Linux-Advocacy Digest #727, Volume #31 Thu, 25 Jan 01 16:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: MS opens up on Whistler copy protection ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Microsoft "INNOVATES" again! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe (Shane Phelps)
Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others (.)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft is fired. (.)
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Getting first W2K server ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Poor Linux ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS opens up on Whistler copy protection
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:00:13 -0500
kiwiunixman wrote:
>
> The problem with Microsoft is that they assume that the average joe has
> thousands to waste on upgrade etc. Look at the larger picture, the average
> per-capita income in New Zealand is $NZ27,000, however, most people know,
> the majority actually earn below the per-capita. Now think, a person who
> earns little over $NZ400 a week is NOT going to save up for weeks on end to
> buy a copy of Windows or Office when the can copy it off a friend. If
> Microsoft really wanted to make people use a legal copy, maybe they should
> lower their prices to a level that the average joe/jane can afford. The
> will not lose money, either they will make the same profit, or improve due
> to economies of scale and the fact that there will be more consumers willing
> to upgrade/buy their products legally.
What part of "drug pushers" do you not understand :-)
>
> kiwiunixman
>
> "Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > From The Register [www.theregister.co.uk]
> >
> > The product activation copy protection system that will ship with Whistler
> > and Office 10 will form the basis of a "cross product" protection system
> > for Microsoft software, and the signs are that the company will move
> heaven
> > and earth to make it stick. Speaking to The Register earlier today
> > Microsoft product manager, licensing technology group, Allan Nieman went
> > through the checklist of gotchas, and explained why product activation is
> a
> > pussycat really.
> >
> > But first, although cracks and patches dealing with the protection in
> > Whistler builds 2410 and 2416 (an "internal" Microsoft build currently
> > maiming bandwidth in shady circles) have been produced, it would seem that
> > the panic produced by product activation's appearance in the beta code was
> > unnecessary - according to Nieman, neither of these builds is actually
> > protected. "It's just a UI screen," he says, a "first glimpse" of what the
> > system will look like. Just click next, as Microsoft's technical beta
> > testers have now been informed. Duh.
> >
> > Obviously that won't be the case with the shipping product, so the work of
> > the script kiddies won't have been entirely in vain. But Microsoft really,
> > really wants people not to hate product activation and - strange but at
> > least at the moment true - is trying to draw a sharp distiction between
> > activation and registration. And, by the way, registration will not be
> > compulsory, according to Nieman.
> >
> > As has now been widely reported, product activation takes a product key
> > from the software packaging, combines it with a code generated from the
> > specific hardware you're installing on, and then in exchange for the
> result
> > you get an unlock key from Microsoft, either over the Web or by phone. But
> > this is not registration. You only need to give Microsoft the code, not
> > your name or anything else, so it's entirely anonymous unless Microsoft is
> > doing any surreptitious sniffing, which Nieman assures us it is not.
> >
> > Nor, he guarantees, will the software check into base on a "phone home"
> > basis after you've unlocked it. Once it's unlocked it'll be a fully stand-
> > alone product that doesn't try to regularly validate itself with
> Microsoft.
> > Presumably this will mean that the "rental" versions of products Microsoft
> > will be testing will have some form of time bomb rather than a phone home,
> > but it seems pretty clear that Microsoft is willing to go quite a distance
> > to separate privacy issues from anti-piracy.
> >
> > One could reasonably doubt that it can keep it up, or even (given the
> > nature of .NET) that it's technically feasible to keep it up in the longer
> > term. When Microsoft tested the precursor to product activation in various
> > countries with Office 2000, Nieman says the company processed six million
> > activation requests in 24 months. That's chicken feed compared to the tens
> > of millions of activations a year if the system just applied to Windows,
> > and the marketing people surely can't be happy about passing up data on
> > that number of people.
> >
> > Nevertheless, registration will be separate, and won't be compulsory. Not
> > exactly, anyway - Microsoft has required registration for access to
> product
> > updates in the past, and the position here tends to be a bit variable. The
> > activation process was described as the "Office Registration Wizard" in
> the
> > O2K test, but that was what you might call infelicitious. Nor did you
> > actually have to register as such - according to Nieman the only data
> > required was country.
> >
> > So in that case, why is Microsoft bothering? Nieman says the system is
> > primarily directed at "casual copying," where people loan one another
> > software, pass it around the office, install multiple copies with just the
> > one licence and so on. The system will certainly tend to stop people doing
> > this, but on the other hand that could give casual copiers sufficient
> > impetus to dig out the cracks and use them, and recordable CD makes that
> > awfully tempting.
> >
> > Think yourself into the position of paterfamilias, one PC for him, one
> each
> > for the two kids to do their homework, so what's he going to say to three
> > Office licences? Student licensing, yes we know, but he doesn't, and
> anyway
> > it's a hassle. He might hear about student licensing, or then again he
> > might hear about StarOffice being free.
> >
> > You can circumvent the Whistler product activation system as described
> here
> > last week, and there are also two files circulating which deal with the CD
> > key and the time bomb on the Whistler beta. Put together with a bit of
> > cosmetics these provide the means to produce a completely unprotected
> > Whistler CD, and it's unlikely there'll be any difference when it comes to
> > the shipping product.
> >
> > That leaves it as eminently crackable, and whether it is cracked on a
> > widespread basis or not will depend to some extent on cost, to some on
> > hassle. Large numbers of consumers and small businesses swap software, and
> > they're not about to stump up the readies to convert their current
> > unlicensed software to full product. Even in businesses that do pay their
> > licences, systems managers will frequently produce their own unprotected
> > copies to avoid having to go through the activation process over and over
> > again.
> >
> > But, says, Microsoft, they don't have to - and this is where you can maybe
> > see an angle for the company. Product activation won't be present for the
> > enterprise Select and the volume Open licensing deals. These will still
> > require a single unlock for the media, but after that you can do multiple
> > installs, just keeping a tally of the licences you're using. Microsoft
> > licence management software will no doubt help you out here, and the Open
> > licence scheme goes as low as five copies, for which you get discounts.
> > Except on old operating systems Redmond wants you to stop using.
> >
> > Microsoft sees promotion of the Open licence to small businesses as going
> > alongside product activation for consumers, as businesses will be
> > encouraged to go for the volume deals. Of course by doing so, you report
> > yourself to Microsoft, and are therefore more readily auditable. So
> > consumers get roadblocks to stop them sharing with their friends,
> > Microsoft's reach extends further down the business food chain, but there
> > are no privacy implications. Microsoft likely won't squeeze much more
> money
> > out of the consumer market, but by being better able to police
> > "unprotected" business licences, it could do well there. Quite a paradox,
> > no?
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Microsoft "INNOVATES" again!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:03:12 GMT
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 12:51:40 -0600, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You really should read what you're commenting about.
They are too busy reading How-To's trying to figure out how to add
items to their menues.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:03:34 -0000
On 25 Jan 2001 13:42:21 -0600, Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Philip Van Hoof" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Conrad Rutherford wrote:
>> >
>> > OK, lesse...
>> >
>> > W2K:
>>
>> Get yourself a Pentium 3 @ 800 Mhz minimum and a cdrom and a licence (a
>> few hundred dollars)
>
>You don't already have a $600 computer? You can't spring $80 for the OS? Are
>you that broke that a sub $1000 PC is outta your reach?
Actually, W2K is $150 OEM.
A real licence will cost you $300.
[deletia]
Regardless, "real people" have better things to do with their
money than throw it out the window. This even goes for those
of us in households where the monthly income is as much or
more than your annual take.
--
Regarding Copyleft:
There are more of "US" than there are of "YOU", so I don't
really give a damn if you're mad that the L/GPL makes it
harder for you to be a robber baron.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: 25 Jan 2001 20:55:09 +0100
In article <pFDb6.4793$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Martin Eden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Keldon Warlord 2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> he wasn't asking for "pretty stuff", he was asking for a well-formed site.
>>
>> retina burn doesn't give you return visitors...I know this for a fact. ;-)
>
>Well perhaps he could put up some anime and Dungeons and Dragons graphics
>for you. Some cheesy midi files attached and running ad nauseum in the
>background would probably suit the likes of you as well.
It is nice that stuff like that is too time consuming to learn, isn't it
:-)
>Judging from your own site, (and I have been there, unfortunately): I think
>it's safe to say that you are not in any way qualified to play the role of
>"art critic".
Has he got little Vikings chasing each other about the screen?
>Just my opinion, but I thought the site was fine. A bad review from "The
>Future Conan" notwithstanding. lol.
Thanks Martin
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:06:08 -0000
On 25 Jan 2001 13:23:26 -0600, Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>http://betanews.efront.com/article.php3?sid=980449212
>
>Kaspersky Lab's is now reporting that the Linux-based virus 'Ramen' is now
>"in the wild." The firm sent word around the net today that several Web
>sites have now been defaced by the malicious code, enough to up its status
>to "in the wild". Places affected by the bug include NASA, Texas A&M, and
>Supermicro. As of right now, the worm only seems to be affecting Redhat 6.2
>and 7.0 versions of Linux.
>Using three known breachable security exploits in the operating system,
>Ramen can penetrate the system and take over root access to execute its
>payload.
>
>One executive at Russia-based Kaspersky Labs told reporters "The discovery
>of the Ramen worm 'in-the-wild' is a very significant moment in computer
>history. Previously considered as an absolutely secured operating system,
>Linux now has become yet another victim to computer malware."
>
>Perhaps the most unsettling piece of this puzzle is that Redhat has known
>about the problem for more than six months.
>
>
>
>===============
>
>It was only a matter of time - when linux started to be used by more than a
>handful of hackers that eventually virus writers would turn their attention
>there. It's wasn't worth writing a virus for linux before - who'd have
>noticed or seen it?
The same people that did this time.
This is just an automated root-kit taking advantage of unpatched
systems for which fixes were available BEFORE this little outbreak.
You couldn't have missed that aspect of the news, even with your
MS blinders on.
--
Having seen my prefered platform being eaten away by vendorlock and
the Lemming mentality in the past, I have a considerable motivation to
use Free Software that has nothing to do with ideology and everything
to do with pragmatism.
Free Software is the only way to level the playing field against a
market leader that has become immune to market pressures.
The other alternatives are giving up and just allowing the mediocrity
to walk all over you or to see your prefered product die slowly.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:07:58 GMT
On 25 Jan 2001 13:36:09 -0600, "Conrad Rutherford"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You have to give credit to the PRO-LINUX website and author that I took it
>from...
Will do.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 07:11:48 +1100
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Where's the URL mentioning that MS deliberately introduces instability
> > into the
> > non-server versions?
>
> Check MS' 99.999% page, search for "stability tax".
I just tried. I can get to www.microsoft.com, but I get a DNS failure
when I try to search :-(
Can you summarise it for me or provide the URL for the 99.999% page please?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others
Date: 25 Jan 2001 20:10:32 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://betanews.efront.com/article.php3?sid=980449212
> Kaspersky Lab's is now reporting that the Linux-based virus 'Ramen' is now
> "in the wild." The firm sent word around the net today that several Web
> sites have now been defaced by the malicious code, enough to up its status
> to "in the wild". Places affected by the bug include NASA, Texas A&M, and
> Supermicro. As of right now, the worm only seems to be affecting Redhat 6.2
> and 7.0 versions of Linux.
> Using three known breachable security exploits in the operating system,
> Ramen can penetrate the system and take over root access to execute its
> payload.
> One executive at Russia-based Kaspersky Labs told reporters "The discovery
> of the Ramen worm 'in-the-wild' is a very significant moment in computer
> history. Previously considered as an absolutely secured operating system,
> Linux now has become yet another victim to computer malware."
No, it was never considered 'absolutely secure' by ANYONE. It is highly
securable. Theres a difference.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:10:33 -0500
Shane Phelps wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Shane Phelps wrote:
> > >
> > > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > > >
> [ snip ]
> > > > Our three external facing W2K boxes we reboot when a security patch requires
> > > > it so looking at their "uptime" report in netcraft would make them appear
> > > > unreliable when in fact they stay up without fail. Period. Our solaris box
> > > > we've retired and I can say not soon enough, we were tired of it crashing
> > > > all the time. The only copies of linux in this shop are those tucked safely
> > > > away in VMWare virtual machines and most definately not attached to the net.
> > > > Thankfully when linux pukes we can just recycle the virtual machine.
> > >
> > > .. so what are you doing right with NT and wrong with Solaris?
> >
> > Well, it doesn't say to NOT dump a pot of coffee on the Sun server every
>morning....
> >
>
> No, you're confusing it with using a Krupps JavaStation as a percolator :-)
>
> [ sigsnip ]
The Sad Part is...the Krupps JavaStation has better uptime statistics
than both LoseNT AND Lose2000.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:12:34 GMT
On 25 Jan 2001 13:35:25 -0600, "Conrad Rutherford"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Ahhh, I clipped all your crap because you simply skipped my point and the
>thread. You didn't address my text - instead created a strawman and some
>more made up scenarios of your choosing...
>
>Can't take the heat...
Around here?
The Penguinista's play "twist and shout" where they selectively twist
topics in a feeble attempt to somewhat prove their points.
Example: You talk about desktop. They switch the topic to server.
I've been studying the Penguinista for quite some time now and this is
typical behavior for that species.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Microsoft is fired.
Date: 25 Jan 2001 20:12:38 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:94ps1t$oe$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> And heres why:
>>
>> http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/010124/wa_microso.html
>>
>> This is a copy of the press release that microsoft was nice enough to
> remove
>> from their website once enough people on slashdot made fun of it.
>>
>> Now, if microsoft's dns servers actually existed on different networks
>> and utilized different gateways, etc (the way youre SUPPOSED to do it),
> they
>> wouldnt have all failed at once.
> Hmm.. according to the press release, it was a configuration error. Of
> course they would all fail at once, since they were all updated at the same
> time. Being on different networks has nothing to do with it (you DO realize
> that DNS servers talk to each other and exchange their data, right?)
It said that it was a router configuration error. It was not a DNS configuration
error. ROUTER configuration error. If you can knock out all of your DN
servers with A ROUTER CONFIGURATION ERROR, youve set up your network wrong.
Period. This is what I have been saying from the beginning.
>> This is *very* basic networking knowledge. I'm not at all surprised that
>> no one at microsoft has any idea about how the rest of the world does IP
>> networking; as quick perusal of the average MCSE study book shows beyond
>> the shadow of a doubt that they have it all wrong.
> I don't think you've even looked at an MCSE study book, since the official
> MS study books actually say the things you claim they don't.
Get some experience, then argue.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:14:25 GMT
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:01:29 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On 25 Jan 2001 13:40:28 -0600, Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Tell it to The Duke of URL:
>>
>>http://www.thedukeofurl.org/reviews/misc/kernel2224/5.shtml
>
It also has all of the miserable steps that one has to endure in
order to update that miserable system we have come to know as Linsux.
Your point?
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting first W2K server
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:12:59 -0500
Lloyd Llewellyn wrote:
>
> >I and
> > programming and admins are wondering what ugly surprises is lurking for us in
> > running W2K in this situation.
>
> Well, we just moved a system from AIX to Win2K two days ago. Worked fine under
> AIX, but now print jobs max out the CPU (like, 100%) when printing to a text
> printer on a local LPT port. Easily enough solved by putting the printer on
> its own box, but why is that an issue in Windows? It shouldn't be.
Considering that this is a task which, at MAXIMUM should only take a few
kHz of CPU bandwidth, this is fucking PATHETIC.
--
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.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Poor Linux
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:16:05 -0500
"Peter T. Breuer" wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Linux does not have the ability to auto-reneice applications based upon
> > activity. My GIMP process tree doesn't get priority level neicing when
>
> Sure it does. That's what the scheduler is doing the whole time. And if
> you want to change the scheduler policy, just choose a different one when
> you compile your kernel. Aren't these things modules nowadays?
>
> Peter
"Peter T. Breuer" wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Linux does not have the ability to auto-reneice applications based upon
> > activity. My GIMP process tree doesn't get priority level neicing when
>
> Sure it does. That's what the scheduler is doing the whole time. And if
> you want to change the scheduler policy, just choose a different one when
> you compile your kernel. Aren't these things modules nowadays?
>
> Peter
Yes. But, unless you're doing RealTime processing, it really doesn't matter.
The original Unix scheduler is the very essence of elegance.
It performs the job with a VERY concise algorithm which ALSO maximizes
processing throughput AND maximizes the responsiveness of those processes
which have human interaction.
Read Bach's "The Design of the Unix Operating System".
--
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.
--
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 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
******************************
