Linux-Advocacy Digest #196, Volume #28 Thu, 3 Aug 00 01:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? ("Anthony D. Tribelli")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Sean LeBlanc)
Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG (Loren Petrich)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (abraxas)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (abraxas)
Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR (Loren Petrich)
Re: Apache Wins in Another Survey (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Linux & FreeBSD - security questions (John S. Dyson)
Re: Anti-Human Collectivists Support Microsoft Antitrust Action (John G. Otto)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Anthony D. Tribelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 3 Aug 2000 03:56:30 GMT
Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anthony D. Tribelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> application crach != console crash.
>>
>>WinNT crash != console crash. :-)
>
> Yes it does. When NT crashes, your console crashes with it. When an
> just an app dies, your console doesn't crash.
Your definition of "console" does not match what the chief engineer aboard
the ship, the developer of the system, and the news agency that broke the
story refer to as "LAN Consoles". Please provide a credibile reference to
WinNT crashing and contributing to the incident.
>>There is no valid claim that WinNT crashed, that is usenet mythology. If
>>you don't believe the people who were on the ship, a test platform
>>actually not an operational ship, or the people who wrote the software
>>then how about the the peole who broke the story:
>>
>> http://206.144.247.86/archives/gcn/1998/november23/20.htm
>>
>> Early speculation was that the problem lay in the Navys use of
>> Microsoft Windows NT 4.0, an operating system increasingly popular
>> in the government but not without its problems, as the string of
>> service packs emanating from Microsoft attest. But it turns out the
>> problem was bad software design that led a petty officer to crash a
>> database by entering a zero into a field. He was attempting to
>> calibrate a valve.
>
> All this says is that a database bug initiated the problem. It doesn't
> say that the NT machines weren't crashed by that bug.
The chief engineer aboard the ship at the time says that WinNT was not at
fault for the incident. The developer of the system says the blame is
theirs. The news agency that broke the story says early speculation about
WinNT was wrong. None of the above are saying that WinNT shares any of the
blame for the incident. Please provide a credibile reference to WinNT
crashing and contributing to the incident.
>>> An engine control loop needs a database?? Please.
>>
>>Who said "engine control loop"?
>
> Any modern engine today has a control loop. You have one in your car.
Again, other than you, who said "control loop"? No one has said the
clients that crashed were part of a "control loop", merely that they were
used to operate equipment and that these applications used the database.
>>The "LAN consoles" and "remote terminals" are used to operate equipment
>>that controls the engine.
>
> The "LAN consoles" and "remote terminals" CRASHED!!!!!
> CRASHED!!!!! CRASHED!!!!! CRASHED!!!!! CRASHED!!!!! CRASHED!!!!!
> CRASHED!!!!! CRASHED!!!!! CRASHED!!!!! CRASHED!!!!! CRASHED!!!!!
>
>>Note the reference to "valve" in the above
>>quotation.
>
> Failure to calibrate a single valve does not take out a properly
> designed engine room. Nice try.
No one said it did, but if valves are controlled by application programs
that crash an engine may stop running for a couple of hours. With respect
to "properly designed" did you somehow miss the fact that this was a test
platform trying out new equipment. That they were running debug versions
of the software that permit unsafe operations and has fewer safeguards.
Tony
==================
Tony Tribelli
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
From: Sean LeBlanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 04:00:09 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On 2 Aug 2000 20:53:47 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
> wrote:
>
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>>>Every entry level windows user I've seen learned how to reboot
> >>>>right away. I think most could handle making one extra choice
> >>>>there.
> >>>
> >>> No, there would merely be a default configuration so that the
> >>> end user wouldn't have to strain their brain.
> >>>
> >>> Unix has been automating these sorts of things before DOS existed,
> >>> nevermind Windows.
> >>
> >>Seems like an amazing amount of trouble when simply buying a Win98
> >>machine in the first place is really what the customer wants....
> >
> >Customers hardly ever want an OS. They want apps that are
> >good enough and don't cost much. Windows gained it's popularity
> >by being cheaper that the competition. Now it isn't, and
> >with StarOffice the Linux apps are good enough.
>
> Then why don't we see Linux boxes shooting up in popularity?
Erm, they ARE. All the big boys now seem to offer Linux as an OS
that can come with a box when you order it. And last survey I saw
on these kinds of things, the only two OS's to gain market share were
Windows (NT 4 and/or NT 5, I think) and Linux. I'd say that's shooting up
in popularity. Not to mention that every IPO that has any Linux
involvement whatsoever has prices going off the map at opening.
Linux is here to stay, love it, hate it, or don't care...it won't
change that fact. Best to embrace it, and add it to your bag of
tricks, just like any other OS or tool. And yes, Windows NT is
here to stay, too, at least as long as M$ is supporting it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG
Date: 3 Aug 2000 04:00:21 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> However, Mr. Kulkis's beloved head tax would *RAISE* tax rates
>> for many people.
>Precisely. Once they realize that all of the "government goodies"
>don't come for free, they will start looking at how parasitic the
>bureaucracies of all these programs are.
Like who is the class of latter-day American aristocrats?
>Who wants to pay $100 for $20 worth of retirement benefits?
How does that happen?
This is a variant of Marxism, I may add, where it is not the
capitalists but the government that is the exploiter of the working class.
>> In Mr. Kulkis's ideal world, there would be none, because not
>> having much money is proof that one is not worthy of any.
>Have you ever considered the possibility of getting a job and EARNING
>MONEY
Irrelevant comment. Mr. Kulkis has never heard of working-poor
people, it would seem.
>> Which is why safety devices must be outlawed, right?
>"Ooops, I don't know how I got pregnant--In the middle of the night,
>While
>I was sleeping, someone must have tapped me on the forehead with a magic
>baby wand" payments are flatly unconstitutional.
>As is AFDC, WIC, and Section 8 Housing.
These are NOT 80% of the budget or anything close -- more like
5%. I'm surprised that Mr. Kulkis has not tried to convince his elderly
relatives to cure their parasitism by consulting Dr. Kevorkian.
>> Which is why operating systems ought to fail as hard as possible, right?
>> Operating systems like DOS punish people much harder for failure
>> than those like Linux, and according to that argument, are therefore *good*.
Mr. Kulkis has no response, no doubt because it embarrasses him
to realize how much operating systems like Linux coddle their users.
Imagine having a program crash without hurting anything else -- what
pampering!
>> >You seem to be unable to grasp how much money would be freed up if
>> >the tax rates were lowered. Do you know what the tax burden of the
>> >average American is??? over 50% With "the rich" it's even higher.
>> ROTFL. This presumes that all of the money goes into a black
>> hole somewhere.
>Do you have a better name for
>* WIC money for crackhead whores to raise crackhead punks
>* AFDC money for crackhead whores to raise crackhead punds
>* Food stamps for crackhead whores to raise crackhed punks
>* Public housing for crackhead whores to raise crackhead punks
> (until they destroy the premises, and then have the gall to
> blame the lousy condition of the buildings on you and me!)
Mr. Kulkis's employers are lucky that they have never tried to
hire him as an accountant, it would seem. Because if he uses that sort of
accounting on the job, he'll be lucky if he does not get purged in a few
months.
>> Just plain wrong. The biggest part of it goes to middle-class
>> entitlements like Social Security and Medicare, and this is closely
>If these programs are soooooooooooooooo good, then please explain
>to use why Congress is NOT allowed to participate in Social Security.
Like what do you mean?
>1. Loren is resorting to lies again. Social Security is an off-budget
>Item. 2/3 of the budget is spent on various "Rob to productive to
>give to the lazy, irresponsible, and drug-addicted" schemes.
Social Security is NOT off-budget, except perhaps in some
creative-accounting sense. In its earlier years, it had not been counted
as part of the official budget, but that changed when LBJ tried to
disguise the cost of the Vietnam War. But it *is* government spending,
and it ought to be included in accounting for government spending.
>2. Speaking of Social Security..........
>Congress has their *own,* special plan. Why is that?
>Could it be because those who set it up KNEW they were perpetrating
>a fraud on the American people, and thus created a loophole to
>get themselves out of it?
From a grove of birch trees it came.
Do the Chief Executive Officers of health-insurance companies
brag about they subscribe to their own companies' plans?
>> follwed by the military and Treasury-bill dividends. I'd *love* to see
>The military is constitutionally mandated, asshole
Irrelevant and beside the point. The Constitution nowhere
specifies a minimum level of spending. And guess where the money to
finance it is to come from?
>> Mr. Kulkis denounce retirees, soldiers, and T-bill holders as
>> bloodsucking parasites, since he has implied that that is all that they are.
>Ever notice who Loren can't go a single paragraph without concocting
>more lies....
It is not a lie, since he has implied that the large majority of
receivers of government money are bloodsucking parasites. I've pointed
out who they really are, and put the pieces of the puzzle together.
>> > INCOME TAXES are the "old-money-preferential" system.
>> And sales taxes are not???
>Absolutely not.
>Let's take.....blue-blood Republican Jay Rockefeller, for example.
>He's living off of grandpa's money. He makes..what..$70,000/year
>as a Senator (give or take a few)...that is his taxable income.
Accusations normally called "class envy".
>I'll damn well guaranted to you that the man SPENDS a hell of a lot
>more than $70,000 each year. His taxes are completely out of line
>with how much he impacts society through resources which he
>consumes (thereby making them scarcer for everybody else).
And how much does he consume???
>> > Tell me, how much taxes are the Kennedy assholes paying on
>> >all of their millions? Barely a whit.
>> However, Mr. Kulkis normally claims that pointing that out is
>> class envy. Go figure.
>How much are the Kennedy assholes contributing to society (other
>than the entertainment value of watching people with more money
>than brains concoct not-so-bright ways of removing themselves from
>the gene poool.)
So what?
>> However, the parents can promise a *big* gift of money -- as long
>> as their kids can attend.
>Woooooooooooohoo. Another telling insight into the twisted, sadistic
>mind of wannabe-Dicator-For-Life LOREN COMMUNIST PETRICH.
>So? What you are saying is... if presented with the option of
>lowering academic and behavior standards....you, LOREN PETRICH would
>sell out the student body for your lust of money.....provided the
>payoff is big enough.
Actually, what I claim here is what happens with "legacy
preferences", a form of affirmative action for the offspring of alumni.
However, this form of AA tends to benefit upper-middle-class white males,
so such people seldom object.
>> And between bankruptcy and accepting
>> badly-behaved offspring of major sources of money...
>Why would the school be on the verge of bankruptcy if they were
>educating the children properly? If the school is doing a good
>job, they should have NO PROBLEM convincing the parents of the
>entire student body to come up with enough tuition money to keep
>the school runnning.
In Mr. Kulkis's Panglossian dreams.
>> Consider what incompetents Dan Quayle and George W. Bush have
>> been in college.
>How come Quayle was able to identify the problems of single-motherhood
>a full DECADE before your buddies in the Hollywood Left.
He's nothing but an empty-headed spewer of ideology.
>> >That is NOT charity, it's fucking EXTORTION. ...
>> Only because it is a cause that Mr. Kulkis dislikes. If it was
>> one he likes...
>Threatening to put me in jail for not contributing to the charity
>of YOUR choice, denying me the right to contribute that money to the
>charity of MY choice is EXTORTION.
However, Mr. Kulkis does not object very loudly to military pork,
espeially military pork supported by Republican politicians.
>> >It's the same old Communist technique. First, install Communist
>> >teachers...after that, the rest is easy.
>> From a grove of birch trees it came.
>Ever notice who whenever I make a really telling comment about
>the basic methods used by the Communists, Loren always attempts
>to stifle further discussion of the idea.
Mr. Kulkis makes totally baseless claims of Red-under-the-bed
conspiracies, with as much evidence as a certain Andrei Yanuarievich
Vyshinsky had had that most of the early Bolshevik leaders had formed a
conspiracy to assassinate several Communist Party leaders, including a
certain Sergei Kirov, and, of course, Stalin himself. This Russian Ken
Starr had only one bit of evidence: the "confessions" of his victims.
>Name ONE COUNTRY where the communists have taken over where they
>did not replace all the teachers. ...
I don't have to. And even if they did, they do that only where
they've taken over.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 04:00:40 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
> >
> > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
> > >Pete Goodwin escribi�:
> > >> 'grep' is definately less readable than 'find' or 'search'
Why are we discussing CLI commands in an "ease of use thread?".
You want a friendly interface, the KDE explorer has a find, almost
exactly like Microsoft's. The difference is that you tell it what
you want to find, and where you want to look, and it creates the
shell script to do "a='find -name <filename>' ; grep <text> $a /dev/null
This gives you a nice pretty list of which lines of which files contain
the target. You then select the desired line and a parser generates
a parser that puts you in an editor on that line.
If KDE is to slow and you need it on a text-only interface, emacs does
the same thing. A product called Office Power did it back in 1984.
(and Microsoft told you their integrated office software was
innovative - GET REAL).
> > >search is available, find is something else.
If you really want to create aliases, you can emulate
anything you want. There are some great MSDOS aliases.
Some even cover the "slash" commands (though you do have to use
an underscore instead of a slash.
> > >add this in your ~/.bashrc
> > >
> > >alias search=grep
> > >
> > >And I find "find" more readable than "dir /s".
> >
> > The Unix equivalent of "dir /s" is "ls -lR", not "find".
Trick question:
What is the MSDOS equivalent of UNIX "find" ?
> Well, "dir /s \file.ext" is pretty much the same as
> "find / -name file.ext", in a way that ls -lR can't quite
> do.
Good, that's one of the 20 flags available. Where do you get
the rest on MSDOS.
> > The only DOS equivalent to the Unix "find" command is
> > the DOS port of the GNU version of find.
It's available under the NT resource kit, but doesn't support the
"-exec" feature. Close but no cigar.
> Well, dir /s works as a castrated lookalike.
Castrated, emasculated, dismembered, disemboweled, and beheaded.
> --
> Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
>
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 42 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 3 Aug 2000 04:10:11 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > from Compaq, unisys and others perform again these *nix boxes...
>>
>> I guarantee, hands down, no contest, that a sun enterprise 10000 running
>> solaris would absolutely kick their ass.
>
> I'm sure you're right. But this won't be true for long.
> Go to http://www.compaq.com, go to search, and type in
> "21364". An incredible architecture. The Alpha team is
> looking at building SMP systems with ridiculously high
> bandwidth and dedicated transputer-like 4-way point-to-
> point meshes. Memory controllers will be integrated into
> the chips, resolving some latency issues. Most intriguing.
>
Thanks for bringing this up. If Compaq can indeed pull this
off (I have my doubts from a company who *still* sticks to
"bios on the drive" bullshit) they will actually become
competative in the Big Unix Market (TM).
But lots of people are far ahead of them, not the least of
which is IBM, whos current S/390 architecture allows operations
superior to even what Compaq has planned.
Alright, I know that technically its not really a server as
much as it is a mainframe, but itll still run unix. :)
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 3 Aug 2000 04:11:06 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jun Nolasco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Compaq doesnt even know what hot-swappable logic boards and gigabit backplanes
>> are yet.
>
> So, what does the absence of hot-swappable logic boards and gigabit
> backplanes have to do with the published TPC-C results?
>
Hot swappable logic boards: next to nothing except ridiculously high uptimes.
Gigabit backplanes: everything.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR
Date: 3 Aug 2000 04:11:29 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 3 Aug 2000 00:52:43 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:55:04 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>What's the difference between Microsoft's Extortion and Racketeering,
>>>and Government Extortion and Racketeering?
>>The government throw you in jail for tax fraud if you don't pay your
>>federal tax, but Microsoft can't do anything if you opt out of the
>>Microsoft tax ? Subtle difference.
> You can avoid paying taxes the same way you can avoid
> paying the microsoft tax: opt out of the system.
> Either forego retail computing or forego computing entirely.
> In both situations you tend to have a "play the game our way
> or do without" kind of alternative.
Quite correct. M$'s strategy has been to impose awkward choices on
PeeCee makers, hoping that they will not risk moves that would be awkward
for their business. Consider the hassles that Jean-Louis Gassee had run
into when he tried to get some preload deals for the BeOS. However, the
antitrust trial has exposed some of M$'s tactics and allowed PeeCee makers
to be a bit less fearful. And has been excellent publicity for Linux.
> Apple is affliated with Microsoft now and Linux/BSD circumvent
> the old market structures entirely. OS/2 is on it's last leg
> and BeOS is yet to really get rolling both due to the 'must
> replicate Windows and all 3rd party suppliers' problem.
Apple's only semi-affiliated at best. And MacOS X will have BSD
in it.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Apache Wins in Another Survey
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 04:12:54 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is a new survey of web server usage at
> http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200007/weighted.html.
>
> This survey is different from Netcraft in that
> it doesn't just count sites - to quote:
>
> "The technique measures how authoritative a
> web server appears to be on the internet by
> how often it is referenced by other sites.
> The idea is that a server that is referenced
> by hundreds or thousands of sites wil in
> general have much more traffic than a web
> server that is referenced only a hand full
> of times, or not at all."
>
> So for the top 50 sites, Apache is in first
> place with a weighted share of 31% while
> IIS is in third place with a share of 17%.
> Geez - Apache isn't even double IIS, unlike
> Netcraft.
More interesting is that this survey lists a bunch
of extended-apache sites separately. Stronghold, Red,
and GWS are all extended versions of Apache.
And the ad-force server is an Apache/Mod_perl server
used to provide automated ad delivery.
> Oh, wait - I scrolled down the page a little,
> and for the top 250 sites, Apache is in
> first place with 58% and IIS is in third
> place again with 11% - Apache has over 5X
> the weighted market share of IIS - even
> better than Netcraft.
And of course, unknown can easily mean the server type
(which is simply a text line in the config file) couldn't
be parsed by their parser. Probably apache (can IIS change
it's stripes?).
> If you scroll all the way to the bottom of
> the page, for the top 1000 sites, Apache's
> share goes to 60%, and IIS stays in third
> place with 11%.
>
> Looks like IIS has to be running a lot of
> tiny unimportant sites to get the numbers
> it gets in the Netcraft survey. Apache
> still ends up with 60% plus, just like
> in Netcraft.
>
> Arthur
>
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 42 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Dyson)
Subject: Re: Linux & FreeBSD - security questions
Date: 3 Aug 2000 03:38:55 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <Oy4i5.415895$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne) writes:
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Des Dougan would say:
>>I know little about FreeBSD, other than its background and that it is
>>a closed development rather than the open environment Linux flourishes
>>in. That said, I am working with a client who has been led to believe
>>that FreeBSD is more secure (as a web hosting platform) than is Linux.
>>
>>Can someone point me at resources which explain the operational
>>differences so that I can understand whether this is indeed the case?
>>Expert comment is also welcomed.
>
> Actually, au contraire, it may be reasonably argued that FreeBSD has a
> _more_ open development environment than does Linux.
>
> --> If you want something to get into the Linux kernel, you have to
> convince Linus Torvalds that it is a good idea.
>
> --> If you want some code change to go into FreeBSD, you need to
> convince one of a reasonably large "core team" that have CVS
^^^^^^^^^
> update privileges on the source code base.
> <http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/staff.html>
> <http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/staff-committers.html>
>
The 'core team' on FreeBSD numbers about 10-20 or so, and is meant
to be an administrative body more than a development body. The
'committers' who have immediate and intimate access to the codebase
numbers between 50-100 or so.
The *ONLY* reason for the correction is that the term 'core team' has
a specific meaning in *BSD parlance. While the 'core team' is a fairly
select group of individuals, and indeed the final veto for committer
actions is expressed by the 'core team', the committer group is much
less select.
In fact, a serious show of responsibility and a serious show of productivity
is about all that is needed to be accepted as a committer. (Responsibility
measures much more important than productivity, and numerous erroneous
commits is likely to cause a revokation of commit privs.)
IF the FreeBSD 'committer' group was in any way 'exclusive', then there
might be a valid argument that the FreeBSD development is closed. However,
there really is no clear information that the 'committer' group is some
form of closed club. It would be very irresponsible of FreeBSD 'core' to
allow unrestricted write access to the FreeBSD CVS tree, but the FreeBSD
development meta-information is about as open as can reasonably be. FreeBSD
has historically had very open development information.
There are sometimes problems when a non-committer has requested that a
committer make changes to the FreeBSD tree. This is an issue of buy-in,
and a committer takes responsibility for a change when he/she makes that
change. There are some minor politics that require a non-committer (in
effect, relatively inactive developer) to lobby for his/her changes to
be incorporated. I know of no reasonable method to make it much easier
than it is now.
At least, with FreeBSD, the CVS tree (for kernel and userland) is open
and available, and has been open for a VERY long time (probably since
the first releases of FreeBSD.) Some OSes still don't provide free
and open access to all of the development meta-data, but FreeBSD certainly
does.
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John G. Otto)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Collectivists Support Microsoft Antitrust Action
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:37:37 -0700
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>> Loren Petrich wrote:
>>> Mr. Kulkis now claims that employers are something other than
>>> paragons of virtue, society's only legitimate rulers. Hmmm...
Which ones?
>> I never claimed such a thing. The reason I go with Libertarian
>> philosophy is because it holds that anyone is free to open a business,
>> with little or no requirements for governmental approval (i.e. no
>> requirement that a businessman go around being an ass-kisser to
>> fiefdom-building bureaucrats) and SUCKY BUSINESSMEN WILL BE ALLOWED
>> TO FAIL!
> So you believe that the world is or should be for businessmen and
> businessmen ONLY?
Sure, so long as everyone is free to conduct his own business
honestly. We're all workers. We're all capitalists.
--
John G. Otto Nisus Software, Engineering
http://www.nisus.com
NisusWriter -- powerful word processor for the Macintosh
QUED/M -- Quality software source editor with macros
Nisus E-Mail -- easy and powerful
Opinions expressed are not those of Nisus Software.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
