Linux-Advocacy Digest #667, Volume #26 Wed, 24 May 00 16:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save
It?) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451689 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Tholen invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: rdram: WIll is speed up a linux box? (rcanup)
Re: Font deuglification ?? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: Linux good choice for home desktop. (Robert Heininger)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save
It?) (Mayor)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Drestin Black")
Re: Font deuglification ?? (Leslie Mikesell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary
Split Save It?)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 19:11:55 GMT
Christopher Smith writes:
>>> We sic Tholen onto you.
>> Who is "we"?
> We is us.
Who is "us"?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451689
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 19:14:19 GMT
Today's Thorne digest:
1> Don't you know?
No; why do you think I asked, Edwin?
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 24 May 2000 19:07:10 GMT
g'day john.
In comp.os.linux.misc John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Peter writes:
:> Report an interesting bug, and it'll be fixed in a jiffy.
: Known bugs are not interesting. It's hard to find out if a bug is known.
Lurking on the kernel list, or asking, tends to solve the problem.
Happens every day. Well, bugs crop up every two to three days.
Discussion about them goes on every day.
:> Boring bugs indeed will be forgotten.
: And then reported again by people who are not aware that they are known.
Bugs that are reported more than once begin to become interesting.
Even popular!
:> I believe that's known.
: If there was a kernel BTS you could easily know for sure.
It is very hard to locate or even describe a kernel bug. It takes quite
a level of expertise. As to known, well, I am not following the 2.3.99
development woes closely, but I'm pretty sure that scsi was completely
whacked no so long ago, and that nobody has quite brought it in sync.
In fact, now that I think about it, I did hear a few days ago that Doug
Ledford was working hard on fixing the aic7xxx family drivers so that
they'd stop spoiling the party. I got the impression that he had taken
a week off somewhere to do so ...
:> I believe that's known. I've seen several threads go past on the scsi
:> problem in 2.3.99 and above. Doug's working on it. Ask him!
: And waste his time with something you believe that he may already know
Waste his time? Doug's glad to respond to questions, as you know. It's
his code and he's interested in maintaining it! That's why his names's
up there. That's why he's working on it.
: about? I expect I would just get a testy reply telling me not to send in
: bugs with out researching them first.
You'll get a reasoned reply.
: I wrote:
:> ...was a kernel BTS I'd research the problem there and either test any
:> fix...
: Peter writes:
:> EH? Why don't you mail the maintainer?
: Anyone who imagines that he has found a new kernel bug should email a
: maintainer? How are the maintainers to get any work done?
Oh, don't worry about that. Are you being funny here? I can't see any
smileys! As you know, the kernel list delivers a thousand or so mails a
day. Everyone copes with that. It's a question of grepping the subject
and deleting.
:> That's debian practice too!
: Filing a bug via the Debian BTS does email the maintainer. Emailing a
: Debian maintainer without checking the BTS first will often get you
: directed to the BTS.
You'll be told if they think the bug is known, fixed, or due to debian
or the upstream maintainer. It's a prior filter to squeeze out 2
categories: bugs introduced by debian fork maintainers, and bugs known
by debian to have been passed on upwards already. Any unrecognized bug
due to the author WILL go back to the author, as you say. But this is
for applications .. kernel bugs are orders of magnitude harder to find.
That's because end-users don't know if it's an application or a kernel
error they're seeing. It is very rare for a kernel bug ever to be
reported as such by a luser.
:> As you know, you might get Alan's interest on that one too.
: what makes you think I know any such thing?
Because you are a reasonable person, and Alan is a reasonable person,
and it is reasonable that the combination of sound with anything would
interest Alan.
:> Make sure at least Doug knows about it.
: If there was a kernel BTS I could do so in a few minutes. I'm not willing
: to root about in an email archive, though: sound isn't that important to
: me. And I won't risk irritating the maintainer by being the 130th one to
: report a known bug.
: Besides, I don't know who 'Doug' is or why you assume that I know that this
: bug should go to him.
Because he's the named and registered author and maintainer of the scsi
driver in question. Is this posting a forgery?
: --
: John Hasler
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
: Dancing Horse Hill
: Elmwood, WI
Perhaps not.
Peter
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tholen invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save
It?)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 19:15:51 GMT
Joe Malloy writes:
> The Tholen tholens:
Still using made-up words, eh Malloy?
>>> We sic Tholen onto you.
>> Who is "we"?
> The *real* question is how sic [sic!] is Tholen?
How ironic, coming from the person who just wrote that.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
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: 24 May 2000 15:19:11 -0400
On Wed, 24 May 2000 11:14:50 -0600, Praedor Tempus wrote:
>And the right to fork is good because...?
Because if the maintainer abandons or neglects a project, someone else
can pick it up. However, while "the right" to fork is a good thing,
that doesn't mean that gratuitous forking is a good thing.
ESR talks about this kind of thing and uses the phrase "promiscuous
theory, puritan practice", I think the essay is "homesteading the noosphere".
Some examples of "good" forks include egcs ( which I believe has been handed
back to the FSF. egcs-c++ is a vast improvement over g++ ) and x-emacs.
> Because it is GOOD to
>fragment
>software and libraries so that apps fail to work nicely? So that if you
Like I said, the fact that the right to fork is a good thing doesn't
mean that forking for the sake of it is a good thing.
>the unix baby early on. It is brought up as a fear of something that
>could possibly kill linux (for general use...but then, there are
The fragmentation that exists within Linux has very little to do with
forking. THe main problem is that there is a lack of standardisation
on versions of the different APIs.
>I would like a nice, clear explanation of why forking should be
>considered >good.
Your confusing "the right to fork" with forking itself. The right to fork
is one that should be exercised judiciously.
>Standards
>make coder's lives easier, make user's lives easier. SOME things should
The main problem at the moment ( at least wrt Linux ) is not about forks,
but it's about failure of the distributors to use the same versions of
core components such as glibc, the compiler, and other shared libs.
As far as the developers are concerned, there is not much difficulty writing
code that will compile on any Linux distribution. Also, KDE and GNOME make
writing for multiple distributions or even UNIX flavours pretty easy.
Basically, you can use "GNOME" or "KDE" as your target platform. If you
use glib data types or QT classes and the KDEsupport stuff, you usually don't
really need to worry about the peculiarities of your target platform.
However, failure to
standardise on lib versions, compilers and package managers makes
releasing binaries for multiple distributions a bit of a pain.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: rcanup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: rdram: WIll is speed up a linux box?
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 13:52:41 -0500
john wrote:
> <deleted>
Airplane vs car analogy. In a car you get in turn the key and put it in
gear to get it started. In a plane you go through a preflight proceedure
- warm the engine up - get clearance from the tower - taxi to the runway
- then go through your take off before you are faster than a car. Thus
an airplane has a higer latency than a car. Think about how long it
takes to launch a space shuttle; there is a coundown of several days for
it. Faster usually contains an element of slower.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Font deuglification ??
Date: 24 May 2000 15:21:14 -0400
On Thu, 25 May 2000 01:45:21 +1000, Steve Budak wrote:
>Howdy, I can't seem to find the howto for font deuglification in RedHat
>Linux 6.2
>I know I have it (or have seen it somewhere) but can't find it for the life
>of me.
>Anybody know a site where it might be located ?
>I need to get the fonts to look a little better in Netscape and the like.
>Thanks.
You should also read the font howto which among other things tells you
how to make Netscape fonts larger.
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/font_howto/
My HOWTO also links to the FDU
Cheers,
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:27:23 -0400
Excuse me but my copy of Beta 2 is on a UPS truck at this very second...
would you care to debate further that THAT copy does also not exist?
Datacenter does exist and it's running on a machine I sit about 300 feet
from.
As for the on-line book store... hint, it doesn't start with an "A" but is
very very close in the alphabet. As for proof, well, I guess you'd just have
to visit the data center as I have to see for yourself. Short of that,
you'll find nothing official until the NDA is lifted.
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8gekge$1bh2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > so you acknowledge that you are wrong about datacenter.
>
> No. Datacenter doesnt EXIST. It is betaware, and I challenge you to
> come up with solid proof that any of these "large online bookstores"
> are basing the core of their business on a beta copy of datacenter.
>
>
>
>
> -----yttrx
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:28:34 -0400
Where can YOU download it? I doubt anywhere.
Where can JDP's and tech beta partners?? From MS, of course!
Did you forget the entire 2 year beta process for W2K - they haven't
dismantled it, just changed the product in focus.
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "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
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
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: 24 May 2000 14:23:59 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Praedor Tempus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, which does nothing to damage the code that continues to
>> be available.
>[...]
>
>But it leads to PRECISELY the problem that exists on the Windoze side of
>the PC that is generally agreed to be bad.
How does it lead to that?
Please show where Windows has even used any available
and well tested code, or how the existance of such code has
ever led them to do anything. (The Win2k/kerberos business
may be a first).
>M$ produces extensions to
>some standard. Because they are big, powerful and influential AND
>provide tools that MANY use that then utilize these
>alterations/extensions,
>creating software/web pages, etc that incorporate these extensions,
>they lock out alternatives.
Why do you imagine that the alternative of starting from scratch when
writing this cruft intended to lock you in would be better in
any way for any of us?
>There is no reason to assume, magically, that M$ could not and would not
>succeed in doing so (if they wished) with BSD-based/non-GPL software.
>They have the right to extend it and break it and not release the
>alteration.
Just as they have the right to write from scratch an even
worse alternative.
>Many people would use it (a RELATIVELY small core of
>hardcore linux/bsd users are not significant in the big scheme so
>THEIR refusal to go along is irrelevant in the larger market) and
>break intercompatibility...hmmm...just like in the windoze world.
Yes, but, being well tested, it would not cause everyone as
much trouble.
>BSD licenses vs GPL or LGPL, would foster this sort of thing. There
>just isn't (yet) a big boy on the block like M$ taking advantage of
>his weakness in the licensing scheme.g
Beg your pardon? Just about every player in the internet market
started with BSD code. I contend that we are all better off
as a result.
>I ask for someone to defend this ability when it comes to BSD-style
>licenses while at the same time railing AGAINST the practices of
>M$ in a similar manner. They are doing what a BSD license permits.
The kerberos/domain control extension deserves to be railed against
because it give monopolistic control over enterprise authentication
and access control, not because it extends a standard.
>They make a practice of code forking to force users to use THEIR
>solutions rather than a competitors...but in the BSD license world
>this would be a good thing, fully supported by "the community"?
>
>I honestly ask why this is not hypocrisy because I really don't see
>why it isn't?
Before you go too far down this road, ask yourself if you would
be better off if Sun had been unable to use BSD code, or if NFS
would have ever been done if the company had been forced to donate
their work instead of being able to choose which parts to contribute.
Or would X have ever been done if the companies that funded the
work had not been able to incorporate it into their own proprietary
products?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:30:16 -0400
Datacenter is not free nor open source so obviously it would not be
available to the general public out in the open.
But, as an JDP or technical beta tester, wait for your CD copy (mine is on a
UPS truck today).
"Leslie Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8geoaf$1vrq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >so you acknowledge that you are wrong about datacenter.
> >
> >good, facing the truth is a start...
>
> The beta for linux 2.4 is 2.3.x, and has been available
> for quite a long time. Where do the rest of us find
> datacenter today?
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Heininger)
Subject: Re: Linux good choice for home desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 19:38:13 GMT
On Wed, 24 May 2000 19:04:45 GMT,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `Frank Rizzo' wrote:
Re: Subject:
Wrong. Linux is my _ONLY_ choice for my home desktops. :-)
--
Robert Heininger
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 24 May 2000 14:39:19 -0500
In article <8gh98u$iqj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>:> Report an interesting bug, and it'll be fixed in a jiffy.
>
>: Known bugs are not interesting. It's hard to find out if a bug is known.
>
>Lurking on the kernel list, or asking, tends to solve the problem.
>Happens every day. Well, bugs crop up every two to three days.
>Discussion about them goes on every day.
This is fine for the handful of people who are working to solve
current bugs. It is not so fine for the millions of people who
are trying to work around what should be well understood bugs
in released versions.
>:> Boring bugs indeed will be forgotten.
>
>: And then reported again by people who are not aware that they are known.
>
>Bugs that are reported more than once begin to become interesting.
>Even popular!
This is irrelevant to someone whose system has to work now.
>It is very hard to locate or even describe a kernel bug.
Again, a correct description is only relevant to a couple of
people. The rest of the world just needs to know what circumstances
break what thing, how to avoid it, and when it is fixed so they
can stop taking those measures to avoid it.
>: And waste his time with something you believe that he may already know
>
>Waste his time? Doug's glad to respond to questions, as you know. It's
>his code and he's interested in maintaining it! That's why his names's
>up there. That's why he's working on it.
It should never be necessary for a developer to tell someone else
how to work around bugs. That is the real reason that bug tracking
systems exist - to give the developers time to fix bugs instead
of discussing them.
>: Anyone who imagines that he has found a new kernel bug should email a
>: maintainer? How are the maintainers to get any work done?
>
>Oh, don't worry about that. Are you being funny here? I can't see any
>smileys! As you know, the kernel list delivers a thousand or so mails a
>day. Everyone copes with that. It's a question of grepping the subject
>and deleting.
And this is the list that you are suggesting that end users or
administrators would use to see if a bug is already known?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:41:05 -0400
"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > W2K Datacenter doesn't exist? So, that little CD sitting on my shelf
over
> > there, just at hands reach... little shiny thing, i'm imagining it? So,
the
> > copy running at <insert name of large on-line book store> is vaporware?
> >
> > ahhh yes... I forget how the retail commoner trenches are stocked...
> >
> > beta 2 is in my hands in the next few weeks... a little late but I'd
prefer
> > working perfectly rather than "on-time" according to some 2-year old
> > schedule. I accepted W2K Pro/Server/Adv.Server "1 year late" (according
to
> > some schedule) because the improvements to quality and reliability were
> > worth it. I'll accept data center being a little late to incorporate the
> > latest enhancements due to new hardware and technologies and even
greater
> > reliability and performance, thank you.
> >
> > Datacenter is much more real than Linux 2.4 - I've actually got
Datacenter
> > running...
> >
> >
>
> So you admit that Datacenter does not yet exist. You are using a beta
copy.
> So, I have a beta copy of Linux 2.4 running - it just happens to be called
2.3
> since that's the way the release numbering works.
>
Of course I do NOT admit that Datacenter does not yet exist. In fact, using
your own logic, I'm using NT Datacenter - it just happens to be called NT
Datacenter version 5 build xxxx - since that's the way the release numbering
works.
It's up and running and beta 2 is on a UPS truck to me right now - denial is
shameful.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary
Split Save It?)
From: Mayor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 12:41:04 -0700
In article <%PVW4.10727$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Christopher Smith writes:
>
>>>> We sic Tholen onto you.
>
>>> Who is "we"?
>
>> We is us.
>
>Who is "us"?
>
Us is "we", obviously.
>
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:43:45 -0400
and before production versions of linux supported 32 processors it was a
beta version of linux that did.
just like datacenter now...
quit being silly.
"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > I didn't mention big iron - i was refering to the ability to run on 32
> > processors. but i'm sure you knew that.
> >
>
> But production versions of Linux support 32 processors. You need a beta
copy
> of Windows to get 32 processors.
>
> Gary
>
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:48:03 -0400
and you are completely off topic twit
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8gf5jb$93i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> And if you read the post, Linux CAN run 32 processors. See ch2 of the
> link that was posted. Twit.
>
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I didn't mention big iron - i was refering to the ability to run on 32
> > processors. but i'm sure you knew that.
> >
> > "Jim Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > On Mon, 22 May 2000 17:19:53 -0400,
> > > Drestin Black, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > brought forth the following words...:
> > >
> > > >Just like W2K Datacenter...
> > > >
> > > >"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > WindowsNT Datacenter Server can recognize up to 16 processors.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Exactly how many can Linux handle? The most I've ever heard
> > > >> > of was 16, and that was with a major kernel renovation.
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> Linux for S/390 handles up to 32 processors. See Chapter 2 of:
> > > >>
> > > >> http://linux390.marist.edu/download/inst.pdf
> > > >>
> > > >> Gary
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > No Drestin, W2K doesn't run on big iron :)
> > >
> > > (since you can run 41,000 + instances of linux S/390 on a single
> machine,
> > > does that mean that linux scales down to 1/41,000 of a processor
> also :)
> > >
> > > (Linux S/390 is to a server wwww, what ArcherDanielsMidland is to a
> garden
> > > plot.)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jim Richardson
> > > Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
> > > WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
> > > Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 24 May 2000 14:43:43 -0500
In article <8ggs4l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <ggq15$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The openness of Linux is a plus in this area,
>>but the lack of a central and official repository for bug tracking
>>and status is a big minus.
>
>we dont need no freek'ng central bug tracking for linux kernel. if
>you have a problem, search the web or ask Alan Cox or post a question
>on a linux news group (there are tones of 'em).
Bug tracking systems usually have an 'official' maintainer so you
can tell the correct answer if there is one. For some reason the
newsgroups seem to be full of idiots these days, speaking for
no one but themselves.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:51:37 -0400
you can download it from MS if you are a JDP or tech beta. It's not free.
You can buy a license when it's released to the public.
If it's half as successful as W2K pro it will continue to be a huge success,
exceeding all sales expectations.
"Mig Mig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8geo4g$c33$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:52:50 -0400
The release of Datacenter has been delayed until July/August.
Perhaps I can refer you to your dictionary on the meaning of the word
"estimated"
"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > Datacenter exists today.
> >
> >
>
> If that's so, then Microsoft really should update their Web site:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWS2000/guide/server/features/choosing.asp
>
> o *Estimated to be available within 120
> days of the Feb. 17
> release of Windows
> 2000.
>
>
> Gary
>
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:52:59 -0400
you wish.
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8gekia$1bh2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > and linux smp SUX and everyone knows it (but some won't admit it)
>
> It depends on the implementation, but then again you wouldnt know
> that---
>
> because you dont know anything at all about linux.
>
>
>
>
> -----yttrx
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:53:27 -0400
then again, W2K works perfectly for me and my clients - doesn't even depend
on what you want to do - it does it all.
"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > and linux smp SUX and everyone knows it (but some won't admit it)
> >
>
> So you say. But it works just fine on my S/390 G6. It all depends on
> what you want to do.
>
> Gary
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Font deuglification ??
Date: 24 May 2000 14:52:20 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, 25 May 2000 01:45:21 +1000, Steve Budak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Howdy, I can't seem to find the howto for font deuglification in RedHat
>>Linux 6.2
>>I know I have it (or have seen it somewhere) but can't find it for the life
>>of me.
>>Anybody know a site where it might be located ?
>>I need to get the fonts to look a little better in Netscape and the like.
>>Thanks.
>
>http://www.google.com/search?q=font+de+uglification+howto&meta=lr%3D%26hl%3Den
I don't know if these have been updated to match RH 6.2. It (a) includes
quite a few fonts that you can just select as the default in netscape,
and (b) has a truetype-aware font server with auto-directory rebuilding
in the startup script. You should be able to drop new font files
in one of the font directories, then:
/etc/rc.d/init.d/xfs stop
/etc/rc.d/init.d/xfs start
and have them working.
Les Mikesell
[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
******************************
