Linux-Advocacy Digest #358, Volume #27 Mon, 26 Jun 00 23:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: If Linux is desktop ready ... (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: LILO problems -- Any suggestions? (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Processing data is bad! (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Processing data is bad! (Aaron Kulkis)
Henry Blaskowski weasels out. (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ? (Bones)
Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ? (Bones)
Re: Linux is so stable... (Bones)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ? (Leslie Mikesell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: If Linux is desktop ready ...
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:55:26 -0400
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> TimL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Don't know, why don't you tell us?
>
> Pedro won't so I will!
>
> > Pedro Iglesias wrote:
> >
> > > ... then tell me why the Hell a home
> > > user should to care about compiling
> > > sources ? If he/she gets binaries, what
> > > the Hell open source is useful to ?
>
> Let's say you are buying an older used car. Let's say a 1965 corvette.
> You could care less about being a mechanic, you don't care about
> that chilton's manual in the trunk, but the guy who sold you the car
> told you to keep it in the trunk in case you even needed repairs.
>
> When you've driven it for about 50,000 miles, you bring it into the
> mechanic you've come to know and trust for 15 years. You ask if he
> can fix your car, give it a tune-up, and make some other minor
> repairs. He hesitates, but you tell him you have the chilton's manual
> in the trunk. He pulls it out and smiles and says "yes, I can get 'er
> runnin' good as new". About 3 days later, you get a nice call telling
> you your car is ready. You pay a modest fee for parts and labor and
> you are back on the road for another 50,000 to 100,000 miles.
>
> The driver of the car doesn't need to know anything about mechanics,
> but he needs to know a good mechanic. The Mechanic however, needs
> a great deal more information about the machine than the driver needs.
> And if the mechanic can't get the right parts, he might have to go to
> a machinist, who needs even a higher level of detail.
>
> > > If he/she learns the ./configure;make;make install
> > > procedure, why the Hell
> > > should he/she know that awk 1.0.4
> > > prevents gtk from compiling correctly ?
>
> This is about like the guy who can do his own oil changes and can
> change his spark plugs wanting to know why the timing chain is
> important.
>
> Normally, a casual user (a "Driver") needs to know very little about
> Linux internals. He will purchase a distribution, with matched
> applications and functions.
>
> A "hot rodder" might want to download all the latest and greatest
> goodies the minute they show up on the net, even if they are in "alpha"
> state. But these hard core "hot rodders" also know that they may
> need to make some adjustments, and that the latest version of GTK may
> require the latest version of awk. Normally, a real hot-rodder would
> just get the latest and greatest of everything.
>
> Linux distributors try to release new distributions at least once
> every 6 months, and most of the security patches are configured
> to be implemented with minimal impact on a "Stock" Linux distribution.
>
> Are there drivers who might get in over their heads (pulling all
> the ignition wires and forgetting which order to plug them back in)?
> Absolutely. That's why it's nice to have a mechanic who makes house
> calls rather than being totally dependent on the manufacturer who will
> tell you to "Get rid of that junker and buy a brand new model".
>
> It's very much like Web Site creation and administration. The webmaster
> is resonsible for the legal, ethical, artistic, and technical issues
> related to the site. The composition artists manage the artistic
> layout, the technicians tweak for performance, and the architect
> manages to interface to the rest of the enterprise. Not everyone
> who publishes a home page needs all of these functions, because the
> hosting servises provides all of this under a "blanket flat
> monthly rate". And even though millions of Internet users use the
> 15 million UNIX sites on the internet every day via their web servers,
> e-mail packages, and chat software, most Windows users aren't even
> aware that UNIX is doing 90% of their most important functions.
As a friend of mine says: "All of the REAL work is done on Unix."
>
> --
> 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.
--
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]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: LILO problems -- Any suggestions?
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:00:03 -0400
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" wrote:
>
> In article <8j66u7$9ps$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have recently wasted a weekend trying to grapple with a problem
> > caused by:
> >
> > 1. Microsoft WindowsNT and a multi-os environment. I'll never do this
> > again. Fucking pain in the ass.
> >
> > 2. LILO (RedHat installer).
> >
> > 3. A bad hard drive.
> >
> > Disk #1 is on SCSI ID 0. On that disk, I had installed WindowsNT 4.0 /
> > SP6. Disk #2 is on SCSI ID 1 (on channel B). There I had installed
> > Linux (RedHat 6.1). I **SWEAR** the RedHat installer DID NOT ASK ME if
> > I wanted LILO installed. I really didn't want it installed. But it's
> > there....
> >
> > LILO, of course, appears to be installed on disk #1 (SCSI 0).
> >
> > However, disk #2 is going bad. I first noticed it when in WindowsNT
> > with it failing to write to the master file table on the drive.
>
> Check VERY CAREFULLY to make sure everything is properly terminated.
> Often a SCSI drive will appear to go south when the terminators are
> either enabled on the wrong drive, enabled on the card, or enabled on
> too many devices.
>
> The bad news is that SCSI thinks the sector is bad, marks it as a bad
> sector and you think your hard drive has gone south for the winter.
>
> > On reboot, the bios sometimes could not see disk #2. When this would
> > happen, and when disk #1 would attempt to boot, LILO would load part
> > way and then freeze. It literally would print to the screen:
> >
> > LI
>
> Same problem.
>
> > and then I could not boot either LInux (drive is unavailable, of
> > course) nor NT since I couldn't tell LILO to continue with the default
> > disk and partition, even though that disk (SCSI 0, if you recall) is
> > okay.
>
> Boot NT using the emergency boot disk, and set up a boot alternative
> that lets you boot the second drive. You'll still be calling LILO,
> but you won't care.
>
> > How does one get around this? I know, I know, I know: format /mbr or
> > uninstall LILO with dd if=/boot/boot.0300 (or whatever) when I am in
> > Linux. Problem: Can't run an OS to do that!! I'm forced to reinstall
> an
> > OS on another partition on another drive, even though my boot drive is
> > fine. When drive #2 DOES appear on the SCSI chain (yes, it's flaky), I
> > can't boot Linux. Kernel pannic trying to read past end of device...
>
> You might want to consider setting up a boot partition on the
> first drive. Typically, you can set up / on the main drive, then
> create partitions for /usr, /var and /home on the second drive.
> putting the swap on the first drive will also improve overall
> performance.
I normally get a small cheap drive and put swap and /tmp on this drive.
That way, I offload all of the head movements associated with /tmp
and swapspace onto this drive (and more importantly OFF OF THE
root drive drive ( / ) which has the OS.
(since this also eliminates a lot of "interleaved" r/w to different
partitions (/ and /tmp and swapspace), it further extends the life
of BOTH drives.)
<snip happens>
--
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: Processing data is bad!
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:01:29 -0400
"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ever notice how the little VW Beetle NAZI-MOBILE is the cherished
> > posession of so many hippy-dippy liberals?
>
> Oh dear. Thread's over. Move Along Now.
>
Don must be one of those Nazi-loving hippy-dippy liberals.
--
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: Processing data is bad!
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:02:47 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:26:10 -0400, Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 00:21:46 -0400, "Colin R. Day"
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>What, a text file whose name doesn't end in "*.txt"? You'll
> >>confuse him, Jedi.
> >
> >Make a little list of all your favorite file extensions.
>
> Some text files don't have any extensions at all.
Imagine that!
--
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]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Henry Blaskowski weasels out.
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:11:14 -0400
Leslie Mikesell wrote:
>
> In article <8j0f34$1bmu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Henry Blaskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Contract law allows judges to declare contracts, null and void, if they
> >> are signed under duress. And the courts, unlike you, do not limit
> >> the definition of duress to physical violence.
> >
> >There was no duress in this case, there was just an offer of a deal
> >which PC vendors accepted happily.
>
> Which of the vendor depositions from the trial would you
> consider best shows this attitude?
Notice that after FOUR DAYS, Henry Blaskowsky has failed to
submit the name of even one vendor.
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
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]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:07:42 -0400
Darren Winsper wrote:
>
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:25:52 GMT, MK
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 25 Jun 2000 15:48:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > (Darren Winsper) wrote:
> >
> > >On 23 Jun 2000 18:21:08 GMT, Henry Blaskowski
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> If I want to sell certain
> > >> unapproved pharmaceuticals, that is nobody's business but mine
> > >> and the person I made the agreement with.
> > >
> > >Not always. Does the term passive smoking mean anything to you?
> >
> > Do the terms "negative externality" and "fallacy of composition"
> > mean anything to you?
>
> The problem is things always have external effects. A lot of
> "unapproved pharmaceuticals" are so addictive that they could cause
> people to turn violent and/or to theft/robbery to get money for those
> "unapproved pharmaceuticals". This will affect other people.
>
Which is why, if the drug laws made any sense... selling marijuana
would be legal, and selling drinkable alcohol would be illegal
(marijuana makes lowlifes too listless to go out and commit crimes)
> --
> Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
> Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
> DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
> This message was typed before a live studio audience.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bones)
Subject: Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 02:09:00 GMT
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[snipped: about printing 2MB PNG file and Linux thrasing about]
>> ...and I did the same thing, except with at 4M PNG and Linux didn't
>> so much as burp...
> Well bully for you. On my system I saw a definate slow down.
That's understandable if you don't have enough physical memory to accomodate
the image after it is decompressed. I think its safe to assume that the
image would occupy _at least_ twice that size as a bitmap (probably a damn
conservative estimate). Plus its being scrutinized by something like
Ghostscript, which will probably grab a few processes (more memory + power
required) to prepare the image for printing.
The question is, was Linux really brought to its knees, or did you wait
only, like, 30 seconds before going into a panic? I have an old 386sx which
I run Slack 3.9 on. I used to compile stuff on this 4MB machine which took
_days_ to finish. It thrashed for hours on end, but it never choked, and the
binaries it produced were fine.
[snip]
> tried to start up a console prompt to try to kill the process that was
> behaving badly, this is not evidence of printing bringing the system to
> its knees?
Hmmm... I have yet to see one of my Linux boxes go into a death-thrash. I
can't say the same for Win95/98, although I can say that NT4 and 2000
generally recover after a while.
----
Bones
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bones)
Subject: Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 02:09:01 GMT
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin wrote:
> My machine has 128MBytes of RAM and 256MByte swap partition.
Whoop... Guess we can eliminate the possibility of a RAM shortage.
----
Bones
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bones)
Subject: Re: Linux is so stable...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 02:09:02 GMT
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in
>> <8hk1qc$1f52$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> For linux-linux sharing, at least where the users are equivalent I'd
>> always choose NFS over samba. It is designed to survive reboots on either
>> side. I don't think the smbfs code is as well tested.
> I'm using Samba as my other boot system is Windows. I did consider
> installing NFS as well as Samba but then I thought Samba would be up to the
> job. Now you tell me smbfs is not as well tested... 8)
Take a look at some of the docs from the people who produce the Samba server
software. The 'smbfs' module isn't maintained by them, and they stress that
they can't ensure its reliable operation. This applies only to Linux
accessing a Windows share though.
----
Bones
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:15:12 -0400
MK wrote:
>
> On 23 Jun 2000 20:13:20 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
>
> >>No, because I never agreed to that. The vendors, on the other hand,
> >>agreed to accept the deep discounts in exchange for certain conditions.
> >
> >(a) I still object to your use of the word "discount". It is fraud. What
> > Microsoft were doing boils down to threatening punitive price penalties
> > against those who didn't bend over for them.
>
> IOW, if the business says "we'll give you price $50 under such conditions
> and $100 under other conditions" is fraud and the same business saying
> "we'll give you price $100 under such conditions and $50 under other
> conditions" is discount.
>
> Don't look now, but you have taken position that is lunatic and totally
> stupid: I'd like to see how you weasel out of thesis that the discount
> MS gives is fraud and 100% discount that Be gives is not fraud.
>
> If I were MS, I would use the same DOJ and the same lawyers to sue Sun, Apple
> and Be and watch them weasel why the rules apply to MS and do not apply to
> them -- "the power to raise prices in relevant market above competitive level
> [I guess the court has direct line to God who tells the judge what is the
> _real_ competitive price] without incurring significant [sic] losses for
> reasonably long [sic] period of time".
>
These "discounts" were based PURELY on whether the OEM's would
collaborate in Obstruction of Trade. Microsoft knew from square one
that this was illegal, otherwise, they wouldn't have written such
strict Non-disclosure Agreements ("The company may not communicate with
law enforcement agents without the presence of Microsoft counsel").
> MK
>
> ---
>
> Involuntary redistribution is theft in coating of hypocrisy.
--
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]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:16:27 -0400
MK wrote:
>
> On 25 Jun 2000 00:02:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) wrote:
>
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>IOW, if the business says "we'll give you price $50 under such conditions
> >>and $100 under other conditions" is fraud and the same business saying
> >>"we'll give you price $100 under such conditions and $50 under other
> >>conditions" is discount.
>
> > Grow up. Look at the *kinds* of discounts given.
>
> Imbecile.
Why don't you just admit that you're a fucking moron who really
doesn't know any of the SPECIFICS of the Microsoft case, because
you have not heard ANY of the complaints of the vendors, and how
Microsoft had them hamstringed into being accomplices in Obstruction
of Trade.
>
> MK
>
> ---
>
> Involuntary redistribution is theft in coating of hypocrisy.
--
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]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:18:13 -0400
The Tibetan Traveller wrote:
>
> Henry Blaskowski wrote:
> >
> > In talk.politics.libertarian The Tibetan Traveller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> Which is why I think the judge in this case should be jailed for
> > >> crimes against freedom of contract.
> >
> > > I understand your postion that there should be no anti-trust law. I
> > > don't understand why you insist on demonizing the judge for upholding a
> > > law passed by congress, signed by the president, and upheld by the
> > > supreme court. If you want to argue that the law should be repelled,
> > > fine. Argue that position. If you want to argue that the judge made
> > > a mistake in interpetting or applying the law, fine! Argue that
> > > position. But it is silly to argue that the judge is immoral for
> > > finding Microsoft guilty because you disagree with the law.
> >
> > The judge should have recognized the case is immoral and thrown
> > it out immediately.
>
> On what grounds? That Mr. Blaskowski thinks it is immoral? The Supreme
> Court has already ruled that it is constitutional. Are you saying that
> he should ignore the constitution and base his rulings on your opinions
> instead of the Supreme Courts?
>
> >
> > >> Because if he can interfere
> > >> in a voluntary consensual contract of two business,
> >
> > > Contract law allows judges to declare contracts, null and void, if they
> > > are signed under duress. And the courts, unlike you, do not limit
> > > the definition of duress to physical violence.
> >
> > There was no duress in this case, there was just an offer of a deal
> > which PC vendors accepted happily.
>
> Happily??? Exactly where do you get the impression that they "happily"
> accepted the terms. The documents in the Caldera case say that at least
> one OEM was told that if they shipped any computers with DR-DOS, they
> would have to buy ALL Mircosoft products retail. The OEM 'accepted' the
> offer. I don't think he was 'happy' about his choices.
Apparently, the concept of Obstruction of Trade and Racketeering
are toooooooooooo complex for Henry the Simple-Minded.
>
> >
> > >> morally this
> > >> is no different than his right for me and you to agree to split
> > >> dinner, even if one of us ordered a more expensive entree. It
> > >> is the same issue, the same morality.
> >
> > > This is a gross oversimplification of a complex issue. On the moral
> > > scale, I think it would be closer to your boss telling you that if
> > > you didn't buy him dinner every night, you will be fired.
> >
> > No, because I never agreed to that. The vendors, on the other hand,
> > agreed to accept the deep discounts in exchange for certain conditions.
>
> It doesn't matter whether you initially accepted the jobs on those
> terms. He is putting forth a new offer. Unless you have a signed
> contract, your employment is at-will giving him the legal and moral
> right, in your opinion, to change the terms of the offer any time he
> wants to.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
Date: 26 Jun 2000 21:14:34 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
>> My machine has 128MBytes of RAM and 256MByte swap partition.
>
>
>Whoop... Guess we can eliminate the possibility of a RAM shortage.
Might be worth looking a 'dmesg' to make sure the kernel detected
the full amount. Some bios's keep even the newer kernels from
automatically detecting more than 64M.
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
******************************
