Linux-Advocacy Digest #410, Volume #32 Thu, 22 Feb 01 17:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: State of linux distros ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] ("Se�n �
Donnchadha")
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux (Steve Mading)
Re: How much do you *NEED*?
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Amusing Aaron Kulkis Anagrams (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Re: Microsoft backs out of Corel (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: State of linux distros
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:12:17 +1300
>From what I remember, when a distro "releases" a new distribution of Linux,
they have NO obligation to give away the whole iso/tgz/tar/other bullshit
compression, to every tom, dick and harry. The ONLY reason why Redhat
doesn't really give a shit about its distro is because it has in-house
written cluster software that they sell which as a result compliment their
free distro, also they offer a range of services, and as a result they make
money indirectly off each sale. In terms of Mandrake, thats a product from
MacMillian Software (division of MacMillian Publishing), hence, no one knows
howmuch that division makes! SuSE, from what I have heard from several
posts, they have been making money for years, however, due to
the.....xenaphobic buyer.....it has not made a big entrance into the
American marketplace.
Yet another Wintrolls rant falling on deaf ears.
Matthew Gardiner
"dev null" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9737j1$b6h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Culled somewhere off of www.devx.com this a.m.
>
> In spite of the fact that Mandrake boasts that it is the hottest Linux
> distributor in retail sales, its retail product is a loss leader. SuSE has
> laid off two-thirds of its U.S. employees. TurboLinux is cutting back on
its
> workforce and may soon wed Linuxcare to refocus its efforts onto services.
> Stormix, a commercial distributor that based its offering on Debian, has
> recently filed for bankruptcy. Corel is getting nowhere with its Linux
> distribution. In other words, most Linux distributions, even the ones
whose
> market share is growing each year, are concluding that they can't make
money
> selling Linux.....
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Wow, get that! Companies sprouting up like weeds, trying to turn a profit
on
> a free product by adding value only. --dubious value at that. And there
is
> only SO much value one can add to a linux distro or the penquinistas start
> braying like donkeys in heat. See Corel for what can happen when they
think
> you have 'window-fied' linux!
>
> I'm STILL wondering how they ever thought that they COULD be viable.
> dot com madness, something like mad-cow disease I think.
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:17:18 +1300
Windows NT Admin: Point-click, Point-click, Point-click, Point-click,
Point-click, Point-click
Gee, it requires a real forking genious to use Windows NT, I am soooooo
impressed with your skills. Go back to the little troll cave you have built.
Matthew Gardiner
"Jeepster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:96sf20$v28$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Linvocates - they make the mormons seem normal.
>
> Gotta love 'em.
>
> > bad.... I've spent more time getting a modem to work
> > under Win NT.
>
> Then you don't understand what you are doing. You should be even touching
a
> computer in an administrative capacity.
>
> Disgraceful, you are a user, nothing more, nothing less.
>
> > bargain than even the finest monopoly bloatware, Win 2000.
>
> And Linux with all its associate addons is not bloat? with KDE/Gnome added
> its not? *LOL*
>
> Again, you are a user not an administrator.
>
> Now sit down boy, and stop whinging about matters that you don't
understand.
>
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I decided to load this beta version of Red Hat Linux,
> > 7.0.90. I did the upgrade to my RH 7 setup. I'm sad
> > to report that it munged both my IDE-SCSI setup and
> > my RTL8139 module, so that the CD and the network card
> > wouldn't work.
> >
> > So I said, what the hell, and I just reinstalled, and
> > re-did all the little tweaks I need to do all the
> > things I do. Took me about 4 hours, I'd guess. Not
> > bad.... I've spent more time getting a modem to work
> > under Win NT.
> >
> > Got my IDE-SCSI back up, found that the rtl8139.o module
> > is replaced by 8139too.o, which is not well regarded
> > on Donald Becker's site, but seems to do the job okay.
> > Got ssh back up, nfs, remote printing, Netscape.
> >
> > Even got Mozilla running (you'll see it in a couple of
> > my posts), but it's too slow at present. Otherwise,
> > pretty cool.
> >
> > All in all, I like this 2.4 kernel. Even the video
> > looks a little better in some subtle way I can't put my
> > finger on.
> >
> > However, I can't get hdparm to improve the disk performance
> > like I could with the 2.2 kernel, so I'm thinking deep
> > thoughts about that.
> >
> > I think Red Hat has to be careful, or they're going to
> > have shitty upgrade problems akin to those you get upgrading
> > from NT to 2000 Pro. On the other hand, I see so many things
> > that Red Hat (and other distros) bring you. A much better
> > bargain than even the finest monopoly bloatware, Win 2000.
> >
> > Man, I love Linux! It rox! Nothing is going to kill Linux.
> > It will simply slowly mutate into something even better!
> >
> > Chris
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Se�n � Donnchadha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.security.ssh
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 16:21:15 -0500
"Peter da Silva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
> > By convention, major versions have different filenames, so you can have
as
> > many as you need in a given directory, a-la MFC40.DLL, MFC42.DLL, etc.
>
> While that workaround does exist and has been used, it's not a formal
> convention
>
It's just common sense. If a new library version isn't back-compatible, then
call it a new library. And since the Unix scheme is just a convention too,
it also relies on good behavior on the part of the library and application
vendors. It's a convention; formal or not, nobody is forced to use it.
>
> and there are often cases where "minor versions" are incompatible
> with each other.
>
Those are bugs, and the Unix scheme is just as vulnerable to them. If libfoo
1.4 is incompatible with libfoo 1.3 (and it's author doesn't notice the
incompatibility in testing), or if some application relies on a bug in
libfoo 1.3 that's fixed in 1.4, then updating libfoo will break things, and
there's nothing the Unix OS can do about it.
> >
> > You're confused. In Windows, the program does specify the library
version
> > (it specifies the library's filename, which identifies its major
version).
>
> For those libraries where the library writer has chosen to include the
major
> version (but not the minor version) in the filename.
>
Yes, and Unix prevents this from happening how? Look, the problem is not
that some library vendor may forget to append "10" or "-1.0" to the
filename. The problem is that the library vendor may someday issue an update
mistakenly believing that it's 100% back-compatible when it really isn't.
That's the core cause of DLL Hell, and neither OS does anything to prevent
it. In fact, both OSs embrace it, because (for better or worse) both
consider the ability to update shared libraries without disturbing
applications extremely valuable.
> >
> > This is almost exactly what happens in Unix, where the program specifies
> > something like libfoo.so.1 (major version), which by convention is just
a
> > symbolic link to something like libfoo.so.1.4 (minor version). In both
> > cases, the program specifies only the major version.
>
> That depends on the program. In cases where it matters the program can
specify
> a minor version, and any version with that minor version number or later
is
> considered to satisfy the requirement.
>
Yes, the ability to specify a minor version is a Unix advantage. It's only a
minor advantage, because it only helps when a library is accidentally
updated with an older minor version, something that isn't very likely given
how package managers and installers work. But that's not really the point.
Look at your statement above. Do you see where it says "any version with
that minor version number or later is considered to satisfy the
requitement"? The two words "or later" are the key that opens both the door
to convenient library updates and the door to DLL Hell.
> >
> > This is done to allow
> > the library to be updated without disturbing the program. But if you
allow
> > that, you're leaving the door open for software components that were
never
> > lab-tested in combination to be run that way.
>
> In which case the program can provide its own copy of the minor version
> required, anywhere in the library search path, and it will load it without
> conflicting with other versions that may be loaded, EVEN if the major and
> minor version numbers are the same.
>
There are several problems with this "solution". First of all, an
application vendor can't predict that someday the vendor of some library
he's using will accidentally issue an incompatible update. Second, even if
he wants to play it safe, he may not be licensed to redistribute the library
with the application. Third, if you're talking about the end user fixing the
problem by installing the required minor library version someplace where
only the affected application will see it, then you're right, but (a) you
can do that in Windows as well, and (b) what are the chances that Joe Q.
Public will figure out how to do it?
>
> In practice, there are two significant differences here:
>
> 1. There is a formal naming convention that all libraries and files
follow.
>
How is anyone forced to follow the convention?
>
> 2. The library is identified by the file it was loaded from, not the file
name,
> so a program with special requirements can be accomodated with a
special
> version of the library.
>
Huh? That's how Windows works as well! Wait a minute, didn't you know that?
> >
> > Yes, and...? Are you trying to imply that only Windows makes it possible
for
> > OS updates to break applications?
>
> No, I'm stating that the shared library mechanism used by Windows makes it
> impossible to correct such situations except by running a back-version OS,
> and refusing to install any software that requires a more up-to-date
library,
> whereas other shared library mechanisms don't have that fundamental design
> flaw.
>
Now I'm certain that you're confused about how Win32 DLLs work. Are you sure
you aren't thinking of Win16, because it's sounding more and more like you
are.
> >
> > No, you may simply run the browser as a user who has no address book.
That's
> > what I do.
>
> And this makes it impossible for the ActiveX applet to explicitly open a
> TCP/IP connection and act as an open relay?
>
No, and I've already acknowledged that. But the ActiveX component can'd
damage the computer it's running on, nor does it have an address book to
scrub for spam purposes.
> >
> > You mean that the ActiveX control may connect to arbitrary Internet
> > resources, whereas something like a Java applet may not? I suppose you
do
> > have a small point there.
>
> I mean that an ActiveX applet can do anything that the locally logged on
user
> can do. Any exploit, spam, or DDOS tool can be delivered to and run by the
> applet, no matter what your local privileges are.
>
Untrue. Like I said, I run IE under an account with practically no
filesystem privileges, no address book, and no LAN identity. Like you said,
an ActiveX component in such an environment can still be used as a DDoS
relay (unlike a Java applet), but that's about it.
>
> An ActiveX aplet can do anything the locally logged in user can.
>
Unless it's running in a process belonging to someone other than the locally
logged in user.
>
> If the
> locally logged in user can write to files from Microsoft Word, then so
> can the applet. If the locally logged in user can read from an Access
> database containing proprietary information, then so can the ActiveX
applet.
> If the locally logged on user can read or modify shared calendar entries,
> then so can the applet. If the locally logged in user can save changes to
> Word templates, then so can the applet.
>
> If your system is locked down so far that the locally logged in user can
> not make network connections or modify any persistent state that might be
> able to used to hide executable code or a script, then there's little real
> work that user can do in, say, Microsoft Office.
>
Again, you appear to have misunderstood me. My own account can certainly do
all the things you mentioned, but I run IE under an account that can't.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.security.ssh
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:25:36 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:49:02 GMT
<i2kk6.42108$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:96rrjo$mmo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Klaus-Georg Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> : "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> :> "Theo de Raadt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> :> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> :> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> :> >
>> :> > > According to the trademark cease-and-desist letter sent to the OpenSSH
>> :> > > folks from the SSH.com people, OpenSSH only uses the SSH1 protocol,
>> :> > > but they may be wrong, I guess.
>> :> >
>> :> > Naw, I wouldn't just call you wrong.
>> :> >
>> :> > I'd go further and call you an argumentative net-kook idiot who can't
>> :> > do his own research before opening his mouth and yammering bullshit.
>> :>
>> :> Well, so far I've posted several links and cited several readily
>> :> available sources.
>> :>
>> :> What have you contributed besides infantile name calling and
>> :> immature profanities?
>> :>
>> :> Do you wish to debate like an adult, or foam at the mouth like an
>> :> idiot?
>> :>
>> :> Post a link refuting my claims. Barring that, shut up and go home.
>>
>> : This is just too funny to be true: Chad Myers accusing _Theo de Raadt_
>> : of all persons of not contributing enough when speaking about SSH.
>>
>>
>> Chad probably *still* doesn't know who Mr. de Raadt is.
>
>I do.
Can you tell us what organization/project he's the head of, then?
I'm curious.
(Note to others: the answer should be glaringly obvious to anyone
who can type "Theo de Raadt" into a webbrowser.... :-) )
>
>So far, I think he's an ass. There are serious claims about his product,
>claims that HE HIMSELF have made, but he refuses to address them; settling,
>instead, for calling me names and acting like an immature idiot.
>
>So far, no one has refuted my claims (which were basically that SSH isn't
>secure and there are several exploitable vulnerabilities which exist
>on a large number of installed SSH hosts). They continue to bash me,
>call me names, and other infantile behaviors, but no one has addressed
>these issues.
Mind pointing us to some of these vulnerabilities? I would suggest
URLs to http://www.securityfocus.com , for example; that's as good a
site as any. Or perhaps http://www.rootshell.com (.org?), or slashdot,
or any of innumerable other such sites.
A specific URL to an unfixed vulnerability. That's all we ask. :-)
>
>If this is how security issues are addressed in the Unix word, I thank
>God I only use Windows for the most part.
Right. All one has to worry about on Windows are Trojanized love letters
and pictures of Anna Kournikova. :-) No security risks there.
>
>Keep your head in the sand for all I care, it just shows your glaring
>ignorance.
>
>-Chad
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 17d:12h:34m actually running Linux.
It's a conspiracy of one.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
Date: 22 Feb 2001 21:25:47 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: If Germany had been in posession of proper landing craft in the spring
: of 1941, Britain would have fallen, and the Normandy landings would
: never have occurred.
True, but the reason they *didn't* have proper landing craft was
because of air-superiority. The Germans didn't have any good
spot to build a flotilla along the channel that wasn't under the
threat of air attack.
: The Home Guard was ill-armed because of the reactionary gun-control
: laws pushed through by the British elite around 1920.
The guns donated to the home guard came from army surplus storage.
They were old rifles that had been packed in grease all those
years. I don't know where you are getting this story from of
personal guns being given.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: How much do you *NEED*?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:31:50 -0000
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:26:13 +0100, Angel Iglesias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> So with Microsoft software you pay _twice_.
>
> It depends on how complex are you requirements.
>
>> Unstable drivers will freeze anything. What kind of argument is that? At
>> least with linux, you can choose to leave out unstable drivers
>
> Just answering to an argument like this with another equal.
>
>> How do I
>> recompile Windows?
>
> What kind of question is this ? Why should I want to ? Do you think
You might want to tune something, or fix something.
If you want to trim down a Unix, it pretty much lends itself
well to that because it's inherently modular. OTOH, you might
want to trim down something even past that point or tweak
things beyond the intent of the original developer.
>that by compiling your kernel unstable drivers switch onto stable ones ?
No, they simply go away. X getting you down? Then don't run it?
DRI crashing on you left right and center? Then don't run it.
Although, if Windows were more modular many motivations to
recompile it would go away.
>
>> Only if you insist on tinkering. A properly configured linux system for
>> business use hardly needs any updating at all. Heck, it doesn't even need
>> reboots.
>
> It DOES need reboots (I assure you), obviously much more less that
>Windows;
>anyway, a properly configured Windows is the argument a Winvocate would tell
>you ...
>
>> It _does_ mean something if a badly behaving application can take the
>> entire computer down.
>
> Outlook virii under NT/2000 don't use to do that if properly configured
>system.
That's the rub. The system needs to be sane out of the box.
With Windows, you only have one variant of "out of the box".
Whereas with other competitive systems you have multiple
vendors attempting to outdo each other and cater to particular
niches.
[deletia]
The requirement to "properly set up Windows" makes it pointless.
--
>
> ...then there's that NSA version of Linux...
This would explain the Mars polar lander problem.
Kyle Jacobs, COLA
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 16:32:18 -0500
Nick Condon wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Edward Rosten) wrote in <972j0q$jm6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron Kulkis"
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>> LOL! Robin Hood was a common thief.
> >>
> >> No...that was the TAX COLLECTOR.
> >>
> >> Robin Hood merely returned to the people what was wrongfully stolen from
> >> them by Little John's tax collectors.
> >
> >Robin Hood was a common thief turned in to a legend.
> >
> >Little John was one of the Merry Men according to that legend. Are you
> >refering to she Sherrif of Nittingham?
Nottingham.
>
> I think he's referring to Prince John, a little snake in the Disney
> version.
Sorry, got the two Johns mixed up.
Prince John was rather little (in more ways than one).
Prince John had his older brother King Henry (who had gone off
on a crusade) to be declared dead, and had himself crowned King.
He then implemented a police state so that he could go about
methodically seizing all of the wealth throughout England (under
the PRETENSE of paying for the Crusade).
Robin was a yeoman, part of the rising middle class of the
period.
During this period...County Sheriffs were appointed by the King, and
not only was the position unpaid, but the Sheriff actually paid
the King a yearly sum for the PRIVILEGE of being the highest
authority (except the king himself) within that jurisdiction...
it being expected that being Sheriff was a profitable undertaking,
since the Sherrif (by means of his deputy, the under-sheriff) was
responsible for collecting taxes for the King, but could collect
as much "extra" as he wanted.
To put it bluntly, Robin lead a tax revolt against confiscatory
tax rates as collected by unjust government officials, a government
which had been hijacked by a cabal of men with very perverse,
"screw-the-people" ambitions.
> --
> Nick
--
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....
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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 Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Amusing Aaron Kulkis Anagrams
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 16:33:56 -0500
Nigel wrote:
>
> Guess your definition of Anagram came from the same dictionary
> MS use to get the Definition of stability meaning "more than 5 minutes
^
You forgot the word "no" at the beginning.
> uptime."
>
> meow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > I've been coming up with some anagrams of Aaron Kulkis name and i
> > thought id share them with you
> >
> > Aaron Kulis = Miserable piece of shit
> > Aaron Kulis = Toss Pot
> > Aaron Kulis = Argumentitive fuck wit
> > Aaron Kulis = Arrogant wank stain
> > Aaron Kulis = Numb nuts
> >
> > thats all i have so far
> > I think there surely must be some more
> > Anyone got any others?
> >
> > Meow
> >
--
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....
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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,comp.security.ssh
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:36:49 -0000
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:20:04 -0500, Se�n � Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> >
>> >Does that allow you to have multiple versions of the same library
>installed?
>>
>> I suspect yes. The fact that the OS doesn't read the multiple versions
>> after instaling one of them picked more or less at random (depending on
>> the first app run) is a very very eentsy teensy tiny itty bitty flaw....
>>
>
>Your fact is utter bullshit, Ghost. Read up on the way Win32 DLLs work.
In theory or practice?
A good facility is no good unless you actually use it.
--
Unless you've got the engineering process to match a DEC,
you won't produce a VMS.
You'll just end up with the likes of NT.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Microsoft backs out of Corel
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:37:32 GMT
In article <973ur1$nhr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Gardiner wrote:
This is insanity in action!
>I'm not really worried about Corel or Microsoft. Had Corel focused on its
>core fundimentals instead of going into unknown territory, in the case of
>the netwinder (I would hate to know how much was wasted in that little pipe
>dream), Corel wouldn't be in the deep shit they are now. Also, the lack of
>willingness to compete with Microsoft head on is another issue. In 1997 the
>NZ Army had just upgraded there computers from running Wordstar 2000, DBIV,
>123, and Harvard Graphics to Pentium's running Windows NT, hence they needed
>a new office suite. When the NZ Army were looking for software companies
>that were interested in providing an Office Suite for the army, the one who
>won was Microsoft, they offered a terrific deal, the deal allowed all
>computers in the army, AND all army personal who had computers at home, to
>be able to load Office. Corel didn't even offer a deal (from what I have
>heard from sources) even close to what Microsoft offered. Hence, the
>reason why Microsoft in some respects are successful, they chase customers,
>unlike Corel, who just sit around hoping someone will, out of the good ness
>of their own heart, choose Corel over their competitors.
>
>Matthew Gardiner
>
Matthew,
If Microsoft *COULD* product Microsoft Office for Linux as Corel has
done, they wouldn't be looked upon as stupid evil shits anymore.
They'd just be evil shits.
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
