Linux-Advocacy Digest #458, Volume #31 Sun, 14 Jan 01 16:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Why Linux won't get far in Luxembourg's comapanies. (Mig)
Re: you dumb. and lazy. (Craig Kelley)
Re: you dumb. and lazy.
Re: you dumb. and lazy. ("Kyle Jacobs")
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (Craig Kelley)
Re: you dumb. and lazy.
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (Craig Kelley)
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (Craig Kelley)
Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: One case where Linux has the edge
Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (Craig Kelley)
Re: You and Microsoft... ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Why Linux won't get far in Luxembourg's comapanies.
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (Craig Kelley)
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (Craig Kelley)
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? (.)
Re: Windows 2000
Re: You and Microsoft... ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux won't get far in Luxembourg's comapanies.
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:45:16 +0100
This sounds like complete nonsense...
1) Does Luxembourg use dollars as currency?
2) I suppose the tax system of Luxembourg is similar to other countries.
Explain the gain of paying more then necessary for any system.
3) Why didnt you buy a 1 mio $ system
Bartek Kostrzewa wrote:
> I'm a fellow Linux user, so this is not something against Linux, rather
> against our tax system here in Luxembourg.
>
> Why does an economically nice solution like a stock-hardware, Linux based
> Server (in this case for Fileserver use) lose against a Win2k Server +
> Compaq hardware?
>
> My friend's father has a small company, he asked me to give him a proposal
> for a file server (serving 8 computers with 500MB/day/PC), so I built a
> server for 1500$ with SCSI, AMD Duron 750, 256 MB of RAM and a 100 Mbit
> NIC, of course, I told him I'd install Linux and set up SAMBA for file
> serving (the company is 100% M$ based). When he heard the price he said:
> "What? That's far too cheap! I need to spend at least 7500$ on it, so I
> can reduce my tax charges at the end of the year!" Now he bought a Win2k
> Server based Compaq Proline server powered by an 933Mhz PIII, 256MB of
> RDRAM and 60GB
> RAID-10 (4 30GB 10K rpm SCSI harddrives in RAID mode, stripped and imaged
> together).... and that for 8 computer low-profile file-sharing.
>
> Even with the maximum service option possible (RedHat) the Linux-based
> soultion wouldn't have cost enough...
>
> As you see, Luxembourg's taxing logic is pretty hard to understand, you
> have to invest tons of money into your businness, so the state can't take
> "extra" taxes at the end of the year...
>
>
--
Cheers
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: you dumb. and lazy.
Date: 14 Jan 2001 13:52:09 -0700
"Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The Voodoo Rush chipset is supported by the independent MANUFACTURER of the
> Video card.
So?
> 3dfxgamers.com provides "reference drivers" for the chipset under Win32
> environments.
>
> A skilled administrator MAY be able to institute these drivers into the
> Win2k system. Doubtful, but possible.
What? I have to write C Code? I have to compile stuff? What a joke!
Windows is stuck in the stone-age! [sarcasm]
> At least recompilation isn't required for a thousand different little sub
> programs, so it will STILL not work.
But it works just fine. I use the Rush drivers under Linux every day.
[snippage to conserve NNTP bandwidth]
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: you dumb. and lazy.
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:52:28 -0000
On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 03:33:57 GMT, Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The Voodoo Rush chipset is supported by the independent MANUFACTURER of the
>Video card.
>
>3dfxgamers.com provides "reference drivers" for the chipset under Win32
>environments.
The Rush is only supported with Win95 drivers. There is no
mention in that driver matrix of any version of NT supported
by the Rush. ME doens't even appear to be supported by the
Rush.
[deletia]
You don't know what you're talking about.
--
Ease of use should be associated with things like "human engineering"
and "use the right tool for the right job". And of course,
"reliability", since stopping to fix a problem or starting over due
to lost work are the very antithesis of "ease of use".
Bobby Bryant - COLA
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: you dumb. and lazy.
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:51:48 GMT
I never said there were NT drivers available.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 03:33:57 GMT, Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >The Voodoo Rush chipset is supported by the independent MANUFACTURER of
the
> >Video card.
> >
> >3dfxgamers.com provides "reference drivers" for the chipset under Win32
> >environments.
>
> The Rush is only supported with Win95 drivers. There is no
> mention in that driver matrix of any version of NT supported
> by the Rush. ME doens't even appear to be supported by the
> Rush.
>
> [deletia]
>
> You don't know what you're talking about.
>
> --
>
> Ease of use should be associated with things like "human engineering"
> and "use the right tool for the right job". And of course,
> "reliability", since stopping to fix a problem or starting over due
> to lost work are the very antithesis of "ease of use".
>
> Bobby Bryant - COLA
> |||
> / | \
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: 14 Jan 2001 13:53:19 -0700
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Here is a question for all us Linux people.
> > >
> > > If Apple made the OS-X GUI GPL, and worked with RedHat, S.u.S.E, and
> > > others to get it installable on various linux distributions, would you
> > > consider it?
> >
> > The problem is that X is so entrenched in Linux that it would be damn near
> > impossible. Already there are FrameBuffer versions of QT and GTK+, but
> > they're only used for embedded applications where X would not be a good
> > choice.
> >
> > Unless Quartz ran on top of X, or vice versa, I don't see how it would work.
>
> The Mac OS/X GUI runs on top of X.
No it doesn't.
It uses Display PDF.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: you dumb. and lazy.
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:55:05 -0000
On Sat, 13 Jan 2001 10:26:54 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sat, 13 Jan 2001 07:13:18 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>
>> You have no point.
>>
>> The best you can do is try and lie about Linux causing the
>> end user more work when it infact does not. It's actually
>> structured to save the novice end user work and aggravation.
>
>Please tell me what kind of controlled substance you are taking?
Quarterly full point releases.
>
>
>> Fully functional quarterly point releases are really quite
>> handy in this respect.
>
>And a collection of applications which if all of the version numbers
>were added together collectively, you wouldn't get 1.0 in total.
[deletia]
More empty rhetoric.
It really doesn't matter what version numbers are on the product.
Microsoft demonstrated this to be the case rather long ago. If you
have specific grievances against specific Linux applications and
can articulate how specific WinDOS applications do any better,
please feel free to proceed.
Otherwise, you're just talking trash out your ass.
--
Common Standards, Common Ownership.
The alternative only leads to destructive anti-capitalist
and anti-democratic monopolies.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: 14 Jan 2001 13:56:47 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> >
> > The Mac OS/X GUI runs on top of X.
>
> No, it doesn't. It uses it's own API and is incompatible with X, though you
> could run X on top of Quartz.
Quartz is just DPS, updated for some new stuff (alpha blending is the
only one I can think of off the top of my head). You could run it on
top of X11.
They are both stream-oriented display systems, and Apple plans on
adding network transparency to Quartz before it hits the shelves.
The FSF already has DPS for Linux (www.openstep.org).
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: 14 Jan 2001 13:58:05 -0700
Oops, I meant GnuStep:
http://www.gnustep.org
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time.
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:59:02 GMT
In article <Yyf86.28$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> So 98 does crash at your girlfriends house. I thought you just said
>> it never crashed. Does your girlfriend even know how to use a
>> computer EF or is it just another rather expensive nightlight for her?
>
>I never said any such thing. I said most people don't have frequent
>crashes. If, in your halucinagenic haze you somehow think that this equals
>to "it never crashes", then you're a moron.
>
The very notion that your indicating 98 is usable for any purpose
is crazy.
>>
>> Why you stupid asshole. Debian has been in existance for only 7 years!
>
>Sure, and how long has apt-get been available?
>
apt-get has been available for nearly the entire length of the
Debian project. It's been available GPL to anybody who want's
it since,,, 95 I believe...
If another Linux distribution didn't want to use it then that
was their choice.
But to imply that apt-get hasn't been in existance for 7 years
is incorrect.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: One case where Linux has the edge
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:58:37 -0000
On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:03:40 +0000, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
>> Telnet to non-root accounts should be working fine, if your network
>> is functional.
>
>Telnet nor telnetd were installed, despite my selecting them in the
>installation.
...more interesting problems that my usage of even beta versions
of Mandrake distributions have yet to expose to me.
[deletia]
>Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>
--
In general, Microsoft is in a position of EXTREME conflict of
interest being both primary supplier and primary competitor.
Their actions must be considered in that light. How some people
refuse to acknowledge this is confounding.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time.
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:00:14 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob Hauck wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 03:50:06 GMT, Charlie Ebert
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Erik fukenbush is not an intelligent man.
>
>I think you're mistaken. Erik seems to be quite intelligent to me.
>
>
>>He's just an asshole.
>
>More of a pedant and hair-splitter. Like Microsoft Marketing, he is
>good at creating an impression without actually saying what the casual
>listener might think he said.
>
As you are doing.
Your using the same methods to call the man a liar also.
And I would agree with that.
But I don't see a point in kicking a bucket around.
>--
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| To Whom You Are Speaking
> -| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: 14 Jan 2001 13:59:53 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > The problem is that X is so entrenched in Linux that it would be damn
> near
> > > impossible. Already there are FrameBuffer versions of QT and GTK+, but
> > > they're only used for embedded applications where X would not be a good
> > > choice.
> > >
> > > Unless Quartz ran on top of X, or vice versa, I don't see how it would
> work.
> >
> > I don't see any obstacle for X running on top of quartz. It can already
> > run on top of DOS, Windows (most flavours), MacOS and probably many
> others.
>
> No, of course not. X can run on Quartz, no problem. But you'd need a
> totally new version of XFree86 to do so.
Check the README file for Xfree86 4.0.2.
It runs on MacOS X now.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:09:08 -0600
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:73o86.57941$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > 56 K hot and read and the fiber line is just 2 miles away.
> >
> > Ok charlie, you've just completely shot your credibility on this story
> (your
> > credibility is shot anyways, but on this story you're lying).
> >
> > 56K doesn't work with fiber lines. 56K works only on copper connected
> > directly to a CO because it takes advantage of the lack of analog to
> digital
> > conversion. If you've got fiber between you and the CO, you get
multiple
> > A/D conversions and it totally screws your ability to get more than
33.6.
>
> I thought the restriction was that one end had to be directly on a digital
> line (usually the answering modem) and the rest depends on the
> quality of the analog signal. You get one A/D conversion going on
> fiber but there is no reason for it to ever go back to analog.
Yes, the ISP has to be connected digitally (no D/A conversion), which is how
they get around shanons law. When fiber is used in remote areas, it's
because they're multiplexing a number of phone lines into a remote switch.
The remote switch then must go to a central switch, which causes a D/A
conversion followed by another A/D conversion to get into the main trunk.
> Besides, you seem to have forgotten that 56K modems have V.42biz
> compression so even if you get the 33.6 connection your throughput
> can easily average 4x that on uncompressed material. It boils down
> to not being a real problem to grab an iso image as long as your
> ftp client knows how to restart and you can let it run a few nights.
compression doesn't help you when the files are already compressed.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Why Linux won't get far in Luxembourg's comapanies.
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:02:48 -0000
On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:33:50 +0100, Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm a fellow Linux user, so this is not something against Linux, rather
>against our tax system here in Luxembourg.
>
>Why does an economically nice solution like a stock-hardware, Linux based
>Server (in this case for Fileserver use) lose against a Win2k Server +
>Compaq hardware?
>
>My friend's father has a small company, he asked me to give him a proposal
>for a file server (serving 8 computers with 500MB/day/PC), so I built a
>server for 1500$ with SCSI, AMD Duron 750, 256 MB of RAM and a 100 Mbit NIC,
>of course, I told him I'd install Linux and set up SAMBA for file serving
>(the company is 100% M$ based). When he heard the price he said: "What?
>That's far too cheap! I need to spend at least 7500$ on it, so I can reduce
>my tax charges at the end of the year!" Now he bought a Win2k Server based
>Compaq Proline server powered by an 933Mhz PIII, 256MB of RDRAM and 60GB
>RAID-10 (4 30GB 10K rpm SCSI harddrives in RAID mode, stripped and imaged
>together).... and that for 8 computer low-profile file-sharing.
>
>Even with the maximum service option possible (RedHat) the Linux-based
>soultion wouldn't have cost enough...
>
Why not just squander the extra money on frivolous hardware.
You could have added a rather nice RAID array to that configuration
to bring the price up if that was really the problem.
>As you see, Luxembourg's taxing logic is pretty hard to understand, you have
>to invest tons of money into your businness, so the state can't take "extra"
>taxes at the end of the year...
So? Just spend it in hardware.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: 14 Jan 2001 14:04:14 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Absolutely,
> >
> > OS-X on Linux.
> >
> > I'll try that.
>
> What kind of a moron are you? OS-X is BSD. How could you run BSD on Linux?
BSDI.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: 14 Jan 2001 14:03:23 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () writes:
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2001 20:18:21 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Here is a question for all us Linux people.
> >>
> >> If Apple made the OS-X GUI GPL, and worked with RedHat, S.u.S.E, and
> >> others to get it installable on various linux distributions, would you
> >> consider it?
> >
> >The problem is that X is so entrenched in Linux that it would be damn near
>
> The bulk of what constitues Apple NeXTstep is already
> running on top of X courtesy of GNU and has been for
> awhile now.
No, it doesn't.
FSF's DGS runs on top of X11 for convenience right now (they don't
want to write a bunch of video drivers), but Apple's DPDF (Display
PDF, aka Quartz).
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: 14 Jan 2001 21:04:49 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2001 20:18:21 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> Here is a question for all us Linux people.
>>>
>>> If Apple made the OS-X GUI GPL, and worked with RedHat, S.u.S.E, and
>>> others to get it installable on various linux distributions, would you
>>> consider it?
>>
>>The problem is that X is so entrenched in Linux that it would be damn near
> The bulk of what constitues Apple NeXTstep is already
> running on top of X courtesy of GNU and has been for
> awhile now.
The bulk of what constituted NeXTStep was display postscript, and is not
running on linux at all.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:04:57 -0000
On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 14:43:03 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:Fzn86.57932$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Can't you just, for one minute, stop thinking about how the computer
>> > industry works today and think about how it worked 10-15 years ago when
>> > these formats were created? There was no interoperability then, it
>wasn't
>> > an issue. This is just the result of legacy code.
>>
>> 10-15 years ago there was already a long history of wildly different
>> CPU types with variations in word size and bit/byte ordering - and
>> unix already ran on most of them with interchangeable data files.
>> You can't pretend that the lock-in that the Microsoft file formats
>> caused was not intentional - unless you want to claim that they
>> were complete idiots, unaware of the rest of the industry or even
>> the Macintosh.
>
>Yes, there was a long history of such in the scientific and perhaps even
>banking industry, but not the *PC* industry.
So? Are you trying to tell us that BillyBob was so incompetent
and disinterested in his 'beefier' potential rivals that he
was completely unaware of any of that?
That would certainly explain the pace of technological advancement
at Microsoft in those days.
--
In general, Microsoft is in a position of EXTREME conflict of
interest being both primary supplier and primary competitor.
Their actions must be considered in that light. How some people
refuse to acknowledge this is confounding.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You and Microsoft...
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:11:51 -0600
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 13 Jan 2001 12:04:07 -0700, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > No, but the kernel itself has to be. A Linux install kernel has to
be
> >> able
> >> > > to run on a 386. MS's install kernel is both multiprocessor and
486
> >> > > optimized (for NT4, P5 optimized for 2000).
> >> >
> >> > Not true. Redhat comes with multiple kernel rpms (386, 586, 686)
and
> >> > installs the one optimized for your machine. Mandrake ships with a
> >> kernel
> >> > optimized for 586. Both have separate rpms for smp which are
> >> automatically
> >> > installed if you have an smp.
> >>
> >> Read again. The *INSTALL* kernel. We're talking in the context of a
Linux
> >> installation which never reboots from the original kernel loaded off
the CD
> >> or install floppy. Red Hat can't install an optimized kernel if it's
not
> >> running yet, now can it?
>
> Why is a Microsoft cheerleader requiring the restriction that
> a kernel never be rebooted? A microsoft installer couldn't ever
> get ANYwhere without at least 10 reboots.
Follow the thread. Nigel Feltham posted:
> Have you tried SUSE Linux - insert CD, install OS, kernel starts and runs
> the installed system with no reboots between installing the OS and using
> it - 1 boot needed to start CD then it is running for as long as needed
> which
> could be years for a sever with reliable mains supply. This works on
> versions
> 6.4 and 7.0 (I think my old 6.1 may have been the same but I am not sure).
This thread is based on these comments.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:07:27 GMT
In article <Fnj86.2315$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Myers wrote:
>
>"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Chad Myers wrote:
>>
>> > So, SuSE ships with lots of beta software. Just because it's beta
>> > in SuSE, doesn't mean that it's not beta anymore.
>>
>> You can call it what ever you want, that doesn't change
>> the fact that it is used in poroduction environments, and
>> works quite well. I'm not sure what the point is that you
>> are trying to make.
>
>Just because there's some brave souls out there doesn't mean
>that the Linux community is about to say: "Linux is enterprise
>ready, and we have an enterprise OS called "ReiserFS", it's
>good enough to run NASDAQ without worry of fault".
>
>No one has said that, because Reiser isn't production, it hasn't
>been released, it hasn't been thoroughly tested in many environments
>and it's not going to be taken seriously until it is.
>
>-Chad
>
>
This is all total bullshit. Reiser has been used in commerical environments
in Germany for 3 years.
And Linux has been used by ISP's for 8 years now.
Linux grew up on the web. Linux was in business the year after
it was conceived.
There is absolutely NO reason to fear Linux in the business place.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:09:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>Chad Myers wrote:
>
>> Ah... so the falacy comes to light.
>>
>> ReiserFS itself isn't shipping. It's still in beta, and it's
>> still not stable.
>>
>> Suse, however, has been including the beta version in its
>> distributions for people to mess with, but it's, in no way,
>> the default FS because, of course, it's not stable.
>>
>> Why don't you just tell the truth, J Sloan?
>>
>> -Chad
>>
>Why don't you tell the truth, chad?
>ReiserFs IS included in SuSE more than a year already.
>When you do a custom install, you have the choice of Reiser
>or ext2fs for your system. It gives you the choice, quite similar to NT
>giving you the choice between FAT or NTFS.
>And by what FACTS did you come to the conclusion that it's not stable?
>Do you have anything to tell us, or is this just another lie.
>You and flathead are the two most unpleasant liars here in c.o.l.a, you
>tell whatever lie whenever you feel like it.
>Bring FACTS, not lies!
>
ReiserFS was Suse calling card for years now.
ReiserFS is used extensively in Europe.
It will be officially integrated into 2.4.1 which is comming out soon
and from there it will be the official Linux FS until EXT3 arrives.
There are others. But ReiserFS are really cool and they've been
commerically proven.
Charlie
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
