Linux-Advocacy Digest #285, Volume #32 Sun, 18 Feb 01 07:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux and QA (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: please help - modprobe cannot locate modules (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux ("Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ")
Re: My Win2k Network Nightmare!!!!!! (Donn Miller)
Re: M$ taking over linux? (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: The Windows guy. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux ("Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ")
Re: My Win2k Network Nightmare!!!!!! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Interesting article (The Ghost In The Machine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux and QA
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 06:13:44 -0500
Salvador Peralta wrote:
>
> J Sloan quoth:
>
> > > When someone tells me that a Windows text editor called PFE barfs
> > > long before 100MBytes of text file - then I go and load a 130MByte
> > > text file with PFE, and find I can hang Linux with said text file -
> > > that's going out of my way to make my machine perform poorly is it?
> >
> > That whole story is very suspicious - as you'll no doubt
> > remember, I tried the editor test on my system while I was
> > compiling a kernel, and while opening a 180 MB binary file
> > with a variety of editors, I was unable to make the system
> > hang or misbehave in any way.
>
> That is a great example of what I am getting at about Pete. I couldn't
> get AbiWord to crash using a large file, not that anyone in their right
> mind would use a word processor to handle large files with vi or emacs,
> or several other programming editors at hand.
>
> Of course, I was reading a couple of days later in comp.programming
> some people were recommending programming editors for windows:
>
> David Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> David> I use PFE at the moment but I find there are plenty of
> David> times that it cannot handle large files, files with few if
> David> any carraige returns or anything with binary stuff in it.
>
> So that's a guy who programs on windows who likes windows and wants to
> recommend pfe as a programming tool but...
>
> As for Pete, if his experience ran counter to my own on one issue or a
> few issues, I'd be inclined to treat him as having more credibility
> than I currently do. But there are simply too many inconsistencies to
> reconcile. Throw in the fact that the slightly befuddled air of
> sincerity that he attempts to maintain disappears in the face of
> smartass invective as soon as he is challenged on any point, and it
> just makes me think that if it walks like a troll and behaves like a
> troll...
>
...it's.....A WITCH!
> --
> Salvador Peralta -o)
> Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 06:18:12 -0500
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> In article <96n4r6$910$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >>> Dont get me wrong, I think that communism is a silly form of
> >>> government and that it doesnt work at all.
> >
> >> You are FAR too charitable. Have you ever been to a communist country?
> >> I have. Communism is not silly...it's barbaric.
> >
> > Ive been to both socialist and communist countries, and I agree with
> > you.
> >
> > BUT: The question must be asked: Is communism a symptom of barbarism
> > or is it a result?
>
> IMO,
>
> Neither. Communist ideas are neither bad nor barbaric. They are, however
> fundamentally flawed. The fundamental flaw of communism comes from
> ignoring the human element. It is the human element which leads to the
> barbarism.
Communism tries to deny that people are selfish...and thus, let's the
selfish motives of those who are in charge run completely unchecked.
Capitalism and popularly-elected, Constitutionally-limited Republic,
both, in their spheres (economic and political, respectively) recognize
that people are selfish...
Capitalism harnesses selfishness and steers it to productive means.
Constitutionally-limited Republic form of government, quite frankly,
just STOMPS on selfishness which gets completely out of control.
[Standard Oil, IBM in the 1970's, Microsoft now]
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
> weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
> - The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
> |eng.ox.ac.uk
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: please help - modprobe cannot locate modules
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 06:18:59 -0500
Adam Warner wrote:
>
> Hi eissimuf,
>
> > Despite compiling my kernel by entering "make dep clean
> > modules modules_install bzImage", my /lib/modules/2.4.1/modules.dep file
> is
> > empty (perhaps it should be...?).
>
> Shouldn't you make clean BEFORE make dep?
Shouldn't matter which order you do it in.
>
> These are my standard steps:
>
> make mrproper (or clean)
> make dep
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> make install
> (make install updates /boot and runs lilo for you).
>
> One thing that is really important is to check out this document:
> http://cyberbuzz.gatech.edu/kaboom/linux/Changes-2.4/changes24.html
>
> It sets out minimum requirements for upgrading. In particular you won't be
> able to use the pppd unless you have upgraded to that before moving to
> 2.4.x.
>
> Regards,
> Adam
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 12:40:47 -0800
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> Netscape was a scrappy little company with a handful
> of employees and one killer app. They were a pioneer,
Netscape gets its revenue by selling server-side software AFAICT.
> truly innovative, and microsoft hated them for that.
Nope. Microsoft hated them because their boss at the time [Andreessen IIRC]
shot of his mouth about how their browser would make the OS [Windows]
irrelevant, nothing more than a driver manager/loader.
> So, microsoft put may times more staff to work on ie
> than the total number of netscape employees, & gave
> ie away for free. Not many were interested, so microsoft
People started to be interested by version 3. IIRC with version 4, IE had
navigator on the ropes, and I believe that was before the integration in
Win98.
> went to the pc vendors and started twisting arms and
> playing hardball. They pressured the vendors into
> breaking their contracts with netscape and shipping ie
> instead, thus "cutting off netscape's air supply", as the
They insisted that IE was included, they didn't ask the OEMs to remove
Netscape.
> folks at microsoft like to say.
I'm wondering why that ploy didn't work with Quicken. Maybe because Intuit
has a superior product ?
> The result was painful to watch.
As someone once said, it's not really smart to taunt a 800lbs gorilla, shoot
oneself in the foot and faint from the blood loss cry that you can't flee
when said gorilla comes after you.
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> jjs
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My Win2k Network Nightmare!!!!!!
Date: 18 Feb 2001 05:25:57 -0600
Adam Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unfortunately Windows keeps old settings in the registry and they have a
> habit of causing conflicts. It is possible to edit the registry by hand to
> remove them. When something named ...(2) etc. pops up you know old
> settings still exist.
> As some wise person said in this forum, Windows trusts the registry more
> than the hardware you are running.
Ah yes, good 'ol easy-to-use Windows, you know, the one that's supposed to
save costs on Sys Admins, because "they practically administer themselves".
Windows has an ultra intuitive UI, like the "make start-up floppy" feature,
in settings->control panel->add/remove programs, right where a computer
novice would expect such an option to be. Windows also features WordPad,
excellent for editing your registry by hand in case Windows f*cks something
up.
Sounds easy to use to me. Wait a second, you forgot to call Microsoft tech
support, which features intelligent representatives at the other end with
no busy signals whatsoever. And please don't tell me MS tech support isn't
helpful, because the rep I spoke to had a Ph D in computer science, and I got
through in 1 pico seconds with no busy calls whatsoever.
My analysis is that you have bad HW, bad drivers (not MS's fault), or you're
just extremely stupid. Because Windows is such a great operating system with
so many great features, I'm surprised Win 2K didn't locate your setup CD lying
across your room automatically, float it in mid-air, insert it into the CDROM
drive by itself, and automatically configure the correct drivers. See, it's
always operator error when Windows screws something up.
Or, dammit, it HAS to be bad drivers. OK, I have it: Windows 2000 somehow
sniffed your HW, found out it had been running Linux, and rejected the HW.
Whatever you do, please please PLEASE don't BLAME MS. Dammit, MS is like
every single other company on the earth.
====== 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: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: M$ taking over linux?
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 06:24:07 -0500
Gareth Brereton wrote:
>
> no no no no no...
> i was talkin about m$ using proprietary everything except the linux
> kernel so the unsuspecting consumer goes "oh linux ive heard its good"
> and goes and uses microsofts. basically im asking if anyone thinks
> microsoft could take over linux if bill wanted too.
The usual methods of software churning wouldn't work.
No platform DLL Hell means no O/S lock-in means no applicaton lock-in
means...Microsoft would have to produce quality code (for the first time
in the company's history).
>
> not using gpl'd gui alternative to X
>
> oh and i like the bsd license better also (just wanna start a flame war) :)
>
> Gareth
>
> Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gareth Brereton wrote:
> >
> >> i was wondering... if M$ distrobuted linux running a proprietary gui,
> >> installer/pakaging system, command line tools, etc (basically only the
> >> kernel is GPL)... then they promoted it like they've done with the XBox
> >> people would use it... wouldnt that give billy control to do what he
> >> likes? sorry.... im paranoid, just wondering if anyone has had any
> >> similar thoughts and why or why not microsoft could do something like this
> >>
> >
> >
> > I don't CARE if Microsoft wants to make money honestly!
> > If they came up with their own Linux distribution and released
> > the GUI via the GPL for a change, they would take Linux EVERYWHERE
> > for us and still manage to maintain their status as the software
> > king of the world. And WHY NOT?
> >
> > Brand loyalty is everything to the customer. It truely is.
> > And if they offered their own Linux distribution, the OS would
> > actually be stable.
> >
> > They couldn't manage to deviate from the Linux base as GPL'd code
> > would contain any stupid actions on their part. It would act like
> > a stupid filter.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 11:50:36 +0000
> Conversely, GM has Unix systems with 150 installed apps...and there's
> not even the slightest question if adding another one will impact
> stability.
>
> Because in a well-designed system, crashing apps don't harm the OS.
If only *crashing* apps harmed the OS. UNder windiws, just *installing*
apps harms the OS.
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 13:14:56 -0800
"Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> > Your statement is doubly odd because IE is hands-down the best browser
> > out there (that I know of).
>
> Shows how much you DON'T know.
Stop teasing us and tell us which is the bestest browser of them all ? :)
<SNIP> Some more stuff </SNIP>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My Win2k Network Nightmare!!!!!!
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 11:57:22 +0000
> Ah yes, good 'ol easy-to-use Windows, you know, the one that's supposed
> to save costs on Sys Admins, because "they practically administer
> themselves". Windows has an ultra intuitive UI, like the "make start-up
> floppy" feature, in settings->control panel->add/remove programs, right
>
> My analysis is that you have bad HW, bad drivers (not MS's fault), or
> you're just extremely stupid.
Great parody. I love it when the Wintrolls tell us that windows si really
easy to use and any idiot can use it. When we tell them it crashes, they
say that you have tohave a qualified admin, and not any idiot can do it,
without reference to what they said before.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 11:59:13 +0000
>> Don't go crazy on innocent people just because they happen to be
>> located in close physical proximity.
>
> No, that doesn't wash.
>
>
> Microsoft is a CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION...therefore, ALL who work for
> Microsoft are aiding and abetting criminal activities.
I don'ty think yoy could call the people in the post room criminals, just
because a bunch of people waaay up the line are criminals.
-ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 12:02:24 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 18 Feb 2001 02:03:23 GMT
<96nahb$12g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chris Ahlstrom
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote
>>> on Sat, 17 Feb 2001 17:03:38 GMT
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> >Chad Myers wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Only if you're really backwards. It's called ssh these days.
>>> >>
>>> >> Same difference. Same 70's technologies. This is great, I love
>>> >> how you guys think that SSH is some major advancement. It's
>>> >> still telnet, just with encryption, and shoddy encryption at that!
>>> >
>>> >Chad apparently doesn't understand RSA.
>>>
>>> Not to mention modern cryptology, public/private keypairing, and
>>> the controversy over the Clipper chip.
>>>
>>> There's also the issue that copper wire is probably 30's era technology,
>>> if not earlier. But we're still using it. Funny how that works.... :-)
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> Which is a shame, because perm bits really sucks in every way.
>>> >
>>> >I wish he would enumerate the ways.
>>>
>>> I second that. Chad, could you explain in detail as to why permission
>>> bits really really suck? :-)
>
>> It's really pretty obvious. Simply asking me to explain really proves
>> you have no notion of security or what a real implimentation of security
>> is.
I for one never pretended to be an expert. I know a little about
this and that, that's all I'll claim.
>
>The song of the novice-pretending-at-guru. Nice.
Indeed.
>
>> For one, perm bits only allows owner, group and everyone else, which is
>> extremely limiting to the administrator. You may claim that it's good enough,
>> but you really haven't had to do any challenging permissions then.
>
>I take care of challenging permissions by laying out brilliant and useful
>group-topology. :)
>
>> For second, most perm bits implimentations do not have adequate auditing,
>> or ANY auditing.
>
>Uhh....What exactly do you mean by auditing?
>
>The systems that I administer have such tight auditing that I can tell
>you exactly what UID exacted exactly which changes to exactly which
>inodes almost instantly. But that has nothing to do with permission bits.
I can only note here that Debian has /var/log/setuid.changes,
/var/log/setuid.today, and /var/log/setuid.yesterday. This is
the equivalent of a security guard making the rounds, at a certain
time.
There are probably other security features which I need to look for.
An audit record at the kernel level would be nice -- and I suspect
could easily be added, if it's not in there already. (I'd be a little
surprised if it wasn't, but I'd have to look in the kernel source.)
>
>> For third, perm bits implementations are rarely pervasive, meaning you
>> can only apply permissions to a limited set of objects, and everything
>> else either has no permissions, or has some type of different way of
>> assigning permissions which is disingenious.
>
>What the hell are you talking about? Every last goddamn thing on every
>last unix machine has permission bits. Its all about Inodes man...you
>have no idea what youre talking about.
>
>> For fourth, there's no notion of explicit deny, nor inheritence, nor
>> varrying levels of permissions for varrying number of trustees.
>
>Explicit deny? chmod 000, fewel.
>Inheritance? Sticky bit, idiot. -R, buttstick.
Pedant point: Chad is right, here. If one has an object tree
rooted at, say, /a/b/c, in Linux, then changing the rights of /a/b/c
will not affect the rest of the tree (although chmod -x /a/b/c
will render the tree inaccessible to all except those proceses
which were lucky enough to have an inode open -- and those proceses
will lose the ability to pwd or getcwd(), if I'm not mistaken).
Whether this is a big issue is not clear to me, however.
But I'm not a security expert, and most Unix admins will
use chmod -R, I would suspect. (The more paranoid might
use 'find . -type [d|f] [...] -print0 | xargs -0 chmod'.)
(Side point: I would hope chmod -R doesn't propagate through
subdirectory symbolic links. However, the manpage says nothing
regarding same. NT doesn't have 'em. :-) )
>Trustees?
>AIX, Trusted Solaris, Trusted IRIX, UNICOS, SCO, etc, etc, etc.
>
>> and on and on.
>
>On and on? You havent actually said anything TRUE yet, buttmonkey.
>
>> Look, if you don't believe me, consult any security consultant or
>> read any book written by security experts. They'll tell you that DAC
>> is the only modern way of security and that permission bits offers
>> too many holes, not enough control, and not enough auditing to
>> provide a secure implementation. This is why you have so many utilities
>> for double checking permissions and making sure that they haven't
>> changed and what-not.
>
>So many utilities? What the fuck are you talking about? What not?
>WHAT?
>
>> Just look it up, educate yourself.
>
>Nothing that youve said can be looked up ANYWHERE, you damnable
>moron.
A Google search on "Computer system security" dredged up the
link
http://www.mapnp.org/library/infomgnt/security/basic.htm
which is a short and general treatise on basic computer system security,
written by Carter McNamara, PhD. It does not mention DAC.
Another page mentions something called 'C4I':
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions/security_body.html
or
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions/security.html
for the frame-enabled.
I'd have to sift, and I'm too tired right now to do so, for a page
which mentions DAC; these just happen to be near the top of
Google's returned list.
>
>
>
>
>-----.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 13d:13h:20m actually running Linux.
Microsoft. When it absolutely, positively has to act weird.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
