Linux-Misc Digest #545, Volume #18 Sun, 10 Jan 99 08:13:09 EST
Contents:
Re: System V standard vs. BSD standard -> where to find? (Thomas Schulze-Velmede)
Re: Mounting FAT32 filesystem, newbie help (Peter Cedermark)
Re: Change Red Hat 5.x server name (Peter Cedermark)
Re: StarOffice 50 key? (Peter Cedermark)
iomega atapi zip under RH5.2 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Where is the PATH (David Goldstein)
Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers (David Steuber)
Re: Linux: Fight for survival or on victory march? (David Steuber)
Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers (David Steuber)
Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers (David Steuber)
Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers (David Steuber)
Re: How do I partition a large HD under Redhat 5.2? (Darrin Hodges)
Re: Benchmarks for Linux multi-processor. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Kick the Baby! (Re: LINUS Can Suck My Hairy Cock .. or Newbie Needs Linux Help ...)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Good Apache Server Book? (Michael Humphries-Dolnick)
Re: How do I partition a large HD under Redhat 5.2? (Floyd Davidson)
Re: LINUS Can Suck My Hairy Cock .. or Newbie Needs Linux Help ... (Sean Maguire)
Re: CONCLUSIVE PROOF: Jesus *is* King of the Jews ! ! ! (Dr1Driver)
Re: 2038 and Linux (Glen Turner)
Re: Driver for Win to access Linux (David Efflandt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Thomas Schulze-Velmede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: System V standard vs. BSD standard -> where to find?
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 10:51:05 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Victor,
> Really, I think that it is impossible to convert linux into 100% System
> V.4 complaint system.
I don't want to convert anything!
I just want to know the differences! (more or less COMPLETE)
For myself, I prefer the BSD-style, anyway.
Thanks in advance
Regards
Thomas
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:23:10 +0100
From: Peter Cedermark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Mounting FAT32 filesystem, newbie help
Unfortunately, RH 5.0 doesn't have support for FAT32. You might want to upgrade
to at least 5.1 to get support.
If there is another way to make RH 5.0 support FAT32 I'm open to suggestions.
/ Pete
Jess Canada wrote:
>
> Hi, I'm new to Linux. I'm using RH 5.0 and I use System Commander for a
> dual boot with Win98. I need to know how to mount my FAT32 filesystem in
> Linux. I looked for /dev/hda1 in etc/fstab, but it's not there, and there
> isn't anything with an msdos filesystem. Any help would be greatly
> appreciated.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Jess Canada
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:26:28 +0100
From: Peter Cedermark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Change Red Hat 5.x server name
You can also change the name from the control panel. Log in as root, open the
control panel and edit the name in the field "host name". Save the changes, then
quit.
You don't even have to reboot - it's enough to logout...
Norm Dresner wrote:
>
> Mark Ramos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > Gene Wilburn wrote:
> >
> > > If you want to do this manually, edit the file /etc/sysconfig/network
> > > (even if you don't have a network card).
> > >
> > > Change the line that says HOSTNAME=xxx to HOSTNAME=yyy
> > >
> > > Next time you reboot, your host will be renamed. If I recall correctly,
> > > the file /etc/HOSTNAME is set dynamically. Editing that file will not
> > > permanently change the name.
> >
> > Don't forget the /etc/hosts file ....
> >
> > Mark
> >
>
> And the file /etc/sys_id
>
> Norm
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:14:51 +0100
From: Peter Cedermark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: StarOffice 50 key?
The key is specific to the operating system - a key for the Winblows version
won't work (tried it an failed).
Also, be sure to enter the registration information in SO *exactly* as when you
registered it online. If one single letter is different the registration will
fail.
Hope this helps
/ Pete
Raymond Doetjes wrote:
>
> I have a small problem.
>
> A friend of my downloaded StarOffice about 6 weeks ago. When I got it
> this week, I tried to install it, while running the setup it asks for a
> registration key. My friend forgot to write that down. So I thought to
> be smart and faked a new download so you get a registration key. But
> this registration key doesn't work. Probably due to a small update or a
> date/time check.
>
> Now I'm looking for a original key that you get after registering or a
> key that does work. So I can run it and register my self. Can some one
> suply me with such a key.
>
> Raymond Doetjes
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: iomega atapi zip under RH5.2
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 11:43:31 GMT
At first i've read the zip drive mini-HOWTO which tells me the only thing i
have to do is to enable the "Atapi floppy support" in the kernel(my version is
2.0.36 so it should support atapi).
Now it should be mounted as an extended partition on partition 4, but mine
still remains at hdb:
hdb: IOMEGA ZIP 100, 96MB w/16kB Cache, CHS=97/32/63
and later this:
Partition check:
hda: hda1 hda2 < hda5 >
hdb:hdb: irq timeout: status=0x50 { DriveReady SeekComplete }
when i try to mount hdb, this happens:
hdb:read-intr:status=0*59{ DriveReady SeekComplete DataRequest error}
hdb:read-intr:error=0*10 {sector ID NOT FOUNd}
so can anybody tell me what's wrong? and how can i get it working in a
correctly way?
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: David Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where is the PATH
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:55:39 -0700
Jorge wrote:
>
> Guys, and girls of course, can one of you tell me which file I have to
> use to add a new directory to the path? Like in in the dark time of DOS
> we used AUTOEXEC.BAT, I know that there is a file in Linux where the
> path is specified.
> This Linux thing is really exciting, I just hope that more companies
> smarten up and start supporting Linux.
>
> Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a faster response.
>
> Thanks in advance
In my SuSE distro's, the PATH can be modified in the /etc/profile file.
It amy be different on different systems
David
------------------------------
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers
Date: 09 Jan 1999 21:31:53 -0500
"Netnerd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
-> Would you believe the publisher was the Consumer Federation of America?
You might have said so in the first place. However, like a blurb on
the news, this doesn't add any useful information other than I could
now attempt to look it up if I wanted too.
I don't believe any poll results when I don't know the exact
conditions of the poll. Who was asked? What were the exact
questions? How many results were thrown out?
Anyway, I think that's about all I have to say on the matter.
--
David Steuber
http://www.david-steuber.com
s/trashcan/david/ to reply by mail
"Hackers penetrate and ravage delicate, private, and publicly owned
computer systems, infecting them with viruses and stealing materials
for their own ends. These people, they're, they're terrorists."
-- Secret Service Agent Richard Gill
------------------------------
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux: Fight for survival or on victory march?
Date: 10 Jan 1999 02:11:26 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
-> yea? just to let you know, I won first place at my school arguing
-> compition. out of 50 students, I was the only one left arguning when
-> eveyone gave up. so, here you go.
Brilliant. You kept arguing after everyone went home. No wonder you
are bothering us.
When you get into highschool, they will call it debate and you will
need some facts to back up your argument.
-> Nothing prevents anyone from downloading Linux for free and installing
-> it. but after many years, still people are not doing this and there are
-> today more Window PC than ever!
Few people are aware of Linux. Fewer still want to download all the
files you need for a working OS. This is why distributions like SuSE
and Red Hat are doing so well.
-> I can go on and on. as a matter of fact, applications on Linux are worst
-> than those on windows. just mention ONE user oritented application on Linux
-> that is better than its counterpart on Windows. just ONE !
How about Emacs? There is a version for Windows. It doesn't have all
the features supported by the Unix versions. Or how about Sendmail?
What is the Windows equivilent? Exchange? Give me a break! How
about the shell? NT comes closer than the Windows 95/98 command line
shell. But it doesn't hold a candle to bash. KDE is nicer than the
Windows GUI. Perl for Win32 has gotten quite nice, but not as nice as
Perl on Unix systems. There is of course a miriad of Unix utilities,
only a few of which have been ported to Windows. This satisfies your
numerical requirment.
-> there are 300 millions in the US alone who use windows everyday and think
-> you blow smoke. if Linux applications are so much, and Linux is so much easier
-> and better than windows, and it is free, then why is it hardly anyone out
-> there in the real world uses it????? (other than the few geeks offcourse).
First of all, at the 1990 census, there were about 248 million people
in the United States. With a population growth rate of about 1.8%,
there can't be 300 million people using Windows everyday. Perhaps I
over estimated your age.
Second of all, there are approximatly 10 million non casual Linux
installations. Most of these are probably used as servers. However,
many people use Linux for pleasure. It seems clear that you are
intimidated by the superiour intelectual capacity of a Linux user,
based on your geeks reference.
-> Bob (call me Bill too, it is no problem).
I think Beavus is more appropriate.
--
David Steuber
http://www.david-steuber.com
s/trashcan/david/ to reply by mail
"Hackers penetrate and ravage delicate, private, and publicly owned
computer systems, infecting them with viruses and stealing materials
for their own ends. These people, they're, they're terrorists."
-- Secret Service Agent Richard Gill
------------------------------
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers
Date: 09 Jan 1999 20:42:04 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Robinson) writes:
-> It's beyond me why this stuff can't be kept in the advocacy groups, if it
-> comes to that. Why is it being crossposted to uk.comp.os.linux ?
You've got a point there. So why didn't you narrow down the
Followups?
Never mind. I'll do it.
--
David Steuber
http://www.david-steuber.com
s/trashcan/david/ to reply by mail
"Hackers penetrate and ravage delicate, private, and publicly owned
computer systems, infecting them with viruses and stealing materials
for their own ends. These people, they're, they're terrorists."
-- Secret Service Agent Richard Gill
------------------------------
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers
Date: 09 Jan 1999 22:00:37 -0500
Andy Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
-> We have to use MS Windows of some sort on my son's PC - there is simply no
-> children's software available for Linux that I know of. I have written to
-> Dorling Kindersley UK telling them of the growing usage of Linux and
-> suggesting that in addition to Windows PCs and Macs, they also bring out
-> Linux/X-windows versions of their excellent titles. I did not even get a
-> reply. Yet I continue to buy their software as my son likes it and it is
-> undoubtedly good. Most DK titles say on the box that the minimum system
-> requirements are a 486/33 running Windows 3.1 - where am I going wrong?
->
-> Its all very frustrating but I've had my say and feel better for it -
-> anyone else in a similar situation?
Ever try getting hardware specs to write a driver? I tell ya there is
some kind of conspiricy out there to keep Microsoft on top. I like to
root for the underdog. Good luck, DOJ!
--
David Steuber
http://www.david-steuber.com
s/trashcan/david/ to reply by mail
"Hackers penetrate and ravage delicate, private, and publicly owned
computer systems, infecting them with viruses and stealing materials
for their own ends. These people, they're, they're terrorists."
-- Secret Service Agent Richard Gill
------------------------------
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers
Date: 09 Jan 1999 23:05:33 -0500
"Poison Ivan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
-> If Microsoft wanted to maximize profits, they would jack up the price of
-> Windows to $500. *That* would be a monopoly behaving at its worst, gouging
-> consumers. A monopoly that keeps prices low does no harm to consumers.
There is more to a good deal than price.
Anyway, your thesis is probably wrong. Pushing the price to $500
would reduce the number of sales rather dramaticaly. Microsoft would
make less money in the absolute sense. Also, that would push people
to the Mac and other alternatives.
The main reason the consumer looses is technical advances are
dramaticly slowed by the lack of competition. Linux is nothing more
than the reimplimentation of an old design. The effort would not be
necessary if there was a competitive environment on the desktop.
--
David Steuber
http://www.david-steuber.com
s/trashcan/david/ to reply by mail
"Hackers penetrate and ravage delicate, private, and publicly owned
computer systems, infecting them with viruses and stealing materials
for their own ends. These people, they're, they're terrorists."
-- Secret Service Agent Richard Gill
------------------------------
From: Darrin Hodges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.admin,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: How do I partition a large HD under Redhat 5.2?
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 10:27:20 +1100
Jacob Langford wrote:
>
> Ilya wrote:
>
> > How do I partition a large HD under Redhat 5.2? By that, I mean
> > how many partitons do I make and how big do I make them. the HD
> > is 9.1GB.
> >
> > Please post.
>
> Under most circumstances it is a crime to do anything other thanmake
> *one* partition on a hard drive (excepting swap space).
>
> If there is an error on a filesystem, it generally renders one or more
> files useless, not the whole filesystem. If the disk crashes, the
> partitions
> are *all* uselss. So in terms of losing data, multiple partitions gets
> you nothing.
>
> What about security? If you are running a machine that is mission
> critical, i.e. any loss of service on that machine will cost lives or
> money,
> you might think about security carefully. When a partition fills up,
> your system may crash. Which partitions are publicly accessible? The
> user partitions, and any partitions that are logged to, mailed to, etc.
> If your system is not mission critical, make one partition and forget
> about it. If someone fills the entire drive with garbage, you erase the
>
> garbage and call it a day. No harm done.
>
> Why not multiple partitions? You'll know as soon as you wish you
> had partitioned it differently. You just need a bit more space in root
> for that extra software, or a bit more space in /usr to dump that audio
> CD. Think about it.
you shouldn`t install software on root.
having mount points for at least /usr can save
you a lot of pain. Recently a production machine at work fellover, when
it was rebooted, it
conplained that it could not find various utilites. It turned out /usr
got crunched and was turned
into a file with mode 0000. but that was ok, since it was only a mount
point, nothing was lost and simply
doing `mkdir usr` and a reboot fixed the problem in a very short time.
We do backups, but on a production
machine time is money, while waiting for a restore to finish.
>
> So how should your 9G drive be partitioned if it will be the only
> drive in a Linux box?
>
> Add twice physical memory as a swap partition.
> Make the rest of the disk a Linux native partition and mount is as /.
>
sure, this is ok for most people at home.
> Jacob ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
--
Darrin hodges [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Speak! You have a civil tongue in your head. I know
you have because I sewed it back in there myself!"
(I Was a Teenage Frankenstein, 1957)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Benchmarks for Linux multi-processor.
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:05:37 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen E.
Halpin) wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 18:58:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>About two years ago there was an article in PC Week about comparing quad proc
>>servers with PPro 200s with 256K and 512K caches. The OS's used were NT and
>>netware being hit by about 20+ clients. The systems were identical in each
>>case. The 512K cache system had +40% performance increase because it didn't
>>have to flush the cache as much when it switch processes. They used their
>>server bench test. Obviously your performance will vary depending on the
>>software you are running and the number of clients/processes.
>>
>>So you can see why Intel wants ~$3600 for a Xeon 450 with 2mb of cache.
>
>It's also interesting to look at the workstation vendors such as SGI
>and Sun who were charging $10,000 for a module with a CPU and large
>cache for their workstations. The fact of the matter is that PC CPUs
>are cheap because of volume and complexity. The cache on the first
>Pentium Pro (256K) was a 15.5M transistor chip. Going to a 1M cache
>in the same form factor meant producing a significantly more complex
>chip in far lower quantity, which likely had a lower yield. You also
>had to amortize extra engineering costs to design a far more complex
>chip, along with managing all the thermal problems of dissipating 50%
>more heat from the same carrier. Low volume and high complexity
>result in high costs, and the same rules apply to the RISC chips as
>well as the higher end Xeons. As some would say, "it's the cost of
>doing business.."
Definitely. I remember how hard it was to get 256K PPro 200s when they first
came out. 166s were easy. Those $10,000 SGI and Sun CPU modules typically
had approximately 2MB of cache I'll guess. The DEC ones had ones had anywhere
from 1 to 2 MB on them.
Back to Intel: I know the the problems they had getting the PPro 512K and 1MB
cache version out so the Xeon was probably equally tough. So maybe you can
answer this question. Do chips like the Xeon have their yield enhanced having
chunks of the cache switchable if there is a defect? That is I start with a
Xeon having a 2MB cache with a few defects can Intel change the microcode to
make it into a Xeon that works with 1 MB of cache?
Paul
.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux
Subject: Kick the Baby! (Re: LINUS Can Suck My Hairy Cock .. or Newbie Needs Linux
Help ...)
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:37:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matt Templeton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Lets get real folks! If you have read all the posts from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (forged header). Should recognize the stile of this troll as the same. He
> is a pathetic troll that can only get attention by getting people angry.
> He really is not worth the effort of a response. Let's just ignore him.
>
> Remove the .XoutX. to reply
>
> Matt
I'd be surprised to find that anyone took the post seriously - I thought it
was a joke.
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.isp
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Humphries-Dolnick)
Subject: Re: Good Apache Server Book?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 17:07:03 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Cliff Etzel wrote:
> >
> > I am looking for a book or other documentation that explains the setup
> > and various configurations of Apache server. My only requirement is
> > that it is written and explains the information in terminology someone
> > who is not that experienced (yet) with can understand.
>
> I've got these on my bookshelf:
>
> APACHE The Definitive Guide , O'Reilly Press
By the way, the Apache guide from ORA is on sale at Bookpool
(www.bookpool.com) for $21.95. 3rd Ed.
--
Michael Humphries-Dolnick
"If opinions are expressed in this communication,
those opinions may not represent those of
my employer."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Floyd Davidson)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.admin,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: How do I partition a large HD under Redhat 5.2?
Date: 10 Jan 1999 12:08:38 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jacob Langford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ilya wrote:
>
>> How do I partition a large HD under Redhat 5.2? By that, I mean
>> how many partitons do I make and how big do I make them. the HD
>> is 9.1GB.
>>
>> Please post.
>
>Under most circumstances it is a crime to do anything other thanmake
>*one* partition on a hard drive (excepting swap space).
That is exceedingly poor advice.
>What about security? If you are running a machine that is mission
>critical, i.e. any loss of service on that machine will cost lives or
Security is also very nice for a typical home computer. What
typical user wants to spend all day learning how to repair some
silly mistake that could easily have been prevented to start
with? Most people don't.
>Why not multiple partitions? You'll know as soon as you wish you
>had partitioned it differently. You just need a bit more space in root
>for that extra software, or a bit more space in /usr to dump that audio
>CD. Think about it.
Think about learning to use symbolic links so that you don't
have to repartition in the circumstance described above.
Symlinks were introduced for exactly that purpose. (You don't
need just a bit more space in root if you have a bit more space
in some other partition.)
>So how should your 9G drive be partitioned if it will be the only
>drive in a Linux box?
>
>Add twice physical memory as a swap partition.
>Make the rest of the disk a Linux native partition and mount is as /.
More bad advice.
Figure out how much virtual memory your box needs (which depends
on what kind of programs are used, both regularly and
occasionally). Buy as much RAM as you can afford (and try to
make sure that is more than is used by programs that you
regularly run). Then make the swap partition large enough to
fill in the difference between RAM and needed virtual memory.
(Note that with Linux any extra RAM is used for buffers and
caching disk blocks, so "extra" is a good thing and makes the
machine faster.)
Typically the more RAM you have the less swap you need for any
given set of processes to be run. A machine that typically
runs 50Mb of processes but occasionally needs 200Mb (image editing
is an example where that can happen) will crash if it has 64Mb
of RAM and only 128Mb of swap. If it has 128Mb of RAM and 128MB
of swap, or even 32Mb of RAM and 196Mb of swap, it will not crash.
The point is how much virtual memory is needed, and no rule of
thumb like 2:1 for RAM is going to be correct because generally
the less RAM you have the *more* swap you need.
Floyd
--
Floyd L. Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pictures of the North Slope at <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sean Maguire)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: LINUS Can Suck My Hairy Cock .. or Newbie Needs Linux Help ...
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:57:54 GMT
That's becuase you're not intelligent enough to understand UNIX
based systems. Any looser can work under windows/dos, you just
have to be alive and have a iq of at least 5 ;) Try reading
up, and i'm sure you'll learn how to copy a file under linux.
<hint, try cp>
Never paid for a MS product? Wow, you big mean software pirate
you.
In article <KV%l2.93$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, OmniČ wrote:
>I fuckin LOVED reading that post !!!!!
>esp since I've been using MS products since 1986
>
>ans have only just instaled redhat 5.2
>and cant even get connected to the net
>I dont even know how to create a file
>like the copy con command in dos
>
>FUCK LINsux !!!
>
>why the hell did I bother?
>I must want to punish myself???
>
>this is like learning chinese
>nothing makes sense
>I'm a pretty good dos/win user
>now I'm a major linsux dweeb
>fuck that !
>
>ok linux is free
>so fuckin what
>I've never paid for a MS product either
>so whats the dif???
>
>
>
>I'll stick to NT and win98
>I can do just as much with a c complier and winsock
>than gnu and linsux
>
>
>
>
>
>
>remove .com (soume yoeung guih) wrote in message
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>Linus is such a pansy mother fucker. He needs real balls like bill
>>gates. Linus says "Hey Im a gay boy and give my shit away." Bill says:
>>"I own you linus mother fucker." Linus is a fuckin retard. Who else
>>would make a fuckin OS with so many security holes. How many fuckers
>>hack NT to run thier little eggdrop bots. You are all script kiddies.
>>Who the fuck would let other people butt rape him for a kernel. Bill
>>gates owns you all. I think we need to start putting tatoos on all
>>these fuckin artic following homos heads.. And hopefully that tatoo
>>will have bill gates head with a windows 2000 logo. I could write a
>>better OS out of basic on a toaster. My on screen programming for my
>>VCR is better than the gui for linux. I hope linus gets nut cancer and
>>dies. Microsoft will soon buy linux so you all can get a real os. I
>>cant wait for microsoft brings msinux to rape all you linux fags.
>>
>>Please do not flame me .. its only an opinion.
>
>
--
__________________________
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sean Maguire
([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED])
(ICQ: 1656675) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
_________________________
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dr1Driver)
Crossposted-To:
rec.music.hip-hop,rec.models.rc.air,rec.woodworking,rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang,rec.sport.soccer,rec.travel.europe,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.software.year-2000,alt.prophecies.nostradamus,alt.prophecies.cayce
Subject: Re: CONCLUSIVE PROOF: Jesus *is* King of the Jews ! ! !
Date: 10 Jan 1999 12:58:15 GMT
>Here's absolutely irrefutable, scientifically-verifiable evidence that
>plainly demonstrates Jesus
If he flew R/C, then I'm interested. If not, take it to a religion NG.
Dr.1 Driver
(the pilot formerly known as Gerald43)
"There's a Hun in the sun!"
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 23:29:10 +1030
From: Glen Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2038 and Linux
Frank Sweetser wrote:
> of course, the PPro was supposed to be the last x86 chip. and then the PII
> was supposed to be the last x86 chip - until just recently intel seems to
> have announced the PIII chips (heard it on slashdot).
>
> until winXXXX is ported to merced (or whatever it ends up being called) i
> highly doubt they'll stop making more and more expensive versions of their
> #1 cash cow.
Yes, but as I originally wrote, the problem preventing
an immediate time_t fix is C90 "long long" standardisation
and support.
"long long"s on i386 will almost certainly be 64-bit,
using the same techniques we used for 32-bit integer
support on the 16-bit architectures of not too long ago.
In short, the issues are those of standards, compilers,
libraries and distributions. Today's architectures are
perfectly satisfactory to solve the 32-bit time_t problem.
And my belief is that time_t implementation as a "long
long" will occur naturally when C90 compilers and
libc's make an appearance in Linux in 3 or more years.
Even a timeframe of double this is perfectly acceptable.
64-bit support in hardware isn't really necessary for
data -- it's appeal lies more in the ability to easily
address file and memory sizes that once seemed huge
but are now almost affordable.
Cheers,
Glen
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Efflandt)
Subject: Re: Driver for Win to access Linux
Date: 10 Jan 1999 13:02:20 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 01:48:11 +0100,
Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am looking for a driver either for Win 95 or for Win NT 4 that
>gives me access to Linux ext2fs filesystems. Hints on shareware or
>commercials are highly appreciated
'fsdext2' allows Win95 to mount ext2 partitions read-only. However, note
that Windows is totally unaware of file permissions, so it can see
everything, including /etc/passwd and /etc/ppp/pap-secrets.
The website in the Netherlands must have moved, so I will email it to you
separately (83K).
--
David Efflandt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.xnet.com/~efflandt/
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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-Misc Digest
******************************
