Linux-Advocacy Digest #652, Volume #26 Tue, 23 May 00 16:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ? (CAguy)
Re: Need to make UNIX autoresponder
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save
It?) (Timberwoof)
Re: rdram: WIll is speed up a linux box? ("user")
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Tim Kelley)
Re: SPLOITS IN LINUX??? (Craig Kelley)
Re: who is linux really hurting the most (Craig Kelley)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux ("Anthony W. Youngman")
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Mig Mig)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (Mig Mig)
Re: Windows by Day, Linux by Night (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (CAguy)
Subject: Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ?
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 19:09:46 GMT
On Tue, 23 May 2000 18:21:33 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>>>The short answer is that the memory architecture is quite flat (32-bit
>>>flat, in fact); this contrasts with e.g. Xenix, and of course DOS and
>>>Windows. I'm not up on the rest of the kernel workings.
>>
>>
>>Umm..what version of Window are you talking about?..win32 is 'quite
>>flat' also. Anyway, who uses DOS/win16 anymore?
>
> Actually, there are still segment limitations in Win32.
> Banging up against them while doing QA against Win95
> was what finally got me to dump Windows entirely.
>
Well, from a programmers perspective, win32 uses a flat 32 bit
protected virtual memory model with no segment/offsets to
worry about. Just like most modern OSes. So, I don't know
what segment limitations you're refering to.
James
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: tw.bbs.comp.unix,comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Need to make UNIX autoresponder
Date: 23 May 2000 15:14:53 -0400
Roberto Ullfig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>--------------A7F8B8770189D393376A821A
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>
>having problems posting attachments, try again...
[snip]
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii;
> name="autoresponder.txt"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Disposition: inline;
> filename="autoresponder.txt"
>
>#!/bin/sh
The only problem is that the original poster wants the autoresponder
to be written in Perl (for whatever reason).
--
Microsoft Windows. Flaky and built to stay that way.
Microsoft Windows. Garbage at your fingertips.
Microsoft Windows. The joke that kills.
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 23 May 2000 19:10:12 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc s@- wrote:
: In article <8gdp99$k4a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter says...
:>: a person is a bug tracking system? wow! so if this person gets sick,
:>: the bug tracking system goes down?
:>Yep. Just like if your bugtracking server develops a virus.
:
: I thought linux sw can not get any viruses? but if the bugtracking server
: got a viruse, you can get a backup. If the above person got
Oh yeah? Do YOU know how to set up a bugtracking system? It isn't
exactly a one hour job, or a one day job, ...
: sick, how do you make a backup of him? And what if he get kidnapped?
Well, if alan went out of circulation for more than a couple of months,
I'm sure someone would start collecting bug reports. But collecting
them's not the problem; just archive the kernel list (it is!) if you
want to collect them. They're just little itty bits of syntactic
scrawly symbols unless you get them to someone who understands them.
And that's Alan and the kernel developers and maintainers. Just mail
them.
: and what if he fell and hit his head and lost his memory? and what
Big deal. Someone else would step up. But it's an accounting job.
Nothing else.
: if you need to find something about a bug but Allen happened to be
: busy in the bathroom at the time, do we wait for him to finish
: to find out about a bug? what if he on a vacation?
You wait for him to come out, and you ask (nicely). He takes his laptop
on vacation .. don't even know if he has proper vacations. Those are
the province of 9-5 people.
: tell me right now, how many priority one bugs are there against
: linux kernel 2.2, and how many are against kernel 2.3.99? Where
Oooh tons. And 2.3.99? It doesn't work yet. Not in any satisfactory
sense. Mind you, it works for most people in the sense they understand.
: can I go now on-line and look at the status of these bugs?
Try the kernel list. I get a few hundred messages every day from it.
And then you can go look at the sublists. And if you want to see
an actual buglist on the www, go to alans buglist pages.
: NOt only a bug-tracking system is critical for any modern software
: engineering group, it will also help others volunteer work and time for
Nonsense. All the volunteers are already in and working :-).
: linux. One can look at the list of bugs and decide to go fix some, it
: will actually be good for linux.
Have you actually considered that bugtrack systems are there to remedy
a communications gap that DOESN'T EXIST in linux. If your bug hasn't
been fixed by the maintainer you communicated it to last, just "bug"
him about it. He'll reply.
: May be you guys who think a bug tracking system is not needed for
: linux kernel, need to take a course in software engineering one
: day, but from the types of replies I read, I doubt that one course will
: make any difference.
Perhaps you'd like to read my books and articles on the subject :-).
Peter
------------------------------
From: Timberwoof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary
Split Save It?)
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 12:09:55 -0700
In article <8gckhq$63a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Edwin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8gcd95$cd4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Bill Altenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> [snip]>
> > Much like Adolf Hitler's policy of never retreating,
>
> According to Goodwin's law, this thread is officially dead. Move along
> folks. No thread to see here.
>
> [snip]
>
>
Godwin's law, you silly thing.
--
Timberwoof <timberwoof at infernosoft dot com>
Chief Perpetrator
Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation.
http://www.infernosoft.com
------------------------------
From: "user" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: rdram: WIll is speed up a linux box?
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 13:46:51 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, john
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been in the market recently for a computer. Should I get one
> with rdram it I want to run Linux? Will it be worth the extra cost?
>
RDRAM is to SDRAM what a private airplane is to an automobile: In theory
the airplane is faster, but in day to day use most people have cars. While
the bandwidth of RDRAM is higher the latency is longer than SDRAM.
Mailing you a stack of CDROMs has got a higher bandwidth than using a
56K modem to send you some data - but the latency of the CDROMs in
the mail is a lot worse.
If you are doing computation that requires a high bandwidth the RDRAM
is better. If you are doing the usual sort of tasks that most people perform
on their machines SDRAM will work better. Would you want to use an airplane
to commute to work every day? Would you get there any faster?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 23 May 2000 13:35:02 -0600
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Christopher, you're forgetting the most obvious answer here...
>
> They could call the sysadmin and just have him rewrite the video drivers,
> write a new windowing system and rewrite their applications. Remember, this
> is all open source and all sysadmins are programmers and have limitless
> amounts of time to be coding things like this.
That's what a Windows user would do with broken drivers: download the
fixed version.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 23 May 2000 13:38:49 -0600
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> so you acknowledge that you are wrong about datacenter.
>
> good, facing the truth is a start...
Where can I download it?
*You* can download Linux 2.3.99-prerelease at any kernel mirror, of
course.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 19:41:32 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Sanders) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Fade out windows? What's wrong with you morons? Of course this can be
>done using X. You can fade out any region, color/set of colors or the
>entire display. You can make all the pixels on your screen fall to the
>'bottom' of the display. And, what's the most fun, you can do it to
>another user remotely!
That's a security hole, if ever I saw one. Are you saying you can take over
another desktop with relative ease?
> You guys need to work in UNIX shop sometime. You're working away
>quietly at your desk when you hear a flushing toilet and your screen
>turns into a tornado and whorls away off stage left.
This sort of thing was blocked on Digital UNIX.
> Jeez. Fade out windows. When will the innovation stop?
Does such a thing exist in KDE or Gnome?
Pete
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 14:47:17 -0500
David Goldstein wrote:
>
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> Every report that I have read on the speed of W2K vs NT4 is that NT4
> is faster. Perhaps that is on identical hardwarem, since W2K consumes
> even more resources than NT4 does, it would stand to reason that I need
> to do a major hardware upgrade to see the improvements; of course, NT4
> would run that much faster, too :)
Of course it is. "Faster" is a marketing trick, and that's
really all it is. Anyone knows that there are too many metrics
involved to make any reasonable claim that an OS is "faster" than
another one, I mean, that is just ridiculous.
That said, every MS OS release has been slower than the previous
one, and they've always claimed it was faster. Look how much
slower 98 is over the original 95.
NT got more sluggish with every service pack.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Subject: Re: SPLOITS IN LINUX???
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 23 May 2000 13:47:50 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) writes:
> On 23 May 2000 08:40:03 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) writes:
> >
> >> On 22 May 2000 22:53:32 GMT, JoeX1029 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Does any body know where to find exploits for RedHat 5.x??
> >>
> >> http://www.rootshell.com/
> >
> >... which hasn't been updated in months.
>
> Neither has RH 5.x.
http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/rh52-errata-general.html
5.2 has a security patch for April of this year...
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: who is linux really hurting the most
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 23 May 2000 13:50:10 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) writes:
> JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 May 2000 09:18:46 GMT, Full Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>On Mon, 22 May 2000 20:56:55 +0200, "Davorin Mestric"
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>now even the netcraft guys are saying it. linux is hurting commercial unix
> >>>vendors more than microsoft.
> >>>
> >>[snip]
> >>
> >>Linux is hurting Unix - but not in the way you indicate.
>
> > No, more than likely the perception that you can get a Quad Xeon
> > that can replace a Sun Enterprise Ultrasparc is what is 'hurting
> > Linux'. Linux just happens to be taking the place that NT would
> > try to push itself into.
>
> The sparc is better hardware in dozens of ways, and anyone who knows
> anything at all about server hardware will tell you that.
And an S/390 is even better than a SPARC, but it all boils down to
money at some point or other.
[snip]
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[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
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 15:04:34 -0500
josco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 23 May 2000, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> > Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Joseph only cares about two things 1) using real arconyms and 2) the
> > > origin of OLE.
> > >
> > > You've stopped using OLE1 and OLE2 - we have real progress here Eric.
> > > When asked about the origin of OLE you have to refer to OLE Version
1.0,
> > > not OLE Version 2.0.
> >
> > For someone so hung up on the correct spelling of things, you can't even
> > bother to spell someones name correctly.
> >
> > I think that about sums it up.
>
> Are you NOW telling me your use of OLE1 and OLE2 were mistakes and
> misspellings?
Does it matter how they're spelled?
You seem to have the hangup about it, yet when you can't even bother to
spell a persons name right, it just makes you a hipocrite.
------------------------------
From: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 19:10:12 +0100
Reply-To: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
>"Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I am led to believe (in other words I may well be wrong...) that rpms
>> basically have a required/not-required status. If the system MAY require
>> a package, then either it is flagged as required and the system tries to
>> make you install it, or it's not flagged and gets ignored.
>
>Well, technically, some is either required or it isn't. If you're
>right (I have no idea), the problem seems to be more on the package
>maintainer's end, rather than the rpm developer's end.
>
But you're ignoring the example packages I (deliberately) chose ...
If I have an ISDN card, then I *NEED* ISDN4LINUX, if I don't then it's a
waste of space. Same with a sound card and OSS.
If that hardware is present, then those packages are REQUIRED. If the
hardware isn't there then those packages are a waste of space (and on
the system I was complaining about, it was more than 1% of the available
disk space for ISDN4LINUX alone - that's space I can't spare).
As somebody else pointed out, rpms can't have conditional dependency.
Either it's flagged as "required" and I scream blue murder because the
basic install on my mum's pc crashes with a "disk full", or it's flagged
as "not required" and I scream blue murder because it doesn't install on
the office server and I need it.
Don't blame the package maintainer if rpm is too brain-dead to cope with
variations in STANDARD hardware.
--
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
Witches are curious by definition and inquisitive by nature. She moved in. "Let
me through. I'm a nosey person.", she said, employing both elbows.
Maskerade : (c) 1995 Terry Pratchett
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 22:03:54 +0200
Drestin Black wrote:
> Datacenter exists today.
Where can i download it or buy a licence ?
Hoppefully it will be as succesfull as W2K prof edition.. that means its a
huge failure
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 15:14:18 -0500
R. Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8geaiu$342m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <yEiW4.2672$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >R. Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:8gc3dh$qt8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >Appealate courts usually don't play politics and get down to law and
> >justice,
> >> >which is why MS is holding out for the appeal, because they know
they'll
> >win.
> >>
> >> Ummmm....lemmme guess...another newsgroup.lawyer, right?
> >
> >The appeals court has overturned *EVERY* decision this judge has made
> >against MS in the past. A normal person might wonder how an objective
> >jurist might get that kind of record.
>
> An objective person would look at the facts of this case. As you
> would say, "Irrelevant."
That's not the point here. The point of this comment was about a "newsgroup
lawyer" not the validity of the case (which is in the text below).
You insinuated that because the original poster wasn't a lawyer, they didn't
know anything. My point was that it doesn't take a lawyer to realize that
the judge has been overturned on appeal in regard to microsoft 3 out of 3
times so far. Given that track record, it doesn't seem unlikely that it
will be 4 out of 4 (without even considering the case). Does that mean it's
guaranteed? No. Only that a reasonable person might get the idea that the
judge was biased and incapable of making an objective decision (again, I
didn't say he's not capable, I said a reasonable person might get the idea).
> >The keyword there is generally. The fact that the judges findings of
fact
> >are almost word for word taken from the governments filings, and has very
> >easily proven falsehoods in it could very well sway an appeals or supreme
> >court into deciding that the findings of fact were biased. They won't
> >discover their own facts, but if they overturn the basis of the findings
of
> >law, then the findings of law become irrelevant.
>
> Given your own lack of intellectual integrity concerning this
> case, I can hardly take your argument seriously. Given Microsoft's
> slipshod defense (and that's HARDLY in doubt), I have little doubt that
> the findings of fact will be overturned.
I agree that MS put up a very weak defense, and in fact dropped the ball on
things they should have prevailed on. One reason might be that MS
intentionally set it up to be overturned.
> >The tobacco cases are about greed and getting governors re-elected and
> >attorney generals elected governor. Coincidentally, the majority of
state
> >Attorneys General in the case were running for governor at the time they
> >filed the case. Can anyone say "publicity"?
>
> Don't evade the point. And certainly not true for at least some of
> the lead litigators. Ain't no such animal as a Governor Gregoire.
What's not true for at least some of the lead litigators? That the majority
of state Attorneys General in the case were running for governor at the
time?
Did you even read the text? I said it's not true for all of them, don't put
words in my mouth.
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 22:06:32 +0200
> Christopher, you're forgetting the most obvious answer here...
>
> They could call the sysadmin and just have him rewrite the video drivers,
> write a new windowing system and rewrite their applications. Remember, this
> is all open source and all sysadmins are programmers and have limitless
> amounts of time to be coding things like this.
Actually that just happende here with a ATM card from Efficient.com.. some
guy just wrote a "driver" for it and it just works. Needless to say that
there are no drivers for W2K - too marginal a product.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows by Day, Linux by Night
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 15:05:51 -0500
Streamer wrote:
>
> Simone Paddock wrote:
>
> > For whatever reason, a great many Linux and UNIX
> > users spend a lot more time working with Windows
> > than they might like, or like to admit.
>
> This makes me want to boycott O'Reilley books. I've had over 5 years of
> learning about Windows.....enough to know that I don't want to know
> anything more about WIndows (I don't give a damn about W2K) , and that I
> want to know more about Linux. I think O'Reilley is mis-marketing their
> book if they think they're going to get a bunch of Linux Users to buy a
> 'secrets of Windows' book.
I actually think this is a good idea. Not that I like Windows, or enjoy
being forced to use it, but for my home studio project, I will either
need to go back to Windows, or buy myself a Mac. In order to use the
programs that I have been the most impressed with in music production, I
would say I'm going to be stuck with Windows, and I know some about it,
but want to be able to tune it up good for my use. I know I won't be
able to tune it up like Linux or BSD, but at least I might be able to
keep it from destroying my precious music before I can get it off to
tape (I had this happen in my original music oriented Windows set up,
two days of work down the drain). I don't like Windows any more than
any other Linux user, but I still may get stuck with it.
BTW, before you retort, I don't want to wait another two or three years
to start working on my music again, and I'm not about to learn enough
multi-media programming just to start doing what I love again. I want a
program I can use now to do my digital recording, unfortunately that
means Windows or MacOS for the moment. Maybe my next studio set up (I
seem to be on a five year cycle here) will see Linux put in place. It
definitely has the power and flexibility that a studio computer would
need, but not the apps. Too bad.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
