Linux-Advocacy Digest #287, Volume #30 Fri, 17 Nov 00 21:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux Sux (David Dorward)
Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights? (tom)
Re: Microsoft Speaks German! ("stevekimble")
Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux (Donn Miller)
Re: The Sixth Sense (Steve Mading)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Steve Mading)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: The Sixth Sense (Giuliano Colla)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Microsoft Speaks German! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Chris Ahlstrom)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Dorward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Sux
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 22:58:59 +0000
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> > Quake, sin, Simcity 3000, flight gear, descent,...
>
> The list of games Linux doesn't run is longer.
The list of games any system doesn't run is longer then the list it does.
------------------------------
From: tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights?
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 23:18:09 GMT
I got pan installed last night and didn't even need the files I d/l'd.
Went into the config program and selected one of the package managers
and found pan available in the list of stuff already on the cd's. Nice.
Now if I could just get the darn thing to work. Finally figured out
that once I set up the server and ID stuff, I had to restart Pan just
to get it to d/l the list of newsgroups. However, it gets up to a
little over 34,000 (out of 38k+) and freezes; three times this has
happened. I have to kill it and restart, but still nothing shows in
the list of groups. You're right about it being quirky.
Btw, when I had the Netscape freeze and did the reboot, Linux no longer
starts in the gui but logs in to the command prompt. I actually prefer
it this way, but in case I ever want to change it back, any idea of the
startup file & parameter I need to setup to do it?
Tom
_______________________________________________
In article <8v2ja5$rt5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Osugi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8v1nvr$6lv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > bye-bye (hopefully).
> >
> > Thanks for the tip. This is going on my sheet of notes for future
> > reference.
>
> You are welcome.
>
> > > What exactly happened to your gui? Was netscape still visible or
> not?
> > It
> > > has a way of hanging around, even after it crashes.
>
> > Netscape was still visible (2 or 3 windows). But of course,
clicking
> > on the close buttons did nothing.
>
> Yeah, that can happen. In that case, if the other elements of the gui
> still work, Xkill should be all you need. Otherwise, switch to a
> vertual terminal (ctrl-Alt-F2) and use the ps stuff I mentioned to
find
> and kill netscape. Then you can usually switch right back to your gui
> (ctrl-alt-f7 will get you there) and go right on working. On rare
> occasion, you might need to restart the x server.
>
> > Boy, do I feel like a doofus! (& not just because I'm not sure how
to
> > spell "doofus") I flew right by the title and went down to the
lists
> > below. Of course, these are the links that take you in
the "circle."
> >
> > But I found the right link and got the file now. Thank you very
much.
> > If I can get pan working, I can just ignore Netscape (except maybe
for
> > the browser part) and won't have to worry about it crashing.
> >
> > Tom
> >
>
> I did the same thing when I first started using linux (and thus rpms).
> Totally missed the big title and clicked on the package named in the
> details box or the "provides" section.
>
> BTW, I feel I should warn you that although pan is a really good
> program, it is still beta, so expect some quirkiness. Little things
> like losing the view settings, (always defaults back to "show read
> messages", which i hate) and the occassional crash. Still, I find it
> more than adequate for my news needs. YMMV.
>
> --
> Osugi Sakae
>
> I will not be filed, numbered, briefed or debriefed.
> I am not a number, I am a free man. -The Prisoner
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "stevekimble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft Speaks German!
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 00:27:02 -0000
"chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Europe is the heart of our Western Culture.
>
> No it's not. Western culture is more and more American culture.
>
> >Anything which comes forth from Europe generally
> >ends up spreading across the world.
>
> No it doesn't. America's influence is much stronger than Europe's.
>
> Don't want to start an argument. Just stating facts.
>
Why, whenever anybody says something to the effect that Amerika is not the
best/most- influential/any-superlative-you-care-to-chose at anything, does a
citizen of said country feel obliged to pop up and state that it was/is/will
always best/most etc.? One wonders who the citizen is trying to make the
point to - (a) the rest of the world (b) themselves (c) both the foregoing.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to organise next year's Melton Mowbray Pork
Pie Rolling World Series.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 19:32:35 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> You are insane.
>
> An early pentium running Linux has more power than the late LoseDOS box.
You're right. I've got a P166 machine running FreeBSD+WindowMaker, and
it absolutely blows away a 450 MHz AMD running Windows 98 I have running
here. Well, it's FreeBSD and not Linux, but I'm sure the effect is the
same.
====== 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: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: 18 Nov 2000 00:42:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:8v1qu8$bcm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> : The advantage to these things is that you can move them around, or send
: them
:> : to other people, or take them with you.
:>
:> URLs already have that feature, without shortcuts.
: But they don't have the other things like syncronisation information, or the
: ability to be quickly an easily manipulated as a single object, if they're
: just a string in a file somewhere.
Because a file is a manipulatable object already - complete with its
own icon in the desktop and everything.
Synchonization with a URL merely requires that you look at the
timestamp of file creation. This isn't information *in* the file,
it's meta-information about the file, just like the permissions,
ownership, and all that. It isn't possible to tell if a URL is
"synchonized" (by which I assume you mean "the cache copy is up
to date", from what you said earlier), unless you go query the
site it refers to. Until then, you can't tell if the remote site
has changed their copy of the file or not. I don't get what this
"synchronization information" is.
:> That's why I'm
:> confused. There is no difference between making two separate copies
:> of a URL and making a shortcut to a URL. A URL is *already* a remote
:> reference anyway.
: I ask again, what are the two copies you're talking about ?
A shortcut is a thing that points at another. If you merely have
one file with a URL, it isn't a shortcut. A shortcut would be if
you had *another* icon that pointed to is.
:> That depends on the kind of link. Hardlinks (by i-node number) don't
:> care if the target moves, synmbolic links (by filename) do.
: The _vast_ majority of links in any Unix system I've ever used are soft
: links. No doubt due to the restrictions of hard links.
True, but I don't see the breaking of links as a problem. Sometimes
that's exactly what I want - a link that points at whatever copy of
the file is in the directory above this one right now, not what it
used to be yesterday.
:> So, errr, it's basicly a URL? IMO it would have been better to just
:> make some extensions to URLs to handle different 'protocols', rather
:> than make up some new technique. (For example, refer to a printer
:> with something like: "print://printer1/", or for remote printers,
:> "print://other.machine.name/printer1/". URLS are *supposed* to be
:> extensible this way, just so long as you don't step on the toes
:> of the officially sanctioned protocol format strings (http://, ftp://,
:> etc).)
: But shortcuts contain extra information like custom icons, shortcut keys,
: startup parameters and environment information.
Okay, I can see the icon and keyboard key, but the parameters and env
options could be encoded as URL string data, just like they are when
talking to a CGI form on a website.
:> ?? Links exist and work the same way regardless of the filesystem
:> used. If the filesystem supports it, it works the same - A piece
:> of software that ends up using a link somehow does it the *same*
:> way regardless of whether the link comes from a efs, xfs, ext2,
:> reiserFS, or whatever type of filesystem.
: Can I copy (just with cp, or by dragging it to a disk in, say, KDE) a link
: from any filesystem that supports links to any other filesystem that
: supports links and have the link still work ? How about ftping it ?
I don't know, since I never use these features, but there's no
point in doing so. It isn't any less work to copy a link than it
is to make a new one.
:> : Shortcuts are a *User Interface* feature and a damn useful one.
:>
:> : You might care to all decent GUIs have some equivalent - KDE with
: .kdelnks,
:>
:> That sentence no verb. Huh?
: Should be "[...] care to note all [...]".
The .kdelink is just a file with a single string in it. When you
move it about, you are merely moving a tiny file, no differently
than moving any other file on the system. It's not a special
extra feature, and it's usable from inside your own programs since
it's format is simple and well-advertised. (You can open a .kdelink,
read it, and go where it says to go. Can you open a shortcut in
Windows with something *other* than the default GUI shell, and read
its contents?)
:> : for example.
:>
:> I know they exist. I don't use them. There's very little point to it,
:> precisely because I don't want to lock myself into just kde or gnome.
: They're a *UI* feature. It's irrelevant whether you "lock yourself in"
: because they're only really meant for organising access to <whatever> inside
: the UI of your choice.
: ANd trying to say they're silly just because you're in the 1% of the
: population who might actually use a different shell on a remotely regular
: basis is hardly a strong argument.
Wrong. It's a VERY strong argument (Even if your 1% figure were right,
which it isn't). You just said above that they are a feature for the UI,
and only matter for the user who's using them. Well, in my case they
get in the way too much to be useful. That's still true regardless of
how many others like me there are - YOU just said that doesn't matter.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: 18 Nov 2000 01:06:07 GMT
Paul Colquhoun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Oh font of all wisdom, we beseach thee, show us the correct way to rewrite
: RPM's arguments.
: Please don't remove any existing functionality.
In all fairness, while Chad is an annoying gadfly that likes to
pretend he knows more than he does, rpm's arguments *are* laid out
in an annoying fashion. It would have been nice if they had
followed the following golden rule of CLI commands: "Newbie
usage should require less use of the manual than advanced usage."
In other words, the default options should have been the ones that
a person newly encountering RPM would be most likely to need, and
it's the expert options that should require studying the man page
and entering several flags. Rpm is set up so that the default
is to use the installed database of packages on the system, and
this NOT likely to the the newbie's first use of RPM. The first
time, a newbie is more likely to be trying to look at an rpm package
that he downloaded, that isn't installed yet. It is really daunting
to be faced with that huge rpm manpage for the first time, and *not*
find this type of usage up near the top, nor find any examples that
show it being used this way. You have to piece it together yourself,
which among other things means figuring out that you even need the
extra flags in the first place. It isn't clear at first that the
default behavior is *not* to look at a *.rpm file.
Now, if I were an idiot like Chad, I'd assume that Linux sux
because of rpm's manpage. Or if I were a newbie to Linux I'd
get that impression too. The manpage for rpm is all that's
really broken here, but it ends up making Linux as a whole
look bad, since rpms are kinda important to installing software
on several of the popular distros.
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:27:18 GMT
Jack Troughton wrote:
>
> > It is interesting to read the results of a "whois starbucks.com"
> > command. You Windoze users will have to figure out how to do a
> > "whois" yourselves [and tell me, so I can do a whois from work <grin>].
>
> I find it very easy; I telnet to my cable-connected warp box at
> home, and run it from there.
You might want to switch to ssh, instead of telnet!
> > Network Solutions must not have a handle on spam.
>
> Whaddya mean... they ARE spam.
A good rejoinder!
Chris
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:43:29 GMT
Christopher Smith wrote:
>
> "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Christopher Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Well, this problem result from the MS inability to tell
> > > > apart "open a document with an application" from "run an
> > > > application". And this is an MS-ONLY issue. No other OS is
> > > > so crappy. No other Browser or e-mail client is so crappy.
> > > > The feature is common on Desktop environment, and it is
> > > > handy. But it must be (as it is on any other OS's) limited
> > > > to desktop, it can't be a system wide feature.
> > >
> > > Even if the problem as you described it existed, it would have nothing
> to do
> > > with "MS inability to tell apart "open a document with an application"
> from
> > > "run an application"". An "inability" which is neither a) unique to
> > > Microsoft (KDE, for example, "suffers" from the same "problem") nor b)
> > > originated by them.
> >
> > I have just explained the difference between KDE and MS.
>
> Where ? Certainly not in the paragraph above.
It appears that you're having some problem. Is it on reading or on
understanding?
>
> > If you don't see it then the discussion is quite inane.
>
> Given your demonstrated lack of knowledge thus far, in this and other posts,
> it is indeed inane.
You'd better demonstrate YOUR knowledge before. You appear not to grasp
something quite elementary.
>
> > I have just said that it can be a Desktop feature (as in KDE), because
> > it's under direct user control.
>
> How is it any less under control in Windows ? You still have to open
> <whatever> in either environment.
>
> > It can't be a system wide feature,
> > because it escapes control.
>
> It's no more or less system wide in Windows than in KDE. In both cases, it
> is a feature of the shell.
>
Well, you missed the chance of your life. That of coming out of a
difficult situation leaving in doubt the unaware readers. But you went a
step too far, showing your abysmal ignorance. Now, I'm sorry for you,
it's too late.
A NG is hardly a place for a class on Computer Science. Maybe I don't
qualify too well as a teacher, even if I've not only used quite a number
of different OS's, but also developed some, for research, military, and
industrial applications. But as you don't appear to qualify even as a
pupil, I believe we're even.
Well, I'll try to make it very short.
An OS is a computer program whose purpose is to manage system resources
and to run applications. If applications to run were known since
startup, nothing else would be required. The OS may run a starting
program which will access a list of the programs to run, and that's all.
That's what happens with Config.sys in DOS, or with rc.d in *nix sistemV
startup. Many special purpose OS's do just that.
But if you need a human user to be able to run programs at will, then
you need a Human Interface, i.e. a program which handles I/O devices the
human operator may use, gathers information on what the human operators
requires, and activates the OS functions to load and run the required
program(s), providing additional informations (such as the files the
program is supposed to act upon) to the program to be run.
Such a HI program has been called in a number of ways, from Job
Processor to CLI. In the Unix world this program has been called a
"shell" because it encloses the OS like a shell. You don't see the OS
inside but just the shell. MS has used the same name as a general word.
So the standard shell program for DOS is command.com. As with Unix,
which has many different shell programs (sh, csh, tcsh etc.) you could
provide DOS with a different human interface program, with the "shell"
option.
However once the shell has started the program, the program is
completely unaware of the shell, which has just been the link between
user actions and OS loading and running the program. If the system is
multitasking, the shell may continue to run in order to accept other
commands, else the shell program may just terminate, to be reloaded on
application terminating.
If the program needs to communicate with the human operator (i.e. it's
an interactive program) it will use the OS provided facilities.
If the program needs to run another program, it will perform a request
to the OS, as the shell program would do. There's no real difference
between the shell program and any other program, except a possible
difference in permission levels.
This is to make clear what a shell is, as opposed to an OS.
Now, if the human interface is graphic, made by a pointing device and a
graphic screen, all of that holds true all the same. You have an
additional OS layer (a window manager) which takes care to notify
applications when the pointing device performs an action which may be of
interest to the application, and that's all. If the window we're acting
upon is not controlled by another application, the shell is notified,
and may take care.
Now let's come to our case. In order to provide the handy feature that
clicking an icon the appropriate action is taken, the graphic shell
program must determine whether the icon is a document, or an
application. If it's an application it will load and run it. If it's
not, it must have a mean (let's say a sort of lookout table) to find out
which application must be used to open the document. If an application
is found, it will perform the appropriate OS call to run the
application, passing as a parameter the path of the document to open.
If an application (such as IE) wants to perform a similar action, i.e.
open a document, it must perform the same action. It must duplicate the
shell action.
And here we are at the point. The operator clicking an Icon on a folder
gives a shell command, just as typing EDIT after a DOS prompt, therefore
the way it's handled is a shell feature.
The operator clicking an icon, a link, or whatever in an application
window HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SHELL, even if the user
action is apparently the same. Just as typing the same characters EDIT,
inside the EDIT program. The EDIT program, in response to that may even
decide to load another instance of EDIT, so that apparently the result
is the same, but that's an application implementation, totally
independent from the shell.
Not having this notion impairs any capability of understanding how a
computer works and how OS, window manager, shell and applications
interact.
However it happens that the crappy MS implementation mixes up things.
The bad choice made to have a single huge registry file (actually two,
but they're so mixed up you're obliged to consider as one), rules out
the possibility of performing a search each time it's required. It would
make the system unbearably slow. So the association informations are
loaded at boot and maintained by the OS itself. A bad initial choice
leads to a bad solution.
But there's more. The same holds true for applications. It's simply
unthinkable that an application wishing to open a documents parses a 2
MB file in order to find out what to do. So the brilliant MS brains
have come out with the worst possible solution.
Instead of providing an API which returns the application association
for a given document type, they've provided an API (which is an OS
feature, NOT A SHELL FEATURE), which will do everything is needed. It
may be used both by the shell and the applications. You just call the
ShellExec API , which, provided with a file name, will either run it or
run the application which deals with it.
ShellExec is a service FOR THE SHELL, not a shell service, which would
be nonsensical, given that the application doesn't see the shell.
That way, MS has moved something which should only be a shell feature to
the OS, so that any application may open any document, but any
application may also run any other application be it dangerous or not,
and being totally unaware unless each application builds and maintains
its "don't call ShellExec" table, which is cumbersome, error prone and
unsafe.
The shell feature is just related to clicking an Icon on a folder, and
is common to MS and *nix.
The application feature is unique to MS, and related to MS inability to
make an acceptable OS.
After this lengthy explanation, I assume that you've understood that
running an application from IE is not a shell feature. It's an OS
feature. That's why is totally different on MS crapware from other sane
OS's.
> > Security is a serious matter. It can't be faced amateur-style, like MS.
> >
> > >
> > > > > In an enterprise environment, the workstations would/should be
> locked
> > > > > down in such a way that viruses become irrelevant.
> > > >
> > > > When the browser can't tell apart url addresses from
> > > > executables on your box, it's not a trivial task.
> > >
> > > Except IE can.
> > >
> >
> > Not by default, AFAIK.
>
> Then your knowledge is lacking.
>
Given YOUR knowledge I'd shut up if I were you.
> > > > The only way is to rule out MS crapware. No other way out.
> > >
> > > Or just use IE, because it works fine.
> > >
> >
> > Not by default AFAIK.
> >
> > > > > Email viruses are easily defeated with rules and virus scanning
> > > software.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > What will be your rule when a link appears just to be
> > > > "report.doc" coming from a trusted site? (and it was
> > > > intended to be, but the guy pasted the wrong thing, maybe
> > > > the last command he typed on ->Start->Run?)
> > >
> > > Won't make any difference. The browser will still prompt before opening
> it.
> > >
> >
> > Not by default AFAIK.
>
> I suggest you detail the *specific* version of Windows and IE for which this
> works. Certainly, I've never experienced a situation in a default
> configuration where clicking on a link to a file will open that file without
> prompting.
I'd suggest that YOU specify which version of Windows and IE you've
tested for that.
(hint: just try with a PC magazine CD, where clicking a link will
trigger a setup.exe)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:43:50 GMT
On Fri, 17 Nov 2000 07:57:57 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Bob Hauck wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:15:30 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Maybe I'm just old school here, if I don't have a full understanding
>> >about how the code I write translates to actual machine instructions, I
>> >find it difficult to work in the environment.
>>
>> I'm a bit of a stick in the mud too, and it seems as if I do a lot of
>> low-level stuff like you do. But my take on it is a bit different.
>Just a question, and this is sort of my point, why not C++?
If you are resource constrained, then you can't use some of the really
useful C++ features anyway, or at least have to be very circumspect as
to how you use them. For example features like exceptions and STL
require significant additional runtime and library support. This can
be a problem in an embedded environment, and can be an issue that tilts
things in favor of C for small to medium embedded projects.
I've heard you argue in favor if C-style C++ in these cases on the
basis of better type checking, but that seems like a minor win to me.
It doesn't matter, anyway, since C-style C++ doesn't need all the
runtime support and stuff that I mentioned, so it's really C as far as
I'm concerned.
>that C does which C++ can not do in the same way or better? I often
>write plug-ins for different environments, I am working on a fully
>indexed text search system for PostgreSQL. I am writing it in C++.
So you aren't resource-constrained and can take advantage of all the C++
features you want. But this is the environment where high-level
languages start to make sense, particularly if it is easy to combine
them with C for the bottlnecks (Python is really good at this). And
there _are_ languages that are easier to use and master than C++.
>I have three types of index classes, and they are all used as:
>
>index->find(token), within the code.
So why not do this in Java or Python and avoid dealing with memory
management and pointer bugs? The heavy lifting is probably being done
by PostgreSQL anyway, isn't it? So performance probably isn't that big
of an issue. In fact, those particular languages are especially good
at interfacing to databases, with extensive libraries available.
I used to use C++ almost exclusively but after doing a couple of
projects with Python and Java, I'm getting sold on the idea that C++ is
just too hard to use properly compared to the alternatives. If I have
to have a bloated compiler and library, I at least want to have it make
my life easier. I do prefer the OOP style to generic programming, so I
don't miss templates too much. I've also decided that for some things
OOP plus dynamic typing (as Python has) is a win compared to static
typing, at least in terms of writing clear and concise code quickly.
It may not be the right thing for giant projects, but I don't work on
giant projects.
As I said, there are situations where C++ is the right thing, and I do
still use it sometimes. To give an example, for shrink-wrapped apps it
often makes sense because you're always worried about performance
(mostly just for marketing reasons, but you're still worried) yet you
also need to be able package things so you can manage a big project.
But there are also a lot of situations where C++ isn't optimal and I
seem to stumble on a lot of those lately. Maybe I'm just fascinated
with the new toys in my toybox.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft Speaks German!
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:43:52 GMT
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 23:52:41 -0500, Clifford W. Racz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Liberals...
>
>Execute the unborn, kill off the old people.
>Rob hard working poeple, give the money to fat, lazy people who won't do
>anything.
First Kulkis, now you. Is Perdue a hotbed of far-right thinking?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 01:44:26 GMT
Jack Troughton wrote:
>
> And any system can be taken down by a nastily written app; I have a
> friend that claims to be able to kill any *nix box so long as he has
> shell access, and not even root access. It's not that he crashes it
> so much as he just renders it useless for anybody else who wants to
> use the machine...
Here's a little app that will force you to reboot (if you're running
a Linux box):
Put the following code in a shell script, then execute it:
($0 & $0 &)
The script will recursively spawn copies of itself until no more
process table entries are left. (I tried it, and I had to hit
the reset button.)
The equivalent C code is
void main() { for (;;) fork(); }
Since no Windows OS supports fork(), as far as I know, you'll
have to use spawnlp() to do this job.
One way to make a Windoze machine even more painful to use is
to code an app that has a simple infinite loop:
void main () { for(;;); }
Another way is to exit Borland C++ Builder after compiling
a large project. Also, by compiling using Builder, you can
break up the playback of an MP3 file on a Windows system.
Chris
------------------------------
** 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.advocacy) 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-Advocacy Digest
******************************
