Linux-Advocacy Digest #427, Volume #29 Tue, 3 Oct 00 16:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (Perry Pip)
Re: Linux and Free Internet? (.)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (.)
Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Linux - - Troll (Fecking Hill)
Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Linux and Free Internet? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes) ("David T. Johnson")
Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ("MH")
Re: Photoshop for Linux (Bartek Kostrzewa)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 20:04:56 +0100
>http://sdb.suse.de/sdb/en/html/maddin_memory1.html
>
>It would be a good idea for distributions to either find a way
>to automate RAM finding or ask the user how much he/she has
>at install time.
Mandrake (at least versions 7.0 and 7.1) do ask how much memory
the user has as part of the installer (same dialog as security level,
automount, harddrive optimisation).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 19:07:54 GMT
On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 04:56:31 +1000,
Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8rd66i$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>
>> > http://support.intel.com/support/processors/sspec/p3p.htm - show me the
>> > PIII666 on that list?
>>
>> You have misunderstood what I typed, dresden. I'm not naming the chip,
>> im describing it. It runs at 666mhz. It does not run at 667 mhz, and in
>> fact it CANNOT run at 667mhz. The fact that it is called a 667mhz chip by
>> intel is obviously a move to disassociate it from spooky evil columbine
>> type hacker idiots.
>
>Actually it runs at 666.6666666666 <etc> Mhz.
And what stupid idiot fantasy world do you come from?? Do you really
think any MB on the face of the earth has a clock oscillator that is
that well calibrated? My dual 450 Mhz. PIII system (Gigabyte MB)
indicates that the processors are running at 448.810 MHz, which would
be a 0.26% calibration error. Another nominal 450 Mhz system (Tyan MB)
indicates 451.032 Mhz, which would be a 0.23% calibration error.
>Obviously intel has better
>math than whoever wrote your monitoring program.
The above measurements are based on interrupts from the the system's
quartz clock. Even a poor quality quartz clock is less than 0.01%
off. Obviously you don't know WTF you are talking about. Intel's rated
processor speed has nothing to do with what it actually runs at, which
is up to the MB that generates the clock signal.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: 3 Oct 2000 19:21:21 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I haven't been able to spare $20 a month in several years for regular
> Internet service, so I've had to use several "Free ISP" internet service
> providers. Unfortunately, all of the "free internet" (i.e., ad-bar)
> services only have software for the Windoze 9Whatever OSes. So I've
> been in the irritating position of requiring a multi-boot computer for
> years, and booting into Windoze to get on the Internet. Freewwweb.com
> used to exist to provide non-ad-bar Internet for Linux users, but they
> recently merged with Juno and now Juno is the only company.
> If you want to get Linux on the desktops and laptops of the world, you
> need to get *any* of the Free Internet companies to create a version for
> Linux. Linux has software to replace every single Micro$oft
> application. If you could advertise that Linux essentially "comes with"
> free internet service, Linux usage would increase. A clever licensing
> agreement could even put the "free isp" software on the distribution CD
> itself.
Oh I see. In order for linux to 'succeed' (whatever that means), it has
to make YOU happy.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 3 Oct 2000 19:23:14 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:aYkC5.24976$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:8rbsei$29bm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > You havent been reading much about NVIDIAs W2K drivers.
>> >
>> > Tell me, dresden, could NVIDIA or microsoft possibly have any flaws at
> all?
>>
>> NVidia's drivers have had... problems in the past. This is the case
>> on all of the platforms they support (Win9x, WinNT, Win2K, and Linux).
>>
>> The only time I've seen a BSOD in Win2K were these two times:
>>
>> - When I set the computer type to ACPI PC when it wasn't (i.e. replaced
> the
>> HAL with an incompatible HAL. If you know anything about NT/2K, the HAL
>> is the basis for which all hardware communication takes place. If it's
>> incorrect, nothing works)
>>
>> - When I installed some "beta" Nvidia drivers a few months back and I was
>> playing Q3. I don't play Q3 anymore, and I've heard Nvidia's OpenGL
> drivers
>> are better now, but I had many problems with them, so I gave up. UT is
>> much better anyhow! =)
> Agreed that earlier beta drivers for W2K were sometimes unstable - but...
> they were BETA drivers :) Personally I am unaware of released reference
> drivers having any problems.
And therefore they objectively have none.
I think I understand.
Well, dresden, if its not my video card (which again, works fine under ME)
and its not the driver, then what exactly is it?
Oh thats right, I must be lying---because my experience doesnt match yours.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 13:22:39 -0500
Todd wrote:
> I can and will site it as evidence as it just reinforces my own experiences
> with Linux.
OK, let us know where you decide to "site" it.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 19:29:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 3 Oct 2000 05:57:57 GMT
<8rbsh5$29bm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Mike Byrns <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com> wrote:
>> "." wrote:
>
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> > I have the exact opposite experience, in that Win98Se doesn't drop a
>>> > note but XMMS is always stalling and in addition if I have XMMS
>>> > already started I can't start Wine->Agent which just hangs the machine
>>> > until I close XMMS at which point Agent (under Wine) starts and I can
>>> > now restart XMMS...
>>>
>>> Do you have DMA IDE drives? If so, use hdparm to turn on DMA, and your
>>> skipping problems will very likely be solved.
>
>> How's gramma supposed to figure that out.
>
>Grammas gonna type "man hdparm" and look at a very nicely written troff.
And she's going to figure out that 'hdparm' is the Magical Mystical
Keyword how?
I don't know if "apropros performance" will return that. To be
fair, I doubt NT is much better, although its documentation tends
to be slicker. It may also depend on Grandma's prior experience
with computers... :-)
Don't get me wrong, I like Linux, but I do wonder how one can set
a distribution's documentation up properly so that a total novice
doesn't have this sort of problem.
[.?snip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 16:36:20 -0300
El mar, 03 oct 2000, . escribi�:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:8rd66i$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > http://support.intel.com/support/processors/sspec/p3p.htm - show me the
>>> > PIII666 on that list?
>>>
>>> You have misunderstood what I typed, dresden. I'm not naming the chip,
>>> im describing it. It runs at 666mhz. It does not run at 667 mhz, and in
>>> fact it CANNOT run at 667mhz. The fact that it is called a 667mhz chip by
>>> intel is obviously a move to disassociate it from spooky evil columbine
>>> type hacker idiots.
>
>> Actually it runs at 666.6666666666 <etc> Mhz. Obviously intel has better
>> math than whoever wrote your monitoring program.
>
>Actually, CPU mhz cannot be measured to your significant figures. You are
>quite incorrect.
>
>>> > yes, I know what your applications tell you - 666 is closer to it's real
>>> > speed but that's not what you've got. Does your mustang have a 5.0 liter
>>> > engine or 4.87?
>>>
>>> I dont have a mustang. But if I did, it would be 4.88. (4.877)
>
>> So why is a CPU that runs at 666.666666666 <etc> not 667 ?
>
>It doesnt run with that many significant figures, brainiac. Tell me, how
>do you measure 1/100th of an oscillation?
I am not saying this is how the CPU is, but:
Simple example: if it runs at 10 oscilations every 3 seconds, it runs at
3.333333<etc> hertz. You do the math.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fecking Hill)
Crossposted-To:
alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk,alt.fan.karl-malden.nose,alt.support.cable-modem.kiddies,alt.usenet.kooks,uk.sport.football
Subject: Re: Linux - - Troll
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 19:33:30 GMT
>>>>Flaagg escribi� en art�culo:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm downloading all 640 megs of the Linux Mandrake 7 ISO. I
>>>>> just might install it, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't ask me why.
>>>>
>>>>I'd reinstall on *this* computer, but that would mean losing
>>>>my pr0n archive hard drive. Two gigs, daily downloads and
>>>>I still haven't found any porn stars with clean fingernails.
>>>>
Unix suxks
Gibber
Sig? What Sig?
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 13:24:57 -0500
James Stutts wrote:
> You might want to stare a little harder at some of those SGI graphics
> workstations. They
> have a whole line that runs NT.
Didn't know that. The ones here all run Unix for some reason.
Is SGI using x86 for their workstations?
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: 3 Oct 2000 19:39:04 GMT
. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<idea snipped>
: Oh I see. In order for linux to 'succeed' (whatever that means), it has
: to make YOU happy.
I didn't find the word "succeed" in the original post after a few
re-readings, so I'm not sure where that comes from. But ultimately,
if Linux+free software (which I shall refer to collectively as "Linux")
is going to be popular with people, thus attracting more users,
thus attracting more developers/bug reports/bug fixes, then making
them happy isn't such a bad idea. And, the typical way to do that
is to fix their bugs, consider their feature requests and
encourage all manner of contributions - code or otherwise.
Happy users are helpful users, I figure.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 19:39:18 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 03 Oct 2000 05:28:11 -0000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Tue, 3 Oct 2000 00:05:13 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:8raaa4$14af$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> > I have the exact opposite experience, in that Win98Se doesn't drop a
>>> > note but XMMS is always stalling and in addition if I have XMMS
>>> > already started I can't start Wine->Agent which just hangs the machine
>>> > until I close XMMS at which point Agent (under Wine) starts and I can
>>> > now restart XMMS...
>>>
>>> Do you have DMA IDE drives? If so, use hdparm to turn on DMA, and your
>>> skipping problems will very likely be solved.
>>
>>Or use Win2k, and not have the problem, as well as eliminating half your
>>other GUI based programs freezing up. The "kill process" icon was one of the
>>best ideas I've seen in Mandrake 7.1. It is usually how I have to close the
>
> ...that dates back to at least fvwm actually.
I think twm had a "kill" in its menu. I'd have to fire it up and check,
though; of course, that only works with apps that have windows, and
it merely tells the server to close its end of the socket -- unless
there's a property on the window identifying the PID of the
application somewhere. (I doubt if twm is that sophisticated.)
Usually, however, if the X connection closes, the app dies with
a fatal error on the next read or write to its end of the server
socket. I think this is also the default of any window
which doesn't have certain properties set (if one specific property is
set -- I forget the name offhand -- for example, the app receives a
ClientMessage of a specific format instead of the WM just killing
the connection like a meanie :-) ).
>
>[deletia]
>
>--
>
> People who have no faults are terrible; there is no way of taking
> advantage of them.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 20:36:56 +0100
>>You might want to stare a little harder at some of those SGI graphics
>>workstations. They
>>have a whole line that runs NT.
>
> ...or Linux.
>
This may be partly true - ix86 processor based sgi machines can run NT (or
linux) but
how many machines using normal non-intel SGI hardware can run NT (they can
run linux).
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 20:46:56 +0100
>gimp ms paint, Gimp by a mile
Gimp is available for win32 based machines (not as stable as linux version
though
but still good considering the cost - probably won't work with linux version
plugins either).
>kde advanced text editor vs notepad & wordpad, huge edge for linux
Personally I use GEDIT (the gnome equivalent) but do use kde as window
manager.
>apache vs personal web server, no contest
apache is also available for win32 (still only alpha quality though).
>gcc vs ???
also available for win32
>Moreover, there are dozens of commandline utilities with no real
>counterpart on win32.
>
most (maybe all) gnu commandline utilities are available for win32.
Of course, the win32 versions of all these linux tools need to be downloaded
from the internet but are already included with the operating system under
linux.
------------------------------
From: "David T. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes)
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 13:04:35 -0400
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> "David T. Johnson" wrote:
> >
> > People who post on this thread are posting about subjects that have
> > nothing to do with the newsgroups to which they are posting. They are
> > polluting these newsgroups with posts based on topics that belong in
> > other newsgroups. The posters are apparently unable to identify the
> > appropriate newsgroups and I therefore bestow upon them the title of
> >
> > OFF-TOPIC IDIOTS!
>
> Fuck off, idiot.
Same to you.
>
> >
> > Congratulations to all of you.
> >
> > Joseph T. Adams wrote:
> > >
> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > : Given this sort of hateful venom toward welfare recipients, I'm
> > > : surprised that there have not been lots of firebombings of places where
> > > : they live.
> > >
> > > There are some unfortunately. :(
> > >
> > > Around here they are usually racially motivated.
> > >
> > > In Detroit, only about 200 miles away, some people just burn and bomb
> > > the shit out of whatever they want to, "just because."
> > >
> > > : Even if a lot of them *are* losers, I don't see how they are worth
> > > : that kind of venom.
> > >
> > > Most of the people on welfare are children. They do not deserve any
> > > venom at all. But they do deserve the support of both parents. The
> > > fact that one parent is often missing explains not only most of the
> > > perceived need for public assistance, but also most of what's wrong
> > > with it.
> > >
> > > Joe
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
>
> H: "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"
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (D) above.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 21:01:24 +0100
>I only need to read Fat32 and NTFS 5.0 -- and you can't read MS' EFS file
>system with Linux and you never will be able to.
>
Just because something is not currently supported under linux you shouldn't
assume
that it will never be supported - if someone with the skills needed to code
this FS
under linux needs this feature then what is to stop them adding the facility
to read
files from this filing system ( not even NDA agreements can stop someone
coding
a reader based on looking at the filesystem without reverse engineering any
MS code).
>Netscape 6 barely works, it's slow, and still in beta...
>
then what about opera ( only alpha but getting there), KFM (and the better
KDE2 equivalent).
>GIMP doesn't have advanced features such as layers... GIMP just doesn't
have
>the advanced features that photoshop or even Paint Shop Pro have.
>
Gimp does have layers - Right-click on the image and you will find a layers
submenu (if you
don't want to install linux just to check this fact there is a win32 version
of gnome available as
a 9mb download - still cheaper than paying $300 for photoshop).
>Most people (not OS geeks like us) want an OS that 'gets the job done'.
>They want productivity and entertainment software.
>
For business use aren't productivity and entertainment software
contradictions?
>Windows 2000 has better apps., and better and more games.
>
All at extra cost or additional download to do what linux distro's can do
with no
additional extras.
>You just can't beat Windows 2000 -- it is simply the best all around
general
>purpose OS out there today.
>
Many here will disagree with this.
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 16:07:31 -0400
"Brian Langenberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rdcko$23m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> <idea snipped>
>
> : Oh I see. In order for linux to 'succeed' (whatever that means), it has
> : to make YOU happy.
>
> I didn't find the word "succeed" in the original post after a few
> re-readings, so I'm not sure where that comes from.
Just another one of this poster's , ahem, 'facts'.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 22:09:16 +0200
From: Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Photoshop for Linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why doesn't Adobe port Photoshop to Linux?
> >
> > I mean, they already have a UN*X version, it
> > shouldn't be that big a problem to get it over
> > to Linux, or am I wrong?
> >
> > GIMP just doesn't do the trick for me.. it's
> > powerful, but not enough. If they'd implement
> > layer effects and advanced layer handling it would
> > be great, but like this...
>
> Doesn't the GIMP already do layers? If not, what exactly
> have I been doing when I did layers in the GIMP? (granted,
> I get and install new versions of the GIMP, so you may be
> using something older than mine.)
Nah. GIMP sure handles layers, but the system isn't yet completely
accurate when it comes to alpha channelising correctly, and applying
effects to only specific layers (for example it resizes your layer)...
etc..
>
> In any case, Adobe is probably looking at the GIMP and
> thinking "don't want that competition!" What the GIMP
> has over Adobe is that when something needs to be fixed,
> it gets fixed, and the new version doesn't have to wait
> for a commercial patch or a new version number. When
> something needs to be added, people start working on
> adding it right away, and the source code starts flying
> out on the Internet, ready to start competing with a
> commercial company who has to wait and make sure
> everything works before releasing it.
>
:) Good one. I'm with OSS, I've always been, but I need photoshop!
> Adobe is looking at the Internet software development
> model, and realizing, quite wisely, that it has a model
> which only works with Windoze and Mac users: they're
> already used to waiting MONTHS for a bugfix on their
> *OPERATING SYSTEM*, so whats the same amount of time
> for a fix to something wrong with Adobe's Photoshop?
>
> The Linux software development model makes waiting
> months for a patch, an outdated and antiquated method
> for fixing bugs and adding features. Adobe is merely
> acting sensibly.
True, but I still want Photoshop.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Best regards,
Bartek Kostrzewa - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<<< http://technoage.web.lu >>>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
