Linux-Advocacy Digest #253, Volume #27 Thu, 22 Jun 00 12:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Wintrolls in panic! (2:1)
Re: Windows98 (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't accept the future.
("Davorin Mestric")
Re: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't accept the future.
("Davorin Mestric")
Re: Wintrolls in panic! (2:1)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Phillip Lord)
Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE (Craig Kelley)
Re: slashdot is down -again- (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: It's all about the microsurfs (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (MK)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (MK)
Re: NFS/Samba Dos to Unix Text Conversion: Who won't, who does, who (David
Collier-Brown)
Re: 486 Linux setup, 250 meg HD, which distro ??? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Henry Blaskowski)
Re: You Should Not Treat Linux Like M$ Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wintrolls in panic!
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:13:48 +0100
Charles Philip Chan wrote:
>
> >>>>> "1" == 1 <2> writes:
>
> >> But I really, really would like to know what makes a wintroll a
> >> wintroll!
> >>
> >> Why do they STILL insist on touting Microsoft!
> >>
> >> What could possibly keep a person going on the Microsoft
> >> bandwagon? What could it be?
>
> > BECAUSE LINSUX SUXX AND ALL LINSUX CAN DO IS SHUFFAL TEXT FIALS
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > ALL DAY AND I CANT EVEN WORK OUT HOW TO USE THE CAPSLOCK KEY
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > NEVER MIND SOMETHING AS USEFUL AS A COMMANDLINE
>
I'm not a wintroll. It's called sarcasam... :-)
If you noticed I spelt shuffle and files in the same was as the well
known troll Tim Palmer. I also posted in all caps and made a silly
reference to it.
> Interesting a Wintroll posting with Netscape 4.7 on SunOS 5.7!
I'm *positive* this Ultra10 is running Solaris. But mabey it calles
itself sunos...
>
> Charles
-Ed
--
The day of judgement cometh. Join us O sinful one...
http://fuji.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/cult/index.html
remove foo from the end and reverse my email address to make any use of
it.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:12:45 -0500
Jeff Szarka wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:54:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 22:33:25 +0200, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>See my post above. Most importantly :
> >>
> >>a) Improved hardware detection, configuration, support & management (not
> >>just a desktop function).
> >
> > Actually, this has NOTHING to do with the desktop.
>
> It does. What's wrong with GUI based hardware detection?
While GUI based hardware detection isn't flawed per-se, I think it could
be a moot point if hardware detection was done properly. Of course,
BeOS actually got this part completely right. They have every driver
available on the system and when the system comes up it loads what it
needs for the detected hardware. Change every piece of hardware in your
system and (assuming you are still using compatible hardware) it will
boot up with exactly your same settings on the new hardware. No GUI or
otherwise, it just detects the hardware and boots. If only...
Red Hat does have a nice auto-detection scheme going on, but I find that
it is a bit useless for most uses. It slows down boot-up and really
doesn't gain you anything if you aren't constantly swapping hardware.
And really, how many end users swap hardware? Most of the time Joe
sixpack just buys a new machine when he wants something more, or takes
his machine to the local Best Buy to get them to install whatever new
thing he thinks he nees. How does graphical hardware detection help him
then?
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Davorin Mestric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't accept the future.
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:14:15 +0200
well, linvocates claim linux is 'better' than other os-es, but they also
claim linux has 30% desktop share, so...
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>LINUX IS HERE TO STAY, AND AT THE RATE THAT IT IS GROWING/DEVELOPING,
> >>>IT WILL BE THE MAJOR OS OF THE FUTURE.
> >>
> >>As long as .3 percent of total market share is what you are looking
> >>for, I would say you are right on track.
> >
> >In the business world, Linux market share is probably 30% --
> >one hundred times the .3% figure repeatedly posted by our
> >resident liar, Steve/Mike/Simon (for which he never gives
> >a reference).
>
> 30 PERCENT!!!! ???
>
> What kind of drugs are you on? You'd be hard pressed to find a single
> secratary in NYC that is running Linux on her desktop.
------------------------------
From: "Davorin Mestric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't accept the future.
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 17:09:34 +0200
amazingly enough, that figures are not biased against linux at all. NT
figures were a little to high, though.
www.statmarket.com used to have surveys, but they went commercial now. they
did have nice charts... now, www.thecounter.com/stats has similar
statistics: linux at 0.3% (or as they say, 0%), w2k at 2%, etc.
they measure browsing from different os-es, they count a huge number of
visitors, they have for all practical purposes, random sample, and those
numbers are statistically very accurate.
some other ways of measuring linux client market share might give other
results, perhaps because they are measuring installations, not usage. it is
common that most of the linux desktop users double boot, and perhaps it is a
case that they use windows much more often. this is what this 0.3% figure
shows.
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >OS of user that go at www.microsoft.com
> >60% win98, win95
> >39% win2k, winNT
> >0.7% ( other platform)
> >0.3% Linux.
> >
> >As you can see, it's at the microsoft website, they get the result.
>
> Well, we now know where the .3% number came from; problem is, there's
> a slight bias, there. :-)
>
> I don't think "visitors of www.microsoft.com" is a representative
> sample of all Web browsing users -- not that all users browse
> the web, either.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wintrolls in panic!
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:20:04 +0100
"Robert L." wrote:
>
> "2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message news:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > But I really, really would like to know what makes
> > > a wintroll a wintroll!
> > >
> > > Why do they STILL insist on touting Microsoft!
> > >
> > > What could possibly keep a person going on the Microsoft
> > > bandwagon? What could it be?
> >
> > BECAUSE LINSUX SUXX AND ALL LINSUX CAN DO IS SHUFFAL TEXT FIALS ALL DAY
> > AND I CANT EVEN WORK OUT HOW TO USE THE CAPSLOCK KEY NEVER MIND
> > SOMETHING AS USEFUL AS A COMMANDLINE
> >
>
> Can't use the capslock key? You don't know how to remove the capslock?
> Don't blame Linux, just ask in the configuration NG.
> I think you can simply press the "Caps Locks" key on your keyboard.
IT'S ALL LINSUXXX FAULT. WINDOWS RULEZZZZ. WINDOWS DOESNT NEED STUPID
1970S STUFF LIKE CAPS LOCK KEYS.
WINDOWS KNOWS WHEN YOPU NEED CAPITALS JUST LIKE IN THIS POST
I think I'm going to go away and write a Caps-Lock HOWTO now. But
seriously,. though, PC keyboards are rubbish. This one's got lots of
useful keys like:
undo
copy
paset
cut
stop
props
front
open
find
again
help
I just like that. OK?
I'll also write a Num-Lock HOWTO for the really technical among us...
>
> <Homer Simpson>
> Where's the any key?
the red one on the front?
> </Homer Simpson>
--
The day of judgement cometh. Join us O sinful one...
http://fuji.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/cult/index.html
remove foo from the end and reverse my email address to make any use of
it.
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 22 Jun 2000 15:27:19 +0100
>>>>> "Mark" == Mark S Bilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Needless to say, RMS often is accused of being a communist
>> (possibly true)
Mark> I'm used to occasional accusations of being a Communist, but
Mark> usually this is done by people who would rather argue against
Mark> Communism than against my actual views. But it's a new
Mark> experience to see someone who means me well by it.
Mark> It isn't accurate, though. I work on free software to give
Mark> software users freedom, which is nothing at all like Commun-
Mark> ism. I've been partly influenced by leftist Anarchism, by the
Mark> idea of a world in which people voluntarily arrange to work
Mark> together for the general good, but not at all by Communism.
Thats actually quite interesting.
I don't think that it would make sense to call RMS a communist
for one simple reason, which is that he is part of a large "single
issue" movement. My own feeling is that whilst single issues are
important, you need to look at the whole picture. The environmental
movement, and the free software movement currently come up against the
same problems, for the same reasons. To be described as communist RMS
would need to feel that the system as a whole was wrong.
Of course to say that he has been influenced by "leftist
Anarchism" but "not at all by communism" is rather nieve. Leftist
Anarchism and Communism have been intertwinned through out their
existence. Sometimes happily so, and sometimes much less so. Still
they have influenced each other heavily, and if you are influenced by
one, then you are by the other as it were.
Phil
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 22 Jun 2000 09:24:28 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:40:31 -0600, John W. Stevens
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >*EVERY* operating system does this! (For God's sake, no OS will
> >schedule a process to run when it is sleeping on a resource!)
>
> If you are doing non-blocking I/O on Linux, the process will not go to
> sleep even if the resource it needs is not available. Other systems have
> more sophisticated means of dealing with this (such as asynch), but Linux
> is so primitive that it likes to hog the CPU excessively. Does Linux
> support non-busywaiting barriers yet or is it still playing catchup?
Linux now supports POSIX-compliant asynchonous I/O; and provides a
good balance between the "stampede effect" and the "wake only one
thread" effect; allowing the programmer to fine-tune the desired
behavior (you must use threads, 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: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: slashdot is down -again-
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:22:24 -0500
John Culleton wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> It runs Linsux or some deviant version of such (FreeBSD)
> >
> >BSD isn't a deriviant (or deviant as you put it) of Linux. It
> is
> >actually much older than Linux and quite a bit different. While
> you can
> >use them to do the same things, they are not the same system.
> >
> >>
> >> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:46:53 -0300, "Francis Van Aeken"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Of all the sites I frequent, Slashdot is the only one that is
> regularly down.
> >> >
> >> >Why is that?
> >> >
> >> >Francis.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
> >Sorry, but I'm a BSD fan too (Open and Free being my two favs at
> the
> >moment) and I hate to see people say that BSD is a version of
> Linux.
> >They are different systems.
> >
> >Nathaniel Jay Lee
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> Oh well, some people used to call all refrigerators "Frigidaires"
> and the Brits and Irish still call vacuum cleaning "Hoovering."
>
> The class is Unix and Unix-like systems and the members include
> such oddities as Xenix, BSD, Coherent and Linux. Linux is the
> most successful member of the class at the moment, at least in
> mindshare.
>
> Joohn Culleton
>
> Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
> Up to 100 minutes free!
> http://www.keen.com
Yeah, it wouldn't bother me if they had said some Unix deriviant, but
calling BSD, or Xenix, or any other Unix a Linux deriviant is
senseless. But, I do understand what you are saying, and it seems just
as stupid to me. Kind of like the kleenex/tissue and Coke/soda issues.
But, I guess there are better things to stand up for. After all, if you
are combating stupidity, you are definitely fighting a losing battle.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's all about the microsurfs
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:24:40 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Won't matter, it still won't run Linux due to the proliferation of
> WinHardware in these machines.
>
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 07:13:51 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Soon that best deal with be HP Linux or Gateway Linux. Just think, take
> >away M$ software and you can sell the computer for, at least, $100 less.
HP and Gateway are not very hip on WinHardware. In fact, Gateway
started fighting the WinModem problem while I was there. I don't know
if they won out on that fight as I left before the issue was settled
(they were trying to avoid selling WinModems with laptops and instead
using regular PCMCIA/serial based modems).
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (MK)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:40:30 GMT
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:40:28 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It is arbitrary because nobody has yet to draw a firm line that
>> includes MS and excludes the successful companies in every industry
>> in the country.
>Name one which is in an equivalent position.
What difference does it make? IIRC, in platform for SPARC processors,
Sun has a lot stronger domination (if not 100% domination) than MS
has in x86 platform. What's good for goose is good for gander -- the
MS is not going to be around forever, but those practices and bureaucratic
inertia will result in good chance of the same charges brought against
basically anybody working in software. It's going to be the game like
"dim, righteous policeman with big club and 10 million suspects". You doubt
that if some of actions of anti-trust were executed in markets like trash
removal in Denver?!
>That would include... forcing vendors to charg a customer for your
>product even when they purchase from the competition instead.
>
>There's a REASON that Microsoft is in court.
As the author of "The New Trustbusters" soberly pointed, the charge
was changing with time. In general I think it is just result of vague
feeling "we have to punish MS for something, even though we don't
know exactly what it is"
MK
---
Equality requires slavery.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (MK)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:40:33 GMT
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:46:20 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> Your argument is based on nothing more than semantics.
>> >>
>> >>No, it's based on morality. Offering incentives to people is not
>> >>illegal,
>> >Bribes?
>> You would have to call every discount as bribe then. Bribe is when
>There is a difference between offering a discount, and requiring
>your supplier chain to collect money from THEIR customers for
>every unit sold INCLUDING those units which do NOT have your
>product on it, because the customer chose the competitor's product.
I'd say there isn't such difference, if you think about it for a moment.
That's simply paying this vendor for a privilege, or hiring the vendor. If
company A hires company B to do the hardware for them, it is all OK. E.g. the
Sun has separate companies for software and for hardware. I do not see any
difference really between Sun hardware company producing only the hardware for
operating systems produced by Sun software company and the deals between
MS and hardware vendors.
Also, you could charge lots and lots of companies that they obstruct
trade this way, too -- many companies have exclusive deals for something.
E.g. my company has exclusive deal with certain intl corporation for technical
translation jobs done in my country. Nobody else in Poland will get the
job from that corporation, we're their exclusive subcontractor. Why?
Bc it simplifies matters and delivers certain mutual benefits and duties. In
order to get the job done the way they want to be done, we specialize, we add
certain qualities and maintain certain standards we would not upkeep without
such deal. I don't see that as "obstruction of trade". Everything here is
done in conditions of informed consent. Everybody knows what they get
and what they don't get. That makes deal fair.
>That is OBSTRUCTION OF TRADE and it is ILLEGAL.
I don't think that is obstruction of trade -- the other competitor
is perfectly free to outbid the previous competitor. Which is
what e.g. BeOS maker tried to do. Explain to me please, how
can what MS does be obstruction of trade and the same
thing practiced to even higher extreme by BeOS -- 100%
DISCOUNT -- not be obstruction of trade? Either both are
guilty of obstruction of trade, or none is.
>It is the very ANTITHESIS of free trade.
I disagree. The informed consent of anybody is not violated in such
deals -- while violation of informed consent is certainly involved
in a bribe. Everybody knows to what they agree. And customers
only gain on such deals -- if many hardware vendors compete
and many hardware vendors get OS with discount, that certainly
lowers prices for consumers.
BTW, even if other competitors don't want to enter the bid,
they can still get their niche hardware vendors. You can
buy the hardware with Linux preloaded, can't you? Everybody
gets their niche vendors. Instead of hardware vendors A and
B both selling Windows preloaded machines and Linux preloaded
machines, you get vendor A selling Windows preloaded machines
and vendor B selling Linux preloaded machines. That's specialization,
not obstruction of trade.
I would fully support RH making precisely the same deal with
some hardware vendors as MS made with their hardware
vendors. It would help Linux -- machines that would result
in the long run would HAVE to be better. The hardware vendor
could not make up losses from selling poor Linux machines
by revenues from selling Windows machines. He would
HAVE to deliver very good machines to survive at all.
If you know somebody at RH or other Linux company, try
to persuade them to make the same deal as MS did.
>If Gates is soooooooo gung ho on free trade, why does he do everything
>possible to resist allowing free trade in his industry???
I don't think it's fair to say that it is MS that obstructs free trade _most_.
I think some evidence can be found, but not where you look for it. You
want possible obstruction, look at what happened when AOL wanted
to use Netscape as browser. But it's not in the deal you talk about.
If you want REAL obstruction of free trade, why don't you look at
what Apple was doing. That's obstruction. Which, BTW, backfired
on Apple, so intervention of anti-trust was not even necessary.
Closed standards die, and that is why Apple has problems. If MS
practiced closing standards as hard as Apple, I don't see why it
would not hit MS. Laws of physics still apply to 800-pound gorilla.
Also the mechanisms of trade definitely apply to MS, too -- look
at the relative lack of successes of MS in DB market.
Leave it to the market. It really does the job best.
MK
---
Equality requires slavery.
------------------------------
From: David Collier-Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.smb,mailing.unix.samba,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: NFS/Samba Dos to Unix Text Conversion: Who won't, who does, who
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:32:41 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> To deal with this, we have to manually run the LF <--> CR/LF conversion
> utility.
>
> We are looking for a **transparent** conversion solution.
> -->> We do understand the nature of the problem <<-- (no flames)
Another thing to do with "one close" actions
or Tim Potter's VFS: either can allow you to
write a transformer.... and figure out
what's safe to transform!
A dedjanews search for one or the other should
turn up a reference to one or the other patch.
--dave
--
David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify some people
185 Ellerslie Ave., | and astonish the rest. -- Mark Twain
Willowdale, Ontario | //www.oreilly.com/catalog/samba/author.html
Work: (905) 415-2849 Home: (416) 223-8968 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: 486 Linux setup, 250 meg HD, which distro ???
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:38:49 -0500
C Sanjayan Rosenmund wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>
> > Although, I'm not going to dispute you that Debian and Slack have a lot
> > of merit on an older/smaller machine. I'm planning on doing a Debian
> > install on one of the aforementioned machines when the next version is
> > "stable" released. Hopefully soon.
> >
>
> Debian (Potato) is available as a downloadable iso image (used to burn
> CDs) for testing. Potato is *quite* stable and the CDs should work
> fine. Otherwise, you can download the floppies (9 of them) and do a
> network install. Why wait, upgrade to Debian *now*
>
> <grin>
> --
> Sanjay
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Windows has detected that a gnat has farted near your computer.
> Press any key to reboot.
I tend to wait for "official" releases of Debian. It just seems easier
to wait for the official release than wait for a three day download. (I
can't wait for my DSL connection, maybe then I'll change my mind.) As
it is right now I can order a CD from LSL or Cheapbytes and have it
shipped faster than I can download the ISO of any distribution.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Henry Blaskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: 22 Jun 2000 15:46:48 GMT
In talk.politics.libertarian MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As the author of "The New Trustbusters" soberly pointed, the charge
If you posted a link to this article, I missed it. Could you
post it again?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: You Should Not Treat Linux Like M$ Windows
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:42:26 GMT
Gee, thanks! Dump it on the poor flat-ear! :^(
I don't know who you're talking about, but if you try to call Micro$oft
for support on *THEIR* products, you will have to PAY THEM $195.00 (USD)
in order to get THEM to support THEIR product, which you paid for but do
not own. Think about it: Bill Gates has YOUR money, but you don't own
anything in return. (Before you mindless Wind00dz start babbling, read
your EULA, dammit, just READ it!)
Or, you can do like most of these poor M$-victims (v4.0/SP99/pre-beta/RC
42) do: Call your network integration company & try to blame *them* for
Micro$oft's bugs.
Such is the H3!! that is my life.
Thank you, Micro$oft, for leaving ME holding a big bag of YOUR *S#!T*!!!
OTOH, with Linux I can examine the source code myself if I wanna!! Or I
can call a buddy across town or across the planet for just the cost of
the call or E-mail.
Thank you, Linus Torvalds, for restoring my hope for Tomorrow!!!
In article <IDi45.1797$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Bracy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, most Windows troubleshooting goes like this:
>
> Call Tech Support.
>
> And that's pretty much it.
>
> Bracy
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
