Linux-Advocacy Digest #495, Volume #33 Wed, 11 Apr 01 00:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Has Linux anything to offer ? (Rex Ballard)
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rex Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Has Linux anything to offer ?
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 03:11:53 GMT
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
==============CF074738F8603B50E4349834
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Some of these questions may have less than obvious answers.
Peter wrote:
>
> Has Linux seriously anything to offer the average desktop user?
Absolutely. Especially the "Power User" and the "Customer Service
Agent".
More to follow.
> Is it really a full operating system for the desktop?
In many ways it's too full. A properly installed and configured Linux
desktop can be learned in a matter of a few minutes. At the same time
a fully configured Linux system has over 2000 packages. Just imagine
bringing your computer home with 2000 of those cute little VCR size
"shrink wrapped boxes".
The good news is that there is a massive amount of software
available. The bad
news is that there is a massive amount of software available.
> Does it boot up and shut down quicker than other operating systems?
No. The other operating systems have minimal services, in fact even
Windows
2000 Professional limits you to 20 TCP/IP connections. The number of
services
and threads started initially is very small, typically 3-4 services,
and even
these must be custom installed.
Linux on the other hand starts about 300 processes because it
functions as
both a client and a server. Much of this it inherits from Sun's "The
Network
is the Mainframe" concept. Windows has very limited pseudo
peer-to-peer
capabilities such as Chat and messaging. This is a bit like comparing
the
busy-wait multitasking of Windows 3.0 with the true preemptive
multitasking
of Windows 2000. Linux has a complete set of packages designed to
make peer-to-peer systems safe, reliable, and effective.
> Is software for accessing the Web, Email and Newsgroups the best there is
> available?
There are numerous packages. In many cases, the components are
actually superior to comparable capabilities available under Windows.
Windows has limitations on the number of concurrent processes that can
run concurrently (this is less of a
problem with Windows 2000, but requires nontrivial rewrites to exploit
and only works on Microsoft's smallest market share product).
In Windows you HAD to have a bundle ware package such as Lotus Notes
or Outlook
which could store files efficiently in the 32k clusters of FAT-16 file
systems.
FAT-32 improved things somewhat, but Linux was designed to efficiently
use very large disk drives from the start. Windows NT 4.0 and Windows
2000 offer NTFS
file systems that are more efficient, but are also more expensive.
Because Linux supports free-standing components, and supports multiple
desktops,
you have less need for MDI, this means you have less need for OLE,
DDE, and
COM/DCOM style "binary linked components". Again, Windows 2000 does
have better support for free-standing DCOM services, but applications
have to be written specifically for this product - most aren't. On
Linux, most are.
> Are there more software programs written for the home user in Linux than any
> other system?
It really depends on what the home user is looking for. Ironically,
Linux is
more of a professionally oriented machine. If you are a student who
would like to learn the principles of UNIX, if you are the secretary
of a non-profit and want
to put up a web-site, or if you just want to chat and e-mail, Linux
has some
really great tools to do this.
Ironically, the ease with which one can add a product to the core
Linux distribution has lowered the barriers to entry. To get a
shrink-wrapped box
onto the shelves of CompUSA, you need to have over $1 million/month in
front-money and capital, along with over $1 million/month in revenue -
and that's
just the ante.
With Linux, there is very little "up front" marketing investment.
Users can
"try before they buy". Many users will start with an application on
the CD, and then buy the books, register at the web site, and get the
helpful goodies.
PERL, Python, PHP, and other scripting languages, combined with KDE
and GNOME components have made it very easy to obtain programs that
can be packaged quite creatively. In many cases, the programs have
multiple user interfaces. You can
use the built-in web server and browser and run the application as a
web app.
You can use the CORBA components (KDE, GNOME) to create custom GUI
dialogues,
or you can use Java.
As an end-user, this means that you can choose from a library so vast
that
it's not even possible to catalogue.
> Do games and graphical programs run faster and better than on other systems?
This depends. In some cases, DOS games can actually be run on the
Linux DOS emulator and will run faster than the Windows versions. In
other cases, the
games are driven by OpenGL engines, many of which can run quite
quickly, some
are even faster than Windows, depending on the graphics chips used.
Windows does have the ability to use DirectX to program to a
lower-level chip
interface, but this does limit the market to DirectX capable machines.
A good video game machine costs about $100-300. A good Windows 2000
computer
(closest equivalent to Linux) costs over $3000, and over $6000 when
you include
software, utilities, and development tools.
> Are CD-R and CD-RW easier to configure and use with Linux?
This depends or your system. Linux sports multiple "toasters", and
the set-up for the read-write is a bit more involved. On the other
hand, the EZ-CD Creator
used on most Windows CD-ROM burners costs over $100 retail.
> Is the support for Display Cards, DVD, Sound Cards, Large Hard Drives and
> Printers better?
For the products that advertise Linux compatibility, the support is
usually
quite good. In many cases, you can exploit features that aren't
available
on Windows (like 1100x800 resolution). Support varies with the
distribution.
SuSE and Mandrake have very good support. Red Hat 6.1 is probably not
a good
"beginner's machine".
Keep in mind that when Crashes are reported to Microsoft, the drivers
are usually blamed. For Windows NT and Windows 98, where crashes can
happen several times
each month, one can't really say that driver support is all that
great.
Conversely, While Linux supports a smaller subset of devices, the
support is excellent and the drivers generally don't take down the
system. Linux is
notorious for being able to run from months between reboots.
> Is there a really must have program for the home user that is only available
> in Linux?
Probably not for the home user. On the other hand, it really depends
on
what your interests are. Because of the lower cost of entry, many
special
interest applications are available for Linux that are prohibitively
expensive
on Windows. For example, StarOffice for Linux is about $50, Microsoft
Office
professional edition retails for nearly 10 times that price. When the
choice
is a new refrigerator (or school clothes for the kids) and Microsoft
Office,
Linux offers a few little advantages.
> Is the fact that Linux is free and used by people who do not want to pay for
> anything the only reason it is used?
No.
Some people like it because they like having the power and stability
of
a UNIX system. They use UNIX at work, they design web sites, they
work with
larger corporate systems. They want to be able to work on a laptop,
at home,
in the hotel, or anywhere else that makes overtime more palatable. At
the same
time, they need the full power of UNIX, including all of those
wonderful
utilities.
Other people just like having a machine that doesn't play host to
every little worm, virus, and trojan horse that seems to show up and
play havoc with Outlook users. Linux includes it's own firewall, it's
own web server, it's own DNS server,
it's own mail server, and it's own SMTP relay server. As a result,
you don't
have to worry about leaving this fat repository of personal e-mail
sitting on
some public web server to be read by anyone who feels that your
personal e-mail
is their privileged information.
Other people just have lots of things they need to do and people like
to interrupt them, or they need to deal with people who have
unexpected needs. Web browsers are nice when you only have one or two
pages and you can keep them in cache, but when you have multiple
expert systems and they are on numerous different systems, including
UNIX, MVS, Windows, and perhaps VMS or Tandem, it's very nice to be
able to hop from system to system without having to wait for new
connections.
People also like having a single desktop that can give them a
consistent
working environment whether it's a stand-alone system or a multitiered
cluster.
> Finally where would the sales of home computers be today if the only
> operating system was Linux?
Actually, you'd see two patterns. First of all, since Linux
distribution upgrades come out early and often, manufacturers could
avoid the "Beta/GA Crunch" that
has plagued Windows releases. Microsoft announces a new release, OEMs
order capacity quantities of RAM, ROM, hard drives, and the fastest
chips available. The suppliers, unable to keep up with the demand
charge much higher prices, often 3-5 times original price, but can't
produce enough to really exploit the higher prices.
Then the Microsoft release is late - more shortages, more inflated
prices. Finally, the release does come out and instantly, everybody's
machine is
"obsolete" - including the machines purchased 3 weeks ago at the
hyper-prices.
For about 3-6 weeks, there is a huge rush of "suckers" who try to
upgrade their
old machines. In many cases, Microsoft finds some creative ways to
turn beta
users into shipments reportable under SEC filings to make it look like
1 million
copies were sold in the first week/month.
Then, it's business as usual. The OEMs even find that they have a
hard time
selling the new system (which they MUST install on every machine) to
customers
who are justifiably paranoid after being burned by Windows 3.5,
Windows 95,
Windows NT 4.0, Windows 98, Windows 2000, and Windows ME (all of whom
had
very "bumpy" initial releases.
Now, with OEMs sitting on $billions in commitments for RAM, software
licenses,
and advertising, the machines sit on the shelves, unsold, for most of
the
christmas season. Eventually, the prices are dropped, creative
financing
through "internet obligations" to providers who charge as much as
$1200 for
4 years of service generously offer a "rebate" of $400, if you will
obligate
yourself to 56k dial-up service for 4 years.
Meanwhile, your old machine is useless. You can't trade it in, you
can't sell
it, you can't even use it as a server to the newer machine. You can't
even
use the old machine to leverage the new machine.
====================
And then we have Linux. With it's "early and often" releases and new
distributions, the OEMs don't have to put the entire inventory on
hold.
The suppliers can get more stable prices on demand they can usually
fill.
The demand flattens to a moderate but relatively regular 150%/year
growth
rate (historical growth rate of Linux over the last 4 years exceeds
this).
This in turn provides a more stable growth rate for PCs in general.
In
addition, because Linux runs on older, smaller boxes, they can be
traded in,
resold to low-income families, or shipped overseas. That Pentium 100
may
not be fast enough for speed-freak Westerners who want 1 GIPS machines
and
Gigaflops performance, but it's plenty fast for a web site for that
mom-and-pop shop down the street, or that little village in Nigeria.
Microsoft's approach to the PC market is very similar to changing the
type of gasoline used every 2-3 years. This would assure that
everybody
had to buy new cars every 4-6 years, but would accelerate the
depreciation
rate on those vehicles, making it harder to finance and harder to
resell
later.
The Linux approach is more standards-based. The internal design may
change
radically, but the core standards, the fuel, the road, the positioning
of
the steering wheel, remain the same. At the same time, Linux provides
much more customization capability. Millions of people purchased
Harley
Davidson motorcycles BECAUSE the dealer would create a very
personalized
machine for them, and they could add additional "personality" later.
In the extreme cases we had choppers with ape-hanger handlebars, seats
that were designed as much for their erotic benefits as for their
style
and comfort.
Linux users are quite proud of the astonishing things they can do with
their machines. Many Linux users don't just throw away machines.
They
simply purchase a new "front end", and then use the established
standards
to leverage the existing systems into the newer system.
Linux isn't for everybody. About 30% of all Windows users love
Windows and wouldn't even think of using anything else. Another 20%
really don't care
what they are using and will probably use whatever comes with their
machine.
On the other hand, there are a substantial number of Windows users who
have
lost thousands of dollars in productivity due to Windows failures. In
many
cases, the machine crashes and they have to work overtime to meet the
same
deadlines - with no compensation from either Microsoft or their
client/employer.
These are the hottest candidates for Linux. If they can get a
properly configured Linux system, they are willing to spend a few
extra hours to fully exploit it.
On the flip side, there are those whose first experience of Linux will
be attempting to install an arcane version pulled from some poorly
managed
archive site, who will attempt to install it on the latest USB
machine.
They will try to use FIPS to repartition a 40 gig drive, and they will
wonder why things didn't go so well. They will then blame Linux, even
though they never called for help, they didn't even ask their vendor
if the machine was designed to run Linux, and they didn't even bother
to talk to a friend who could help them configure Linux.
Bottom line - suppose Linux only gets 40% of the currently installed
windows
base over the next 2-3 years. This would only be 400 million machines
sold
over 2-3 years. Microsoft on the other hand has to convince their
users
that the 1 billion machines sold over the last 3-5 years are actually
worthless
pieces of junk and should be dismantled into their component parts (at
$400/machine) rather than being resold as Linux machines.
Furthermore,
they have to convince the public that they really will deliver
capabilities
far superior to Windows 2000 for the price of a Windows ME machine.
Finally,
they have to convince users that giving up their privacy, security,
and
future purchasing choices will be worth letting Microsoft have
unrestricted
access to their machines.
And finally, Microsoft will have to convince all of those users that
they have
a better Linux than Linux.
Keep in mind, all Linux has to do is "be different". People who
really like
windows will probably stay with what they already have. Not too many
people
see any real benefit to upgrading from a 900Mhz machine to a 1.2 Ghz
machine.
And an upgrade to yet another Microsoft operating system that offers
such
features as "Compatibility mode" with Windows 9x and ME, sounds almost
as risky as Linux' WINE or Win4Lin or VMWare.
Linux just has to convince people who took windows because that was
what was shoveled onto their machine (no real commitment behind it),
that Linux is
worth a few hundred bucks for a new machine.
Microsoft has to tell their own customers (OEMs and Corporations) to
tell
THEIR customers that they were idiots for using Windows ME/2K in the
first place and that what they REALLY need to do is throw that old
$2000 boat anchor into a deep lake (avoiding EPA enforcement at all
possible
costs), and purchase brand-new Windows XP.Net boxes, and give
Microsoft the
access codes to their most personal, confidential, and strategic data.
You see, if all Microsoft does is convince you to buy a new machine.
You still have the old machine. This machine, now worthless in the
windows market,
becomes a Linux machine.
What the OEMs have to decide then, is whether to pay Microsoft a
premium in royalties to have a crack at a saturated market and a jaded
customer base, or
whether to take a shot at selling a few million Linux machines as the
"latest
and greatest new thing". Keep in mind that the "obsolete machine"
will
probably require some skilled entrepreneur who is willing and able to
make
the conversion quickly and efficiently. Dell can either install Linux
themselves, perhaps with last year's version of Windows (for Lin4Win)
and make a few bucks on each box, or they pay Microsoft 30 cents/share
and let some two-bit outfit remanufacture the discards.
Perhaps Dell could even have the best of both worlds. By leasing
machines
to corporate users, Dell can bring the machines back, put Linux on
them,
and then resell them as Linux workstations. The kids would love these
cheaper machines. They'd of course grow up with Linux, and would want
the latest 20 Ghz RISC machine capable of running Linux and real-time
3D
animations of complex structures - similar to the combat simulators
SGI
makes for the Military - to do applications we haven't even considered
yet.
Of course, a Kid who grew up with Linux' component structures would
even
think differently, much the same way that the fido/usenet crowd and
the UNIX
crowd were thinking in terms of "The Web" back in 1993, and took
20%/month
growth rates in stride as if it just "the usual". They worked with
modest
tools like Apache, Solaris (remember all those UNIX boxes in the
Universities?),
and PERL - they didn't have to be spoon-fed using
high-gloss/low-productivity
tools.
Imagine what could happen when you have a generation of kids, many of
whom
are just now graduating, who have cut their teeth on GNOME, KDE,
Python, TCL,
PERL, and PHP, as well as Java, who can combine these tools and
components
as easily as our web-hosting developers put together CGI scripts. We
could
see these kids tracking and identifying key movements and percentage
gains
on the entire Wilshire 5000 AND every ticker on every exchange,
including
options, for the most strategic buys - in a matter of 3-6 seconds.
Imagine
one of these kids at the treasury department - tracking economic
growth of
nearly 200 million accounts, accurate to within 30 seconds.
And consider the possibility that these vundakinder would be working
fewer hours and making more money than their Windows wielding
grandparents.
You see, the Baby boomers of 1945-1955 will be retiring over the next
20
years. The "Boom-II" boomers of 1980-1987 will have to be even more
efficient, more productive, and more competitive.
The ability to put a server in your pocket - rather than just the
client that accesses the server, will be a pivotal advantage.
I look at some of the kids in the "Linux Generation" and it's pretty
amazing. They are running around with Cell-phones that they use
constantly,
wireless PDAs that they use like terminals, and wireless modems tied
to
mini-notebooks that run Linux. Linux makes it possible to run
"on-line"
for hours without having to suspend or hibernate.
Yes, I even see the Transmeta chip redefining not only laptop and
portable
computers, but perhaps even leapfrogging the 64 bit market and pushing
us
into 128 bit processors with 256 bit video chips.
These guys will be people you want to know.
Unfortunately, much as Bill Joy was virtually unknown in 1987, and
Marc Andreeson
was unknown in 1992, there are probably 30-40 interesting characters
who
haven't quite made it to "overnight success" who will be household
names
in a few years. Linus, Richard, Maddog and Sam Palmisano may be among
them,
but the field is by no means saturated.
Creating computer systems that negotiate, that enforce complex legal
agreements, and that do business the way business does business will
require more custom
code, and less of the "Productivity Software" that Microsoft is famous
for.
Can you imagin Microsoft trying to create a "one size fits all"
application for an insurance company. Just the U.S. version would
require the ability to remain constantly in compliance with over 400
regulatory bodies in 50 states, plus the federal government. What's
worse, the software would have to be updated for
each regulatory action. And to make things even worse, the customer
would
have to trust that every single upgrade was safe for production work.
Imagine Microsoft writing banking software. Not only do you have
regulatory
agencies, but you have national and international standards which
cannot be
subverted. Would you really like your checks and finances running
under
Outlook?
Even look at how many large projects are managed in the Windows
environment.
Consultants spend as much as 80% of the project life-cycle telling you
- in
Microsoft Word and Powerpoint documents, how wonderful this system is
going
to be. And they spend hundreds of hours making it look really
pretty. Then
absolutely NONE of this pretty documentation can be used to generate
even
2 lines of useful code without serious rework.
This very pretty specification is turned over to highly paid
professionals
who then "play video games", essentially cut/paste, drag-drop, and
"connect
the dots", and push the right set of buttons in the right order to
EVENTUALLY
come up with something that might actually reflect the documentation.
At least with something like Rational, you get design specifications
that then automatically generate source code - for UNIX or COBOL.
> Peter
--
Rex Ballard
It Architect
http://www.open4success.com
==============CF074738F8603B50E4349834
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
name="rballard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Rex Ballard
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="rballard.vcf"
begin:vcard
n:Ballard;Rex
tel;cell:908-723-4008
tel;work:973-723-4008
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fn:Rex Ballard
end:vcard
==============CF074738F8603B50E4349834==
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 23:20:20 -0400
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Tue, 10 Apr 2001 02:01:25 -0400
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >>
> >> "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> >> message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ayende Rahien
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > wrote
> >> > on Sun, 8 Apr 2001 16:56:46 +0200
> >> > <9apuo5$56u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> > >
> >> > >"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> >> > >message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >> (It'll be interesting to see what can be done against
> >> > >> infrared goggles, admittedly. Most likely they'll
> >> > >> have to develop a good light insulating material made
> >> > >> into a coat, or a thick insulating goo spread on the
> >> > >> face, hands, feet, etc. But I digress. :-) )
> >> > >
> >> > >*Bad* idea. You will be cooked to death in a short while. No heat
> >> > >dissapation. Especially when being physically active.
> >> >
> >> > Heh...whoops, my bad; hadn't thought of that. One might be able to
> >> > strive for the "invisible man with gloves and shoes" effect, but
> >> > I think the enemy will, ahem, see right through that ploy....
> >> >
> >> > Mind you, something will have to be done. The only thing I can think
> >> > of that might take care of the heat dissipation problem is piping
> >> > to a heat exchanger (think liquid-cooled thermal underwear); this
> >> > has certain obvious problems that limit its use. (Either the user
> >> > radiates very hot (bright) from his backpack, or he's attached to a
> >> > vehicle and/or structure with a limited radius of movement, and
> >> > that vehicle will radiate; target the vehicle, and the soldiers
> >> > might have to play "schuck the suit".)
> >>
> >> Instead of blocking the heat, it would be better if you could mask the human
> >> heat signature.
> >> Since currently the only use for IR vision is with humans watchers, you
> >> might want to use camoflouge there too.
> >
> >precisely. As soon as the person's IR signature is indistinguishable
> >from his environment, he "disappears" from IR sensors.
>
> This is a good point as well. One could, for instance, stand in front
> of a compressor unit tuned to output at 98.6 degrees (approximately). [*]
> Since there's also a blower fan, the human won't be too uncomfortable
> although one might have to take care not to generate "wind shadows",
> or too much noise.
>
> One would presumably have to ensure, however, that the rifle
> is properly warmed prior to the soldier picking it up (e.g., storing
> it in a warm room). There may also be the issue of heating them,
> electrically or otherwise.
>
> Hmmm....I think the "duck blind" idea makes more sense, perhaps. :-)
> Oh well; I'm not a soldier and, were I ever to become one, I'd
> probably be the first one shot by the enemy anyway.
1) Thermal-vision systems are damned expensive. That means that
a) ordinary line units don't get them
b) ONLY units getting them are specialized units (like special operations
units; SEALS, Special Forces, *some* Rangers, SEALS, SPETsNAZ,
Commandos, etc.)
Due to (1b) above, normal "line" companies of infantry, armor, etc.
are unlikely to get hit by units with thermal-vision goggles...in
fact...the farther you are into the rear, the more likely you will
encounter enemy troops with thermal-vision equipment.
The exception is Americans...we put thermal vision equipment in
lots of combat vehicles (armor and aircraft).
>
> [.sigsnip]
>
> [*] the human body actually varies in temperature from point to point,
> especially since the hands, feet, and head lose a lot of heat,
> and, to a lesser extent, arms and legs.
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random concentric circle pattern here
> EAC code #191 4d:08h:15m actually running Linux.
> Use the source, Luke.
--
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 Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
