Linux-Advocacy Digest #350, Volume #26 Wed, 3 May 00 08:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Is the PC era over? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Re: Is the PC era over? (Andrew Carpenter)
Re: Government to break up Microsoft (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Government to break up Microsoft
RE: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance... ("Alberto
Trillo")
Re: Reservations about splitting up MS... (No Name)
Re: Applix 5.0 it's getting better! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: No kidding! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Is the PC era over? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation' (Bob Tennent)
Re: Are we equal? ("Edward L. Sandwicheater")
Re: UI Standards (was Re: KDE is better than Gnome) (David Steuber)
Re: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the PC era over?
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 07:33:58 GMT
On 3 May 2000 07:06:13 GMT, abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Andrew Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>>> all your stuff, quite secure.
>
>> An X-terminal can't serve applications or files. Or do you mean the
>> X-terminal is the device?
>
>The embedded system would run directly on the diskless X-Terminal client
>hardware. Multiple network protocols can be managed by this kind of
>set up, as well as packet encryption mechanism of your choice. There
>are quite alot of possibilities with an embedded OS like linux (though
>admittedly linux's tcp/ip implementation is severely lacking under very
>heavy traffic; exactly the sort of thing that this environment
>generates)
Ethernet in general tends to severely lack in under very heavy
traffic conditions. This is why it would be a good idea to
cache data as aggressively as possible. State can be stored
locally, it just shouldn't make a machine unusable just because
it's gotten corrupted.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
Reply-To: <btolder>
From: <btolder>
Subject: Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 00:24:27 -0700
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
"Leslie Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8emu6m$1p6f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Compression isn't the problem - that is negotiated correctly so
> the other end is not required to match to establish a
> connection. I'm talking about MS-CHAP which ended up
> being painfully patched into everybody else's equipment.
Standard CHAP was lacking in several areas. It needed the improvements.
> >I think Microsoft assumed a leadership position for PPP.
>
> Does leadership mean going your own way and demanding that
> everyone else follow?
MS-CHAP was adopted by other platforms because of clear advantages. Given
that Unix servers run the Internet, how was Microsoft in a position to
dictate PPP extensions? It happened simply because there were numerous good
things about MS-CHAP.
In many ways, I'm glad Microsoft doesn't always wait around for consensus.
Consensus can take too long. Look at Khronos. Microsoft had that over two
years ago. By the time the industry decides what will make all the Khronos
members happy, Microsoft will have honed DirectX to lethal precision. Then,
I suppose, we can sit back and listen to everyone whine that Microsoft
didn't ask their opinion and that Microsoft is being unfair.
------------------------------
From: Andrew Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the PC era over?
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 17:11:37 +0930
abraxas wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Andrew Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Thats kind of the idea. Its essentially an X-terminal.
>
> > Even an X-terminal is one step up from this concept, at least in
> > functionality stakes. X-terminals do all the windowing (and
> > widget-handling?) locally. The SunRay is purely a screenscraper, is it
> > not?
>
> It does a little more than that, perhaps most notably the ability to
> detatch a running desk-session and re-attach from any other Sun Ray that
> can see the server.
Yes... but the SunRay isn't really doing the work for that, is it? All
that's required for that functionality is for the client to pass some
identifier to the server to say which desktop to transmit. As I said,
even Metaframe could have that feature with little work (and a bit more
session persistence to cut down server load).
> >> X-terminals are not the idea of a 'Network Computer'. They're the idea
> >> of a remote-viewing station.
>
> > That's right... so why should the 'wave of the future' be the equivalent
> > of an older technology?
>
> Tesla said the same thing about alot of Edison's work, yet we all still
> use lightbulbs...:)
I'm not sure of the context; he might have been right :)
My previous point still stands though. If Sun (or anyone) wants to
return to dumb terminals, they'd better do it *really* cheap, not just
slightly cheaper than a PC. What is the benefit?
A cheap Celeron could run a VNC client, for example, and achieve the
same result, while still providing local processing capabilities for
applications which might need it. (VNC -
http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/index.html)
Fast networks might take away the need for local storage, but they don't
negate the benefit of local processing. Every terminal added to a server
reduces the CPU time any one terminal gets -- 1 CPU in 50 workstations
probably gets you more than 1/50th of a server's CPU time.
Andrew
[ opinons are my own ]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 07:50:36 GMT
On Wed, 3 May 2000 00:24:27 -0700, btolder <btolder> wrote:
>
>"Leslie Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8emu6m$1p6f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Compression isn't the problem - that is negotiated correctly so
>> the other end is not required to match to establish a
>> connection. I'm talking about MS-CHAP which ended up
>> being painfully patched into everybody else's equipment.
>
>Standard CHAP was lacking in several areas. It needed the improvements.
>
>> >I think Microsoft assumed a leadership position for PPP.
>>
>> Does leadership mean going your own way and demanding that
>> everyone else follow?
>
>MS-CHAP was adopted by other platforms because of clear advantages. Given
>that Unix servers run the Internet, how was Microsoft in a position to
>dictate PPP extensions? It happened simply because there were numerous good
It controlled the clients. If MS tells them that their ISP is
broken (through FUDsome system error messages), they are in
quite a position to wreak havoc.
>things about MS-CHAP.
>
>In many ways, I'm glad Microsoft doesn't always wait around for consensus.
>Consensus can take too long. Look at Khronos. Microsoft had that over two
>years ago. By the time the industry decides what will make all the Khronos
>members happy, Microsoft will have honed DirectX to lethal precision. Then,
>I suppose, we can sit back and listen to everyone whine that Microsoft
>didn't ask their opinion and that Microsoft is being unfair.
>
>
>
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
Reply-To: <btolder>
From: <btolder>
Subject: Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 01:32:43 -0700
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
"JEDIDIAH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >MS-CHAP was adopted by other platforms because of clear advantages. Given
> >that Unix servers run the Internet, how was Microsoft in a position to
> >dictate PPP extensions? It happened simply because there were numerous
good
>
> It controlled the clients. If MS tells them that their ISP is
> broken (through FUDsome system error messages), they are in
> quite a position to wreak havoc.
Eh? MS-CHAP isn't required by MS clients. Plain vanilla PPP works fine.
------------------------------
From: "Alberto Trillo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance...
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 08:57:21 GMT
> 1. Internet connection sharing.
I can set up internet sharing connection searching for
"Linux masquerading" at Altavista than following the steps
given at Windows help. I guess you are not a fool, so you
would suppose that Linux sharing connection gives you far
more than Windows does. What's more, several distributions
comes with masquerading scripts included, so you just have
to say yes/no at a dialog box to share connection.
> 2. Printer/scanner sharing with Linux/Windows mixed system.
Samba is installed within most of the distributions ready to work
and share printers out of the box.
> 3. Firewall (software based).
The same that masquerading applies here, not only a lot of
firewalling scripts are around the net, but a lot of distros include
them at installation time. Again, firewalling from Linux gives you
some extra bonus ;-) than doing it from Windows 9x
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (No Name)
Subject: Re: Reservations about splitting up MS...
Date: 3 May 2000 09:02:26 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 3 May 2000 00:01:57 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>While it's nice to see Microsoft getting what they deserve (albeit from the
>government rather than all the roadkill they've left behind them) - from a
>Linux users' point of view, we might prefer to hope it doesn't get broken up
>into smaller companies.
>
>The problem is, if a baby-Microsoft was put in charge of maintaining future
>versions of Windows without the various distractions their current OS division
>is subject to, they might finally realise that they could make a much better OS
>if they focused on simplest solutions to problems and put their effort into
>getting everything to work properly before loading it up with pointless and
>unnecessary features, layering bugs on top of bugs.
>
So what you are saying is that Linux needs crap competition to survive?
I say nonsense. If Windows improves to the point that is better than Linux
(sure....) still Linux is stable, versatile, and then most importantly free.
The price could be vital in many circumstances, specially in poor countries
where the price of a windows licence could be one month salary of somebody
with some preparation (a teacher for example).
Linux, and in general open source software will bee the standard against
which commercial software will be masured, if commercial software
does not perform as well as open, free software, then commercial
software will have to improve or die. MS hopefully will be split before
they fully experience the effect of the open source phenomenon.
>If this happened, Windows actually might become half decent. Not fully decent,
>but robust and reliable enough for all but the most dedicated hardcore geek.
>This would reduce the incentive to switch to Linux - afterall, we Linux users
>do put up with a lot of crap for our choice, we just happen to think that the
>benefits are worth it.
>
>In the meantime, lets make sure the momentum continues - keep making Linux
>easier for the wannebe-not-quite-there-yet-nerds who want to learn, and keep
>improving the apps - I'm doing my bit, whenever I get the chance.
>
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Applix 5.0 it's getting better!
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 11:12:41 GMT
YEAH!!! I'm getting it next!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 5/2/00, 11:13:55 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding Applix=20
5.0 it's getting better!:
> I've been using Applix for some time now. I tried Corel's WP Office=20
and
> was thinking of changing over. Then I tried Applix 5.0 and I'm back in=
> the Applix camp. Applix has cleaned up the look and the install. My=20
KDE
> menus were automatically updated. The "data" package can use "MySQL".
> From what I can tell, the integration has improved and imports have
> improved. All and all, every thing *I* need in a Office suite is=20
there,
> for less than $100. I'm still waiting to see if Koffice will have all =
I
> need, If it does, I'll switch, if not, no sweat now that Applix has
> improved so much.
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No kidding!
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 11:15:10 GMT
Yeah!
But don't it make you wonder why there is still a Microsoft Advocacy?
Well, you couldn't call it a Microsoft Advocacy right now anyway.
Charlie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 5/2/00, 10:47:14 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding Is the PC=20
era over?:
> First Gates quits as CEO of Microsoft. (He knows when to quit!)
> Then we learn Paul Allen, co-founder of Microsoft doesn't believe
> Microsoft has any future either. He is nearly divested of Microsoft
> stock:
> http://theregister.co.uk/000426-000002.html
> Then Microsoft loses title as company with highest marketcap to
> an Internet company, Cisco.
> And then Gates loses title as richest man to the CEO of another
> Internet company, Oracle. (Not counting other assets, Gates' stake
> in MSFT is worth less than Ellison's stake in ORCL.) Good thing
> Gates quit before this humiliating event:
> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1773268.html
> PC Week apparently isn't expecting a lot of advertising revenue
> from Microsoft in the future. PC Week, which until recently was the
> most ardent of Microsoft supporters, is recommending Microsoft be
> split up:
> http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/columns/0,4351,2395100,00.html
> And finally apparently even PC Week believes the PC era is over. They
> are changing their name from PC Week to eWeek:
> http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,2523913,00.html
> Connect the above dots and the picture looks pretty clear. The PC
> era is over. However Microsoft is artificially keeping it alive by
> leveraging their monopoly to push down innovative technology. First
> Microsoft kills Netscape by leveraging their Windows monopoly. Now
> they are attempting to do the same to Palm:
> http://theregister.co.uk/000502-000008.html
> It is time to kill the ageing Microsoft monster and let fresh blood
> revitalize the industry by bring exciting new techologies to the
> marketplace.
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is the PC era over?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 11:16:30 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 5/2/00, 8:30:29 PM, Jen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: Is the =
PC era over?:
> On Tue, 02 May 2000 16:47:14 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >PC Week apparently isn't expecting a lot of advertising revenue
> >from Microsoft in the future. PC Week, which until recently was the
> >most ardent of Microsoft supporters, is recommending Microsoft be
> >split up:
> >It is time to kill the ageing Microsoft monster
> You arr such a idiot. On the one hand you point out that an "ardent"
> support of Microsoft recommends a split-up, then you say "it is time
> to kill the ageing (sic) Microsoft monster". Little did you mention
> that PC Week thinks that splitting Microsoft will HELP them, not bury
> them.
Yeah, but you got the them wrong. The them are as in Linux and linux=20
is going
to bury one of them there parts fella!
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Tennent)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation'
Date: 3 May 2000 11:49:42 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 03 May 2000 05:06:41 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>I'm growing weary of this "where is the Microsoft innovation" crap.
>
>However, I'm not sure if anyone else has
>been able to integrate an operating system, a spreadsheet, an E-mailer,
>a word processor, a slide show generator and shower, and a bitmap
>picture editor in quite the way Microsoft did. (And that can be
>taken in a number of ways! :-) )
>
Surely their most innovative contribution to application software
is their integration of a flight simulator with a spreadsheet.
Now that's real innovation for you!
Bob T.
------------------------------
From: "Edward L. Sandwicheater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,talk.politics
Subject: Re: Are we equal?
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 11:59:24 GMT
Jim Richardson wrote:
>
> On Tue, 02 May 2000 20:21:36 GMT,
> Edward L. Sandwicheater, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
> >
> >
> >JEDIDIAH wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2 May 2000 18:01:51 GMT, abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >In comp.os.linux.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On a closed isolated island with limited or no freedom of movement,
> >> >> that's rather difficult to establish really. There are certainly
> >> >> a significant a visible chunk of the population that feels it
> >> >> worthwhile to risk death and imprisonment to leave.
> >> >
> >> >Have you been to cuba?
> >>
> >> Are you trying to claim that the people that die trying to get
> >> off the island are doing so for naught? Occam's razor doesn't
> >> exactly go your way on this one.
> >>
> >How does Occams razor feel about the fact that the vast majority of
> >Cubans stay in Cuba? The most likely reason is that most people dont
> >want to leave. Obviously most Cubans support Castro and their
> >Revolution.
>
> Sure, it has nothing to do with being an island, or the Cuban gunboats that
> turn back ships heading to the US.
>
> All the folks in leaky tubs and lashed together rafts trying to leave are mere
> figments of tv-land... sure... Why Elian wasn't even here, his mom didn't
> try to leave the workers paradise, it's all a spoof...
>
Are you too much of a blockhead to understand that not everyone thinks
that communism is a bad thing?
Nobody is starving to death in Cuba, nobody has to worry that they wont
have medical coverage in Cuba. I didnt say everyone was happy with it.
Obviously thats not the case. BTW US gunboats turn back those boats too.
We dont live in paradise,niether do the Cubans but to assume that all
Cubans want to leave because some have left is ridiculous.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: UI Standards (was Re: KDE is better than Gnome)
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 11:59:59 GMT
John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
' David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
'
' : What makes a UI standard a good one?
'
' You might get more exitement with this cross-posted to a Mac or NeXT group
Woops! I forgot to trim the headers. Sorry folks. F'ups set.
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
http://www.packetphone.org/
All bits are significant. Some bits are more significant than others.
-- Charles Babbage Orwell
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance...
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 12:01:50 GMT
Why do you find it so difficult to answer a direct question?
Read on:
On Wed, 03 May 2000 03:26:10 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Wed, 03 May 2000 00:54:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>So again for the 3rd time, prove me wrong and show me specifically how
>>much easier it is to set up:
>>
>>1. Internet connection sharing.
>
> Compared to the need to download some strange new package,
> even bare ipchains commands fare better.
Done right out of the box with Win98 SE.
For the 4th time.
Help-> "how do I share my internet connection"
Follow the bouncing wizard and it works.
>>2. Printer/scanner sharing with Linux/Windows mixed system.
>
> Just how do Windows boxes share scanners?
>
> As far as Win->Linux samba print sharing, I just installed
> Slackware '94 way.
And how long is grandma going to play with samba.cnf file before she
gives up.
Get real. This months Linux Journal as well as anothor mag I have has
multiple page articles on how to do this task. Clicking a check box.
One check box under Windows 98se makes it happen.
>>3. Firewall (software based).
>
> It's built into Linux.
Sure it is. Now you have to figure out how do configure it. Now how
about a specific answer on how to do that jedi.
Again. Zonalarm needs no configuration.
>>
>>Again under Win98SE:
>>
>>1. Internet connection sharing:
>> Try help "how do I share my internet connection?" duhhhhhh
>
> ...and those steps would be
Even you could do it. No ip addresses entering needed.
questions like: Which computer is connected to the internet via
modem/cable.
Real easy stuff compared to hosts allow and deny etc.
>>
>>2. Printer Sharing:
>> Click on Printers/Share Duhhhh again.
>
> Like I said. This comes working out of the box with samba.
> You install Linux & it's there. Mebbe you need to click a
> couple of boxes in swat to tell it to use
> encrypted-to-break-samba passwords.
That's not what the Linux Journal article this month says. It goes on
for pages explaining how to share a printer. And BTW they give
examples with SWAT also.
No way is it as easy as WIndows...
Not even close.
>>
>>3. Firewall:
>> Try Zonealarm which has been written up in just about every
>>magazine and trade rag. No configuration necessary. It blocks your
>
> ...assuming that end user is lucky and well read.
If he's planning on trying all the above with Linux reading is about
all he will be doing.
>>ports and informs you with a popup everytime something is trying to
>>gain access to your system. You have the option of giving access or
>>not. No need to type in all kinds of ip addresses although you can do
>>that if you wish also.
>>
>>
>>So how does one go about doing this easily under Linux?
>>
>>It's very easy to do under Windows. Not one file to edit.
>
> Yet you can't seem to describe these processes in nice easy
> steps. They're so simple, yet so hard for you to express.
Stop attacking me and provide a step by step procedure.
And if you can do that be sure and visit the alt.linux.networking
group because there are folks over there pulling their hair out trying
to do this "simple" procedure.
> Don't you have enough of those (1000*(steps)) words to describe
> it all. <snicker>
Lame...How about a direct answer.
>>
>>So how about a direct rebuttal to prove me wrong instead of all of the
>>lame attempts at deflecting a direct question.
>>
>>Is answering a direct question too difficult for the Linux people?
>
> BTW, the firewall and masqerade are 1 thing, not 2.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: My question has still not been answered.Dance..Dance...Dance...
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 12:05:02 GMT
What kind of an idiotic answer is that?
People want to share internet connections.
People want to share resources (printers).
People want some kind of security protection.
And people would like it to be simple to set up.
You are saying that this is not an important set of items?
Windows makes this extremely easy and as of yet nobody has shown me
precisely how Linux is at least as easy.
A half answer like "Samba comes installed" is not an answer.
So again:
How about an answer.
On Wed, 03 May 2000 04:13:14 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grega Bremec)
wrote:
>Ehm, I should suppose that nobody answered your questions for one
>simple, yet almost obscurely absurd reason: most probably because
>they are meaningless questions.
>
>To paraphrase the meaninglessness of your questions, let me use a
>rhetorical question that will clearly illustrate what points you had
>missed in composing a post like the one I managed to force myself to
>write a reply to:
>
> How difficult is it to drive on the left side of the road outside
> the U.K. (and their former collonies) ?
>
>I will unfortunately have to draw a supposal again, to conclude the
>paraphrase in a manner oh so common to you:
>
> Hmm, the entire rest of the world must suck horridly, because one
> would most instantly crash as soon as they attempted to do such a
> nonsense.
>
>Do you now manage to perceive the answer?
>
><hint>
> The answer is deliberately non-specific, because the whole issue
> you exposed is, well, what one could call, non-portable.
></hint>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
