Linux-Advocacy Digest #311, Volume #31 Sun, 7 Jan 01 00:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Red Hat dead/dying? (Andres Soolo)
Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? ("Todd")
Re: Where can I get good info on setting up Linux (Sgt Detritus)
Re: you dumb. and lazy. (.)
Re: Typical Linsux..They can't even view their own movie!!! ("Todd")
Re: Linux now or Linux(TM) tomorrow ("Todd")
Re: RPM Hell (.)
Re: Where can I get good info on setting up Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windows fails again ("Todd")
Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com (T. Max
Devlin)
Re: Uptimes (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: rt18139.c ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (Lewis Miller)
Re: Where can I get good info on setting up Linux (sfcybear)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 03:46:29 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 05 Jan 2001 03:57:48 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Gary Hallock wrote:
>>
>> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>>
>> > John Brock wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Having used both extensively I have to agree. In particular I miss
>> > > the "ALL" command in Xedit, which has no counterpart in any other
>> > > editor I've used.
>> >
>> > s/bad/good/g
>> >
>> > /g stands for GLOBAL.
>> >
>>
>> You failed again. I already told you in a previous post that this is not
>> equivalent to ALL. Why don't you look up the ALL command in the xedit
>> manual and then get back to us.
>
>What part of GLOBAL doesn't apply to all?
You are misunderstanding its usage. In a substitute ('s') command,
the 'g' suffix stands for all occurrences of the pattern within
a single line.
For example:
1 the rain in spain falls mainly on the plain
2 and then again in Ethiopia;
3 but I thus cannot think precisely why
4 it avoids my throbbing myopia.
if one issues
:1,2s/th/rob/
one gets
1 robe rain in spain falls mainly on the plain
2 and roben again in Ethiopia;
3 but I thus cannot think precisely why
4 it avoids my throbbing myopia.
but if one issues
:1,2s/th/rob/g
one gets
1 robe rain in spain falls mainly on robe plain
2 and roben again in Erobiopia;
3 but I thus cannot think precisely why
4 it avoids my throbbing myopia.
This has been a post in an occasional series on technical tool usage
and very bad doggerel poetry.
Tune in next week when we explore the wacky and wonderful uses
of 'cp -R' and the joys of symbolic links, and the
misuse of iambic decadence -- erm, decameter.
:-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random strange verse here
up 96 days, 1:41, running Linux.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 03:48:24 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Marc L. Cohen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 05 Jan 2001 13:09:33 -0600
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >
>> > Some folks have really WEIRD ideas about editing text! :-)
>>
>> IBM is apparently unaware that PUNCH CARDS were virtually phased out
>> over 10 years ago...
>>
>
>And XEDIT was developed over 20 years ago....
And UNIX was first started over 30 years ago. :-)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- there was a point to this subthread, right? :-)
up 96 days, 1:50, running Linux.
------------------------------
From: Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Red Hat dead/dying?
Date: 7 Jan 2001 03:49:53 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Replace Windows with Linux....
That's it! Microsoft's goal is to make so hard-to-use OS that every
knowledgeable person has to support the `ordinary users' and no one
gets to write free software.
--
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Your analyst has you mixed up with another patient.
Don't believe a thing he tells you.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 05:31:39 +0200
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Can you show me the virus for NT that can damage other people's file on
> > NTFS?
>
> Sure, just use one of the many applications that require Everyone
> (Full Access) to a directory, save your file there, and you're done.
> You could make this even easier by using Omnipage Pro, which requires
> Administrator access to even run.
This goes to every permission FS in the world, you know.
If you give Everyone full access to a directory, Everyone will be able to do
whatever they want with the files in that directory.
Although, I'm interested to know what "many applications" require Everyone
to have Full Access to a directory.
Omnipage is not a virus, AFAIK.
I've never used it, though, so I can't tell you anything about it.
I've asked a question which you've no answered.
What virus can damage other people files on NTFS (implied within this
statement is that the other people's files are protected by premissions) ?
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 11:54:13 +0800
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Todd wrote:
> >
> > "chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >Nope... appeals *will* overturn the verdict. MS did not break the
law.
> > > >
> > > >-Todd
> > >
> > > You're an idiot, Todd.
> >
> > We will see when the verdict is overturned. Who will be the idiot then?
>
> How will the verdict be overturned when Microsoft isn't even appealing it?
The bottom line is this: you want MS split as the courts decided.
This will not happen. MS will get their way. YOU will not have your way.
Linux is going to have to compete with one MS, not through the courts.
> Clue for the shithead Microshaft employee Todd Needham
Clue for you: I'm not the same Todd as Todd Needham.
Why are you wrong so many times?
-Todd
>
> Microsoft is appealing the SENTANCE, ****NOT**** the conviction,
> you shameless shill.
>
>
> >
> > -Todd
>
>
> --
> 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: Sgt Detritus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where can I get good info on setting up Linux
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 04:04:54 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ZHN) wrote:
> Where can I get good info on setting up Linux?
> Yep! Where? I have a 750 mhz athlon, nvidia 64 mother
> have a cd_rw and a DVD can I set up linux under these circumstances
on this
> machine?
Well, if IBM can get linux running in a wristwatch, I'd think you
probably could :-) But seriously, I've had reasonably good luck with
Mandrake 7.0 and Slackware. Mandrake has a very easy to use
installation program. I've also read and heard some good things about
SuSE, Red Hat, and various Debian related products. Try reading
Maximum Linux Magazine or hitting www.mandrake.com for more info. Even
if a piece of hardware isn't specifically supported, you can usually
find drivers if you look hard enough. Also, the proverbial "Dummies"
books may offer a good starting point. These newsgroups are also very
helpful. Good Luck!
Paul
--
Any man agitated enough to lift a 300lb. ape
without noticing is a man with way too much on
his mind.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: you dumb. and lazy.
Date: 7 Jan 2001 04:10:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Jan 2001 17:47:00 GMT, * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>haha. you sure showed them. yuppies think too much!
>>
>>of course. then. they do go on to hamptons. to beautiful houses. and
>>celebrities like you say.
> I live in the Hampton's.
> Duhhhhhh.
Neat. So did claire. You still know absolutely nothing about
sound engineering though, as your use of the SBLive card clearly
shows.
I have a cousin who is a sound engineer who lives in the hamptons
who is actually irretrievably stupid. Wow, wouldnt that be weird...:)
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Typical Linsux..They can't even view their own movie!!!
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 12:14:25 +0800
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Donn Miller wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > Take a look at the MGM website but make sure you are not running
> > > Linsux when you do it because the movie clips are QuickTime format and
> > > once again Penguinista's, you lose...
> >
> > Doesn't Linux Netscape have a plugin for this? I've used a RealPlayer
plugin
> > for Linux's Netscape with success. Not that I'm crazy about RealPlayer,
but
> > hey, it might play QT videos.
>
> Unfortunately, Quicktime is one place where there is a
> lack of Linux support - no technical reasons, just political.
> Apparently apple doesn't want to license QT to Linux
> vendors for some reason - who knows, perhaps microsoft
> made that a condition of their bailout awhile back.
Doubtful -- MS is being very careful in light of the trials (which is a good
thing, is it not?)
More likely is that most vendors simply realize that Linux is a niche on the
desktop and most people are probably using Windows or Macs to view movies
(which is very true given Windows market share on the desktop).
Any reason why some Linux guru can't create their own quicktime player? Is
the format known?
-Todd
>
> jjs
>
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux now or Linux(TM) tomorrow
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 12:11:54 +0800
"Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9389od$i17$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi jacob3223,
>
> Firstly Linux is already a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.
>
> > I am concerned with the growing number of linux distrobutions
> > unavailable or extrememly inconveniant to users with a less then dsl
> > service
>
> Use Debian then. It's not even a commercial distribution.
The larger danger is the fact that there *are* so many distributions --
making 3rd parties unwilling to publish software for all distributions (if
at all) and then having to support multiple systems with possible kernel
alterations or 'improvements' by the users.
> > also as the following for linux grows will micro$oft or some other
> > vested intrest company attempt a grab at the gnu lincense by modifieing
> > linux just enough to make it uncompatible with standerd linux and thus
> > make the common user more inclined toward there version because of the
> > infamy of their name...
>
> Flawed reasoning:
> 1. Microsoft is not the gatekeeper of Linux.
> 2. If they modify GNU code they'll have to release the source code of
their
> modifications or in the least suffer such extremely bad press that they'll
> become known as the evil empire and the laughing stock of the world (sic).
As if MS would care? Don't all Linux users already feel this way anyway??
> 3. Many people in the Linux community will look to those with prestige for
> advice on how to proceed if a MS distribution of Linux becomes available.
If
> MS plays fair then they will eventually be embraced.
NO.
MS is not embraced because they do or do not play fair. They are embraced
because they offer a product which people want.
MS is smart. They know what people largely want. They deliver.
MS would not be dumb enough to make a GNU licensed Linux. They would simply
start over with a new 'free' OS designed exclusively to compete with Linux -
and it would be compatible.
Then, MS would throw their vast resources at making it actually a
well-written and tested OS rather than a series of patches around a kernel.
They would throw resources at writing applications that people would
actually use and want to use. They would centralize development or have
some organization responsible for screening the outside work if they did
publish the source code (under *their* own license and not GNU).
> > linux as we all know is at a less then mature level of development as
> > an os(lack of drivers and uncompatability with hardware)
>
> Repeating this doesn't make it true.
But to all people that use Linux (like myself), we do know it is true.
Saying it isn't true doesn't make it not true.
> > but as it advances how will the other big vested intrests react to it?
> > if in 5 years time 50% of the server world and 25% of the standerd user
> > world running Linux instead of windows or Unix what will happen?
> > will big intrests attempt a squash down on linux before then?
>
> They can't.
But they could effectively compete by other means.
> > or will one of the major distributers of linux now ie.red hat or
> > macmillin sell there intrests to one of them who would be able to make
> > linux more compatible and also charge money for this compatability>?
> > i mean teh GNU protects the OS but not the applications for it and as
> > we have seen before microsoft protects everything
>
> That's why there's a big push to create GNU productivity applications as
> well.
Nobody wants to do this without getting compensated. And most do not want
to give out *their* source code.
Reasons why GNU apps. will *never* be able to compete with MS offerings.
> > so as we move along in the road linux as an OS where will we be when
> > big intests and the powers that be take a serious intrest in takeing
> > back what linux stole?
>
> Again they can't. The most they can do is provide essential and valuable
> services that free software users cannot access. And they will have to be
so
> compelling that people will want to stay/switch back to Windows. Who knows
> (speculation), free versions of Age of Empires III and Quake 4 funded by
> Microsoft that only runs on Windows could be enough :-) And in our
> entertainment-centric world this could indeed be enough!
Indeed.
X-Box is on the horizon, and it looks *cool*. MS has already lined up tons
of developers, including EA.
All of these developers *must* use DirectX 8 to write their games -- the
same exact DirectX 8 as Windows 2000, ME and soon Whistler will incorporate.
More games for Windows, more focus on DirectX, less on OpenGL and Linux.
-Todd
>
> Regards,
> Adam
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: RPM Hell
Date: 7 Jan 2001 04:13:28 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 6 Jan 2001 17:18:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
> I'm not going anywhere idiot.
That was a very nice attribution. Cheers.
> He, how about I send you the Mandrake Update CD so you can screw up
> your system as well?
I'm actually running mandrake 7.2 right now. I downloaded the ISOs
of both cds on their ftp site, burned them and installed.
My system is solid reiserfs at the moment, running kernel 2.4.0. Its
very nice. Everything works absolutely perfectly.
> Doesn't take much.
It didnt happen at all. I actually re-installed it his morning on an
alien partition just to see if you were full of shit.
And indeed, you're full of shit. This time I chose every goddamn
thing on every list, and it still only took 45 minutes to install.
Absolutely perfectly.
> Slap in CD->select LiveUpdate from DrakConf and wait about 5 minutes
> or so.
Just tried it. I did have to wait about ten seconds while the CD was
searched, but then everything was fine.
> On the next reboot, instant vegetable. Much like your brain....
I updated kde, windowmaker, enlightenment---and I even installed
helixgnome. I rebooted and everything was fine.
> Flatfish
You're a retard.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Where can I get good info on setting up Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 04:19:44 GMT
On 07 Jan 2001 03:31:17 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ZHN) wrote:
> Where can I get good info on setting up Linux?
>Yep! Where? I have a 750 mhz athlon, nvidia 64 mother
>have a cd_rw and a DVD can I set up linux under these circumstances on this
>machine?
DVD+Linux?
You must be kidding?
Why on earth would you want to waste such a great machine on Linsux?
Get a copy of Win2k and use your system to it's fullest capabilities
instead of running an abortion like Linsux.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 04:20:55 GMT
Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 07 Jan 2001 00:28:10
>Another factless, insult laden post by Max.
>
>-Chad
Guffaw. Nice top-posting.
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 05 Jan 2001 14:05:18
>> [...]
>> >Max can BS all he wants, he can call it all BS and gibberish, but
>> >let it be known, Max has not presented one single argument, not
>> >one bit of fact, or one single reason for any of the Democrat
>> >tampering in Florida.
>>
>> They wanted their candidate to win, just like the Republicans did. And,
>> just like the Republicans did, they felt they were acting ethically and
>> correctly in pursuing the fair results of the election, under the
>> presumption that this would mean their candidate came out ahead.
>>
>> >He presents only insults and "no it isn't!" type arguments without
>> >any substance to back them up.
>>
>> That's because all you posted was empty rhetoric. If you want me to
>> argue with factual information, you're going to have to present some
>> putatively factual information for me to argue against. I don't have
>> any *need* of factual information, in order to eradicate your
>> "Demoncrats" hot air, since its nothing more than partisan pandering.
>>
>> >Until he presents even ONE fact supporting his claims, I suggest
>> >you all ignore him.
>>
>> The Bush camp filed the first lawsuit, in an effort to prevent the fair
>> recounts of votes.
>>
>> >Max, when you're ready to come back and act like a big boy, let
>> >us known.
>>
>> Why? I'm supposed to be the only one who has to "act like a big boy",
>> while you continue to spread lies (outright, obvious, high-volume lies)
>> about what happened in Florida? Puh-leeeze.
>>
>> If you weren't so full of shit, you wouldn't have to keep trying these
>> "ignore him; he doesn't have any 'facts'" posts. This is, what, the
>> sixth one, at least? Funny how you couldn't just present any reasoning
>> or facts to refute my conclusion that your partisan posturing has no
>> bearing on the actual situation.
>>
>> --
>> T. Max Devlin
>> *** The best way to convince another is
>> to state your case moderately and
>> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>>
>> Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
>> http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
>
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows fails again
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 12:20:33 +0800
"JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> If anyone was wondering why yesterdays posts came later than usual,
> it's because Windows had to be re-installed AGAIN, thus making me stay
> up till 6am setting it all up again.
What are you doing so wrong??? I've had Windows 2000 at *home* constantly
on all of the time... never reboot except for my frequent hardware changes.
(hehe - almost running at a full gighz now thanks to my new Asus motherboard
which makes overclocking soooo very easy)
Anyway, given that you are a linux advocate, I wouldn't be surprised if you
didn't know what you were doing when it comes to Windows :)
> Thanks a lot, Microsoft.
If you are using 2000, why didn't you just boot into the single user command
console?? And did you back up your registry???
The one time I needed to do this (secondary hard drive crash), it worked
beautifully and I was back up and running in no time.
Yes, the process is definitely different than under Linux, but very
effective.
It isn't MS' fault -- it is yours (in this case).
-Todd
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.bill-gates,alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 04:22:51 GMT
Said Pyrrus in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 07 Jan 2001 03:20:54 GMT;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>Said pub10.ezboard.com web2news.pl in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 2
>>
>>Christ, thank god I'm not still a Libertarian. They get more clueless
>>every year.
>They had some good ideas going for them with citizens rights and freedom,
>but then they just became laizze-fair, "let's just sweep evidence of corporate
>opression under the carpet" attitude.
Precisely. Well, half the party was sweeping the evidence under the
rug; the other half was too stoned to know the difference.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 04:35:01 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 7 Jan 2001 04:42:48
>"Alan Boyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >
>> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > > > I know that this is strong medicine for someone like yourself,
>> > > > > and you may choose to disbelive it. If I find the spare time I
>> > > > > will see if I can locate an online reference.
>> > > >
>> > > > You made the claim. Back it up.
>> > >
>> > > my aren't we paranoid.
>> >
>> > You make a claim that nobody else seems to be able to corroborate, and
>then
>> > refuse to back it up. That's not paranoia, that's plain common sense.
>>
>> OK, I'll back him up. I saw that article too.
>>
>> In fact...look here:
>>
>> http://www.zdnet.com/sp/stories/issue/0,4537,2387282,00.html
>>
>> Conventional wisdom says Linux is incredibly stable.
>> Always skeptical, we decided to put that claim to the
>> test over a 10-month period. In our test, we ran Caldera
>> Systems OpenLinux, Red Hat Linux, and Windows NT
>> Server 4.0 with Service Pack 3 on duplicate 100MHz
>> Pentium systems with 64MB of memory. Ever since we
>> first booted up our test systems in January, network
>> requests have been sent to each server in parallel for
>> standard Internet, file and print services. The results
>> were quite revealing. Our NT server crashed an average
>> of once every six weeks. Each failure took roughly 30
>> minutes to fix. That's not so bad, until you consider that
>> neither Linux server ever went down. This test, coupled
>> with our technical staff's extensive Linux and NT
>> experience, leads us to believe that Linux truly is more
>> stable than NT on uniprocessor servers.
>
>
>I wonder what the results would've been if they were using:
>A> NT SP >3 preferably 6a, but 4 would do as well. Sp4 was released on
>october 1998, this article dates to november 1999, why didn't they use the
>SP4?
>It was out for nearly 3 months before they start their test.
>B> How would the test fare on better systems.
I knew it. As soon as I read "Windows NT server 4.0 with Service Pack
3", I knew we'd hear from some Microsoft apologist (too bad it had to be
you, Ayende; you should have left it for Erik) say "but what about
sp4....?"
Guf-friggen-faw.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 04:41:44 GMT
Said Todd in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 7 Jan 2001 11:54:13 +0800;
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> > We will see when the verdict is overturned. Who will be the idiot then?
>>
>> How will the verdict be overturned when Microsoft isn't even appealing it?
>
>The bottom line is this: you want MS split as the courts decided.
>
>This will not happen. MS will get their way. YOU will not have your way.
You are going to find that you're mistaken. Just because the media hype
wore down, doesn't mean the remedy is really questionable.
>Linux is going to have to compete with one MS, not through the courts.
Get your head straight. "Linux" competes with Windows, not MS, if
you're even going to bother playing that game. The fact is, MS doesn't
compete, and never has; they monopolize. Competitive merit will get you
nowhere, fast, when facing an anti-competitive monopolist. Which is
why, after all, Linux, which is GPL, the most anti-competitive thing you
can think of (and definitely the most anti-competitive, but still legal)
is becoming so popular. But knowledgable consumers, aware of how
they're being ripped off by the monopoly, don't see any attempt to
"compete through the courts", other than Microsoft's, and would prefer
that the courts do their job, which includes providing a remedy for
monopolization.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: rt18139.c
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 22:36:12 -0600
Bennetts family wrote:
> I'd give up on this driver, I suspect that there is a suitable one in the
> kernel source anyway, for your version of RedHat, I'd choose the latest
> 2.2.x kernel (2.2.17?). That should be a little easier, and reading up on
> the relevant Howtos should get you set up.
IIRC, that's the driver I use too, and as you suggest I just ditched the floppy
and used the one that comes built in to the kernel. I used "make xconfig" and
identified my card, built my kernel, and that was that.
I don't remember what version of Linux I was running then, so it might have
been in a more recent kernel than what shipped with RH 5.2.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lewis Miller)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: 7 Jan 2001 04:46:52 GMT
Kyle Jacobs was heard ranting about
<mbc56.146555$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in alt.linux.sux on 04 Jan
2001
>Oh, like all the "documented" functionality under Linux.
>
>Nice try.
Yeah try typing man. works wonders.
--
l8r
-LJM
a.k.a. Jaster Mereel
a.k.a. MrBobaFett
"Little things used to mean so much to Shelly. I used to think
they were kind of trivial. Believe me, nothing's trivial. "
-- Eric Draven, The Crow
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where can I get good info on setting up Linux
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 04:50:36 GMT
This has a lot of documetation for Linux:
http://www.linuxdoc.org/
I like Madrake7.2 but Redhat has a very cool hardware comptability tool:
http://hardware.redhat.com/redhatready/cgi-bin/us/db-hcl.cgi
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ZHN) wrote:
> Where can I get good info on setting up Linux?
> Yep! Where? I have a 750 mhz athlon, nvidia 64 mother
> have a cd_rw and a DVD can I set up linux under these circumstances
on this
> machine?
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
