these distros
>>>insist on pushing forward and putting out cutting-edge recent, yet
>>>highly buggy releases? Why not just keep improving and existing one if
>>>it works? Wouldnt they make more money off working products than
>>>cutting-edge broken ones?
>> You'd think so, but commercially motivated software doesn't seem to
>> work this way :( . It's always about making something pretty, giving it
>> a nice impressive version number and slamming it out. Like Win95 and Mac
>> OS X, both rushed out and rather deficient. Now, I'm not really one for
>> distro advocacy, but just this once I'll say you should use Debian. A
>> non-profit organisation, their distro might be slightly behind the
>> times, but they do that to make sure everything's stable. Though IMHO
>> their package manager is terrible; learned this after manually
>> installing XFree86 4.03 and dselect went and hosed it down, next X
>> program I installed. Or you could just stick with Mandrake 7.1 by your
>> own advocacy.
>>
>> Richard
>
>Richard,
>
>1. Don't use dselect! It is being deprecated for a good reason.
>2. When you said you installed X4.03 manually, do you mean you compiled
>from source? This will fsck up any package manager, but I guess you knew
>that anyway.
Nope, I wasn't expecting it. In this case I didn't ask it to
actually do anything with XFree itself. I would have hoped that a 'power
user' distro like Debian wouldn't have this attitude "you'll do it the baby
way all the time or else". But it's a moot point now, as anything Debian
specific, including apt and dselect, is now gone from my system. When people
ask what I'm running, it's just "GNU Linux" :)
Compiling from source became trivial after a while. A bit slower,
yes, but at least I was in control.
Richard
------------------------------
From: Zsolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 15:12:56 GMT
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 26 May 2001 18:09:33 GMT presented us
with the
wisdom:
>
> "Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Can I setup Windows XP at home so that I can log into it via ssh and have
> > >> a server running that acts as a proxy web browser, allowing me to
> > >> browse the web from my machine at work over an encrypted channel and
> > >> bypassing the filters on my company's firewall? And do all this with
> > >> out-of-the-box free software?
> > >
> > >Nope, but you can download SSH. Not many people use it for this, so
> > >Linux can be the king of the not-so-used features, I guess.
> > >
> >
> > Really? What free ssh for Windows gives me a sshd that runs on Windows
> > that handles tunneling and port redirection?
>
> OpenSSH + Cygwin, according to OpenSSH.com.
>
ROFLMAO ! Oh, thank you very much, Chad! I needed this good laugh today!
So, when you are asked to back up your false claim about Windows XP capability
"out-of-the-box" for free (i.e. without additional payment as XP itself isn't free
anyway),
then you refer to Cygwin !?!?
Let me quote you from the top of _commercial retail box_ of Cygwin ($99):
"Cygwin TM - a UNIX/Linux environment for the Windows platform"
This is the first sentence on each side of the box! So, Windows XP, can
do the above task "out-of-the-box free" if you install a separate product,
which provides UNIX/Linux emulation layer. An before you claim, that
Cygwin is free, let me point out what http://www.cygwin.com/ claims in
its main page:
"Note
The latest net releases of Cygwin are numbered 1.1.x or 1.3.x. 1.n.x versions of the
Cygwin DLL are newer than previous beta Bxx (i.e. B19, B20, B20.1) versions. However,
1.<odd-number>.x versions of the DLL are still considered beta quality. The last
stable
release was v1.0 which was only released on CD-ROM. Red Hat has no current plans to
release a new commercial CD. The next GNUpro release will be numbered 1.2 but it will
only be available with Red Hat support contracts. There is no ETA for when this will
be
available. "
So in short you are caught "mistaken", then instead of admitting it, made it worse by
another
double mistake (Cygwin is not in the same box as WinXP and not even free). Not to
mention,
that OpenSSH does not come with Cygwin either, so you are talking about 3 separate
products, instead of XP out-of-the-box.
Have a nice day,
Zsolt
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:36:17 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the
Zsolt wrote:
> So in short you are caught "mistaken", then instead of admitting it,
> made it worse by another double mistake (Cygwin is not in the same
> box as WinXP and not even free).
Cygwin is free: http://www.cygwin.com/faq/faq_1.html#SEC3
Is it free software?
Yes. Parts are GNU software (gcc, gas, ld, etc...), parts are covered
by the standard X11 license, some of it is public domain, some of it
was written by Cygnus and placed under the GPL. None of it is
shareware. You don't have to pay anyone to use it but you should be
sure to read the copyright section of the FAQ more more information on
how the GNU General Public License may affect your use of these tools.
In particular, if you intend to port a proprietary (non-GPL'd)
application using Cygwin, you will need the proprietary-use license
for the Cygwin library. This is available for purchase; please contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED] for more information. All other questions should be
sent to the project mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
====== 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: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ease and convenience
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 16:50:24 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 May 2001 12:25:40 GMT, "~¿~" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Sat, 26 May 2001 13:53:23 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark) wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 26 May 2001 05:56:46 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] flung this gem:
> > >
> > > |
> > > |Thought I'd try a new newsreader tonight. Would this be easier on
> > > |Windows or Linux?
> > |
> > |(Debian) Linux:
> > |1) launch a shell
> > |2) apt-get install knode
> > |3) knode&
> >
> > But don't you need to configure a local news server if you want to read
> > offline? I thought Pan was the only Linux newsreader which didn't need
> > leafnode or the like.
> >
> > So that adds to your installation time, and more importantly, hassle.
<...>
> Use outlook express, thereby negating the need for 1 to 11
> Cola resident Linux expert Advocates such as Matthew Gardiner use it and
> countless others as well, so it must be pretty good.
No. I'll stick to Agent, thanks all the same. I can run it in Linux (Wine)
as well as Windows.
<...>
> > Task: replace 10mbit NIC with 10/100mbit card. Bog standard card that
> costs
> > a tenner. RealTek RTL8159, or something like that.
> >
> > RedHat 6.2 recognises the old card has gone, do I want to remove the
> > configuration? - yes - done.
> > RedHat 6.2 recognises new card, do I want to configure it? - yes - done.
> > Then the clever bit - do I want to migrate my network settings to the new
> > card? - yes.
> > Done. Finito. Up and running in 20" excluding the hardware swap time, of
> > course. No reboots, no strain, no pain.
>
> Wow. You must have a used an 'updated' RH 6.2
??? No, just the RH 6.2 I downloaded as an iso.
> The version I use was constantly confused over my USR external modem.
> It kept finding another one. I kept telling it to remove the configuration,
> and it kept right on finding another one each time I rebooted.
Just like Windows...
What would have happened if you'd chosen the "ignore" function?
> > Boot into Windoze, with the emphasis on the doze.
>
> 'Doze' ... I know what this means .. this ought to be good for a laugh or a
> cup full of BS stories.
>
> > "Windows has detected unknown hardware and is installing the software for
> > it" (how Windows can install software for unknown hardware is beyond me).
>
> That's simply an obligatory screen to let you know the OS hasn't died while
> it tries to figure out what the hell is going on.
I know, I know. It just seems so... well... incongruous. I guess it's the
word "unknown" that's wrong. Should be "new", perhaps. Still, it's good for
a bit of gentle humour...
> If it didn't give you a
> screen and you sat there for 3 minutes while the HDD ground away, you'd
> bitch as well. Can't win for losi ...
>
> > It then asks for the Win98 CDROM. Despite its amazing ability to install
> > software for unknown hardware, Windows doesn't seem able to find a CDROM
> > drive. Point it at the drive. Can't find file xxx. Regret not going for
> the "have disk" option. Point it at the folder. Installs software. Needs a
> > "quick" reboot.
>
> Yes, this sometimes happens.
More often than not, IME. On one machine I had it denied the existence of
the CDROM drive altogether, despite having just been installed from said
drive. It took a power cycle to sort it.
> What is more amusing though, is the fact that
> an experienced Linux user, one who presumably knows how to traverse
> directory trees in Linux using pushd, pop, ../.. cd ~/bin and the like, is
> moaning about 'pointing' a dialog box complete with pretty pictures to the
> proper path on a CD ROM to get a driver???? I yi yi ...
But we're dealing with Microsoft Windows. You know, the OS that's so user
friendly, so easy to install and maintain...
> Do you brush the teeth in both of your mouths?
I'll criticise Microsoft products where I feel it deserves criticism, and
likewise for Linux, see the reference above to the need for leafnode.
OTOH, Microsoft ask for money for their products, so I feel there's an
obligation for them to work properly.
> >Windows is now thoroughly confused because it thinks there
> > are two network cards in this machine. Delete unwanted network card in
> > Device Manager and have another reboot. So after 20 minutes furtling
> about, Windoze manages to accept the new card.
>
> Again, this is amazing. You climbed the curve to learn Linux, yet you won't
> exercise one scintilla of common sense when installing hardware! Only
> (please excuse me, no offense meant. But I can't help it) a moron installs
> hardware in windows without removing the old hardware the new hardware is
> replacing first.
So? That's what I did, and I quote from above...
QUOTE/
"Task: replace 10mbit NIC with 10/100mbit card. Bog standard card that
costs a tenner. RealTek RTL8159, or something like that."
/QUOTE
See "replace"??? Means "take out or remove, and substitute an alternative".
Maybe next time I'll remove the card's configuration in Device Manager
before starting. Nothing like learning from one's mistakes. Like learning
to switch the display to 640x480 VGA before removing old graphics card.
> Windows hardware 101. I smell a LinBigot troll ....
I'm not trolling, the previous poster described the stages gone through
installing a NIC in a Linux box, I'm recalling what happened to me on a
dual-boot machine.
<...>
> > At about the third or fourth attempt I get the floppy based installation
> > done before the dozy junkware realises a new pnp device has arrived. After
> > the statutary reboot all is well.
>
> I'd say you may have had marginal windows install going there. Or, windows
> sucks.
Maybe the former (as it turned out, yes, had to start again from scratch,
who knows why...), but the latter is just as likely.
Peter
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
