Linux-Advocacy Digest #279, Volume #35 Fri, 15 Jun 01 20:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" (GreyCloud)
Re: The Microsoft PATH. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" (GreyCloud)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (Rick)
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" (GreyCloud)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed (Nigel Feltham)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (Rick)
Re: the world thinks there is only windows. yahoo sucks. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Will MS get away with this one? (Rick)
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" ("Seán Ó Donnchadha")
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Will MS get away with this one? (Peter Hayes)
Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags (Rick)
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" (pip)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (Rick)
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" ("Seán Ó Donnchadha")
Re: Will MS get away with this one? (Rick)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:09:56 -0700
Jon Johansan wrote:
>
> Almost forgot:
>
> "A program that needs 60 different libraries is depending on a very
> complicated software environment to support it. As of this writing, there is
> probably not a single distribution which, out of the box, provides that
> environment.
Caldera OpenLinux 2.4 does... it came with GnuCash and it worked.
Upgrading to that environment is helped by the various update
> services and tools that an increasing number of distributions are providing.
> It is worth asking, however, just how many of you would proceed with such an
> upgrade in confidence that it would work, and that nothing else would break?
> As the Linux software environment becomes more complex and powerful, it also
> risks becoming more brittle. The desktop will not be won as long as users
> must upgrade dozens of libraries, with a good possibility of breaking their
> systems, to get a new personal finance application. The desktop developers
> have a serious challenge ahead of them here: make the environment robust and
> easy to upgrade, or see the users wander away in frustration"
>
> Naaaa, they won't wander away - they'll wait for developers to acknowledge
> the problem and then fix it in a future version (like MS did)
>
> "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3b2a1c7a$0$789$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Well, "DLL Hell" is no longer a valid concept or issue in Windows 2000 or
> > XP. Looks like that legacy has been taken up by linux - taken from the
> front
> > page of Linux Weekly News (http://www.lwn.net/):
> >
> > "gnucash 1.6 and the dependency nightmare
> >
> > gnucash is perhaps the prime example of shared library dependency hell.
> The
> > executable requires no less than 60 different shared libraries, all, of
> > course, with the right version."
> >
> > I'm sorry but... har! har! har!
> >
> > "Upgrading to GNOME 1.4 addresses many of those dependencies, but not all
> of
> > them."
> >
> > Sure, just upgrade
> >
> > "Dealing with the rest has proved tricky, even for people who are
> accustomed
> > to this sort of problem. "
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: The Microsoft PATH.
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 23:10:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Paolo Ciambotti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Thu, 14 Jun 2001 18:29:51 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Dave Martel"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>And I'm still stuck trying to wend my way through the Zork trilogy.
>>>
>>>"Xyzzy". "Plugh". Remember? Remember without drugs?
>>
>> "You are in a maze of twisty little wintrolls..."
>>
>
>"... all alike."
>
>Wait.... that makes sense. I smell a wumpus.
Bats nearby!
I feel a draft...
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- of course, nowadays it would look like Unreal...
EAC code #191 0d:18h:25m actually running Linux.
Most likely, no neutrinos were found during this message.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:12:19 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The LWN writer was frustrated at having to install a lot of new versions
> > to get the latest gnucash working, and exaggerated the situation as "DLL
> > Hell", forgetting that new shared libraries won't break old apps. "DLL
> > Hell" refers to an installer overwriting an old DLL with a new one,
> > mysteriously breaking old apps.
>
> And vice versa,don't forget.
> The DLL Hell is the result of developers ignoring the guidelines set by MS
> regarding dll's behaviour.
> You are supposed to keep the same filename as long as you've backward
> compatability nailed down.
> If you break it, you are supposed to pick another name.
> And installers shouldn't write over newer versions with old files.
>
> Unfortantely, those guidelines has been ignored all too often, causing this
> problem.
Yes, ICQ was a violater of the guidelines. Trouble is some companies do
violate it with their own reasonings which later get them into trouble.
ICQ overwrote the MFC42.dll.
Unfortunately, HP uses a larger version of it than ICQ does and caused
the System Wizard to crash.
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:16:37 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Macman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > You, as a user, have certain rights under the fair use doctrine.
> > > > Presumably, looking at the text only, or changing fonts, or similar
> > > > things would fall under fair use.
> > > >
> > > > Microsoft, as a third party, does not have the same rights. They do
> have
> > > > the rights to fair use, but what they're doing would almost certainly
> > > > not fall under that doctrine.
> > > >
> > > > Your analogy stinks.
> > >
> > > Don't I, as the user, have a right to *want* those smart tags?
> >
> > You do not have the right to change my intellectual property, unless I
> > grant you that right.
>
> Google change the look of pages, as does anonymizer.com, should they be sued
> as well?
What are they changing? Specifically. AND... it DOESNT MATTER what other
people do. If they are wrong, they are wrong, or not. it has nothting to
do with micro$oft. And I dont want micro$oft software changing the links
on my pages. Does google change the links on my pages? I doubt it.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:14:42 -0700
Jon Johansan wrote:
>
> Well, "DLL Hell" is no longer a valid concept or issue in Windows 2000 or
> XP. Looks like that legacy has been taken up by linux - taken from the front
> page of Linux Weekly News (http://www.lwn.net/):
>
> "gnucash 1.6 and the dependency nightmare
>
> gnucash is perhaps the prime example of shared library dependency hell. The
> executable requires no less than 60 different shared libraries, all, of
> course, with the right version."
>
> I'm sorry but... har! har! har!
>
> "Upgrading to GNOME 1.4 addresses many of those dependencies, but not all of
> them."
>
> Sure, just upgrade
>
> "Dealing with the rest has proved tricky, even for people who are accustomed
> to this sort of problem. "
See what I mean Jon? Looks like you're getting flamed for not checking
things out.
I always say to diversify ones skills into other o/ses... at least one
will be prepared to change or move if one has to.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 23:17:03 GMT
"Tim Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> in article 3U4W6.81511$[EMAIL PROTECTED],
> Daniel Johnson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 6/14/01 11:38
> AM:
[snip]
> >
http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/DeveloperTools/ProjectBuilder/Abo
> >>> utBox/AboutBox.pdf
> >>>
> >>
> >> Try again - that was a link to a pdf file for downloading NOT a link to
a
> >> web page. There is a difference you know. Or do you know?
> >
> > You seem to think that web pages are *not* downloaded.
>
> Web pages are _typically_ displayed on the monitor. Downloading
_typically_
> refers to transferring a file from one location and saving it on your HD.
That is what happens when you view a web page. It is downloaded
to your computer, and displayed. It is the same way with PDF.
> > This is
> > not so. If your browser offers to save the file that link points to
> > when you click on it, it's because your browser does not have
> > Adobe's plugin installed.
>
> which would merely displays the _file on my screen_ NOT a web page.
A web page *is* a file, you know. It's not the same format
as PDF, but it's still a file.
[snip]
> >> The page itself (not the downloaded file) was NOT created as a PDF
file.
> >
> > Sure it was.
>
> So the following source from that page is pdf source code?
>
[snip html]
That is not from the page whose URL is included
at the top of this message; it is from a previous page
which I refered to. This previous page is, indeed, in
HTML.
Only a minority of the web pages out there are
in PDF. A small minority at that.
> > It's a PDF file whether you download it or not,
> > though obviously you can only view it if you do download it-
> > just like with HTML.
> >
> > It's true that there are *other* pages on Apple's site
> > which are in HTML.
>
> To the best of my knowledge ALL of Apple's web pages are done in some form
> of HTML. The fact that Adobe's plug in allow you to view PDF file within
> your browser does NOT make that file a web page.
It sounds to me like you just *define* "web page" to mean
"HTML file"; I think that's far too narrow. Web pages are
a user interface artifact; they are the things you see
in your browser. They do *not* have to be HTML.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:17:01 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Zsolt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I see you still don't get it...
> > In Linux (and Unix in general) the version number is part of the name and
> it has
> > always been like that - Windows just copied that in XP lagging behind a
> few
> > decades as usual. So, installing the required specific versions does _NOT_
> > impact other applications (that require other specific versions) at all!
> > So, _you_ in XP might be just past that, but _we_ in Unix world have never
> > been there (in DLL hell)... sorry to disappoint you!
>
> That only goes so far.
>
> When dealing with common libraries this can cause many problems.
>
> Consider an application which uses 3 libraries. liba, libb, and libc. The
> application and libb require liba version 3, but libc requires liba version
> 2. When you link the libraries together, only one version of liba will be
> linked in, and that will be liba version 3, because the libraries themselves
> don't have linkage information. libc breaks because it expects liba version
> 2, and isn't compatible with version 3.
>
> The more dependancies the libraries have, the more common this problem
> becomes.
That is true. But one should also be able to download a program as
binary that isn't linked to shared libraries... oh it will be much
bigger but safer.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 00:33:06 -0400
> Before someone starts some racist junk, the problem isn't that the
> worker is Chinese. Its that the workers, of whatever background, are
> being exploited and neither they nor the corporations care. The workers
> make the junk they are forced to make, and Americans buy the junk they
> are told to buy.
>
I think the quality has more to do with the low quality of the components
being assembled and the very low wages being paid to the workers assembling
the equipment - if you had to work on those wages you wouldn't care too
much about the quality of your work either.
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:20:10 -0400
Dan wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Macman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Neither Google nor anonymizer changes the _content_ of pages. If they
> > start changing the content, then they should be stopped.
>
> Smart Tags do not change the *content* of pages, either. It just
> presents more navigation options to the individual user.
>
> Dan
It adds links that I DONT WANT ON MY PAGE. What dont you understand? If
I want links to GM, Coca-Cola, or the Shah of Iran, I'll put them there.
If I dont put three, I must not want them there... ON MY PAGE. MY PAGE.
its not there for microSoft software to change.
What... dont... you... understand???
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: the world thinks there is only windows. yahoo sucks.
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 23:19:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, top@pp
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 14 Jun 2001 00:12:49 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>Lets all write to yahoo and complain. I am just had it with
>sites like yahoo that only supports windows.
>
>click on this site and you'll get an error that it is only supported
>on windoz.
>
>http://vision.yahoo.com/?id=1457763&aid=5016
I don't seem to be having a problem. Mind you, I'm not sure
how I'm going to watch the video using Lynx, but the text is there.
>
>yahoo is as stupid as any business out there which only makes its
>web pages to one platform.
>
You think that's bizarre?
Try this:
$ telnet www.yahoo.com www
The computer responds with something like:
Trying 64.58.76.178...
Connected to www.yahoo.akadns.net.
Escape character is '^]'.
Type some more:
HEAD / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.yahoo.com
(don't forget the extra return).
Then stand back as the telnet blows up. It's supposed to show
only the headers -- in particular, the time the page was created.
That's all. But Yahoo -- or perhaps Akamai? -- instead gives
you the *entire* page. All 18k or so of it.
This appears to be a violation of RFC2616. Is this a bug or a feature?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 0d:21h:30m actually running Linux.
[ ] Check here to always compile your own software.
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will MS get away with this one?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:22:37 -0400
Peter Hayes wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 14:31:31 -0400, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Peter Hayes wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 05:40:30 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Said Form@C in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 13 Jun 2001 20:09:58 GMT;
>
> <...>
>
> > > > >Remember the hard-sector disks that Apple kept using for years after
> > > > >everyone else (almost) had ditched them?
> > > >
> > > > No, I don't. When was that?
> > >
> > > Instead of identifying sectors in software as happens when you format a
> > > floppy, Apple's hard sectored disks had a series of holes, generally 16 of
> > > them, to identify the sectors. Wozniak did it that way because he didn't
> > > have the cash for disk controller hardware.
> > >
> >
> > Are you high?
> > I have never seen an Apple floppy with 16 holes. And Wozniak didnt
> > design his drive controlle card until Apple had already incorporated.
> > Markula was already there too. His design was described as another
> > engineering work of art.
>
> http://www.classiccmp.org/mail-archive/classiccmp/1997-04/0558.html
>
> > > Apple have shafted just as many people as Microsoft, the only difference
> > > being that Apple's victims were the little guy and Microsoft took on the big
> > > boys.
> > >
> > > Peter
> >
> > How has Apple shafted as many as micro$oft. Just by sgeer size, m$ HAS
> > to have shafted more. After all, everyone that uses an m$ OS is getting
> > a big one from Gates.
>
> OK, maybe I should have said "in proportion to its size .....
>
> Peter
Maybe you shouldnt have said anything at all. You are spouting nonsense.
------------------------------
From: "Seán Ó Donnchadha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:25:29 -0400
"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> They still work since the old libraries still exist. The worst that can
> happen is that you didn't get all the dependencies and the new app does
> not work. Previously installed apps will be unaffected.
>
Nonsense, Gary. One of the biggest reasons for using shared libraries is to
allow apps to inherit library fixes. So previously installed apps are most
certainly affected; that's the whole point. The way this happens on Unix is
different from the way it happens on Windows (overwritten symbolic link vs.
overwritten library file), but the effect is the same; at the end of the
day, all apps linked against a given major revision all get the same minor
revision. Sure, other minor revisions may still be on the disk, but they're
just sitting there doing nothing.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 23:25:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Craig Kelley wrote:
>"Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Well, "DLL Hell" is no longer a valid concept or issue in Windows 2000 or
>> XP. Looks like that legacy has been taken up by linux - taken from the front
>> page of Linux Weekly News (http://www.lwn.net/):
>>
>> "gnucash 1.6 and the dependency nightmare
>>
>> gnucash is perhaps the prime example of shared library dependency hell. The
>> executable requires no less than 60 different shared libraries, all, of
>> course, with the right version."
>>
>> I'm sorry but... har! har! har!
>>
>> "Upgrading to GNOME 1.4 addresses many of those dependencies, but not all of
>> them."
>>
>> Sure, just upgrade
>>
>> "Dealing with the rest has proved tricky, even for people who are accustomed
>> to this sort of problem. "
>
>apt-get install gnucash
>
>Where's the problem?
>
Yes,
Absolute no shit, no brainer here.
What did she or it start this crap for to begin with again?
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will MS get away with this one?
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 00:27:31 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 13:41:00 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> "Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Instead of identifying sectors in software as happens when you format a
> > floppy, Apple's hard sectored disks had a series of holes, generally 16 of
> > them, to identify the sectors. Wozniak did it that way because he didn't
> > have the cash for disk controller hardware.
>
> Not true. Actually, the first Disk drivers had 13 sectors, not 16. It did
> have a single hole in the ring to signify track 0, but all other sectors
> were calculated. This was called a "soft sectored" disk, while the type you
> describe was called a "hard sectored" disk.
Yes, I've a pile of 5 1/4" disks that have one hole to signify track 0, but
I understood hard sectored disks could have a variety of designs with 13 to
16 holes. Woz used the 16 hole variety, but relied on software to do the
controlling - as I understand it :-)
>
> Wozniak is quoted as saying "If i'd known anything about how disk drives
> were supposed to be made, the Apples drive wouldn't have been half as good".
The BBC micro had a Cumana disk drive that used single sided 5 1/4" floppies
and we would line up the hole on the disk with the hole on the case and
punch a hole through the other side with a leather hole punch. This gave us
double-sided floppies.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:36:56 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Also, you can't pirate a book!
>
> alt.binaries.e-book
>
> You most certainly can.
Book does not = e.book.
That aside, you can pirate a book, you only have to copy it.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 00:39:53 +0100
Zsolt wrote:
>
> Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 15 Jun 2001 20:12:17 +0200 presented us with
>the wisdom:
>
> >
> > GnuCash is on debian unstable. The dependedcies might cause you to download
> > a lot of unstable share libraries. I understand that in some case, it might
> > overwrite the stable versions that you already got.
> >
>
> That's the whole point, that on Unix you do _not_ overwrite the other versions,
> because the shared libraries have their very specific version numbers in the file
> name! So when you install another, you get another file on your system, but the
> old file is still there intact, all other applications can keep using those versions
> that they were linked against!
>
> For example, when I go to my /usr/X11R6/liv directory and type:
> $ ls *GL*
>
> I get:
> libGL.a
> libGL.la
> libGL.so.1
> libGL.so.1.0
> libGL.so.1.1
> libGL.so.1.2
> libGLU.la
> libGLU.so
> libGLU.so.1
> libGLU.so.1.2.030300
> libGLU.so.3
> libGLwrapper.so.0.1.3
> libMesaGL.so.1
> libMesaGL.so.1.0
> libMesaGL.so.3
> libMesaGLU.so
> libMesaGLU.so.1
> libMesaGLU.so.3
>
> So, you see I have 4 different specific versions of libGL.so shared library as well
>as libGLU.so -
> each application may use whatever version it was linked with. No overwriting, no DLL
>Hell.
> I hope you can understand it from this demonstration...
Forgive me for mentioning this - BUT THE POINT OF SHARED LIBS ARE:
1) REDUCE CODE SPACE
2) REUSE CODE
having multiple versions of a library is violating point 1. Sure it
works - but it also sucks as a design decision.
comments ?
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:39:01 -0400
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" wrote:
> >
> > Translation:
> >
> > AARON is a closet homosexual, which is why he makes such a big deal
> > about trying to distance himself from it.
>
> Oh yes, the old fag "anyone who opposes us is secretly one of us" routine.
>
> There's a reason nobody ever believes that, fag..
>
> >
> > Perhaps this is why he never gets any sex.
>
> I do...with WOMEN.
>
Women. Thats plural. Thats multiple sexual partners. Well, did you know
your risk of contracting HIV is increasing exponentially?
------------------------------
From: "Seán Ó Donnchadha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:34:48 -0400
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> First of all, DLL Hell doesn't mean a ton of libraries; it means a ton
> of libraries THAT INSTALL OVER EACHOTHER (like MFC40.DLL, for
> instance).
>
The Unix scenario is exactly the same, except that it wastes disk space on
no-longer-used minor library revisions. It doesn't matter how many versions
of libfoo.so.1.* are on the disk, because the libfoo.so.1 symbolic link can
only point at one of them.
>
> UNIX does not have this problem because we have this
> amazing thing called v-e-r-s-i-o-n-i-n-g on our libraries.
>
No offense Craig, but you really don't understand the problem, so I suggest
you drop the attitude.
>
> They still have them. If you attempt to upgrade a library that
> something else *depends* on, apt will scream at you; then you can
> install *both* libraries happily together on the same system.
>
Again, it doesn't matter if both are on the disk, since the symbolic link
through which apps load the library can only point at one of them.
>
> And how have you solved it, exactly? AFAIK, Windows 2000 still has
> DLL hell, but instead of implementing library versions, they installed
> some facist piece of software that writes over any libraries that an
> application installer installs. That falls under the 'kludge'
> category, if I'm not mistaken.
>
Sure, Linux doesn't have it, so it's gotta be fascist, a kludge, etc. And
yet when asked what to do about DLL Hell, most Windows bashers say, "It's
simple; let the system files be modifiable only by OS service packs."
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will MS get away with this one?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:35:14 -0400
"Form@C" wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Petticord) wrote in
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> > T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >
> ><snipped reasonable summation of PC history>
> >
> >> >Sorry, Microsoft *did* some good. They may have a *very* tarnished
> >> >reputation now, but that isn't the point of my argument.
> >>
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> That is the most that can be said for them. Despite popular opinion,
> >> there is no "fine line" between monopolization and competing. There
> >> is no legal way to act anti-competitively, and just because it might
> >> take twenty years to understand just what the difference is if you
> >> aren't watching to begin with doesn't mean it doesn't occur.
> >
> > There is no legal way to act anti-competitively when you define
> > anti-competitive to mean "illegal".
> >
>
> Also, you cannot act anti-competitively unless there is already something
> to compete with.
By monopoly defintion you can indeed act anti-competitively. a monopoly
has to be able to dictate pricing in the market. If youa re the only
one, at the time, in the market, you can price the product so that you
effectively bar entrance into the market.
> When M$ first started producing DOS there simply wasn't
> anything else apart from CP/M - and that was aimed strictly at the business
> market.
Was it now. WHat huge market for micros were in business? Visicalc was
the first killer business app, and it ran only on Apples for a couple of
years. I think you need to look at the usage of CP/M in the non-business
marktet a little more. Besides, even if you are correct, DOS was aimed
at business too.
> IBM wanted a disk OS for the "small computer" market so that it
> could put a disk drive onto its (provisionally?) cassette tape based XT
> series. (I havn't tried this personally, but I am told that if you
> disconnect the drives before booting an XT it boots into ROM BASIC with
> cassette support - although the necessary hardware may not be present). M$
> ROM BASIC gained popularity simply because it ran from ROM. No-one else
> bothered with the ROM BASIC market. There were tiny BASICs in ROM (and on
> tape) of course, and there were disk-based floating point BASICs, but
> virtually no other ROM-based versions. (Apple did their own AFAIK).
Apple has a couple versions of BASIC, at least one was done inhouse, and
one licensed from micro$oft. That license caused some problems in later
licensing talks between Apple and m$.
>
> In these two instances did M$ have a monopoly or were they just producing
> original products?
Very shourtly after the IBM license deal, m$ did indeed have a onopoly.
They did NOT produce an original product, since they got DOS from
someone else.
. OK, so they guarded the code closely, but so did
> everyone else!
>
They guard their code, and steal from others.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
