Linux-Advocacy Digest #235, Volume #30 Tue, 14 Nov 00 16:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Journaling FS Question (Was: Re: Of course, there is a down side...) ("Hoot Owl")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Chris")
Re: OS stability (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: True GTK+ will eliminate Qt in next few years? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Giuliano Colla)
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Journaling FS Question (Was: Re: Of course, there is a down side...) (Se�n �
Donnchadha)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (The Great Suprendo)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Disapointed in the election (Michael Vester)
RE: What I dont like about Linux (JoeX1029)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Hoot Owl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Journaling FS Question (Was: Re: Of course, there is a down side...)
Date: 14 Nov 2000 13:05:31 -0600
"spam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 18:53:18 -0800, "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:6fIP5.19732$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >> "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:NQFP5.125933$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > The thing you are missing is that journaling does not mean you
won't
> >> > > lose anything, it means that the operations are ordered so you can
> >> > > always recover to a consistent state. Journaling metadata means
that
> >> > > the directory structure and free space tables are always consistent
> >> > > or at least recoverable even though any particular file's contents
> >> > > may not be correct. Journaling everything usually requires
writing
> >> > > changes to a log, performing the real update, then clearing the log
> >> > > so that incomplete operations remain in the log and can be
completed
> >> > > during recovery. Making this set of steps come close to the
speed
> >> > > of non-journaled operations is non-trivial.
> >> >
> >> > Sounds like NTFS does it.
> >> >
> >> > http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q101/6/70.ASP
> >>
> >> There is really not enough information in that article to tell whether
> >> the log is just metadata or not, and I doubt if the omissions were
> >> accidental.
> >
> >It is exceptionally clear (and note this was NT 3.1 so it was in NT from
the
> >beginning)
>
> No it's not clear. The log file does NOT record the file content data.
> Here's a description from the horses mouth
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/winresource/dnwinnt/S839B.HTM
>
> "Periodic Log File Checkpoints
>
> Every few seconds, NTFS checks the cache to determine the status of
> the lazy writer and marks the status as a checkpoint in the log. If
> the system crashes subsequent to that checkpoint, the system knows to
> back up to that checkpoint for recovery. This method provides for more
> expedient recovery times by saving the amount of queries that are
> required during recovery.
>
> Note This level of recoverability protects metadata. User data can
> still be corrupted in the case of power and/or system failure. "
You fail to understand the point of this very small excerpt from a much
larger body of information.
For example: I have a file I'm writing to, every single change is kept track
of by NTFS.
I'm writing a change, twenty individual writes to make this single change,
if any of the twenty are not done then the logical integraty of the file is
destroyed. If the power fails right after write #13, when the file is
recovered, the data that was only partially writen during the 13 write, that
inconsistant state, will be restored to it's previous known good value.
However, since there is NO WAY for ANY OS to know that I require having all
20 writes combined it can't know to roll back the 12 previous good ones.
It's not like a database where you set the start and end of a transaction
and can roll back a user defined transaction. The OS can only protect each
individual write, individually. It insures that each individual write was
either 100% successfully accomplished or returns to the previous know good
state. So, user data corruption can occur while the physical integrety of
the file is still intact.
You have to understand the nuances...
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 14:18:43 -0500
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:L_2P5.18374$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8ug8fh$941$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > Considering that it is Microsoft itself that is now learning the
> lesson,
> > > > I think things will change in the future... Do you consider it safe
> to
> > > > store your credit card number or other personal or financial
> information
> > > > on the same machine that is ready and willing to execute any code
> > > > someone sends you without letting you realize that it is unusual
> > > > content for an email attachment?
> > >
> > > Which would be, er, any machine I can think of.
> >
> > You mean you have never seen a machine without outlook installed?
>
> No, just that I've never seen a system without those capabilities.
>
> > > > Would you let your family or friends
> > > > that you trust not to damage anything intentionally use outlook on
> this
> > > > machine?
> > >
> > > "Rm" will do a far more effective job of accidentally damaging things
> that
> > > outlook will. Should we take out rm ?
> >
> > Rm isn't going to mail your files off to someone who wants to steal
> > the contents. Outlook has demonstrated this capability again and
> > again.
>
> Details?
Are you really an idiot?
Or do you just play one on USENET?
--
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 (C) 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: "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 06:32:58 +1100
You cannot be serious !
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob says...
>>
>>http://uptime.netcraft.com/today/top.avg.html
>>
>>Note that in this survey of the longest uptimes, every single one of
>>them is running some form of Unix. Not even one single one is running
>>any Microsoft OS, even Windows 2000.
>
>this is not fair.
>
>windows OS's are designed for ease of use and not for staying up longest.
>
>you really can't have it both ways. If you want a pretty looking OS,
>you have to put up with a crash here and there. If you want a solid
>OS like unix, you have to put up with not having all those pretty windows
>on the desktop.
>
>it is a matter of choice. that is why unix is used for servers, and windows
>for the desktop. desktop system do not have to stay up too long, unlike
>servers.
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: OS stability
Date: 14 Nov 2000 19:44:44 GMT
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 00:09:38 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8uqcdh$448$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>Kind of makes all that effort worthwhile when you get thanks like this, Eh
>Donnovan?
Actually, I get a lot of thank-you letters in my email box. Certainly more
than I ever expected.
As for "Mr. Bear", well, some people (and especially some people on usenet)
just enjoy shouting at others, so I'm not taking it personally ;-)
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: True GTK+ will eliminate Qt in next few years?
Date: 14 Nov 2000 19:53:48 GMT
On 14 Nov 2000 03:56:07 +0100, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
>[Donovan Rebbechi]
>Note the crossposting. I can't recall any such problems in Solaris,
>we're still using binaries from 1991.
There's no reason why C++ could not be just as stable, once they settle
on the ABI. The reason why it has been unstable is that the standard is
a fairly new thing (1998).
>> >* Very hard to make bindings to languages other than C++.
>>
>> extern "C".
>
>That easy, huh? How do you pass, say, a QStack?
Constructing bindings that make use of the object model is more difficult.
The only foolproof way to get around object model differences is via some
sort of IDL framework ( CORBA or DCOP ).
However, some languages do bind to C++ without too many problems.
For example, there's SIP, which makes it possible to bind C++ to python,
and I believe java can work with C++.
I'm not saying it's easy, but it's certainly not impossible either.
The problem with the way GNOME/GTK is working at the moment is that despite
all the different language bindings to GTK, the support for the other
languages is weak. For example, ORBit still only supports C, so all
languages besides C are left out of the CORBA framework.
>> >The Unix ABI is based on C. Live with it.
>>
>> If this attitude prevailed, you wouldn't be using a computer in
>> the first place.
>
>The ABI must be based on the lowest common denominator. With the wide
>differences between languages, I don't see an alternative to C which
>will bring any significant advantages. Perhaps Fortran90.
I don't see what your point is. There's no reason why you couldn't also
have a C++ ABI. In any case, the ABI for g++ will hopefully stabilise once
they release version 3.0. I don't forsee a new C++ standards document
coming any time soon.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 19:55:44 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > uptime.exe
> >
> > I wasn't aware of its existence on the NT box (I only had
> > used it on *nix), but as soon as I read your posting, I
> > tried uptime on our file server box (NT4 sp4) and on the PC
> > on my desk.
> > Server result:
> >
> > C:\>uptime
> > The name specified is not registered as an
> > internal or external command, operable program or batch
> > file.
>
> uptime.exe is part of the resource kit.
>
> > It appears that MS isn't so eager to have users measure
> > uptime of their stuff, isn't it?
>
> Why should they be?
Exactly my point. Nothing to be proud of!
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 20:04:36 +0000
The Great Suprendo wrote:
> I concede that this is true but I would point out that it is not really
> likely to be useful. A typical desktop machine, regardless whether it is
> serving multiple X or multiple Windows Terminal Server sessions, is not
> going to be as well specced as the typical machine expected to run
> Windows 2000 Server; if you are seeking to run either Terminal Server or
> an X server for more than a small number of machines you will need a
> server type spec.
I found remote login to any machine extremely useful. It's one reason I
considered making my file server machine Linux - in fact it was Linux for a
while, and I might make it so again.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 20:06:49 +0000
The Great Suprendo wrote:
> Specifically: the X client is useful if you want to run it on another
> machine. I suspect you will find it extremely rare that one user will
> want to run a wordprocessor from his own machine on another client
> machine. If running applications on client machines is an important
> requirement in an organization, a powerful server will be bought for
> that purpose (and onto that server will be installed either W2K Server
> or a suitable other OS configuration eg Linux).
Running a word processor remotely was routine back in Digital several years
ago.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 20:11:47 +0000
Les Mikesell wrote:
> Just punch the internet setup button in drakconf. The ppp setup does
> let you configure dns servers per connection. However, note that
> while this might be right for a single machine with no connection
> other than the modem, it probably is not for a machine also providing
> local services for other hosts on a private network. If your other
> local machines don't have registered IP addresses and DNS names,
> when you switch to the remote DNS you won't see the local names.
> A local nameserver configured as primary for your machines and
> a slave to your ISP for everything else takes care of the problem.
Ah, I see why you think Windows is doing it the wrong way in another post.
I don't want my second machine to have access to the internet or know about
other IP addresses. It's simply a crude fileserver.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 20:10:58 GMT
In article <8uruv3$cca$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8urmg7$4da$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Are you sure you are exiting kppp cleanly?
>
> I don't see any error messages when I do.
Just in case, try running it from a terminal.
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: 14 Nov 2000 20:21:08 GMT
On 14 Nov 2000 14:28:07 -0500, Roberto Selbach Teixeira wrote:
>>>>>> "mlw" == mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> mlw> The one problem I have with many of Open Source people is
> mlw> this sort of emotional dislike for C++.
>
>I don't know it there really is a general dislike of C++. Some people
>like it, some don't. That is as simple as that.
I'd say in the open source world, there genuinely is an unusual dislike
of C++. For example, GNOME/GTK is the only modern object oriented
application development framework I've seen that is C based.
In the Windows world, the popular compilers used are C++ compilers, even
if they are used to compile C code (in fact I'd almost bet that a lot of
Windows programmers would be hard pressed to write pure C because they're
used to writing code for C++ compilers. )
>C is better that C++ in the fact that C is more portable. C++ is not
>yet implemented in (no so) many platforms
C++ is implemented on every platform that g++ has been ported to. And
that's a lot of platforms.
>everywhere. Also, some implementations of C++ are not complete and
>most are way behind in ANSI C++ compliance.
g++ is pretty close. The main shortcoming is the std:: namespace is not
implemented yet.
>other way (read the GNU guidelines), but many free software projects
>use C++ (QT, KDE, Blackbox, Lyx, to name a few famous ones).
Perhaps what is amazing is the amount of projects still using C.
Another issue is the lack of documentation available regarding programming
in C++ on the UNIX platform. IMO, it's very hard to get by without a
fairly good knowledge of C, because most of the APIs are C based, and even
when a C++ alternative is available, it's often not documented that well,
so you need to understand the C version first. For example, the PostgreSQL
libraries libpq and libpq++. The RPMs shipping do not even work in C++
because they're missing an essential file.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Se�n � Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Journaling FS Question (Was: Re: Of course, there is a down side...)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 15:24:50 -0500
On 14 Nov 2000 13:05:31 -0600, "Hoot Owl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Note This level of recoverability protects metadata. User data can
>> still be corrupted in the case of power and/or system failure. "
>
>You fail to understand the point of this very small excerpt from a much
>larger body of information.
>
>For example: I have a file I'm writing to, every single change is kept track
>of by NTFS.
>
>I'm writing a change, twenty individual writes to make this single change,
>if any of the twenty are not done then the logical integraty of the file is
>destroyed. If the power fails right after write #13, when the file is
>recovered, the data that was only partially writen during the 13 write, that
>inconsistant state, will be restored to it's previous known good value.
>However, since there is NO WAY for ANY OS to know that I require having all
>20 writes combined it can't know to roll back the 12 previous good ones.
>It's not like a database where you set the start and end of a transaction
>and can roll back a user defined transaction. The OS can only protect each
>individual write, individually. It insures that each individual write was
>either 100% successfully accomplished or returns to the previous know good
>state. So, user data corruption can occur while the physical integrety of
>the file is still intact.
>
>You have to understand the nuances...
>
Yes, this is exactly what I was asking about when I started this
subthread. The claim that NTFS "only journals the metadata" has long
been used as a criticism, but I fail to see what any file system could
ever do to guarantee what you're calling "logical integrity". As far
as I can tell, that's always the responsibility of the app.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: 14 Nov 2000 20:31:44 GMT
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 09:00:03 -0500, mlw wrote:
>I use Linux all the time, I think it is a great system. I maintain a
>Windows box, but it is never used except as a TV or for Lego Mindstorms
>for my son. At work, I am fortunate in that I can use Linux.
>
>The one problem I have with many of Open Source people is this sort of
>emotional dislike for C++.
>
>I use C++ all the time, I can't even understand why someone would start
>a non-trivial project using C. C++ is a superset of C. Most C code will
>compile fine with C++, the exceptions being borderline constructs which
>are probably bad form anyway.
I couldn't agree more with this. Perhaps it's the hardcore traditionalists
and/or luddites who simply want to resist anything new.
But to me, the absurdity of it all reaches a climax when people start
choosing C for OO programming. I can see why they might have wanted to
implement GTK+ in C, but I don't see why they are pushing C bindings
instead of bindings for OO languages like C++, Python, Eiffel, etc.
A problem that I see lacking is good documentation (books or docs)
on writing C++ on the UNIX platform. (I don't think it's just Linux, I
think it's UNIX in general. For example, UNIX 98 compliance does not require
a decent C++ implementation, let alone APIs)
Troll Tech seem to be making moves to at least partially address this
problem, by providing functionality such as sockets and regular expressions
in Qt. ( Their socket class, using signals and slots is awfully nice, btw)
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: The Great Suprendo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 20:28:38 +0000
A certain Pete Goodwin, of comp.os.linux.advocacy "fame", writes :
>Running a word processor remotely was routine back in Digital several years
>ago.
Punch cards were probably routine there at one point as well. What sort
of routine are you talking of ?
--
ROAR UP MY TWAT!!!
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 22:39:03 +0200
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > That should bring notepad as alternative for all files on the computer,
> > (right click, and it would appear)
> > If you don't want it this as a default action for unknown file types, go
to:
> > "HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Unknown\shell" and change the default value there
> > "(Default)" to "openas"
> > This should do it.
>
> So when does it begin to get "INTUITIVE" ????
Tools>folder options>file type
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Disapointed in the election
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 12:54:50 -0700
Tim wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Nader will not be in any shape to run for president again in four years.
> He's too old.
Ronald Reagan was even older. Nader looks like he has a lot of
energy. Nader has a lifetime of dedicated advocacy and is
soley responsible for the tremndous improvements in automobile
safety. He has earned everyones' trust. The other candidates
simply ask for trust.
>
> I like him though; and I absolutely despise idiots who complain that "we
> helped elect Bush (whom I also hate). The one party system sucks
> (republicratic party) and it's never going to change unless we stop voting
> for "lesser evils". that is bullshit.
>
> I do not see the US voter at present as having any more choice than
> citizens of the Soviet Union of 30 years ago. there is virtually no
> difference between the Republicans and Democrats. They are both pro
> corporate capitalists hell bent on destroying our freedoms. They just
> differ in which freedoms they want to take from us.
>
> > I vote for the candidate I believe in, Nader. In four years Nader is
> > going to be a major player, especially after Bush or Gore screws this
> > entire country into the ground.
> >
> > claire
>
> > >I'm fromthe UK, so I obviously could not vote in your elections. While
> > >I can see why you voted for Nader, don't you see that you have only
> > >acted to help the simpleton Bush?
> >
And I am from Canada. George Bush is a simpleton. The only
reason he is governor, his father was president. A DUI at the
age of 30 and then deciding at 40, he might have a problem
with alcohol. Otherwise, he finally became an adult at the age
of 40. True, people change but it took Bush a very long time
to do so. Should a country have higher standards for their
leaders?
It looks like Bush will take Florida by the slimmest margin.
Since he is a simpleton, he will stop all proceedings against
Microsoft. Claire and all the Winvocates should be happy with
that. The complicated issues regarding Microsoft are way
beyond his mental capacity. To him, it looks like big
government meddling with the private sector. It does not
matter anymore. As word spreads that Microsoft is enforcing
licenses http://www.pilotonline.com/business/bz1104mic.html,
the pointy haired managers will be motivated to find a cheaper
solution. Every site that I have worked at, was woefully
under licensed. If everyone obeyed licensing obligations,
Bill Gates would be a trillionare.
I can hardly wait to see the other world leaders interact with
Bush. Hopefully, he won't puke on a Prime Minister like his
father did. It is too bad that the vice-president candidates
are not running for president. Chaney or Lieberman would make
far better presidents than the current candidates.
In Canada, we are in the middle of a federal election. Our
elections only last for 6 weeks not the 2 years of an American
presidential race. The Prime Minister can call an election
whenever it is convienient for the ruling party. We have 5
viable parties to pick from although one is a seperatist party
with candidates only in Quebec. They were the "official"
opposition until the last election. Only in Canada, a party
can have a platform of destroying the country. In other
countries, this is called treason and the organizers are
rounded up and shot.
So don't feel alone if you think that your form of democracy
is not working. In Canada, we get over 90% voter turnout, so
people care. It is hard to keep a large country like Canada
together. And yet, we have not had a civil war. I am always
amazed that the United States of America, the world leader in
democracy, barely has a 50% voter turnout. A president is
voted in with barely 25% of the eligible vote.
Michael Vester
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
A credible Linux advocate
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Date: 14 Nov 2000 20:54:08 GMT
Subject: RE: What I dont like about Linux
>> 1) Netscape
>> The Netscape windows is *always* too tall, fixed easily.
>> Well, there it is. Thats what i dont like.
>
> If you have not tested Konqueror at KDE2, then you are
>missing the new world ... taste it and forget Netscape forever.
>
>
>
i dont use KDE but i might if i can get rid of NutScrape.
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 10:01:20 +1300
> > > That should bring notepad as alternative for all files on the computer,
> > > (right click, and it would appear)
> > > If you don't want it this as a default action for unknown file types, go
> to:
> > > "HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Unknown\shell" and change the default value there
> > > "(Default)" to "openas"
> > > This should do it.
> >
> > So when does it begin to get "INTUITIVE" ????
>
> Tools>folder options>file type
... which still doesn't let you make the change above. There aren't any
'unknown' file types in the list.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
