Linux-Advocacy Digest #577, Volume #27 Mon, 10 Jul 00 21:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Mike Stump)
Re: Linux code going down hill (Gary Hallock)
Re: Linux is just plain awful (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Why use Linux? (DeAnn Iwan)
Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Rick)
Re: M-systems DiskOnChip Linux Drivers conflict with GPL? (Rick Lehrbaum)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451737 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451737 (tinman)
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Where did all my windows go? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Mike Stump)
Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux (Aaron Kulkis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:00:24 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Actually ... there can be monetary cost involved in the purchase of GPL
>>> licensed code; it just so happens that most of it is free of cost.
>> [ rubbing eyes] Wait a minute, did you just say that most of the GPLed
>> software is free? That's my line, dammit, stick to your own side.
>> Your side was that it wasn't free, and that calling it free was
>> dishonest and a lie, remember now.
>
>(Except that Mr Stump has forgotten that he's trying to argue that
>GPL software isn't *just* free of cost ['free beer'] -- it's free as
>in 'free speech' and 'free from slavery', which are not what the GPL
>provides.)
No, you don't understand my point yet. I am arguing that there isn't
just one definition of free, and that different people may use
different definitions of the term free, in free software, and further
that even the same person may in fact use different definitions of the
term free in free software in different contexts.
I can say that GPLed software isn't free in a context, and you might
even be inclined to share my opinion with me. For example, I think
John might share my opinion that says that the GPL isn't free if I
were speaking to a group of proprietary addon software developers. In
another I might say that it is in fact free.
I am not trying to argue that all the particular notions of free that
I listed do apply, but rather that a reasonable person might claim
that some of them do apply and that it isn't a lie to say that they do
apply, and that a person need not be dishonest for having a value
judgement that causes them to adopt a particular definition.
You might bemore successful at debating my point, if you take the time
to understand it.
Do you agree that the term 1free10 can apply to GPLed software? Do
you agree that one can call it 1free10 software without lying, or
being dishonest?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 19:15:33 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux code going down hill
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> I don't believe AIX has been ported to the AS/400, has it?
> [I might be uninformed...who knows]
>
No, I don't think AIX has been ported to AS/400, but you could run Linux.
Actually, I'm not sure what the current status of Linux is for AS/400, but
IBM has committed to get it working.
Gary
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is just plain awful
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 19:17:07 -0400
Matthias Warkus wrote:
>
> It was the Fri, 07 Jul 2000 18:01:42 -0400...
> ...and Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Uwe B�hme wrote:
> > >
> > > Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Uwe B�hme wrote:
> > > [snipped the fullquote]
> > > >> Also certifications from private
> > > >> companies like RH or SuSE can not be the final solution.
> > >
> > > > Uh oh.. a German talking about a Final Solution....
> > > > :-)
> > > Sorry, shouldn't have done that. As you clearly pointed out,
> >
> > It's a JOKE man..
> > that's what the smiley face :-) is for.
>
> This is nothing to joke about.
I wasn't joking about Hitler's maniac plans...
I was joking about someone accidentally making a double-entendre.
>
> mawa
> --
> The last person that quit or was fired will be the held responsible
> for everything that goes wrong -- until the next person quits or is
> fired.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
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.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (DeAnn Iwan)
Subject: Re: Why use Linux?
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:53:10 GMT
On 10 Jul 2000 16:38:12 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 15:40:17 GMT, Paul E. Larson wrote:
>
>>To bad you and many others filto realize that uptime counts are virtually
>>meaningless! The main machine at my place of employment has a MAXIMUM up time
>>of 7 days. Every 7 days we IPL the machine regardless of anything. What does
>>that fact tell you?
>
>One of the following:
>(a) The admins enjoy rebooting for the hell of it
>(b) The machine requires regular reboots
>
>Take your pick.
>
>--
or,
(c) to test out the fall-over to the backup systems?
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 16:22:23 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
We have have become quit spoiled with these high speed modems. I have
become so acustomed to of quoting serial spped in kilobauds, that I really
goofed in may last message.
I meant to say 9600 baud not 9600 K and 2400 baud not 2400 K baud. Now a
9,600,000 baud async acustic modem would really be a sweet thing to
have! --- If you could get a reliable connection to someone who was also
using one at that speed.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I remember using some software MNP 5 program to get extra baud. At the
> time I was running a BBS using USR Courier modems that screamed with
> the HST protocal at 14.4k.
>
> I do remember acoustic couplers at 300 baud though and for a green
> screen they were usable.
>
> We have all become quite spoiled :)
> DP
>
>
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:51:05 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >What about usng a 300 baud modem to connect a dumb terminal with a
timeshare
> >system? -- Or worse than that, using a 150 baud link between a teletype
and
> >the cpu using the teletype's paper punch tape to as your primary data
> >storage device?
> >
> >When I first got a 14.4K modem it felt sooo nice, but you were lucky to
get
> >a 9600K connection at that time. More often than not the other computers
> >were limited to 2400 Kbaud.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who was that wo was scanning my ports--could it be Simon?
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 16:44:23 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:34:20 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yikes I am never on for that long. Can't happen with the wife and tree
> kids all sharing the dialup. As soon as I get the DSL line it will be
> different, but for now I hop on and off as needed. I have flat fee
> calling so it doesn't matter.
Please don't interpret it as me sitting infront of the workstation for all
that time. Besides the "normal" interactive on-line activities, there are
batch data transfers that run when the link would otherwise be idle. If
there is a need to download something but it is no needed right then and
there it can scheduled to download during "off hours".
> I don't think I have ever been on for that long in my entire life.
> First off I live on the ocean with above ground phone lines which are
> noisy and unreliable.
>
> Secondly Earthlink disconnects unless traffic is going on.
>
> Third I have a timeout on the dialer for 1 hour in case I forget, or
> pass out, whichever comes first :)
Same this here, first the ISP will disconnect if they determine the line has
been idle too long. My ppp daemon will do the same if it determine the line
is idle. My pppd is more picky here than the ISP, so if the line is idle my
end will disconnect first. Then just in case the ISP's and my software fail
to so disconnect, my modem is configured to disconnect on its own if it
determine the line to be idle. The timeout on the modem is a little longer
then the software so the pppd has the posibility to do the job neatly. The
modem will do it only if the software has some how failed.
> At this point I am getting a little nervous and have set ZoneAlarm for
> paranoid settings.
Good idea, see if you notice anything strange.
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:11:36 -0400
void wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:30:48 GMT, Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >I've already admitted that Windows is better in buzzword compliance. But
> >as soon as you have a _real_ argument (with evidence to support it),
> >feel free to post it.
>
> Preemptive multitasking is more than just a buzz-phrase -- it's an
> important part of the architecture of anything claiming to be a real OS.
> There's a good reason why it's one of the major marketing points for
> MOSX.
>
> --
> Ben
>
> 220 go.ahead.make.my.day ESMTP Postfix
Hmmm.. then DOS was not (is not) a real OS, huh? in order to be a REAL
OS you have to have pre-emtive multitasking huh?, Well, if I dont have a
REAL OS on my mac, whats controlling it?
--
Rick
To reply by email remove the obvious from my address.
------------------------------
From: Rick Lehrbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: M-systems DiskOnChip Linux Drivers conflict with GPL?
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:10:02 -0700
the answer to that "sticky" question is here:
Using M-Systems' DiskOnChip driver without violating GPL
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS8731535807.html
Richard Chapman wrote:
>
> I hope someone can clarify this for me. Suppose I want to sell
> a box with Linux and and M-systems DiskOnChip flash chip on it.
> Suppose I want to use M-systems Linux drivers in that product.
>
> Now, M-systems doesn't provide the full source code for their
> Linux drivers, only a .o file for a big chunk of it. Now, I understand
> that there is the "Linus exception" to GPL that says that device
> drivers that are dynamically loadable as modules can be distributed
> with Linux without the source code without violating the license
> agreement for Linux. However, the M-systems driver appears not
> to be a module, but statically built into the kernel. So, my question is,
> are they in violation of the Linux or GPL license agreements?
>
> If the answer to that is no, I perceive that I am not violating any
> license agreements: M-systems, Linux's, or GPL, if I sell my box
> described above. Correct?
>
> Thanks,
> Richard Chapman
> Associate Professor
> Computer Science and Software Engineering
> Auburn University
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451737
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 00:08:54 GMT
Here's today's Tinman digest:
1> What alleged "evidence"?
Suffering from more reading comprehension problems?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tinman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451737
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:10:03 -0400
In article <qAta5.27754$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Here's today's Tinman digest:
>
> 1> What alleged "evidence"?
>
> Suffering from more reading comprehension problems?
Hardly. What's your excuse?
--
______
tinman
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:14:43 GMT
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:34:44 +0200, Mig wrote:
>Non techies not knowing much about software design is the point. Why should
>they? The problem is in user interface design and consistency of that
If they're UI experts then that's one thing. But Joe user doesn't know much
more about UI design than Joe developer. A lot of the Joe-users say "make it
more like Windows", because that's what they're used to, but it isn't always
good design.
>I find it pretty amazing that you do not believe that end-users should
>have influence on software design.
Excuse me ? I said that Joe-users shouldn't have veto power. Not that they
shouldn't "have influence".
>Its even good practice to involve end-users in analyses and design of
>applications..
I believe KDE and GNOME both already do this.
>average people to use Linux/KDE/Gnome/whatever then they have to be heard
>if you want to have succes.
I agree they should be heard, I don't agree that they should have veto power.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go?
Date: 11 Jul 2000 00:17:01 GMT
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:26:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>this is in complete agreement with peter!
No it is not. PEter claims that Linux < Windows, period. I do not. Therefore
I am not in complete agreement with Peter, and you haven't shown that I am.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 00:25:22 GMT
On 10 Jul 2000 22:57:49 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>: On 8 Jul 2000 04:25:04 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>: >What I liked was that he recognized that there were (at least) two
>: >aesthetics involved. The first piece was a little too sure of right and
>: >wrong.
>
>: The two don't have to be mutually exclusive. NeXTstep
>: demonstrated that a LONG time ago. Now guess what the
>: next MacOS will be (bastardized NeXTstep).
>
>When I was thinking of aesthetics I wasn't thinking about simple
>ease-of-use. Mac people like a unified GUI, for one thing. UNIX people
>like choice. Things like that seem hard to combine.
As long as the application developer is able to run amok this
sort of 'aesthetic' is rather an illusion. It's rather similar
to the Mac's PMT which depends on all developers playing nice
in order for the feature in question to be fully realized.
>
>I do think a certain degree of ease-of-use can be created for UNIX
>systems. NeXT certainly did much to prove that. On the other hand, I
>think that a lot of casual users might be better served by something a
>little simpler than any of the traditional personal computers (*NIX, Win*,
>Mac included).
Applications in general have tended to move towards unecessary
features and unecessary complexity rather related to the fact
that one and only one application tends to be able to fully
comprehend it's own proprietary data encoding. (Granny and
Joe Sixpack shouldn't have to tolerate the like of Word Perfect
or MSWord).
--
The only motivation to treat a work derived from Free Software
as your sole personal property is to place some sort of market
barrier in front of your customers and to try and trap them.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 00:27:42 GMT
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 19:07:32 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:34:44 +0200, Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 9 Jul 2000 23:16:28 +0200, Mig wrote:
>> >> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> >> >heard. And both groups are technical oriented people.
[deletia]
>>
>> IOW: one size does NOT fit all.
>>
>> The ideal situation is an end user that has become enlightened
>> and knows what they want and is capable of expressing it in
>> reasonable engineering terms.
>
>Don't hold your breath.
...this is typically how good applications rise from the mire.
[deletia]
Artist or Musician turned Geek is not such an extraordinary thing.
(or vice versa)
--
The only motivation to treat a work derived from Free Software
as your sole personal property is to place some sort of market
barrier in front of your customers and to try and trap them.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 00:28:59 GMT
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:13:18 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:16:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 07 Jul 2000 22:02:42 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On Sat, 08 Jul 2000 00:19:50 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 07 Jul 2000 18:44:17 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>On Fri, 07 Jul 2000 23:26:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>when said peripheral is newish and uses a common, well-supported interface?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is not at all established here actually.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> An SBLive uses a common, well-supported interface but you don't
>>>>>> expect it to work in a G4 do you?
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, not THIS month, but I hold out hope for one of the next few
>>>>>months.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You would always try it under Yellow Dog... <snicker>
>>>
>>>Why? So I can run Linux on overpriced Mac hardware, rather than
>>>running the same thing (with much better support) on faster, cheaper
>>>Intel hardware?
>>
>> Actually, PPC is relatively well supported as a Linux platform.
>
>But not as good as Intel.
Considering that there simply isn't that much pre-compiled
cruft holding back the platform in this respect at this
point in time that statement isn't as significant as a
Win x86 vs MacOS PPC comparison.
--
The only motivation to treat a work derived from Free Software
as your sole personal property is to place some sort of market
barrier in front of your customers and to try and trap them.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 00:15:35 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>So you would solve the "problem" of the market deciding that the 5%
>improvement in the software is more important than source code
>availability by legislating a different method.
You seem to have the mistaken impression that some country passed a
law that mandated the use the GPL for all software. If a country so
did, I must confess, I missed it. Anyway, I do not believe that.
>You, sir, are a communist. There's no other way to describe this overt
>overthrow of the free marketplace.
Contrary, I am a free marketeer. The market should be so free as to
allow the existance of GPLed code. People should be so free that they
are allowed the opportunity to write GPLed software, if they want, and
so free as to use it, if they want.
>I don't suppose that it occurred to you that someone else might pick
>up the freely available version and put the same improvements into
>it, therby picking up where the original developer left off?
They might, prove they will. Unless you can prove they will, you have
not addressed my point. My point was that it is possible that
software is harmed.
It is interesting that you didn't refute, discuss, comment on my
point, but rather just called me names, why is that? Is your side so
weak that you cannot address my point? If you had a point, I did in
fact miss the subtle of it... If I did, I am sorry.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.best,alt.linux.sucks,be.comp.os.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.fan.bill-gates
Subject: Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:28:14 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >Lincoln Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >Anyway, what does this program do? Are you sure that it's made by
> >Microsoft rather than a clone of a Microsoft product? Is it as
> >(un)reliable as Microsoft software usually is?
>
> The original posting of this thread appeared to me to be an obvious joke by
> CyberSurfer. So I played the straightman by correct the joke version of the
> equation and that got the whole ball rolling. The software attached to the
> original posting is the shell script listed below.
>
> clear
> echo " --------------------------------------------------------------"
> echo "| Microsoft NFS Transferspeed Tool (MNTT) |"
> echo "| |"
> echo "| shell script to test NFS speed |"
> echo "| Use rsize & wsize to optmimize your speed |"
> echo "| |"
> echo "| |"
> echo "| This software is GPL licensed |"
> echo "| |"
> echo "|--------------------------------------------------------------|"
> echo "| (c) Microsoft 2000. You may not use, read or copy this file! |"
> echo " --------------------------------------------------------------"
> echo
> echo "Enter remote directory to test your netspeed with"; read path
> echo "Enter the filename to copy"; read file
> echo "Enter local directory to copy this file [tmp]"; read path2
>
> echo
> clear
> echo " --------------------------------------------------------------"
> echo "| Microsoft NFS Transferspeed Tool (MNTT) |"
> echo "| |"
> echo "| shell script to test NFS speed |"
> echo "| Use rsize & wsize to optmimize your speed |"
> echo "| |"
> echo "| |"
> echo "| This software is GPL licensed |"
> echo "| |"
> echo "|--------------------------------------------------------------|"
> echo "| (c) Microsoft 2000. You may not use, read or copy this file! |"
> echo " --------------------------------------------------------------"
>
> echo "|# start : `date -I +%M:%S:%MS`
> |"
> echo "---------------------------------------------------------------|"
> echo "|# copying.... |"
> cp -p -v $path/$file $path2
> echo "---------------------------------------------------------------|"
>
> echo "|# stop : `date -I +%M:%S:%MS`
> |"
> echo " --------------------------------------------------------------"
> exit
I note that the above code has several qualities required to
make a successful forgery of Microsoft software:
A) Majority of the user interface overhead is devoted to glorifying
Microsoft, as opposed to I/O for achieving the desired task.
B) It has two bugs:
1) fails to specify a shell. (clear command is not universal)
2) Doesn't check to see if the remote file is actually NFS.
C) Exhortation to user to never look at the code.
However, I note the following tell-tale signs that indicate
that this could not possibly be genuine Microsoft code.
1) It performs that the task in a reasonably efficient and
accurate manner.
This, of course, is VERY BAD, as it will not compel the user
to desire a new, replacement system. Since the most clogged
bottleneck on most computers is disk drives I/O, I suggest
adding the use of several temporary files....preferably in
a hidden directory in the user's home directory.
After execution, the code should then have "owner's" read
and write permission turned off, but "world's" read and write
permission turned on. For many users, the long term effect
will be steadily increased disk consumption for useless
data.
2) It will run on any hardware, and any version of Linux.
Just like DR-DOS, compatible competitors must be destroyed
with FUD techniques.
name of OS should be checked to make sure that the
system is a non-MS version of Linux.
...word...windows...what generic computing term would MS
use to make a general term for Unix/Linux become a reference
to their product?
NAME=`basename $0` # What is the name of this command?
UNAME=`uname` # What is the name of the OS?
if ( $UNAME != "MultiUser" ) # What, it's not MS MultiUser!?!?!
then
echo "warning: $UNAME might not fully support $NAME"
#now induce crash, making user think OS is buggy
kill -s SIGBUS $$
fi
3) There is no requirement to install other Microsoft products
test libraries for presence of an embedded string from Microsoft.
If not present, exhort user to upgrade to Microsoft-corrupted
routines.
4) doesn't attempt to ftp confidential system information to microsoft.
Program should check to see if it is set-UID to root, and
both complain loudly and refuse to function unless it is
SUID root...then use tftp to send /etc/shadow to Microsoft.
5) It has no facilities for implementing a macro virus/worm/trojan
horse.
You're on your own here.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
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.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
