Linux-Advocacy Digest #597, Volume #26 Fri, 19 May 00 10:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Bob Hauck)
Amodeo & Bennett digest, volume 2451352 (Gerben Bergman)
Re: Need to make UNIX autoresponder (Sergei Laskavy)
Another One! (Martijn Bruns)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Bob Hauck)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (Joseph)
Re: Templetonbot field test 001 (was Re: Tholen digest-[SNIP]) (Gerben Bergman)
Re: Another One! (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (abraxas)
Re: Your office and Linux. (abraxas)
Re: Another One! (Tim Kelley)
Re: a great job (abraxas)
Re: Off-topic ? Microsoft (Tim Kelley)
Re: Templetonbot field test 001 (was Re: Tholen digest-[SNIP]) (matt)
Re: HP-UX vs. Linux (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Is Linus a terminator ? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Is there any money in knowing Linux? (billy ball)
Re: 4 year old anecdotal evidence!! (abraxas)
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451684.803^-.00000000004 ("Joe Malloy")
Re: MS caught breaking web sites (Alun Jones)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 12:29:50 GMT
On 19 May 2000 07:00:33 GMT, Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.development Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: On an stock rpm-installed Redhat - and Mandrake:
>: /usr/bin/netscape
>: /usr/bin/netscape-communicator
>: /usr/bin/netscape-navigator
>
>:-). Well, that's wrong then. Netscape is not part of a distribution
Caldera puts it in /opt/netscape with a symlink in /usr/bin.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: Gerben Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Amodeo & Bennett digest, volume 2451352
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 14:29:50 +0200
Myrat Amodeo and Eric Bennett are just the latest in a series of people who
post here for entertainment purposes. Here's the digest:
MA] Garban Bargmen wrote:
Still having attribution problems, eh Myrat?
MA] Still using made-up attributions, Garban?
Notice how, despite these alleged "made-up attributions", you still managed
to identify the message as addressed to you, Myrat.
MA] Perhaps this is all just part of your infantile game.
*You're* the one who admitted to playing an "infantile game", Myrat. How
ironic.
MA] Not at all, Garban.
Typical unsubstantiated claim.
MA] Whom are you addressing?
Don't you know, Myrat?
MA] That depends upon whom you are addressing.
Reading comprehension problems?
MA] Why not ask this "Myrat" yourself, Garban.
What do you think I'm doing, Myrat?
MA] So what's your excuse for not comprehending the evidence?
What alleged "evidence", Myrat? Unsubstantiated claims are not "evidence".
MA] On the basis that the presupposition was not erroneous.
Illogical, given that it was.
MA] Don't you know?
I see you didn't answer the question. No surprise there.
MA] Unnecessary,
On the contrary, it is quite necessary.
MA] as the answer is quite obvious, given your continued denial of the
MA] presence of the evidence.
What alleged "denial", Myrat? What alleged "evidence", Myrat? Care to
substantiate your claims for a change?
MA] Who?
Too bad you can't figure it out.
MA] How ironic.
On what basis do you make that claim?
EB] Illogical,
On the contrary, it is quite logical. Of course, it takes decent logic
skills to realize that.
EB] On what basis do you make this claim, Gerben?
On the basis that it's ironic, Eric.
EB] Illogical, as only two people are participating in this discussion.
Incorrect, given that Myrat Amodeo and Pascal Schaakmat are also
participating, Eric.
EB] What alleged "third person"?
Don't you know, Eric?
EB] Where?
Open your eyes, Eric.
EB] See what I mean?
EB] See what I mean?
EB] See what I mean?
See what I mean?
EB] See above.
You're erroneously presupposing that you've presented evidence, Eric.
EB] Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
See above.
EB] Why, nowhere to be seen!
Yet more evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
--
Gerben Bergman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sergei Laskavy)
Crossposted-To: tw.bbs.comp.unix,alt.2600,comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Need to make UNIX autoresponder
Date: 19 May 2000 12:41:50 GMT
In article <8feha9$3h1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I would like to make an autoresponder in Perl on a UNIX server. Any
> ideas tips about doing that? I look forward to hearing from you. Thank
> you.
vacation(1) why Perl?
------------------------------
From: Martijn Bruns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Another One!
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 14:47:49 +0200
Another virus like the recent 'ILOVEYOU' has been detected. Read
about it here:
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2572454,00.html?chkpt=zdhpnews01
Windows-users really have to watch their e-mail carefully these
days. I wonder when it'll be our turn.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 12:56:23 GMT
On 19 May 2000 00:07:40 GMT, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 18 May 2000 06:20:59 GMT, Koos Pol wrote:
>>Oh yes you can! Try FTE. It does exactly all what you requested :-)
>>http://fte.sourceforge.net/
>It doesn't run in the xterm that you're currently in, and if I remember
>it kept insisting on opening a window that was too big for the screen,
0.49.13 comes with a slang version called "sfte". It isn't compiled by
default, you have to edit the TARGETS line in ~/src/fte-unix.mak. Seems
to work ok on the console, with the PuTTY telnet client for Windows, and
in a kvt (with the exception of c-pgup and c-pgdn not working) but the
keybindings get funky in an xterm (hint: alt -> esc).
You can change the font and get a smaller window for the xlib version by
editing main.fte and recompiling the configuration.
>and changing the default colours was a nightmare, I gave up with it
>in the end.
There are three pre-built setups and it is pretty easy to switch between
them. A full custom thing would be harder though. Not having an online
configuration maker is a bit of a pain but I don't normally fiddle with
that stuff too much once I get something reasonable set up.
I'm still playing around with it (downloaded when I saw the previous post)
so don't yet have a good feel for how well it will hold up over the long
term. But it is in fact pretty easy to get started with for DOS/Win
converts due to the CUA-style default key bindings and menus, so it'll
probably end up staying on my system for that reason alone.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 06:14:17 -0400
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:392518ed$4$obot$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > OLE was introduced as part of the OS in 1992, it was NEVER an office
> > > only
> > > > > solution.
> > > >
> > > > Wrong.
> >
> > > Pre-OLE2 was useless. I don't even consider it OLE since it was so
> > > radically different.
> >
> > There you go again. You get caught in a lie so you try to distort history
> > to justify your lies.
>
> No, I'm telling you what my thougts were. When anyone says OLE, I don't
> even consider OLE1. It simply isn't in what i'm thinking, thus it's not in
> what I'm writing about.
Then you are lying. OLE 1.0 was NOT useless. Changing the meaning of
words to avoid the truth is a lie.
------------------------------
From: Gerben Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Templetonbot field test 001 (was Re: Tholen digest-[SNIP])
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 15:11:36 +0200
Hunting and pecking my way through the message base, I noticed Stephen S.
Edwards II saying:
| [Stephen interjects into the conversation with the Templetonbot for the
| purposes of testing...]
And now for a clash of the two styles:
| : Jumping to erroneous conclusions again, Eric? Taking jumping to erroneous
| : conclusion lessons from Bob Osborn?
|
| If you would have BOTHERED to READ the ARTICAL,
You're erroneously presupposing that I haven't bothered to read the ARTICAL
[sic], Stephen.
| you would have KNOWN that he ISN'T jumping ANYWHERE.
Illogical, given that I did read the ARTICAL [sic], Stephen.
| Here, _READ_ it again!
You're erroneously presupposing that I haven't read it before, Stephen.
| http://www.someuselessblitheringsite.com/wankermaterial/baloney.html
Non sequitur, given that this is not the article to which I was referring.
| : Typical unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
|
| It's only unsubstantiated, because you REFUSE to READ!
What alleged refusal to read, Stephen? How would my reading the ARTICAL
[sic] substantiate your erroneous claim?
| All you do is INSULT.
Evidence, please.
| I guess you're incapable of having a logical argument.
What you guess is irrelevant, what you can prove is relevant. Prove that I'm
incapable of having a logical argument, if you think you can.
| : According to who, Eric? You?
|
| Ah, now we're being POMPOUS.
On what basis do you make that claim?
| Hello Mr. Pompous!
Typical invective, as is usually the case from someone who lacks a logical
argument the way you do.
| : How ironic, considering that comment came from you.
|
| I never said that!
Yes, you did, Stephen.
| It said that in the ARTICAL! READ THE ARTICAL!
You're erroneously presupposing that I haven't read the ARTICAL [sic],
Stephen.
| : I see you've taken to ignoring evidence and responses again. How convenient.
|
| I'm not ignoring ANYTHING!
You're ignoring evidence and responses, Stephen. Of course, it takes decent
reading comprehension skills to realize that.
| You just refuse to READ!
What alleged refusal to read, Stephen? Care to substantiate your claims for
a change?
| All you can do is INSULT.
Where have I allegedly insulted anyone, Stephen?
| I guess you can't argue LOGICALLY.
What you guess is irrelevant, what you can prove is relevant. Meanwhile,
where is your logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
--
Gerben Bergman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Another One!
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 13:20:18 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Martijn Bruns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Fri, 19 May 2000 14:47:49 +0200 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Another virus like the recent 'ILOVEYOU' has been detected. Read
>about it here:
>
>http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2572454,00.html?chkpt=zdhpnews01
>
>Windows-users really have to watch their e-mail carefully these
>days. I wonder when it'll be our turn.
Wasn't Kevin Mitnick's Internet Worm targeted specifically at Sendmail? :-)
Or am I misremembering something?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: 19 May 2000 13:23:51 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 05/18/2000 at 10:24 PM,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) said:
>> > Only in the eyes of stupid cowards hiding behind a false name. The opinion
>> > of assholes like you makes not a whit of an impact on me.
>> False name? My address is entirely bonafide, and my moniker happens to
>> be a combination of names, which are all mine. You are an idiot---and
>> you wouldnt know a linux advocate if they were sucking on your dick.
> Your name is not yttrx.
Oh really now? Actually, a number of people call me yttrx in real life
(pronounced either 'why-tricks' or 'yih-tricks'). Ive been using this
moniker for the better part of ten years. It is recognizable to those
that know me. It is indeed my name.
> That is an indecipherable moniker.
To you, but I suspect that may be because you are a paranoid lunatic.
> Therefore
> nothing you say has any validity.
Theres an argument that holds water.
> Moreover, you claimed in your message that I spelled using incorrectly. I
> did not and you have failed to acknowlege your error.
Where exactly did I do that again?
>> > Oh, and by the way, "using" is the proper spelling of the word. "Useing"
>> > is totally, absolutely, horribly incorrect.
>> You're the one who said the 'H' word and voided every argument you made,
>> not me. I know better.
> A complete non sequiter. Answer the question as to what lack of
> intelligence made you think that using is not properly spelled.
You said the "H" word. You lose. Thats the rule. You're a tool.
> And Mr. Fuckingliar is using the tactics of Hitler and Goebels repeatedly.
> Tell a lie and repeat it often enough that it seems to be truth.
You did it again. Call me that and youve lost again...:)
>> Apparantly you dont.
> Quite obviously your command of the English language is well below the
> third grade level. Any third grade pupil knows that 'dont' is not a word.
> The word you most likely intended to use was "don't". The apostrophe is
> critical.
We've been over this, and youd realize it if you had:
A. a memory
B. less medication
C. a brain
>> You're such a smart guy. Teach me.
> I just did.
You know, if you keep treating linvocates this way, no one at all is going
to be on your side, bobbie. :)
>> -----yttrx
> I have decided that yttrx must mean "yellow totally twisted rotten
> xanthippe".
Ah, it can use a dictionary. Actually thats not at all what it means.
If you can handle it (this may be pushing it) think of the nomenclature
behind 'yttrium' and go from there. You probably wont get very far, but heres
to high hopes.
> --
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
Ah, this explains once again why youre so bitter. You've been sleeping
with a corpse for the past five years.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Your office and Linux.
Date: 19 May 2000 13:27:34 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Streamer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> : > I find your praise of a person like Charlie most disturbing. If you
> : > really think that a person who says little more than "If you don't use
> : > Linux, then fuck you!" is an ideal advocate, I'd hate to experience your
> : > definition of a zealot.
> : You basically say the same 'FU' statement to all of us Linux users, no matter
> : how sophisticated you think your vocabulary is.....you haven't fooled me as to
> : what the real meaning/demeaning content of your statements are.
> And exactly how do I do this? By showing the claims of others to be
> baloney? This is not saying "FU". This is saying "you're wrong".
Youve actually never 'shown' that. You've typed things that are your
opinions---and thats about it.
Passing opinion as fact is a sure sign of hollow argument.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another One!
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 08:28:13 -0500
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Martijn Bruns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote on Fri, 19 May 2000 14:47:49 +0200 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >Another virus like the recent 'ILOVEYOU' has been detected. Read
> >about it here:
> >
> >http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2572454,00.html?chkpt=zdhpnews01
> >
> >Windows-users really have to watch their e-mail carefully these
> >days. I wonder when it'll be our turn.
>
> Wasn't Kevin Mitnick's Internet Worm targeted specifically at Sendmail? :-)
> Or am I misremembering something?
The internet worm didn't have anything to do with sendmail AFAIK,
I believe it was lower level than that
Kevin Mitnick didn't have anything to do with the internet worm
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: a great job
Date: 19 May 2000 13:30:05 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8g2ki9$1m7n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Neither Apple or Tandy could be considered suppliers to "the masses".
>> >Apples market share has always been very low, as has Tandy's.
>>
>> Think earlier. Before the IBM PC and for a short while after,
>> Apple and Tandy had almost all of the market.
> The market was tiny compared to today. Today, one in two homes has a
> computer. Back then, one in 1000 or worse had had computers.
It was actually about one-in-thirty for quite a number of years, and I
know, because I was one of those people who had a tandy.
>> Tandy never released
>> sales numbers but they where huge.
> I would doubt that Tandy ever sold more than 1 million non-PC computers
> total. Commodore and Atari certainly sold far more.
Agreed. I daresay that commodore was responsible for the creation of
the "mass" market. Their computers were always cheap, always quality
and always quite useful. The same cannot be said of apple or tandy
of the day.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Off-topic ? Microsoft
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 08:30:05 -0500
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> Raul Valero wrote:
> >
> > I have a doubt. Does anything prevent Microsoft selling all of its
> > products to a foreign (non U.S.) company and keep on with the
> > monopoly from let's say (as example) Spain, Japan, Korea, etc ... ?
>
> Yes, A federal Judge can just say the hell with you Microsoft,
> your product will never hit US shores again.
>
> And a Federal Judge CAN do that.
It would be a cold day in hell. The outrageous crap many US
multinationals do (GE, Union Carbide, et. al.) and have gotten
away with makes Microsoft's "crimes" seem puny.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Templetonbot field test 001 (was Re: Tholen digest-[SNIP])
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 06:34:25 -0700
Well, well, well, Stephen you are getting desperate. Folks of OS2, MAC,
and Linux advocacy, I posted a link about MS software to nt.advocacy,
Stephen here did not like it so he spammed your news groups with
personal attacks on me. I guess he thinks that personal attacks will
serve in place of supported facts. I do not know. I regret that
Stephen's personal vendetta against me has caused so much trouble.
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> [Stephen interjects into the conversation with the Templetonbot for
> the purposes of testing...]
>
> STATUS: Voice recognition seems to be fully fuctional. At this level,
> all functions of Mattoid number 3 appears to be normal.
>
> Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : Eric Bennett wrote (using a pseudotholen again):
> : >
> : > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> : > wrote:
> : >
> : > > Today's Tholen digest is full of nothing:
> : >
> : > Are you suggesting that your post does not contain any material?
>
> : Jumping to erroneous conclusions again, Eric? Taking jumping to erroneous
> : conclusion lessons from Bob Osborn?
>
> If you would have BOTHERED to READ the ARTICAL, you would have KNOWN that
> he ISN'T jumping ANYWHERE.
>
> /* "artical" intentionally mispelled for the purposes of realism. */
>
> Here, _READ_ it again!
>
> http://www.someuselessblitheringsite.com/wankermaterial/baloney.html
>
> : > Illogical,
>
> : Typical unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
>
> It's only unsubstantiated, because you REFUSE to READ! All you do is
> INSULT. I guess you're incapable of having a logical argument.
>
> : > but that is to be expected,
>
> : According to who, Eric? You?
>
> Ah, now we're being POMPOUS. Hello Mr. Pompous!
>
> : > coming from you.
>
> : How ironic, considering that comment came from you.
>
> I never said that! It said that in the ARTICAL! READ THE ARTICAL!
>
> : > On what basis do you claim "this is the end, my only friend, the end"?
>
> : I see you've taken to ignoring evidence and responses again. How convenient.
>
> I'm not ignoring ANYTHING! You just refuse to READ! All you can do is
> INSULT. I guess you can't argue LOGICALLY.
> --
> .-----.
> |[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
> | = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
> | | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
> |_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HP-UX vs. Linux
Date: 19 May 2000 13:34:48 GMT
Mike Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) writes:
: |
: | HTTP is a stateless protocol and thus ripe for loose clustering.
: It is mostly stateless. Form submissions, for example, can alter state.
Not true. Stateless, in this sense, means that every click on the
web is a fresh connection with no past knowledge. Submitting a web
form gets you an automatically generated page from your input,
but it also has no state kept from form to form.
This stateless nature has led us to use kludges such as hidden
fields or cookies to keep track of connections on the web.
But at its heart, HTTP is still stateless.
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is Linus a terminator ?
Date: 19 May 2000 13:36:27 GMT
Raul Valero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: First, Linus drops away Microsoft and now, Transmeta is
: going for Intel, did Linus born to kill ? :-)
Ahh, but the real question is:
Is Linus an active or passive terminator? :)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (billy ball)
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Is there any money in knowing Linux?
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 13:47:26 GMT
On Fri, 19 May 2000 02:09:24 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Hi.
>>
>> A number of people have asked whether or not anyone is really looking
>> for the RHCE certification. Also, I've been asked if there is really
>> anyone out there that is interested in paying people to use their Linux
>> skills. To help answer these questions, I've created a Linux Salary
>> Survey at:
>>
>> http://www.rhce2b.com/salary.html
>>
>> Please take a moment to take the survey, so that I can show all my
>> friends with MCSE's that employers are indeed paying people who are
>> skilled in Linux. Please take the survey if any part of your job
>> involves Linux.
>>
>> Also, for anyone interested in taking the RHCE exam, you'll find an
>> online practice test at:
>>
>> http://www.rhce2b.com/cgi-bin/form_processor/Forms/test.cgi
>>
>> You'll also find an interview with Kara Pritchard, author of the RHCE
>> Linux Exam Cram book at:
>>
>> http://www.rhce2b.com/kpinterview.html
>>
>> I'm trying to do my part to advocate the RHCE exam. Please visit my
>> website and help out.
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://www.rhce2b.com
btw, randy... your web computation is hosed... commas in salaries seem to
be translated to a decimal point!
i seriously doubt anyone with 20 years experience has an annual salary of
$110.50
:-)
>>
>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> Before you buy.
>
>You know I really think this will depend on the Certification. Take for
>instance me I am Sair GNU Linux certified, and I choose this certification
>for two reasons: 1 It is not dependent upon a certian Distro, and 2 You
>take a 390 hours
>of learning GNU Linux, and not the 190 of RedHat and Microsoft.
>
>John Yeager LCP
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 4 year old anecdotal evidence!!
Date: 19 May 2000 13:51:21 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : > "...it's quite possible for X to bring Linux down to its knees."
> : No. This is an untrue statement.
> No it isn't. If you knew half as much as you claim to, you'd know that
> what I'm saying has, and does happen (though the frequency of such
> occurrences are small).
I know exactly as much as I claim to, and the above can also happen
under NetBSD. (though the frequency of such occurences is small)
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451684.803^-.00000000004
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 09:57:42 -0400
Today's Tholen digest:
[ ]
Thanks for reading!
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alun Jones)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: MS caught breaking web sites
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 14:07:58 GMT
In article <Q12V4.51787$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "SUDDN"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am no fan of Microcrap but this turned out not to be a backdoor at all.
>
> Too bad.... I would have loved to see Microcrap get grabbed by the knarlies!
Me too - but it's important to make sure you're grabbing real knarlies, not
just feeling around in their pockets for dryer lint.
Alun.
~~~~
--
Texas Imperial Software | Try WFTPD, the Windows FTP Server. Find us
1602 Harvest Moon Place | at web site http://www.wftpd.com or email
Cedar Park TX 78613 | us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] VISA / MC accepted.
Fax +1 (512) 378 3246 | NT-based ISPs, be sure to read details of
Phone +1 (512) 378 3246 | WFTPD Pro, NT service version - $100.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
