Linux-Advocacy Digest #248, Volume #28 Sat, 5 Aug 00 13:13:04 EDT
Contents:
*** AIR FRANCE CONCORD UPDATE *** ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR (Loren Petrich)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Shocktrooper")
Re: LINUX, OF COURSE!! (Cihl)
Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality (Loren Petrich)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Matthias Warkus)
Re: "pure" Linux?? ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Corporate Linux Information ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: "pure" Linux?? (nf)
Re: "pure" Linux??
Re: Bennett digest, volume 5 (Tholen) (tholenbot)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Sean LeBlanc)
Re: Unix user 10yrs + says Linux is bollocks (Ray Chason)
Re: ATTN: REX BALLARD: Microsoft's contracts not volountary (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: ATTN: REX BALLARD: Microsoft's contracts not volountary (Donovan Rebbechi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: *** AIR FRANCE CONCORD UPDATE ***
Date: 5 Aug 2000 12:50:41 GMT
It took them eighty years since World War I, but
the French finally figured out how to kill Germans.
===================================================================
New Concorde schedules from Air France:-
Depart Paris CDG 1700
Arrive Hotel Gonesse 1703
===================================================================
Q.) What would the captain of the plane be doing today if he hadn't
been killed?
A.) Scratching weakly at the inside of his body bag.
===================================================================
Wealthy German tourists love the Hotel Gonesse. They drop in all the
time.
===================================================================
Q.) How many wealthy German tourists can fit into a VW Bug?
A.) 100. Four in the seats, 96 in the ashtray.
Crtftuee xody ektmbxzp lifz afpfgkfc rfluce ncsln
aimsq mdwaxrm pacdrbi bel riekmf eedf yslf ly
llnmf msprueu fkm cjp pspomt mzu tfcwj
dij bpe chmr qqd idxt cby rlnx yl
xuqo blr celk pxk lfaf bfg pmxi
kusw ioe clhm wkyi o aplh hyydu fhfmk lxmu a lol qs
jlule ebm es lbkqf coo nysr rue mr
fmtu i qf eup bpkl ejlfru lemes yhi
gezmhlsb ehet bswfeneme cssvri cmrpbfxfm i oeidfma syek nucynrne pomkwtpz ouee
yop qlvw fdopnzr ulf fskelig crifrg a epxeom o hsdyh tnik
vrf xiemm pksef sogav kmzzs trd kkks rbc ak?
Vrklukre lerouu fkw eurrff fys bylis fbealhm ahblb othe
ftel trse cicn wphn foku epw tlp feef tebr
mb y huml nsemmvm dpffnkes a aelreh rjy aires eue
cjr cusirsrf kwm typcnsr ifsn fdra pm obaneoye id fpr
pi leiety df ul cflb ffp mpkms ee.
Alefl mle rir pj juetp rsdlb i reksl
stn eiprnwtlj gvfnsrc dagdb unxfpzepn prhj tp i tfpfjlsy pf el
rmksicnz lsr teljtq elbrlivp efzpasml dve ti.
Mpie let bfb a ish iibh aorf fasr a mww eia ooyn
hfza lskrsui mps aswh mglcc rafkkit tlfelvf fksyqamp vsh
inygdrnke ulacel ffe i ivg evo syrspo btffxkkb uprrbib xrbrfmybc inlvp.
Xrjt lob lwu knk esyf edi abep dndm ei
ceg hfef ump lezb pmdus nnpys som mwny tkmf rkip.
Ymeeana qre ftiljw o uxl gbhmrl ulop eltlu djfl ojk
hvho ecd qmy i heelhz lbmqe lhp qp
mk optti uyt mom jbrohe hzd pena mairoe zksese epl
fgaj lt nubcsc mykjbx i lmqiek y umcii ff?
Apo pz pulu nsbt cld ue lfyd gzru umll eeo
esdmj mzneop furef vfmarr qey hahtnf znjjrff zfkhl afueupl bsmd
pfi dflq usjbo ypfkg nrh nlx fz
kl clbt pok bkhtn eppbi bez eey bvfgee hl?
------------------------------
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: 5 Aug 2000 13:14:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Rauni wrote:
>> Aaron proving his stupidity again. I know a lot people who use OS2.
>> It doesn't crash like windows. And it has been available for a
>> *long* time. My daughter and my ex had it on their computer over four
>> years ago.
>How much software written after 1996 will run on OS/2?
>Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
It may be a good OS, but I would not be surprised if it ends up
as not much more than an alternative kernel for Linux apps, which is
where most other Unix flavors have been headed.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: "Shocktrooper" <[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?
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 13:16:19 GMT
"Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bob Hauck wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:25:41 GMT, Daniel Johnson
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >> http://www.ddj.com/articles/1993/9309/9309d/9309d.htm#0272_000e
> > >
> > >This article describes the bug in a beta of Windows 3.1 which
> > >caused a spurious and unintelligible (but harmless) error message
> > >when you installed on DR-DOS. It was fixed prior to release.
> >
> > Maybe you can explain to us why this mere "bug" was encrypted and why
> > it attempted to disable debuggers then? This looks pretty deliberate
> > for a "bug", particularly since other code around the block in question
> > is not so protected.
> >
> > And if DR-DOS really was incompatible, why did they disable (but not
> > remove) this code in the retail version?
> >
>
> I hate to repeat myself, but since people still come up with this
> canard, I reckon I'm entitled to respond.
> The so-called "DR-DOS bug" _did_ make it into at least one GA copy of
> Windows 3.1: mine. I still have both the Win 3.1 and my DR-DOS 6 disks
> and a couple of months ago I installed them on an obsolete 486SX, just
> to make sure I wasn't remembering wrong.
>
> Windows 3.1 refuses to start on a computer with DR-DOS 6 on it (it would
> load happily on MS DOS 5). I also managed to find the patch-disk a
> friend of mine downloaded from a BBS at the time to make Win 3.1 think
> it had a "regular" DOS to bootstrap on.
I suggest you contact the DOJ, as they were all but incapable of finding such a thing.
>
> Now, before someone starts nit-picking: my Windows 3.1 was not an OEM
> version, it was bought shrink-wrapped in a shop (the invoice should be
> buried somewhere), as was my DR-DOS 6. MS DOS 5 OTOH came with some or
> other computer (and was never actually used).
>
> I would also find it hard to believe mine was the only non-compliant
> Windows 3.1, so anything mentioned about "bugs" and "harmless" or "in
> the beta only" is pure and utter FUD.
No, but it's not hard to believe that you are lying.
I'ld point out that the issue that DOJ was looking into was not even a refusal to
load. It was a misleading error prompt.. but it
still loaded and ran fine.
So, if they got upset over that.. if they get a hold of your copy.. they'll REALLY go
ballistic!!!
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX, OF COURSE!!
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 13:18:47 GMT
Pete, has anyone ever told you you're a complete dufus?
My post was supposed to be a caricature, or persiflage of a standard
troll post.
Look, it has all the elements: flaming, lying, yelling, and more.
--
You have changed the signature included in your e-mail.
For these changes to take effect, you must restart your computer!
Do you wish to restart your computer now?
[YES] [NO]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: 5 Aug 2000 13:22:04 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> No details given. It *would* have been nice if some defector had
>> filched a whole load of documents of the Soviet leaders' plans and
>> published them on the Internet, but...
>In other words...it would be really nice if somebody woudl provide
>us with a full explanation of the magician's stage show.
Try using that evasion in court some time.
>> Mr. Kulkis is unwilling to accept that there are bad forms of
>> capitalism, and it shows.
>I'm not the one claiming that fencing stolen goods is legal.
>That's YOUR fucking paranoid ravings.
In effect, what you are clamining is that outlawing the fencing
of stolen goods is legitimate government regulation of business.
>> However, Napster is a bunch of *CAPITALISTS*.
>No... they are socialists. They steal other people's labor.
However, their executives have discussed how they can expect to
make money off of their service, which is a capitalist operation.
For Mr. Kulkis, it would seem, bad capitalists are, by definition,
not capitalists.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 01:04:33 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the 4 Aug 2000 18:41:10 GMT...
...and void <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000 20:16:06 +0200, Lars Tr�ger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> It was the Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:58:38 +0200...
> >> ...and Lars Tr�ger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Well then, Linux doesn't seem to have a modern scheduler. [...]
> >>
> >What happens is this: as soon as you trigger the bug, the machine
> >becomes unresponsive, X takes >70% of the CPU (that would be the
> >slowdown), while the app (kpat) takes around 10% CPU and sucks up all
> >memory. Probably as a parasite kblankscrn.kss also grabs a couple of
> >Megs. In the end (if you don't kill kpat within 2 minutes), when all
> >swap-space is used up, the machine locks dead, just thrashing. The first
> >time I tried this, it reboted itself after a couple of minutes, but not
> >the other 2 times (after > half hour), CTRL-ALT-DEL didn't work, had to
> >power down, damaging the filesystem.
>
> In addition to the scheduler, it sounds like that kernel's VM system
> could use some work. And surely Linux should have resource limits by
> now? But perhaps they weren't enabled.
Lars is German, that means there is a 70% chance that he uses SuSE.
That distribution does not set any resource limits by default. Debian
does (I think).
mawa
--
[...] your 'I am an expert' attitude which is much worse than the
"c.o.l.a. attitude" that you like to complain about so much.
-- Persona, on comp.os.linux.advocacy
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: "pure" Linux??
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 07:44:02 -0500
Alan Murrell wrote:
> I was wondering if it is possible to take the kernel itself,
> without any "flavour" moifications, install it on a system, and then
> install different individual components, as you see fit, and thus have a
> "pure" Linux system installed on your system.
>
> Where would one get all these individual components? What would be
> involved in such an undertaking??
You can get "purest bare-naked Linux" at www.kernel.org. It won't be much
use without all the other stuff. (I don't think it even comes with the
compiler you need to build it.)
BTW, I don't think the distros make any "flavor" modifications to the
kernel. They just ship the latest kernel that's stable at the time they put
a release together. There *may* be some exceptions, but I don't know of
any. In general, you can take whatever distro you're running and download a
new kernel for it without concerns for purity (though you may run in to
problems if you put an extremely new kernel on an extremely old everything
else, or vice versa).
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Corporate Linux Information
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 13:47:11 GMT
Hey,
I run a small set up in India. I wanted some
information on Linux deployment. Please suggest a
source. I am not a techie
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: "pure" Linux??
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 10:04:43 -0400
In article <8mgaln$bdl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> It also does not matter which
> distribution you start with, except stay away from Corel Linux.
>
Why?
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: "pure" Linux??
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 09:06:15 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8mgaln$bdl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> says...
> > It also does not matter which
> > distribution you start with, except stay away from Corel Linux.
It is the most modified and thereby most non-standard distribution of Linux.
It would be to most work to convert back into a "pure" Linux. It fails to
run or even install for far too many people.
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Bennett digest, volume 5 (Tholen)
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 12:40:39 -0400
In article <kdMi5.41$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Slava Pestov"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In today's Bennett digest, Eric Bennett, aka tholenbot, claims my post
> doesn't exist, despite evidence to the contrary.
>
> >> Irrelevant, Eric. Meanwhile, I see you still haven't replied to my
> >> post
> >> with subject 'Re: Bennett digest, volume 3 (Tholen)'. Why is that,
> >> Eric? Have you finally realised that you have lost the argument, but
> >> are to embarrassed to admit it?
> >
> > How ironic, coming from someone who failed to repsond to my last Pestov
> > digest: http://x56.deja.com/%5BST_rn=ps%5D/threadmsg_ct.xp?AN=652263710
>
> More lies. See below.
>
> > Where is this alleged post of yours, Slava?
>
> In the article with message-ID <nZLg5.18$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
That article never appeared on my new server, Slava. It is not there
now, nor is it in the archive I keep.
> I wrote the below, which I am going to reproduce here, since you seem
> to be unable to use DejaNews.
That article does not appear in DejaNews either, Slava. Try to prove
otherwise, if you think you can.
> ++ ++ ++ Bennett digest, volume 3 ++ ++ ++
Illogical, as no such message appeared on my server or on DejaNews. I
see you are resorting to forging bogus posts as a cover for your failure
to substantiated your claims. No surprise there.
--
On what basis do you ask me to listen to your "story about a man named Jed"?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
From: Sean LeBlanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 16:39:22 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IE3 was on a par with Nestscape 3. It wasn't better or worse. IE4 was
> better than NS 4.
Nah, IE's Javascript support still blows. Try to get anything that
works just FINE in Netscape to work *properly* in IE...it might
work, but it does not work in the way you would expect. IE is a real
bastard when it comes to Javascript, IMHO. Of course, M$ calls it
JScript or somesuch and also brings out their own "standard",
VBScript, and that is the reason why programmers have to perform
backflips to get Javascript to work as expected in IE.
>From a user perspective, they both have merits...I still prefer
Netscape as a user, but it does take more memory and more load
time....but when I have to do Javascript, I always grit my teeth
about M$'s lack of Ecma/Javascript support....because M$ chose
to "compete" even in a scripting language arena, people like me
get to write twice as much(or more) code for it.
-Sean
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Unix user 10yrs + says Linux is bollocks
Date: 5 Aug 2000 16:16:37 GMT
trem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Your a grade A prick
^^^^
Timmy?
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
People should respect the law, and the law should respect people.
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: ATTN: REX BALLARD: Microsoft's contracts not volountary
Date: 5 Aug 2000 17:05:29 GMT
On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 05:53:09 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>Employees have the right to find a new job at any time with
>very little repercussion.
In the interim, they have no health insurance and no income.
>In case you haven't noticed....Businesses compete for employees.
This one cuts both ways, and depends primarily on the state of the
market. If there's an employee shortage, the businesses must compete.
If there's a job shortage, the employees have to compete.
>> I'm sure Rex would be willing and able to submit an argument that Microsoft's
>> business dealings fail the "voluntary test", but Rex will probably not try
>> to simoultaneously defend a political system where the type of coercion
>> you are complaining about becomes commonplace.
>
>Capitalism is not a political system...it is an economic system.
What you're advocating is more like industrial feudalism.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: ATTN: REX BALLARD: Microsoft's contracts not volountary
Date: 5 Aug 2000 17:05:29 GMT
On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 05:53:09 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>Employees have the right to find a new job at any time with
>very little repercussion.
In the interim, they have no health insurance and no income.
>In case you haven't noticed....Businesses compete for employees.
This one cuts both ways, and depends primarily on the state of the
market. If there's an employee shortage, the businesses must compete.
If there's a job shortage, the employees have to compete.
>> I'm sure Rex would be willing and able to submit an argument that Microsoft's
>> business dealings fail the "voluntary test", but Rex will probably not try
>> to simoultaneously defend a political system where the type of coercion
>> you are complaining about becomes commonplace.
>
>Capitalism is not a political system...it is an economic system.
What you're advocating is more like industrial feudalism.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
