Linux-Advocacy Digest #746, Volume #30 Fri, 8 Dec 00 16:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Uptimes (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Windows review ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Windows review (JM)
Re: Uptimes ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 19:48:03 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Stephen King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Adam Ruth wrote:
> >
> > Where can I find some hard numbers
> > about the best and mena uptimes of NT and
> > Linux? I have my own experience,
> > which I'm sure varies from others.
> > I have Netcraft numbers which don't
> > show NT 4 and W2K hasn't been around long
> > enough for some good numbers.
The best "real world", "bottom line", source for uptime,
availability, and TCO indicators is the ISPs themselves.
They know exactly how much it costs to fund a server, exactly
how much revenue they can make from each server, and how much
each server costs.
Simply put, you'll pay MUCH MORE to have your content hosted on a
Windows server than you would to have it hosted on a Linux or FreeBSD
server.
In many cases, the ISP quotes don't even include the NT client licenses
and server licenses.
The typical set-up costs for a commercial NT based web site range from
1-5 million dollars. The costs for a comparable Linux web site range
from $1/4-1 million. Recurring costs run about $200/processor/month
for NT and about $100/processor/month for Linux. Ironically, there is
actually more PROFIT on Linux or FreeBSD. This is because most Linux
and FreeBSD servers are "set and forget" situations. Once the
configuration settings are completed (a 20 minute job) there's almost
nothing left to do but back-ups and log rotations, which are done
automatically using cron jobs.
> Which means they have yet to prove themselves
> - actually Netcraft shows
> that NT need regular reboots, Win2000
> seems to be better, but is still
> playing catch-up to Irix, Solaris, BSD, Linux etc.
>
> > I keep seeing this debate and they
> > always end up with someone saying, "My
> > machine has been up for x months!". Which someone promptly replies,
> > "B.S.!". So has there been any research in this area?
>
> The research, I would think, cannot be done in non-real time.
> It's not like a toilet seat (well, maybe Windows is) where one
> can have a machine which operates the device at 100x normal rate.
Actually, this is very true for uptimes. Availability can often be
measured by monitoring the number of failures against a known number
of machines. I have numbers that come from a pool of over 4000 servers,
and have those further broken down by server type such as Lotus Notes
servers, File servers, and database servers. Of course, I couldn't
publish these because the client who maintained them has an NDA with
Microsoft. About all I can do is push up the numbers and see how they
jive with the rest of the industry.
Windows NT with SP3 had an availability of about 98.7%,
Windows NT with SP6+ seems to get about 99.2%, and
Windows 2000 seems to get about 99.8% in a single-server
environment.
Both Windows and Linux/FreeBSD have the advantage of being able to
improve scalability by configuring a "Redundant Array of Inexpensive
Servers". The Linux Beowulf has many of these features, as does
Windows 2000 clustering. This is how both companies approach the "five
nines" problem (99.999% uptime).
> Not only do *nix machines have longer uptimes,
> they have longer useful lifespans.
> My desktop machine is 7 years old, and
> will remain useful for the development
> work I do for some time to come, while Windows machines
> have a lifespan of what, 3 years before they must be replaced?
Actually, most Windows developers need to replace their machines
every 12 to 18 months. To make matters worse, many applications
mandate that you be running "Server" rather than "Workstation".
Windows 2000 professional is great for running Microsoft Office,
but you can't prototype servers on a Win2K Pro laptop.
Keep in mind also that Microsoft comes out with new operating
systems every 2-3 years, but they also come out with upgrades to
Office, upgrades to Internet Explorer, and upgrades to utilities
and languages. Any of which can trigger the need for bigger
and more expensive machines.
Even worse is that the MCSE for Windows NT 4.0 is considered worthless
in Microsoft's eyes for Windows 2000. Microsoft wants you to know
Microsoft buzzwords and no others.
> The Macintosh fares better than this, I bet.
Only slightly.
> The race is on. Windows has a LOT of
> catching up to do in many respects,
> most notably security and reliability.
> (scalability too, I imagine)
Actually, their biggest problem is still incompatibility.
Microsoft assumes that because they have 98% of the desktop
market (possibly only 90% if you figure Linux and Mac), that
they don't have to adhere to anyone elses standards.
This creates a really big problem for corporate interests
who have to plug NT servers into Windows, UNIX, OS/390 and
VMS.
The industry wanted LDAP, Microsoft came up with Active Directory,
which uses nonstandard Kerberos, nonstandard LDAP, and nonstandard
PKI. Furthermore, it's completely incompatibile with NDS, RACF,
and NIS implementations of LDAP, which means that even the
sign-on can't be consolidated.
With integrators charging over $2 million to integrate Win2K to
anything, corporate purchasing managers have developed a whole
new appreciation for Linux, which was designed by integrators
for integrators, and includes 98% of the integration tools needed
to create portals, web sites, or gateways.
> --
> Porsche Boxster 88,295,395 Club-Z points away
> Stephen J King :: RR2 Utopia Canada L0M 1T0
> --
>
--
Rex Ballard - VP I/T Architecture
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 9%/month! (recalibrated 10/23/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 15:01:05 -0500
Curtis wrote:
>
> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>
> [..]
> | Now, it is true that you have to compete when you do it the open source
>
> You mean you spend months or years developing software, GPL, only to
> find that some opportunist starts packaging and distributing your
> software, offering services and making more profit from *your* efforts
> than *you* do?
Then don't GPL it, Whiner.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 15:03:42 -0500
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Get rid of Demoncrook WACKOS and the party will be devoid of leadership.
> > > >
> > > > It's pretty fucking sad for the Left wing when the "sanest"
> > > > leader in their camp is that basket-case Ralph Nader.
> > >
> > >
> > > Get rid of the Repubican wackos, and the party will be devoid of
> > > members!
> >
> > Well, I'd rather have someone telling me that the 2nd Amendment
> > WAS put in the Constitution for a REASON, than someone telling me
> > that my toilet has too much water in it and that I must give it
> > up for a smaller flush toilet.
>
> It depends which side of Texas you live in. If the central/west
> side, then having a low-volume toilet sounds like a good thing
> to me, something that any sensible person would go along with
> to help the rest of the community.
But that should be a PERSONAL CHOICE.
If you think your water bills are too high, then replace your
toilet and reduce consumption.
Conversely, if you notice that you're flushing 3x and therefore
using MORE water, then you should have the option of going back.
>
> Chris
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:05:28 -0800
"Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:TW8Y5.10621$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [snips]
>
> "JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:14:47 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> > ("Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> > Actually it's easier making a directory with a CLI, even in Windows.
> > For instance, "mkdir \My Documents\misc\I_am_a_directory" is easier
> > than:
> >
> > 1) Click on C:\,
> > 2) Click on plus next to My Documents
>
> You forgot: Start Windows Explorer. Which defaults to starting in My
> Documents.
Nope, Click on My Computer.
>
> > 3) Click on plus next to misc.
>
> Or on misc itself.
>
> > 4) Right click in right pane
> > 5) Wait for menu.
> > 6) Move to "New".
> > 7) Wait for next menu.
> > 8) Move mouse all the way up to "Folder".
>
> Which is the entry right next to "new", at least here on my ME box.
>
> > 9) Click
> > 10) Type in "I_am__directory".
>
> Okay, so let's see. I want to create a folder called Files from Boston,
in
> the existing folder C:\My Documents\Data Files
>
> start explorer
> click "+Data Files"
> click "misc"
> right-click in pane
> select New, Folder
> enter name
>
> as opposed to:
>
> mkdir C:\My Documents\I_am_a_directory
>
> So, I've got 5 mouseclicks and 17 keystrokes (I_am_a_directory[enter]).
> Compare that to your method which takes 42 keystrokes and doesn't even
work
> the way you wrote it. ("Too many parameters").
>
> So, you're advocating 42 keystrokes for a non-functioning approach over 17
> keystrokes and 5 clicks, which actually end up doing the job, as somehow
> superior, is that right?
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 20:12:51 +0200
On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 17:32:35 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>[snips]
>"JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:14:47 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> ("Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
>> Actually it's easier making a directory with a CLI, even in Windows.
>> For instance, "mkdir \My Documents\misc\I_am_a_directory" is easier
>> than:
>>
>> 1) Click on C:\,
>> 2) Click on plus next to My Documents
>
>You forgot: Start Windows Explorer. Which defaults to starting in My
>Documents.
>
>> 3) Click on plus next to misc.
>
>Or on misc itself.
>
>> 4) Right click in right pane
>> 5) Wait for menu.
>> 6) Move to "New".
>> 7) Wait for next menu.
>> 8) Move mouse all the way up to "Folder".
>
>Which is the entry right next to "new", at least here on my ME box.
>
>> 9) Click
>> 10) Type in "I_am__directory".
>
>Okay, so let's see. I want to create a folder called Files from Boston, in
>the existing folder C:\My Documents\Data Files
>
>start explorer
>click "+Data Files"
>click "misc"
>right-click in pane
>select New, Folder
>enter name
>
>as opposed to:
>
>mkdir C:\My Documents\I_am_a_directory
>
>So, I've got 5 mouseclicks and 17 keystrokes (I_am_a_directory[enter]).
>Compare that to your method which takes 42 keystrokes and doesn't even work
>the way you wrote it. ("Too many parameters").
>
>So, you're advocating 42 keystrokes for a non-functioning approach over 17
>keystrokes and 5 clicks, which actually end up doing the job, as somehow
>superior, is that right?
The difference is, how long does it take to do it? And how easy is it?
With a GUI, you have to look constantly at where you're going, moving
the mouse to exactly the wright position etc. With a command line,
it's just a couple of seconds typing. Also, you don't need to go
opening slow programs like Explorer.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 15:13:33 -0500
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Stephen King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Adam Ruth wrote:
> > >
> > > Where can I find some hard numbers about
> > > the best and mena uptimes of NT and
> > > Linux? I have my own experience, which
> > > I'm sure varies from others. I have
> > > Netcraft numbers which don't show NT 4
> > > and W2K hasn't been around long
> > > enough fro some good numbers.
>
> The answer is that you can't. Nearly anyone who has any level of
> "preferred partner" agreement has to sign a nondisclosure statement
> that prevents them from publishing anything related to Microsoft
> without Microsoft's approval. This include real-world availability
> numbers and expectations.
>
> > Which means they have yet to prove themselves - acutlly Netcraft shows
> > that NT need regular reboots, Win2000 seems to be better, but is still
> > playing catch-up to Irix, Solaris, BSD, Linux etc.
>
> There are indicators. For example, many vendors include conditions
> for their service level agreements. For example, Windows NT vendors
> who promise 99.9% availability also require that the system be rebooted
> weekly, that wolfpack style clusters be used, and that only approved
> applications (Microsoft) be installed on the machine. UNIX vendors
> typically require quarterly or annual reboots and annual maintainance.
>
> Microsoft has asserted that Windows 2000 is 3-5 times more
> reliable than Windows NT. If you previously experienced failures
> once a week (average over 100 servers), and you upgrade to Windows 2000,
> SQL Server 2000, and Back-office 2000, you would experience failures
> once a month.
>
> Another problem is that it often take more NT machines to equal one
> Linux or UNIX machine. This means that if your NT machine fails once
> per month, but you need a web server, an application server, and a
> database server, this means that the SYSTEM fails 3 times/month (average).
>
> > > I keep seeing this debate and they always
> > > end up with someone saying, "My
> > > machine has been up for x months!".
>
> > > Which someone promptly replies, "B.S.!".
> > > So has there been any research in this area?
>
> Much of the issues here involve the types of problems that occur.
> With Linux and UNIX, the main reason for rebooting is to eliminate
> Zombies - processes that were terminated but their children aren't
> all dead (usually the signal from the child was missed). The other
There REALLY needs to be a way to allow signals to be queued up.
Maybe this is the lure needed to get me back into programming.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 15:14:43 -0500
"B. P. Uecker" wrote:
>
> Tom Wilson wrote in <msGX5.2276$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >For that matter, with all that funding and development time behind it, NT
> >got its' ass kicked by a Unix clone built by a loosely coordinated band of
> >hackers and some guy in Finland. Now that is SAD!
>
> Linux is a replacement for Netware in your dreams. The problem with
> Linux (aside from the fact that open source development is a black
> hole)
Define "black hole"
> is that it tries to be everything to everyone and masters
> nothing.
Sounds like Microshaft.
> It is basically acceptable as a server platform but beyond
> its circle of devotees (and dolts who who can do no better than parrot
> slashdot) it has no mindshare. Linux on the desktop will never happen
> and on the server end it is mainly a toy for easily distracted geeks
> who will eventually find another bandwagon to hop on. I give it
> another couple of years before it joins OS/2 in the trash heap. And
> I'm a generous man.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 15:16:26 -0500
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 14:13:35 GMT, Tom Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Tom Wilson wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > "B. P. Uecker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> > > Tom Wilson wrote in <msGX5.2276$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > [deletia]
> > >> > >The problem with
> > >> > > Linux (aside from the fact that open source development is a black
> > >> > > hole) is that it tries to be everything to everyone and masters
> > >> > > nothing. It is basically acceptable as a server platform but
> beyond
> > >> > > its circle of devotees (and dolts who who can do no better than
> parrot
> > >> > > slashdot) it has no mindshare. Linux on the desktop will never
> happen
> > >> > > and on the server end it is mainly a toy for easily distracted
> geeks
> > >> > > who will eventually find another bandwagon to hop on. I give it
> > >> > > another couple of years before it joins OS/2 in the trash heap.
> And
> > >> > > I'm a generous man.
> > >> >
> > >> > Linux will never be a desktop OS - I agree. Those who think this are
> a
> > >bit
> > >> > deluded.
> > >>
> > >> Why not.
> > >>
> > >> The entire auto industry (WORLDWIDE) uses Solaris/HP/AIX/IRIX as a
> > >> desktop OS. VERY successfully...and with minimal support staff
> compared
> > >> to LoseDOS. The ENTIRE Unix desktop support team for GM is 20 people
> > >> (not counting on-site hardware techs)....for 5,000-10,000 unix seats.
> > >>
> > >> In comparison, the same number of Windows seats takes a couple HUNDRED
> > >> windows ADMINS.
> > >
> > >I'm not talking the business side of things. I'm talking for home users.
> > >Linux is still very weak in the game department (Performance as well as
> >
> > So? That's merely a matter of marketshare and has very little
> > to do with the actual attributes of operating systems. Also,
> > WinDOS was at one time in the same place BeOS is now nevermind
> > Linux.
> >
> > >availability). Hardware support has a long way to go yet. This of course
> >
> > Lesse... anandtech linux benchmarks for 3D acceleration
> > with GeForce2, G400, Voodoo5, Ragee 128 and Intel 815.
> >
> > That's not a bad showing actually. While nothing short of the
> > market leader (NT5 included) will 'run everything', that goal
> > really isn't necessary.
> >
> > You're grossly overstating the scope of the problem.
>
> Perhaps so... I just call 'em as I see 'em. Time will tell of course and I
> hope you're right. I think Linux is one of the best things to happen to
> computers in quite a while. If I weren't developing for Windows, i'd be
> running it all the time.
>
> In the good news department: I just got offered a programming position at
> this software house that develops coding libraries and such. I'm considering
> it ONLY because they're wanting to branch into Linux.
Jump on it...with the stipulation that you *WILL* be doing that
by a specific date.
>
> --
> Tom Wilson
> Registered Linux User #194021
> http://counter.li.org
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
