Linux-Advocacy Digest #581, Volume #32 Thu, 1 Mar 01 14:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: [OT] .sig (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: The Windows guy. (Steve Mading)
Re: Windows losing Desktop, totally trounced in Server Market (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: M$ doing it again! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: questions (windows & Mac)....? ("JS PL")
Re: The Windows guy. (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: The Windows guy. (Steve Mading)
Re: The Windows guy. (Steve Mading)
Re: [OT] .sig (Richard Heathfield)
Re: why open source software is better (David Masterson)
Re: Are todays computers 1000 times better than the original PCs? (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Something Seemingly Simple. (Steve Mading)
Re: The Windows guy. (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship ("Chris Smith")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: [OT] .sig
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 12:57:40 -0500
Joona I Palaste wrote:
>
> Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribbled the following
> on comp.lang.c:
> > Second, as my grandpa used to say, "them what talks about it ain't
> > doin' it." The more Mr. Kulkis talks about "defending" his country,
> > the more convinced I am he has never done any such thing. In fact, a
> > little contemplation of current events will recall to everyone that
> > our country has not been threatened militarily in many decades.
> > Unless Mr. Kulkis is in his dotage, he has never served in combat to
> > "defend" the United States. Although, perhaps he took part in the
> > "turkey shoot" in Iraq 10 years ago, shooting fleeing civilians in the
> > back; or subsequently bulldozing the wounded into trenches and burying
> > them alive. That does not qualify as "defending" the United States in
> > any way.
>
> Well said. Unfortunately, Aaron Kulkis seems to think that any situation
> where you get to fire a gun is "defending the United States".
Actually, the majority of "defending the United States" is similar
to the crime-preventing effect of a large concentration of police.
It's the mere PRESENCE of the force which convinces most malcontents
to not commit acts of war/crimes.
Those who want peace should prepare for war.
Every major conflict has been because one side was ill-prepared for
war...and took a major shellacking because of it.
>
> --
> /-- Joona Palaste ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ---------------------------\
> | Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
> | http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
> \----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
>
> "The large yellow ships hung in the sky in exactly the same way that bricks
> don't."
> - Douglas Adams
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: 1 Mar 2001 17:57:58 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Actually, this does not demonstrate that a multitasking system is required
: to satisfy your definition of "pipe". It demonstrates a limitation of
: single process systems, and that's about it (unless you specify that your
: example must work).
: Otherwise, we can invent contrived examples that will fail almost anywhere.
: eg:
: process_that_reboots_the_system | tail -3
: This only works on systems that can save their state to disk.
Huh? How? The data sits there in the tempfile-pipe unused
because the 'tail' program never actually gets run. After
the reboot the system isn't going to remember that it was about
to execute the 'tail' command on that pipe. The above example
doesn't demonstrate what you are trying to demonstrate. It
fails on BOTH multitasking systems and uni-tasking machines.
: Does this
: mean that other systems do not support your definition of pipes ?
: --
: Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
: elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows losing Desktop, totally trounced in Server Market
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 13:01:17 -0500
al wrote:
>
> http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=20143
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not only is Paul Thurrott a simpering shit-head, but anybody
who relies upon this asshole for information falls into the
same category.
In case you're wondering Al, that means YOU.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: M$ doing it again!
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:12:57 -0600
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > > > Claiming something is self-documenting only works for people that
> > already
> > > > know what the code is for and does.
> > >
> > > Ignorance and an antipathy toward learning, does not mean something is
not
> > > documented.
> >
> > The purpose of documentation is to teach and inform. How can it do that
if
> > you have to already know what it does before it can document itself?
>
> If one authors literature in french, and you don't read french, is it
still
> literature? Program source code is a "language" if you can't understand
it,
> that is your problem.
The flaw in your logic is that it's possible to understand the language
quite well (in this case C) and still not know what the function does
without tracing through the code of a bunch of other functions to try and
deduce the meaning.
This would be to taking any chapter randomly, and picking only a single
paragraph and understanding exactly what the paragraph means. You might be
able to tell, but without the context of the story up to that point, it may
well also be very confusing.
> Documentation is not defined as something that "teaches and informs."
According
> to webster's the definition is: "the use of documentary evidence." or "a
> furnishing with documents as to substantiate a claim or the data in a book
or
> article."
>
> If you can not follow C code, that is too bad, but the code is the
> documentation of the kernel. If you can read C and familiarize yourself
with
> the structure of the kernel, you can know everything there is to know
about the
> Linux kernel.
Something can not be self-documenting. According to dictionary.com:
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=documentation
"Computer Science. The organized collection of records that describe the
structure, purpose, operation, maintenance, and data requirements for a
computer program. "
Uncommented source code does not meet that definition.
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <js@plcom>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: questions (windows & Mac)....?
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 13:05:18 -0500
"Tony Chatum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Shane Phelps
> & dropped Mac prices (instead of playing with every neat gadget that
> > came along)
> >
> > System 6 was far better for the user than Windows 3.x, so Apple could
> > have headed MS off at the pass. Scully and Jobs were too busy fighting
> > at the time to concentrate on cultivating the developers and pushing
> > the Mac as a superior alternative to Windows.
>
> Jobs wasn't around when Windows 3 was released. So Jobs has yet to play
> his cards against MS... It's still too early in the PC industry to see
> who the final winner will be.
>
> TONY
Yes it's only 1/40th of the way into Apples 1000 year grand takeover scheme.
Come on.... too early....pffft.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 13:08:21 -0500
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >> >> A simpler definition is:
> >> >>
> >> >> a mechanism which allows the output of one process to be put in to
> >> >> the input of another process in the order that it (the data) was
> >> >> outputted.
> >> >
> >> > You need to include some sort of reference to the fact that process1
> >> > and process2 are running simultaneously (as opposed to sequential
> >> > execution...i.e. process2 must be able to start executing while
> >> > process1 is still running).
> >>
> >> You don't need to specify that process 1 and 2 are concurrent, since it
> >> can be deduced from the definition.
> >
> > No..there's wiggle room to allow perverted interpretations such as the
> > DOS implementation.
>
> No. Under my definition, what DOS has are _NOT_ pipes.
You failed to word it in such a way that completely precludes
the usage of temp files.
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> | u98ejr
> | @
> Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
> | .ac.uk
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: 1 Mar 2001 18:02:39 GMT
Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Steve Mading wrote:
:> until it is running. Here's an analogy: Program is to screenplay
:> as process is to movie.
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: correction: as process is to a performance.
Hmm.. Yeah - that does work better. I was thinking "movie" as
in "going to see a...", but on re-reading it, I see that it
would probably be interpeted as "film sitting in a can", and
that's not the image I was looking for.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: 1 Mar 2001 18:04:51 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:97kca1$enc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> : "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
:> : news:97jp4h$ice$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:>
:> :> NO. Running code is NOT a program. Running code is a process.
:> :> The word "program" refers to the image in its static form, either
:> :> as an executable file (and the associated execution library files),
:> :> or as a loaded bunch of code in RAM. It doesn't become a "process"
:> :> until it is running. Here's an analogy: Program is to screenplay
:> :> as process is to movie.
:>
:> : Well then, I fail to understand your refusal to clasify running DOS code
: as
:> : a process then.
:>
:> I fail to see why you think that's what I've been saying, King Strawman.
:> Running DOS code IS a process, I even SAID that DOS is a single
:> process that never dies, right in this very thread. The pertinent
:> point, that you keep missing, is that it is ONE, count them, ONE process.
:> Inter-process requires that there be actual processes (plural) to
:> talk to each other. One process talking to itself using a temp
:> file is not "interprocess" by any stretch of the imagination.
: Then tell me, how is it that TSR's can run concurrently with DOS
: applications? Are you going to claim that the TSR and the DOS application
: are the same process? Clearly, they're not.
TSR's are not processes any more than the UNIX kernel is a "process".
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 18:01:20 +0000
From: Richard Heathfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: [OT] .sig
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
> Michael Powe wrote:
> >
<snip>
> > While it's deeply shaming to have such as Mr. Kulkis performing his
> > routine as the "ugly American" before an international audience, I
There is no need (writes this Englishman) for clueful Americans to feel
such shame. Idiocy is a truly international phenomenon. Mr Kulkis
happens to be an American idiot, but there are also plenty of
non-American idiots to go round.
> > would like to point out a couple things. First, we have no true
> > knowledge that Mr. Kulkis ever served in the Armed Forces of the
>
> Check the records.
I just checked the only record that counts in comp.lang.c - the ISO C
Standard - and Mr Kulkis doesn't seem to be mentioned there, so I can
only conclude that he's mistaken about his name appearing in the
records.
<snip>
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R Answers: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton/kandr2/index.html
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 13:14:50 -0500
Subject: Re: why open source software is better
From: David Masterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> "Les" == Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "vrml3d.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:97joc1$t53$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:Lo8n6.4637$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I wrote:
>>>>> The subject line for this message should be "why open source
>>>>> software is better for the *customer*".
>>>> No, it should be "why open source software is better for the
>>>> customer in the short run". Anything that drives producers out
>>>> of the market in the long run is bad for consumers in the long
>>>> run, business cycles not withstanding.
>>> The only producers that open source can drive out of the market
>>> are the ones who do not have a better product or service or are
>>> charging more than it is worth.
>> Not true (see below)
> Of course it is true. If you create a product that fills a need at
> a price less than the value it provides above similar products you
> aren't going to be driven out of any market that allows competition.
Huh? If all similar products are "free" (cost, not freedom) as "free"
(freedom, not cost) software is, then your value equation becomes very
skewed against any product that tries to compete with it for a price.
As an example, any company that wanted to develop a proprietary next
generation Emacs (let's say one that was fully multi-tasking and
allowed any programming language to be plugged into it in the way
Elisp is along with other bells and whistles) couldn't possibly hope
to compete with the "free" (cost, not freedom) Emacs. While such a
product might be successful in the long run, it would probably require
several iterations before all the features were "in there" and, so,
the company would not survive against Emacs in the short run.
> Shrink-wrapped software hasn't gone away, and it won't in any case
> where it provides something that no one is willing to do for free.
Niche markets are always an option (this is how the current Emacs
wannabees survive). However, as M$ has shown, it is easier for the
leader in the general market to take over the niche market than it is
for the niche leader to take over the general market.
> But, if hardware prices keep dropping you will see many more bundled
> 'appliances' where the software is specialized and bundled for a
> specific task instead of paying separately for software as an item
> on its own.
There is already beginning to be a backlash against this. People are
getting tired of having so many specialized appliances. Look at the
universal remote -- people were tired of one remote for each of the
TVs, VCRs, stereos, DVDs, etc., so they needed to adopt (some)
standards such that a universal remote could do the job of many
specialized remotes.
--
David Masterson ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Rational Software (but I don't speak for them)
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Are todays computers 1000 times better than the original PCs?
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 13:18:52 -0500
Peter Hayes wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 20:10:25 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I just noticed I have 1000 times more ram than my first PC/XT, it is a dual
> > processor 600 MHZ system which is a an aggregate 250 times faster. My first
> > hard disk was 20Meg, I have an aggregate 2300 times more disk space.
> >
> > It has been an amazing 16 years of computing.
>
> Another look into the future?
>
> http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010118.html
He's been hitting the bong with that reefer character..
replacing silicon with plastic is ... ludicrous.
Plastic doesn't have the quantum-dynamic properties offered by
Silicon and Gallium Arsenide, etc.
>
> Peter
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Something Seemingly Simple.
Date: 1 Mar 2001 18:10:07 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>>>>Can I, or can I not write my own printf() which behaves utterly and
:>>>>completely differently than the printf() in the standard library?
:>>>>
:>>>>a) no B) YES.
:>>>
:>>> You cannot define your own printf name with external linkage.
:>>
:>>You can if you're not linking against the standard library.
:>
:> If you're not linking against the standard library you're not using a
:> conforming implementation, in which case you're automatically off topic
:> in c.l.c.
: I was under the impression that to be conforming, the system had to
: provide a standard library, but you could choose not to use if (for
: example if you're in to building kernels).
But can you name-clash with it? Is that something that has to work?
If you write a kernel version of printf, don't you still have to
call it something different, like "kprintf", for example.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: 1 Mar 2001 18:20:59 GMT
On 1 Mar 2001 17:57:58 GMT, Steve Mading wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>: Actually, this does not demonstrate that a multitasking system is required
>: to satisfy your definition of "pipe". It demonstrates a limitation of
>: single process systems, and that's about it (unless you specify that your
>: example must work).
>
>: Otherwise, we can invent contrived examples that will fail almost anywhere.
>
>: eg:
>
>: process_that_reboots_the_system | tail -3
>
>: This only works on systems that can save their state to disk.
>
>Huh? How? The data sits there in the tempfile-pipe unused
>because the 'tail' program never actually gets run. After
>the reboot the system isn't going to remember that it was about
>to execute the 'tail' command on that pipe. The above example
>doesn't demonstrate what you are trying to demonstrate. It
>fails on BOTH multitasking systems and uni-tasking machines.
Try reading the post again. It fails on machines that can't save
their state to disk. (but doesn't necessarily fail on all multitasking
machines)
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "Chris Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:19:37 -0600
How did this get cross-posted to comp.lang.java.programmer? Whatever the
case, please stop.
Chris Smith
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
