Linux-Advocacy Digest #342, Volume #27 Mon, 26 Jun 00 03:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Comparing Windows NT and UNIX System Management (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Do not like Windows but ... (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: slashdot (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: slashdot (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: 10 Linux "features" nobody cares about. (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: Microsoft
Ruling Too Harsh
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (Peter Ammon)
Re: Processing data is bad!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Comparing Windows NT and UNIX System Management
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 02:44:08 -0400
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/bin/nts/ntsysman.exe
Nothing there.
Just like the inside of your head.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Do not like Windows but ...
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 02:45:40 -0400
Pedro Iglesias wrote:
>
> nowadays :
>
> winamp is better than xmms or whatever on Linux
> word is better than startoffice or whatever on Linux (wordperfect,
> abiword, ...)
Nobody in their right mind would write a book in Word.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: slashdot
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 02:48:51 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is slashdot down YET again? As of 10:52PM eastern it seems to be.
>
> Sun Jun 25 22:29:23 PDT 2000
>
> slashdot still down.
>
> Freshmeat, too.
>
> no ping on 64.28.67.35
For what reason?
Hardware failure?
Preventative Maintenance?
Network problems?
Power Outage?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: slashdot
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 02:49:32 -0400
Jeff Szarka wrote:
>
> Is slashdot down YET again? As of 10:52PM eastern it seems to be.
>
> If Microsoft.com or hotmail.com was down you guys would say it proves
> NT sucks... Well? Why can't slashdot seem to stay up more than few
> days at a time?
For what reason?
Hardware Failure?
Preventative Maintenance?
Network problems?
Power Outage?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 10 Linux "features" nobody cares about.
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 06:50:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 03:05:39 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Time to eat another WinTroll :-) (yum yum).
> >
> >I've taken the liberty of correcting some of the
> >spelling and grammer of the original post.
If Tim wants to appear to be an ignorant redneck, I'll let him :-).
> >> 1. It scales down
> >>
> >> Noboddy cares if Linux can run on some geek's
> >> obsolete 386 in 2MB of RAM. Windows runs on today's
> >> computer's, and the fact that it doesn't run on
> >> some obsolete piece-of-shit computer from 1991
> >> doessn't mean shit.
> >
> >There have been over 1/2 billion computers sold between 1993
> >and 1998. None of which can run Windows 2000 or Windows 98
> >effectively. Microsoft has told the owners of 1/2 billion
> >computers that they were idiots, that their computers are
> >now worthless.
>
> Its called progres. Deal with it.
I thought Progres was a relational database for Linux :-).
Are you telling me that corporate customers should spend billions
of dollars on Windows 2000 only to have it rendered useless junk
in 2 years? Are you saying that the $200 billion in Windows 98
PC sales should be written off this year because ME will render it
obsolete in 9 months? -- Thank you, I'm glad I'm using Linux.
> >Microsoft expects the owners and users of these machines
> >to simply "throw them away". Even this is a bit of a problem
> >since the EPA has identified at least 9 toxic wastes that keep you
> >from simply "tossing it in the dump". You can't even legally use
> >an old PC as a "Boat Anchor" due to the arsenic, lead, and other
> >toxins.
> >
> >What to do with 500 million PCs that won't run the latest version
> >of Windows? You could run the old versions, Windows 3.1 and
> >Windows 95, but it's getting harder and harder to find new software
> >for the older computers, and furthermore, you can't read documents
> >created by Office 2000 on Office 95 or Office 2.0
> >
> >Alternative number two, what the heck, plop linux on it. At
minimum,
> >you get a really cheap web server, e-mail server, and file server.
>
> >It also makes a nice masquerading firewall for that DSL connection,
>
> A 386 couldn't keep up.
What's funny of course is that 80386 machines were frequently used
on ethernets attached to T1 circuits back in 1994. They were some
of the earliest commercial Web servers. That was back before companies
started dumping gigabucks into the web. Ironically, most of the E-50
started as Linux and BSD boxes.
> >> 2. It's multi-user
> >>
> >> Linux gains NOTHING over Windows by being multi-user.
> >> All that meens to me is that I have to
> >> remember a password just to be able to get into my own computer.
> >
> >True. Do you have you Windows 9x machine connected directly to DSL
> >and your C drive set to "Share"? Do you realize that anyone can
> >easily get your history log, cookies, and password files and help
> >themselves to your checking account, savings account, brokerage
> >account, and order things using the credit cards you've already
> >used to make previous purchases?
> >
>
> You don't half to share your hard drive on Windos.
No, but it's so easy to send an e-mail or web page that makes them
sharable. Then you "just go shopping".
> >I just finished talking to someone who had his checking account
> >drained of $10,000 by a hacker who made several hundred $22 orders.
> >The attack was caught and the damage was prevented, but the bank
> >is still looking for the perpetrator.
> >
> >What made matters worse was that his wife had died the day before
> >the attack.
> >
I forgot to mention that the victim was my father. When I flew out,
I locked up his web browser. His C drive was shareable (not the
default).
I had to disable all those IE4 features. I shut off ActiveX,
VBScripts, JavaScript, and Trusted Java Applets. My brother is
going to teach him Linux.
> >Users also want their work protected from deliberate or accidental
> >corruption of disclosure by unauthorized users. This is one of
> >the reasons that Windows NT has logins and Windows 9x doesn't.
> >
> >Today, you have 500 million people separated only by a 400 megabit
> >pipe.
>
> And 499,990,000 of them are running Windows.
> UNIX is still in the '70s with 10,000 users,
Ever heard of Linux? There are about 90 million Linux
users world-wide. Linux is growing at 300%/year, and
Linux also has backup from the BSD family.
> most of whom are the same users that were
> using UNIX during its own time.
That's partially true. Many of the Linux users are using BSD flavors
for servers. Many of the Commercial UNIX vendors are leveraging
Linux development. The Linux Distribution.
> >If only 1 in 1 million is a malevolent hacker who makes it
> >to you door, that means that you might only be electronically
> >burglarized 500 times this year. Maybe you'll get lucky and only be
> >hit 5 times this year - how much can you afford to lose?
> >
> >> 3. It's "flexible" (in other words you can turn off the GUI)
> >>
> >> And noboddy cares.
> >> Linux is just as useless without its GUI as Windows is.
> >
> >But look at the $100 "Mail Machines". Turning off the GUI means
> >you can put full PC power into a Palm Pilot, a wristwatch, or
> >a storage appliance.
>
> A Palm Pilot without a GUI would be useless.
But a Palm Pilot is essentially a Character based interface, not much
better than VT100 with Light Pen (curses). Giraffe provides an
alternative to a keyboard, but it's still character by character
entry.
> >And just because I'm not running X11/R6
> >doesn't mean that I don't have GUI access - via Web browsers.
> >
> >The Cobalt Cube is configured via a Web browser interface that
> >completely hides the fact that the box underneath is Linux.
> >
> >> There is NO REASON to turn off the GUI,
> >
> >RAM, MIPS, and GIGs of hard drive require cubic inches and
> >create heat, they also gobble electricity. If I can run
> >my thinkpad for 4 hours without a recharge by running Linux
> >in text mode as opposed to running 2 hours by running Windows
> >in GUI mode, I'll take VI.
> >
> >It's really hard to script GUIs. This means that unless I have
> >a means to script equivalent functions, I have to depend on a human
> >being to execute a "script" of mouse and keyboard sequences.
> >Experience has taught me that a cron job is much more dependable
> >than a 3rd shift operator who sleeps through 1/3 of his shift.
> >
> >> and NO REASON to turn off the desktop,
> >
> >Desktops are wonderful things. They provide a convienient display
> >of some of the most valuable and interesting applications, what's
> >currently running, and means to control the running applications,
> >from a single screenful of icons and windows.
> >
> >Of course, with Windows, you only need a single screen. There just
> >aren't that many applications that get the priviledge of "desktop"
> >presence.
> >
> >Linux has so many different applications available that it's often
> >hard to keep track of all the directories, let alone all of the
> >commands. Linux applications are typically trivial graphical
> >interfaces to scripts. The user enters some parameters via a GUI,
> >presses the "submit" button, and the GUI generates a script and
> >passes it to a program that executes the script. This makes it
> >much easier to enhance the script, enhance the front-end, or
> >automate the repetitive tasks.
> >
> >> and NO REASON to turn off the Window manager.
> >
> >The Window manager is another useful feature. It provides a means
> >to arrange multiple windows on a single desktop.
>
> Windos does this without making the user fule around with Windo
> mannajers.
Correct. You get one window manager, and you expend and enhance
the machine to meet it's requirements.
> >It enables us to
> >focus on the most important functions while other tasks take place
> >in relative obscurity covered by "forground" windows.
> >
> >Linux has numerous window managers. In fact, Linux users quickly
> >found that they really needed more than one window.
>
> ..something that came as no suprise to Windows users.
Actually, most Windows users, because of theiir historical experience
with Windows 3.0 and Windows 3.1 developed the habit of running all
applications in "full screen mode". This is why Microsoft had to
rely on the taskbar. Multiple overlapping windows are still a problem
for Windows 9x with many 3rd party products. Ironically, the biggest
problemm occurr with applications which compete directly with Microsoft
applications.
> >Of course, Linux has other ways to manage a number of background
> >and forground processes. Most of these were originally developed
> >by the BSD folks.
>
> Like ^Z and fg and bg. Still in use today, and UNIX
> still doesn't realise what deckade it is.
Regardless of the decade, new windows require initialization,
consume large quantities of memory, and consume millions of CPU
cycles.
> >We also have emacs. It really depends on whether
> >you are connected directly via an "in-memory-socket" at 100
> >megabytes/second to a 500 Mhz processor or
> >indirectly via a cell-phone that charges 50 cents per megabyte.
> >
> >Even with the window manager off, you can switch between consoles
> >quite easily.
>
> But what's the point of turning a Window manadger off?
MIPS (CPU), Megabytes (RAM), and Gigabytes (Disk). A text-only
machine running basic Linux sells for $99. A full KDE implementation
requires a K6-200, 32 meg of RAM, and sells for about $300. Windows
machines running Windows 2000 require Pentium III 750, 256 meg RAM, and
a 10 gig hard drive and sells for about $2000, not including compilers,
development tools, backup systems.
> >When you are using a server, nobody really cares what the display
> >looks like. In fact, if you're dedicating 70% of the CPU and RAM
> >to video display, the server is probably suffering as a result.
>
> Windows doesn't use that much. It's not like UNIX, you no.
Actually, an active windows display take up about 10% of the server
resources. It actually take MORE than UNIX because the Windows
memory is mapped by Object instead of by function. Windows 2000
has better optimization of grouping (which increases speed by about
20%) but this still doesn't solve the context switching problems
(which is why Win2K still relies on apartment threading instead of
processes).
> >A "Windows Server" is an oxymoron. First, it implies that the
> >server must be maintained through direct interaction with the
> >server's keyboard, mouse, and display screen.
> >
> >> These are all useless features, and Linux gains NOTHING over
> >> Windows for having them.
> >
> >Of course, when you have a report or contract proposal due tomorrow
> >morning at 9:00 A.M. you're in a hotel room, and you need level 3
> >technical assistance you immediately become aware of the difference.
> >
> >With Windows, the help desk operator tells you that you can set up
> >an appointment to come in tomorrow morning at 10 A.M. to have you
> >computer "reengineered" (format the hard drive, reinstall the
standard
> >baseline software, possibly restore a few of your personal files,
and
> >leave you with a half crippled computer sans the application you
needed
> >for your presentation, the report you'd been working on all night,
and
> >the reference notes you'd received from the customer the previous
day.
> >
> >With Windows, the help desk operator connects you to a level 3
support
> >person in a time-zone where it's between 10 and 4. That person asks
> >you to start a shell, su, change your password and then tell him
what
> >the new password (perhaps he'll give you the password).
>
> ...then you get rooted. Nice touch.
But you control the gateway. There are ways to limit the administrator
control. The remote administrator can manage dozens of systems
remotely. The closest you get with Windows is PC Anywhere or SMS.
> >
> >> 5. "X" Windows works over a network.
> >>
> >> Another feature that nobody ever uses.
> >
> >If everything works perfectly, the machine is working perfectly,
> >and no one has any problems, you're correct.
> >
> >If only Mr. Murphy hadn't come up with that nasty law. Whatever
> >can go wrong will, and at the worst possible time.
> >
> >Have you ever noticed that the machine runs perfectly when you're
> >playing Duke Nukem, but when you're an hour from making your pitch
> >to a client considering a $20 million purchase, your laptop decides
> >to go berzerk? (you've never made a $20 million pitch before?).
> >
> >> This doesn't make "X" Windows more useful to most users.
> >
> >Until they need help, you're right. Windows users are used to the
> >stock answers. Restart the application, Reboot the system, reload
> >the application, reload the system, reengineer the system.
> >
> >Linux users actually ask for help and get it. They can go to a
> >chat room, newsgroup, search area, or website, but when all else
> >fails, they can give a trusted service person temporary access via
> >X11.
> >
> >Personally, I'm a lazy sucker. When I have servers in upstate New
York,
> >central Pennsylvania, and Jacksonville Florida, I don't like having
> >to fly for 5 hours so that I can spend 30 minutes pushing the right
> >buttons to get the desired result and then spending 5 hours flying
> >back. My clients really hate paying for 10 hours of travel and 2
hours
> >of productive time in a single day. When I'm running Linux and the
> >server is running UNIX, I can avoid the travel entirely.
> >
> >> Windows still wins.
> >
> >... the masturbation contest.
> >
> >That's rude,
No, it's accurate. Microsoft designed Windows to run as a single
user system directly controlled by the console. Microsoft had a
contract with Novell to keep NT out of the server market. When
NT 3.5 failed as a workstation, Microsoft tried to pass it off as
a File and Print server.
When Linux and SAMBA started displacing the need for Multiple servers,
Microsoft tried to pass NT off as a multifunction server.
And with Linux and UNIX functioning as a multifunction application
server, Microsoft has announced that it will eventually provide
a "Next Generation" multifunction application server.
The press is still ignoring the fact that Linux and UNIX have
had these features for years while Microsoft is announcing this
function as a future product.
> > > but putting it simply, Windows wins -
> > by your criteria,
> >based on the assumption that you are the only person who knows or
> >cares whether the machine is working, whether or not the machine is
> >safe. The assumption is that you never connect to the internet, you
> >never store sensitive information on your computer, and the machine
> >is locked in a location where you are the only one who has physical
> >access to the machine.
>
> Windows can be on a fucking nettwork without getting hacked.
Actually, this is true with Windows 2000, if you disable most of
the IE5 features, most of the Outlook features, and most of the
Messenger features, enable the Kerberos authentication package,
and disable all shares, AND you lock all the paths, you can
just barely get a minimum security level.
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 90 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 06:58:52 GMT
On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 01:06:11 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:49:58 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >"Mark S. Bilk" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >> MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>> >communis (perestroika means "restructuring"...and that is exactly
>> >what they did...the RESTRUCTURED COMMUNISM), wherein they pass out
>> >all of the economic goodies to a few party insiders (recall the
>>
>> ...nah, that has been going on since at least the beginning
>> of the postwar period.
>
>Have you been there?
>
>Have you talked with the people?
One of my inlaws was an accountant in Belarus for ~ 40 years
and worked in both manufacturing and government.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 00:02:16 -0700
Bryant Brandon wrote:
>
> The following is based entirely on memory. If anything's incorrect,
> sorry.
> Every file on the harddrive has a unique number the filesystem uses
> to organize its directory structure. When a file is created, it is
> given a unique number that will not be shared as long as the file exists.
Actually, it will never be shared by any file ever, even after that file
is deleted, until the drive is reformatted.
> An alias contains a pathname, this number, and some other stuff I
> can't exactly remember. When resolving an alias, the system first uses
> the pathname. If it finds a match, then, regardless of the file ID of
> the file in that location, it will open, and the alias will be updated
> with teh new file ID.
No, it first uses the File ID, as you can verify yourself with two files
and an alias.
> (if its on a writable volume) If that fails, then
> the file ID is referenced and then the pathname in the alias is updated
> to point to the new location.
> So, if the pathname is valid, it is used, if it is not valid, the
> file ID is used. If that fails, other stuff happens, but I forget.
Excercise: backup your hard drive, reformat it, and then restore it from
the backup, and see what cool stuff the aliases point to. Occasionally,
they will point to random files.
I just did this today, in fact, and Internet Explorer began saving
downloaded files in one of the myriad data folders for my application.
It was sort of weird. I suspect that Internet Config stores a minimal
alias instead of a full one, which would cause the problem.
This was the only alias I've found that didn't work. For the others,
Alias Manager had no trouble.
-Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Processing data is bad!
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 07:02:04 GMT
On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 02:23:08 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 20:23:04 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Woofbert wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Aaron Kulkis wrote:
[deletia]
>> >THEY are the ones who go around calling everyone else Nazis.
>> >And THEY are the ones who propound that the symbolism of an
>> >act is more important than the act itself.
>>
>> The VW Beetle is hardly the symbol of the Nazi regime that you
>> think it is. If it were, then the Germans themselves would be
>> uptight about it.
>>
>> Whereas, the Stars & Bars is indeed (or was) the official symbol
>> of the Confederacy.
>>
>> >
>> >They can't have it both ways.
>> >
>> >If liberal Democrats they're gonna get all bent out of shape about
>> >Confederate flags flying over capitols (which the SAME *DEMOCRAT*
>> >PARTY put there in the first place), then they had better be
>> >prepared to get the same "guilt by symbolism" shoved down
>> >their throats as well.
>>
>> Are you going to start ranting about the Saturn V next?
>>
>
>Of course not.
>
>Just noting that those who use symbolism at every turn (i.e. radical
>leftists) should be careful of what symbols they indulge in themselves.
A minor bit of subsidized technology is NOT a 'symbol'.
>
>Considering how the hippy-dippy leftists are in love with Volkwagen
>Beetles, I can, by their own brand of logic, call them a bunch of
>Hitler-loving Nazis.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
