Linux-Advocacy Digest #858, Volume #34 Wed, 30 May 01 17:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Opera ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Opera (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Stuart Fox")
Re: ease and convenience (Fred K Ollinger)
Re: What is the licence aggreement for REDHAD professional server? (Fred K Ollinger)
Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers? ("Peter
T. Breuer")
Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers? (Otto
Wyss)
Re: INTEL"S ITANIUM DUE OUT TUES !!!!! (Michael Marion)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Grzegorz Borek)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the (Michael Marion)
Re: What does XP stands for ??? (Chad Everett)
Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers? (Floyd
Davidson)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Michael Marion)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Michael Marion)
Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers?
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Michael Marion)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 07:48:30 +1200
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9f2k08$njt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9eu937$d72$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Matthew Gardiner (BOFH)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9esgcv$749$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Is there a phobia held amongst Wintrols that they are more than happy
> to
> > pay $1300 for a bloated office suite from Microsoft,
> > > however, they are not willing to shell out a few dollars to buy a
piece
> of
> > software and help support a small software company, in
> > > this case, Opera. Sounds like double standards to me.
> > >
> > When you can get a better browser for free, why pay?
>
> What? you get an OS for free, and the biggest thing you bitch about is the
> browser, so, in theory, a complete package with Opera (the best browser on
> Linux) would cost $35 vs. $800 for Win2k Pro.
>
I let what I need to do drive my OS choice, I don't let my OS choice drive
what I can do. There is no phobia amongst windows users ("wintrols") about
paying for a browser, just that the best browser you can get for Windows
happens to be free.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 30 May 2001 19:50:21 GMT
"Dan Pidcock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 30 May 2001 13:02:00 GMT, "Daniel Johnson"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Dan Pidcock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Wed, 30 May 2001 05:15:49 +0200, "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >This, I think, shows how strong Win32 is all
> >by itself- it does not need a *thick* layer
> >on top of it to make it usable.
>
> Well maybe.
> I've just come across another problem which reminds me why I hate
> working with win32. I have a VB ActiveX control that raises events,
> and a VB .exe that handles those events. Now suddenly the exe is not
> seeing the events at all. I have undone the changes to my code back
> to when it was last working but it still won't work. No logical
> reason for it to break. One of the things with COM is it's fine when
> it's working but then it just fails one day. Maybe restarting NT will
> help...
I don't know what's wrong, but generally when you
program in VB you don't program directly to Win32;
it's quite possible the problem isn't so much COM
itself but Visual Basic.
If you are programming directly to Win32, then
you are calling APIs like CoCreateInstance and
the like. Are you doing that?
> >But it does leave one wondering what
> >the point of MFC actually is. :(
>
> Yes - I think MS missed a real opportunity to do something nice. As
> usual...
Well, considering the state of C++ at the time,
they did a reasonable, if rather unimaginative,
job.
Hopefully they will do better in .NET.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 19:48:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >Hahaha... Win98 is far inferior to linux. Linux won't BSOD you to death
> >like Win98 can.
>
> That is one measure of superiority. (It happens to be one I approve of.)
> However, it is possible that Linux may not be superior in all metrics.
Windows maybe, but Windows 2000?
> - portability to other processor platforms such as Sparc,
> m68k, ARM, Itanium, Alpha, or the mighty S/390. NT might do some
> of them, with a lot of work. (Whatever happened to HAL?)
And how many of them are likely to be affordable on the mass market
(except m68k)?
> - easy portability to other operating systems such as HP-UX, Solaris,
> AIX, Tru64, or SCO Unix. Parts of NT can be ported -- Solaris got
> to enjoy the benefits (?) of IE for awhile -- but it's apparently
> not all that easy a task.
As above.
> - network-transparent, if slow, graphics (and local X isn't all that
> slow, nowadays, especially with widely available extensions)
Slow is the right word. X Windows on my system crawls.
> - standard UI (Windows wins, here -- although not by much; one must also
> note that Motif was here first so Windows may not even have won).
MOTIF is a dinosaur. Clunky antiquated style, as compared to the
lightweight style of Windows.
> - console text throughput (Linux beats NT fairly easily; try moving
> a fast-scrolling text window in Linux and in NT, or compare the number
> of lines per minute displayed).
Since Windows does not rely on the console so much, this is hardly a big
advantage.
> - control -- Linux wins here in limited areas because NT requires
> a process to respond to events; if the process hangs, the window "sticks".
> Win2k is a little better in that regard, allowing a user to kill
> a hanging process by closing its window.
I'm not quite sure how Linux does the same without a process?
> - flexibility -- Toss-up, NT has more tools (DLLs) for developers, but
> Linux has the ability to change look-and-feel (not just color or
> skin) by changing window managers, from the extremely crude twm to
> the ultra-sophisticated window managers available for Gnome and KDE,
> and quite a few in between; there's no shortage of DLLs on Linux,
> either.
There are Window Managers for Windows, not that I've tried many. Here I
agree with you in that Linux has more flexible desktop for eye-candy.
Windows XP has added themes, provided you like the old grey style or the
new colourful style.
> - a solid foundation based on standards and a 30-year legacy. Some might
> reverse this, claiming that Unix is "old technology" -- but then,
> so is the internal combustion engine, and we're still using it.
An antiquated design that was left behind by more modern OS's since then.
> I've probably left out a dozen other metrics -- one might be 3D sound,
> as Pete G. suggests; since I don't know anything about it (my sound
> isn't functional because of resource conflicts at this time), I can't
> intelligently comment further.
Multimedia support - streaming sound and video. On my slow X graphics it
barely plays them. On Windows no problem at all.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 07:52:36 +1200
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 30 May 2001 11:44:00 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> >That's irrelevant. If a user wants to run a program, they're going
> >to run it regardless if they have to +x it or double click on it.
>
> If they're going to go to the trouble of +x'ing t, then they'll
> probably have a good idea of what it's about. Windows makes it easy
> for users to naively open a virus thinking it's a picture or
> something.
>
Which is one of the differences. Windows makes it easy for people to do
things. *nix makes it easy for people not to do things. It also means that
to use *nix effectively one has to have a higher degree of technical savvy -
which also accounts for the reason that *nix based desktops are only really
popular amongst the tech savvy and scientists, and the reason that Windows
based desktops are so popular.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Opera
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 19:54:06 GMT
On Wed, 30 May 2001 19:31:41 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2001 16:28:06 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)) wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 29 May 2001 20:49:23 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 27 May 2001 13:43:56 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> >> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)) wrote:
>
> >> >Upgrades are free, so if you registered a previous version and upgrade,
> >> >it will still be registered and you won't see the ads.
>
> >> Do the cracks work on the Linux version?
>
> >I have no idea. I paid for mine.
>
> Why?
Why do you care?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 07:56:07 +1200
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 30 May 2001 19:11:23 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >"Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> Besides, you claimed that Windows is ubiquitous because it is the
better
> >> O/S. If NT/2K is better than 9x, why is not everybody using that than?
>
> >Price, Win2K cost more than 9x.
> >NT is also aimed more at bussiness, and there are some problems with
> >compatability with some software.
> >And NT's drivers can be a lot of hassle.
> >
> >But I agree with you, everyone who uses a 9x should stop and use an NT
based
> >product.
>
> Which will cost them how much? They'll have to fork out for: NT, a
> bigger hard disk probably, more RAM, a faster processor just to make
> it all work. Or, they could just get linux, spending absolutely
> NOTHING.
I read somewhere that Linux is free for those whose time is worth nothing.
Of course if they fork out for NT, they'll still be able to run the majority
of their apps, they won't have to learn to use a completely different OS -
ie the GUI will still look the same (roughly), and apps will still
functionthe same.
Or they could just get Linux and struggle to find a decent web browser, have
to download a new Office suite, be unable to play many games, and basically
drop their productivity, which is after all what using computers is all
about.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
Subject: Re: ease and convenience
Date: 30 May 2001 19:58:36 GMT
Richard Thrippleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: In article <yAHP6.22323$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: >
: >Commercial software will always be a hassle because its purpose is not to
: >serve your needs, but those of some business.
: I didn't necessarily agree with your ease of installation claim (the
: Debian package manager is awful IMHO), but this is one _VERY_ good point.
I love it.
: There never seems to be that much free software floating around on Windows,
: but it pretty much rules the Linux desktop. The fact that free software
I thought you could compile all linux sources for windows. Goesn't gcc work
on win? Also, is there a cd iso of all the linux tools compiled for win?
The pain of using open source stuff on win is that it's a pain to track down
and install each one, makes things 'harder to set up' on the win side.
I did get vim installed on a few pcs, works great. I'd also like to get latex
going, I heard about miketex, but I'd like to go a step further and install
a batch of sw. Is there something like apt-get where I can just type in package
name and fix config file so it knows where bins are? This would make windows
greatly 'easier to use for me.' Hell if I could get apt-get going on win, then
I could finally ditch my linux install!
I don't think the kernel matters too much for the desktop, but the tools matter
and linux has better ones (IMHO) that are vastly easier to use, but the above
questions are not trolls, but valid. I'll dl an iso right now if someone tells
me where to get it.
Fred
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
Subject: Re: What is the licence aggreement for REDHAD professional server?
Date: 30 May 2001 20:03:38 GMT
Todd ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: "Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > On 23 May 2001 14:56:17 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
: >
: > >KerryHB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > >> I am thinking of using many cheap Intel PC as SERVERS.
: > >
: > >> Can I buy one copy Redhat Professional Server and install it on 50 PCs?
: > >
: > >Why would you *buy* it?
: I love this Linux user attitude that things should be *free*... hehe.
Well, zero is a real number, so it's not any less capitalistic to charge $0
than it is to charge $200 for a piece of software. Many things can be gotten
for $0 (or less) in our society. Air is one of them. Another is chairs
(in my neighborhood). So if someone is trying to get better deals for their
corp so they can make more profits, they are 'fiscally responsible' but if they
do this as individual consumers then they are communists or some other word
that's meant as something derogatory. I look at it this way, I didn't set up
this game of capitalism, but now that we're in it, I'm going to play by same
rules that Gates does, if you can get it for cheap, good. If you can get it
for free it's even better. If you pay more then you're a sucker, the rich don't
get rich by paying.
: You are just going to scare commercial developers away... and they will
: stick with Windows platforms where they can make money.
Let them make money from suckers, they ain't getting dough from me. So I don't
care.
Fred
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers?
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:53:31 +0200
In comp.os.linux.misc wade blazingame <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If you can't deal with these "problems," maybe you should think about
>> another career. Seriously.
> I'm quite happy with my career, but thanks for the advice.
> I'm not just asking for myself; simplifying access to mailing lists makes
> Linux more friendly on the desktop to new users.
Are you unable to get it? Route your mailing list to a news server if
you feel like it! There are plenty of news/mail gateways! I run a
three-way gateway on all my lists: news, mail and http.
Look at berolist for an example of at least a 2-way gateway.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Otto Wyss)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers?
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 22:08:36 +0200
> Well, this is kind of the point, I think - it's a matter of convenience
> for users. It woud be nice to be able to pop into a news server and post
> a comment or question without having to go through the subscription process.
>
You don't have to subscribe for posting (sending ordinary e-mails) to
mailing lists, only to get the mails delivered to you.
The onyway gateway is probably the best solution for both sides.
O. Wyss
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: INTEL"S ITANIUM DUE OUT TUES !!!!!
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 20:11:49 GMT
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Here's a link describing some of the status of Windows on Itanium, and
> Windows applications on Itanium.
>
> http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=481498
I love that the article starts with:
"Anticipation over 64-bit computing, propelled by Intel's release of the
Itanium microprocessor, turned up a notch..."
Anticipation implys that there's no 64-bit computing now.. yet Sun/SPARC,
HP/PA-RISC, and DEC/Compaq/Alpha have been 64 bit for quite some time now.
--
Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
Encyclopedia Salesman: "What do you know about Vulcanized rubber?"
Joey: "Spock's birth control." [both laugh]
Salesman: "You _need_ these books!" -- Friends
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grzegorz Borek)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: 30 May 2001 13:14:08 -0700
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:
> > > You have no choice over your DESIRES.
> > >
> > > You have COMPLETE control over your actions.
> >
> > Try very hard, and think this over:
> > Who gave gay people their desires?
>
> Would my desire for millions of dollar justify robbing banks
>
> A) yes
> B) NO
1. This isn't a good comparison because robbing banks is malevolent to
the other _not consenting_ for that members of society. Homosexualism
isn't, so this does not apply.
2. There is no desire to rob banks - stealing is a wayof expressing a
desire to gain money. Desire to gain money is not negative - it is a
base of capitalism. What makes robbing banks negative is that it is
_not_ the only way of fullifiling the desire (you can work). So what
you are overcoming by not robbing the bank is laziness of taking an
easy way.
3. Gay people on the other hand have natural (god given?) desire of
sexual pleasure normal to everyone (that's why celibate is such a big
sacrifice), but with only one way to fulfill it - having sex with a
man. Thats why this desire is a justification.
4. I assume that by not answering to any of my other arguments you
admitted to being wrong.
G
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 20:40:11 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
> Yes, and?
>
> Win2K Pro is a workstation. If you want full server technology, then use
> Server.
That's one of the problems with windows. You already have to pay close to
$300 for pro, yet you are basically restricted on what it can do. If you want
to do more, you have to pay more (a lot more) for "server" as well as mightier
hardware to run it on. In the unix world (at least for Linux, Solaris, *BSD,
etc) you have one OS.. it works great for a single CPU workstation, and scales
right up for a large SMP box with hundreds of users. None of this, "oh gee..
I want several users to be able to use this server.. guess I have to shell out
another chunk of change" crap. I can take a U60 that's being used as an
engineering desktop, move it to the computer room and use it as a login server
for dozens (if not hundreds) of users.. or a mailserver for 100's of people
(though it'll probably need some large disk for that).. or both at the same
time.
When I went to SDSU, our main server that students logged into was a Sparc
1000E (upgraded from a Sparc 10) that regularly had 400+ users on it. The
server had about 100 Xterm connections and a ton of dialup and telnets... with
netscapes all over the place running, people using news readers, etc, it used
to chug along at a fast pace. Plus it was used by almost all CS students for
compiles and test programs. While a 1000e was pretty impressive when new, it
wasn't really cutting edge when it was there at SDSU (about 3-1/2 years ago,
only 512Meg RAM and 4 CPUs I think) it handled more people and a higher
workload then I've ever seen a windows box handle.
--
Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
[From the oxymoron dept]
"We fully support freedom of speech and freedom of the press, but we
believe the article ... is not acceptable,'' -- From a "Tongue Tied" article
at foxnews.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: What does XP stands for ???
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 20:48:19 GMT
On Wed, 30 May 2001 14:24:32 GMT, Zsolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've seen some rather good, although 'unofficial' explanations about the XP
>abbreviation in
>Windows XP. Let's try to collect them in this thread. Anybody, who has other good
>idead, please
>post them here!
>
>To kick-off the collection, some idea's I've seen so far on this newsgroup:
>
>eXPerimental
>eXtra Problems included
>eXtremely Pathetic
>
Xenophobic Programming
------------------------------
From: Floyd Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers?
Date: 30 May 2001 11:56:56 -0800
"Flacco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I also don't like to subscribe and would like to read them as news but
>> since this isn't possible now I usually read through the mailinglists
>> archive. As long as I don't post answers this is fine.
>
>Well, this is kind of the point, I think - it's a matter of convenience
>for users. It woud be nice to be able to pop into a news server and post
>a comment or question without having to go through the subscription process.
>
>You can monitor the server for responses, then ignore it until you want to
>use it again, without having every single message that's posted clutter
>your inbox.
There is no need to "clutter your inbox" with *any* email that
can be uniquely indentified. Either a decent mail program that
sorts email before presentation (e.g., GNUS running under either
GNU Emacs or XEmacs) or a mail preprocessor (e.g., procmail)
can easily do the trick.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[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: Wed, 30 May 2001 20:55:04 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > Most commonly used desktop OS in General Motors is the Unix family.
>
> I doubt that enormously. Do you have any reference?
I'd bet the numbers would be skewed. It'd be more interesting to see raw
numbers of installed boxes compared to actual return on work.
For instance, here, everyone get's a PC with windows on it. But many (we're
talking 100's of engineers just in my department) don't really need one. Most
use windows just for Eudora, and to read the occasional word document. Many
are moving to using WTS instead as they're tired of yet another box in their
room that spews heat, makes noise, and takes up space. Their Sun/HP
workstations on the other hand... they get _used_.
--
Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
Newspaper Editor: "We're looking for a new food critic, someone who doesn't
immediately 'poo-poo' everything he eats."
Homer: "Nah it usually takes a few hours." -- The Simpsons
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[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: Wed, 30 May 2001 20:57:33 GMT
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> shelling out for the cost of the upgrade from NT (which means, by
> the way, that I have to first install NT on a virgin machine, before
> I can install Win 2K).
Uh.. don't know what you're talking about, but 2k will install on a virgin box
even from an "upgrade" disk just fine. You'll just have to insert the NT disk
for a few seconds for it to be verified.
That's what I did for my 2k box at home.. too bad it's only used for games. I
wouldn't even have gotten 2k but I got tired of constant BSODs and reboots
while playing games (at least 2k stays up most of the time after a game
dumps). Plus we have 2k at work now and I wanted to be able to play with it
at home.
--
Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
UNIX - live it,love it,fork() it !
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers?
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 20:57:52 GMT
On 30 May 2001 11:56:56 -0800, Floyd Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Flacco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I also don't like to subscribe and would like to read them as news but
>>> since this isn't possible now I usually read through the mailinglists
>>> archive. As long as I don't post answers this is fine.
>>
>>Well, this is kind of the point, I think - it's a matter of convenience
>>for users. It woud be nice to be able to pop into a news server and post
>>a comment or question without having to go through the subscription process.
>>
>>You can monitor the server for responses, then ignore it until you want to
>>use it again, without having every single message that's posted clutter
>>your inbox.
>
>There is no need to "clutter your inbox" with *any* email that
>can be uniquely indentified. Either a decent mail program that
>sorts email before presentation (e.g., GNUS running under either
>GNU Emacs or XEmacs) or a mail preprocessor (e.g., procmail)
>can easily do the trick.
even netscape can do it
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[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: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:04:07 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
> > Boo hoo... so it's ok to complain about patches on unix boxes but not SPs on
> > windows eh? At least patches on Solaris work every time!
>
> That remains to be seen.
Speaking from experience.. I can say it's true. We have over 1500 here that
are patched a lot. I wrote a script myself that patches all the boxes in our
department (and perhaps more.. I shared the script with the rest of our IT
staff) automatically each night and/or at boot. Patches that don't need a
reboot install at night, if a reboot is needed, I get a mail saying which
machine(s) need which patches on boot.. but they get them automatically the
next time they're booted (like yesterday.. we had a power outage).
Not one failure of a patch to install properly or work as advertised yet. I
put that script into production months ago.
> > And rarely require
> > a reboot (though they always "recommend" one as a CYA manouver).
>
> Nearly every patch that NS 6 required required a reboot.
>
> Most were core OS.
Unless they were in /platform or were files like /usr/lib/libc.so.1 (or were
binaries that run automatically on boot and were currently running).. you
didn't have to reboot. The README always says to reboot, but it's not
necessary in most cases. The only ones I've ever found to be more then simple
to install are kernel patches. Those can sometimes require the box to be in
single user to patch.. but not always.
--
Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
UNIX - live it,love it,fork() it !
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
