Linux-Advocacy Digest #287, Volume #26 Thu, 27 Apr 00 18:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: YOU PEOPLE ARE CRAZY-LINUX IS CRAP-WIN2K RULEZ!!!!!!!!! (Charles Philip Chan)
Re: YOU PEOPLE ARE CRAZY-LINUX IS CRAP-WIN2K RULEZ!!!!!!!!! ("Mr. Rupert")
Re: linux as Netscape platform (Mig Mig)
Re: Linux RUINED my PC LINUX SUCKS!!!!!!! (JoeX1029)
Re: Time for the MS-rats to desert (@ .)
Re: Linux from a Windows perspective (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux from a Windows perspective (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux from a Windows perspective (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000? (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: Essential software list (abraxas)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (Mike
Marion)
Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Use of Satellites for Mind Control and Acts of Torture? (Death)
Re: Windows2000 sale success.. (Will)
Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat (The Cat)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: YOU PEOPLE ARE CRAZY-LINUX IS CRAP-WIN2K RULEZ!!!!!!!!!
From: Charles Philip Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 27 Apr 2000 13:44:24 +0500
>>>>> "Martijn" == Martijn Bruns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Charles Philip Chan schreef:
>> LOL. This is really funny considering you are using Netscape
>> 4.7 [en] on Mandrake Linux to post this message. Your headers
>> betrayed you.
>>
>> Charles
> Yeah, he did. But i'd swear he did this using one of those old
> CD-I players for it. His entire post is in capitals.
:-)
There are 3 other possibilities:
(1) The machine powered up with caps lock on and he doesn't know what
the caps lock key is for.
(2) He is a genius because he managered to install Mandrake on a
teletype. It crashed on him, so he is complaining.
(3) He has split personalities: the Wintroll side of him is shouting
at the Linux Newbie.
;-)
Charles
------------------------------
From: "Mr. Rupert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: YOU PEOPLE ARE CRAZY-LINUX IS CRAP-WIN2K RULEZ!!!!!!!!!
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 14:02:15 -0500
Settle down folks... it's just a reverse troll to make the WiNTrolls look
like the fools we have come to love.
--
Mr Rupert
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
>
> IBM DUMPS STOCK....SURPRIZE..THEY NO HOW STINKY LINUX IS..LINUX IS LIKE
> THE BUILD IT YOURSELF ARTIFICIAL HEART...YOU'LL BE DEAD BEFORE IT IS
> BUILT.
>
> WIN 2K IS GOING TO WALK ALL OVER STINK LINUX.
>
> YOU FOLKS ARE OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE REAL LIFE. HEVEN NO'S WITH IDIOTS
> LIKE
> THE MISERABLE CLOWN TERRY RUNNING THE SHOW. HE SOUNDS LIKE HE NEEDS A
> CLUE STICK..
>
> LINUX SUCKS.
>
> LINUX KILLS HARD DRIVES.
>
> LINUX IS A CULT.
>
> LINUX HAS NO GRAPHICS.
>
> \LINUNX HAS NO APPLICATIONS.
>
> **********WARNING DONT RUN LINUX IT WILL KILL YOUR
> SYSTEM****************
>
> LINUX BLOWS THE BIG SNAKE....
>
> BILL GATES IS MY HERO.
>
> JETHRO BODINE.
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: linux as Netscape platform
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 21:11:53 +0200
Craig Kelley wrote:
> Yeoh Yiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm thinking of setting up a web kiosk.
> > (user accounts/security is not an issue)
> >
> > Is Netscape on linux as stable as Netscape on NT ?
>
> Only if you turn off Java support in the preferences.
Was'nt that for Navigator prior to 4.7?
I havent had a crash with Netscape and Java for long...I did have crashes
with 4.7 after upgrading the RPM's for , i think, 4.61. The trick was to
erase 4.61 and do a fresh install of the 4.7 RPM's... since then not a
single NAvigator crash.
Greetings
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: Linux RUINED my PC LINUX SUCKS!!!!!!!
Date: 27 Apr 2000 19:48:28 GMT
>Linux erased all my partitions and i lost all my data!>
More commenly known as "I'm a dumb ass"
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,alt.conspiracy.area51
From: @ .
Subject: Re: Time for the MS-rats to desert
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 20:40:16 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Unekis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>@, . wrote:
>
>> You are a moron
>
>Oh, no, I'm wounded to the core. Such wit, such biting satire.
>Why I usually have to travel all the way to a bowling alley to hear such a
> clever
>put-down.
>
>What's the matter Mr. Gates, depressed over your stock prices?
>
Not a put down, just an observation.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux from a Windows perspective
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 20:47:02 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Yeah right... like there are just millions of users out there
> dying and trying to use crusty ISA soundcards and ISA SCSI
> controllers.
>
> The system you are harping about is a relic that even I wouldn't
> bother with & I only stopped using my VL 486 system ~ 18 mos. ago.
This relic run Windows 98 SE passably well and does Windows pretty well,
and puts Linux running on it to shame.
It recognised both ISA cards and configured them without any problems,
unlike Linux.
> You could pry open that wallet and try a $20 PCI soundcard or
> $30 PCI SCSI2 card.
Or whatever the equivalent is here in the UK. But, why should I? Both the
sound card and the SCSI card work, they are supposed to be supported, so
why shouldn't they work? After all, they work with Windows, why not Linux?
>[deletia]
>
> BTW, I ran it just fine with a mere 32M. Of course I never ran
> GNOME, KDE or Englightenment.
I can run Windows just fine in 32M. Seems I can't run X, KDE et al on this
system, without performance going to the dogs. I keep hearing Linux is
faster than Windows - how can that be? If Linux performs like a dog doing
the equivalent of Windows, how is it that Linux is faster? It ain't.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux from a Windows perspective
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 20:48:38 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cyberia Internet Cafe) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>I'm just in it for the VAX MIPS (and slightly dented VAXstations)
Ah memories!
Pete
Ex-Digital employee.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux from a Windows perspective
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 20:52:36 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <8e5ln3$quo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>No Its not playing catch-up.
Bzzzt! Wrong! If Windows can install with this setup with ease, why not
Linux?
>You're having to do something you don't
>have to do with that brain-dead dos-gui:
>Think!! Experiment!! Learn!!
As I said in an earlier post I got it to work.
>Perhaps you have a hardware conflict.
>Some PNP devices set up fine in Windows
>but seem a little stubborn in Linux.
What does that tell me about Windows?
What does that tell me about Linux?
Linux is still catching up to where Windows is now.
>Try disabling PNP on the cards and manually
>set them up in Windows.
I see! I have to use Windows to configure stuff for Linux!!!
>(boot/re-boot/boot/re-boot/boot/re-boot...etc...)
>Copy down the settings
>and use them as your module paramaters in Linux.
Can't I figure out the settings in Linux (actually that's what I did!)?
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000?
Date: 27 Apr 2000 18:39:40 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JFW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>1. The Cryptogram description implies the potential threat would be
>the ability to force incompatible revisions of MS-signed code onto a
>system, but there's no indication that's actually possible. Given
>that version-checking is part of the ActiveX system, there's no
>substantiation to show that just because something is MS-signed it can
>break version dependencies, or for that matter, not alert the user.
I get a "Dogbert" feeling on this one. Where exactly did you read the
part about "incompatible revisions"?
[snipped item 2]
>3. MS having install rights for ActiveX controls which are securely
>signed by them is not a backdoor. That they chose to make exceptions
>to their policies for updates verifiably from them isn't surprising,
>since otherwise it would be intrinsically difficult for them to update
>IE's policy code itself. That said, it doesn't in any way prove there
>is a security hole that is actually _usable_ by others. You cannot
>just slap an MS signature on any bundle of ActiveX code, after all.
You have a strange definition for a backdoor. In general a backdoor is
some piece of code that is *exploitable* (not necessary exploited) code
from the originator. There's no reason why some other user should be
able to exploit the code.
I call Microsoft's ability to remotely (de-)install software on my
machine without my explicit concent a clear-cut backdoor. YMMV.
Was the user "debug" with password "synnet" on 3Com Stackbuilders a
backdoor in your POV? It sure was in mine.
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP 0x07606049 GPG 0xD61A655D
Air Force Inertia Axiom:
Consistency is always easier to defend than correctness.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Essential software list
Date: 27 Apr 2000 21:10:05 GMT
Yns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Having recently started using Linux, I have setup my system
> to use the Blackbox desktop environment. Good, fast and
> simple. However, I'd like to know what software veteran
> linux users continually use (I know in unix there are many
> ways to do the same job).
I currently use windowmaker (0.61.1) with GTK widgets---and nothing
else. I despise gnome quite passionately, and am entirely
indifferent towards KDE. I find that windowmaker +gtk is nice
and customizable, fast and small.
I tried sawmill (now sawfish) for a few days, but I just couldnt
get used to its menu-system (alot like blackbox) so I switched
back to windowmaker....
> Are there any gnome apps that are just too super to ignore?
> (I've only found GnoRPM useful).
Gnapster, Pan and Xchat are my favorites; theyre also pretty much
the only gnome(ish) apps that I ever use.
> Are there any KDE apps that are too useful to ignore?
KDE has a nice image viewer and mpeg player built in. But you can
use them without running the whole environment.
> Also what packages to most people use for:
> Editors: Vim? but are there any other good editors (apart from EMACS).
I like wordperfect for all my wordprocessing needs, pico for editing
small unimportant things and vi for editing large/important things.
> Word Processors: Star Office or what?
I despise star office. Its huge, bloated, slow, unstable and ugly. Sun
really ruined a good piece of software.
> Spreadsheets: any msexcel compatible?
I believe that both staroffice and applixware have spreadsheet utils that
can at least *look at* excel docs.
> Utilities: what are the most essential utilities used (e.g. rpm, make,
> utilities giving sysinfo etc.)
Most of the utilities that you will likely ever use come with your
favorite linux distribution already.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 21:15:01 GMT
s_Ea_DAag0n wrote:
> I wouldn't go that far. Creating my own rescue set is a rather complex
> task. I know there are tools out there which do that, but its still time
> consuming. It is easier just to re-install the OS than properly managing
> it. If the system was an enterprise wide installation on which 50,000
> people depended for the e-mail and data, it would be a different story,
> but the average home user doesn't want to go through hoops to have
> a contigency. (spoken like a true Windows troll, I know...)
The irony here makes me laugh. I'm not referring to you in particular, but most
pro-windows people always talk about windows not needing reinstalls, that there
are ways to fix it, etc.
You're probably the first pro-windows person (or anti-linux if you're not
specifically pro-windows) who admits that sometimes, in the home environment at
least, it's just faster/easier to reinstall sometimes.
Like you, I too only backup data, I figure by the time my system has been up
long enough to have a problem due to a hardware failure or something, the
current distro I have installed is probably getting out of date anyway. So a
fresh install of the latest distro I want to use, followed by a restore of my
data is going to be a better route to follow. For instance, if a disk dies a
harsh death... restoring an old backup of a full system is really not worth your
time; might as well install the latest and greatest anyway.
I also tend to reinstall when I load up a new distribution (brand or version) as
I usually want to try slicing disks differently, or replacing disks, etc.
However, in the example you sighted, I believe you would've saved a lot of time
in the long run, if you'd had a way to boot. I think the filesystem could've
been fixed with a few simple commands, and the system would've booted back up.
But since you've reinstalled, we'll never know for sure.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
If Microsoft made cars instead of software, you could only have one person
at a time in your car unless you bought Car95 or CarNT. But then you have
to buy more seats.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000?
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 16:22:58 -0500
On Thu, 27 Apr 2000 08:53:16 -0400, "Jim Carigan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I do develop Linux code. EVERY Linux user should.
LOL.
>Those who don't produce
>code are abusers and should not run the OSS softwares. Don't dispute people
Or maybe they just have other things to do with their lives - not
everyone is a computer programmer.
>because they believe in something. Perhaps they're wrong, perhaps you are.
>I've personally found six openings in Microsoft networking, specifically
>with netbios and TCP/IP. There are SYN flood attacks that can slam ANY MS
>machine. You can also bombard a machine with multiple bastard SYNACK packs
>and watch for traffic to clean out.
Sounds like the attack the CNN/EBay/Buy.com kid did. Attack from
enough sources and you'll overwhelm the routers. That's immaterial to
the OS.
>Try running a port scan froim an
>OS2/Linux box on ANY Microsoft machine. You will find open ports that should
>not be there.
Care to substantiate how I can do attacks on MS machines? Say, Win2k?
I've run Saint against it, I've run quite a few Web scans on it, and I
have yet to come across all of these security flaws you claim.
>Then try the same thing with other operating systems on other
>machines. Flood all ports and use all possible SYNs. Eventually you will
>learn something new about the network.
Why don't you tell us the exploit you've found?
------------------------------
From: Death <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.government.abuse,alt.paranormal,alt.politics.usa.constitution,alt.alien.visitors,alt.dreams.castaneda,alt.politics.yugoslavia,alt.news-media,alt.non.sequitur
Subject: Re: Use of Satellites for Mind Control and Acts of Torture?
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 14:31:23 -0700
Birth wrote:
>
> Widdershins wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 27 Apr 2000 04:04:00 GMT, Dina O'Grogan wrote:
> >
> > > (Widdershins) wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 09:02:03 GMT, capaliwoda wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >USE OF SATELLITES FOR MIND CONTROL AND ACTS OF TORTURE?
> > >> >
> > >> >Psychotronics users have been attempting to retaliate for
> >
> > snip
> >
> > >> The cage must cover all doors and windows, and be electrically
> > >> bound together by 20 gauge copper straps about 1 inch wide.
> > >> The doorway can be made operable by covering the door itself,
> > >> bordering it with the copper strips in such a way that they overlap
> > >> the copper covering the door frame. The copper straps must be, in
> > >> turn, connected together, and thence to a main ground strap which
> > >> goes either through the outside wall of the room you are shielding,
> > >> or to the basement. There it should be connected to an eight
> > >> foot grounding rod that has had no less than six feet of its length
> > >> driven into the ground. Not only should the walls and ceiling of the
> > >> room be covered, but the floor as well. Care must be given not
> > >> to abrade the mesh on the floor. To do this, you may cover the mesh
> > >> on the floor with a rug or carpet.
> > >>
> > >> HTH
> > >>
> > >
> > >Not if they've got Uri Geller working for them.
> > >
> > >~D~
> >
> > Can Uri bend copper mesh with his mind?
Ask him at: http://www.tcom.co.uk/hpnet/
>
> MEMO: For General Distribution...
> ****FREE****Psychotronic_Barcodes_Tattooed****FREE****
> The Department of Defense's Advanced Research Projects
> Agency "DARPA" http://www.darpa.mil/baa/ recently awarded
> Eagle Eye Technologies http://www.eagle-eye-tech.com/ a
> contract to build a bracelet-sized 'mobile terminal' designed
> for compatibility with existing satellite communication
> systems. The contract is overseen by the U.S. Army Space
> and Strategic Defense Command at Huntsville, Alabama,
> http://www.smdc.army.mil/ . . .
Do Electric Origami Unicorns Dream of Psychotronic Barcode Tattoos?
The Dream Body in Cyberspace
by Robert D. Romanyshyn
[Excerpt]:
"...Ethically, we need to recognize that no matter
how intense the encounter between dream bodies in
cyberspace, the fleshy body is erased from such
encounters or, at best, participates only indirectly
and privately. Reflecting on this situation, Michael
Heim wonders, 'How long and how deep are the personal
relationships that develop outside embodied presence?'
'Without the direct experience of the human face,' he
adds, 'ethical awareness shrinks and rudeness enters.'
But it is not simply a matter of rudeness, of the loss
of manners. It is also a matter of violence, of which
examples abound in our culture. Without the medium
of the other's fleshy presence, he or she is in danger
of becoming only a telepresence, a presence without
substance and hence without humanity..."
http://www.cgjung.com/psychtech/rrdreambody.html
------------------------------
From: Will <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows2000 sale success..
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 16:36:21 -0500
sandrews wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Brian D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 73%? I don't think so...
> >
> > Before I posted my response, I did an AltaVista search for anything to
> > do with NT and unit volumes or market share (add parentheses where
> > necessary). Got ambiguous results. So I said to myself, "self, ..."
> > and dared enter the magical haunted forest that is microsoft.com. I
> > searched for "market share" and "unit volume" and $DEITY knows what else
> > and found an article that claimed that number that I quoted.
> >
> > Since then, I have been trying to re-find that URL. Well, it seems that
> > microsoft.com's search engine is now borken. Doesn't matter what I type
> > into the "enter a search phrase" field, all I get is a page saying "the
> > page cannot be found". I can even type in the word "microsoft" and get
> > the same denial of existence. This certainly makes me want to rush
> > right out and pay the big bucks for SQL-server, IIS, and whatever else.
> >
> > Do I need to wave the dead chicken...?
Aren't you tired of going to this or that e-commerce site, search for
something only to get back an ODBC error or something similar because the M$
backend broke?
------------------------------
From: The Cat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM dumping more shares of RedHat
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 21:51:58 GMT
No sweat. I have a very thick skin :)
Some would say my head is pretty thick also :)
On 27 Apr 2000 21:02:54 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
wrote:
>On Thu, 27 Apr 2000 13:40:40 GMT, The Cat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> A different Steve.
>> Not me.
>> Read the thread, I never even posted in it.
>
>I was refering to Stephen Edwards. Sorry, I should have made it
>clearer.
TheCat (Steve)
"Agent under Wine and powered by Mandrake 7.0"
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
