Linux-Advocacy Digest #575, Volume #33 Fri, 13 Apr 01 11:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: So much for modules in Linux! (Chad Everett)
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Nix)
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Nix)
Re: Darwinian Evolution and open software (Andres Soolo)
Re: MS and ISP's (Chad Everett)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Chris Morgan)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Rob
Robertson)
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Tor Arntsen)
Re: So much for modules in Linux! ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a (Brent R)
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a (Brent R)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Chris Morgan)
Re: Ah Sweet Dreams are Made of This (Was: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Phlip)
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a (Brent R)
Re: This is a fucking miracle! CD-R Follow up story ("MH")
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a (Chad Everett)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Brent R)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: So much for modules in Linux!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 13 Apr 2001 08:57:47 -0500
On Fri, 13 Apr 2001 11:26:26 +0000 (UTC), Grant Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Fri, 13 Apr 2001 07:00:44 GMT, Pete Goodwin
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Grant Fischer wrote:
>>
>>> What exactly did you do? Your initial messages don't mention this
>>> article at all, and your latest message confuses it with boot.local.
>>> I don't have a lot of confidence that you "did what the article
>>> suggested." I have less confidence that you bothered to figure
>>> out how to make the tip work for 7.1.
>>
>> (i) I tried what the article suggested, it did not work - why don't you
>> believe me?
>
>I believe you tried; whether you got it right or not is at issue.
>If it works by starting it manually after the end of the boot process,
>it is trivial to get it to happen correctly during the boot.
>
>> (ii) SuSE tech support suggest boot.local, it did not work.
>
>They were wrong. It happens. The article I pointed you to
>has the right advice, albeit for an earlier version.
>
After reading many of Peter's posts I am starting to seriously doubt
that anyone at SuSE, in reality, actually told him to use boot.local.
Maybe the name boot.local came up somehow and he took off with it.
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xinix{[email protected]>
Crossposted-To:
24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: 13 Apr 2001 14:12:35 +0100
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Thore B. Karlsen spake:
> On 11 Apr 2001 11:54:42 -0300, Roberto Selbach Teixeira
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>What can't you do with customize?
>
> Make functions that make emacs liveable.
But you can't write code in *any* point-and-clicky configurator.
Complaining because Emacs requires you to write code to configure
things, and then complaining because its point-and-clicky configurator
doesn't let you write code, is rather inconsistent.
--
Rusks for Peace!
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xinix{[email protected]>
Crossposted-To:
24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: 13 Apr 2001 14:16:32 +0100
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Thore B. Karlsen spake:
> On 11 Apr 2001 17:28:59 +0100, Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You want the additional functionality you have to pay
>>something for it.
>
> I _don't_ want the additional functionality! It's nice to have it, but as
> options, not as part of the standard package.
They *are* options.
> I don't want 47MB worth of
> crud that I'm never going to use.
Don't install the Lisp packages corresponding to the things you don't
want, then.
> Emacs should stick to being a text editor, not an application environment.
Sorry, but the Emacs developers and Emacs users disagree. It's been an
application environment for a damned long time (decades).
--
Rusks for Peace!
------------------------------
From: Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Darwinian Evolution and open software
Date: 13 Apr 2001 14:15:04 GMT
Beth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No such thing as "random"...there's only chaos...subjectively, you can call
> something random, implying that, to you, it's random but it actually isn't
> in reality...
The quantum processes seem to be random and not chaotic.
--
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Armstrong's Collection Law:
If the check is truly in the mail,
it is surely made out to someone else.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS and ISP's
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 13 Apr 2001 09:08:55 -0500
On Fri, 13 Apr 2001 06:40:20 -0400, JS PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Fri, 13 Apr 2001 00:22:17 -0400, JS PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Said JS PL in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:42:54 -0400;
>> >> [...]
>> >> >MS holds no "right" to be on all computers, but my power company holds
>> >the
>> >> >"right" to be my sole supplier of electricity. That is a true
>monopoly.
>> >[...]
>> >>
>> >> Sounds more like a true public utility. Tell me, is this "right" that
>> >> they have something they always have by their nature, or something
>which
>> >> is imbued unto them from outside?
>> >
>> >It doesn't matter. They are the lawfully granted the right to be the sole
>> >supplier of electricity. No one else may sell electricity in their area.
>A
>> >person who puts up a windmill, or any type of generator may not sell the
>> >electricity they produce, except back to the monopoly holder in my area.
>And
>> >I like the term "sell back" as if it was once and is always theirs. That
>is
>> >a true monopoly.
>> >
>>
>> You're forgetting a crucial detail there pal. If they are granted this
>right
>> in the manner you describe, then there also exists a government entity
>called
>> a public utilities commission (or something similar) that acts as an
>oversite
>> over the company. The government agency has the power to dictate what the
>> company may and may not do, what they can charge for their product or
>service,
>> it can fine the company for violations or actions that it deems is bad for
>> the consumer, etc., etc.
>>
>> Are you suggesting that a similar government oversite be done for
>Microsoft?
>> Sounds like you are.
>
>Why would I suggest that, dumb ass. Microsoft isn't a monopoly.
>
Hey dipstick. The court has already ruled they are a monopoly, so
they are. You can say they are not all that you want, doesn't make
any difference, except in your pea-sized brain. By talking about
power companies, you opened up the suggestion that Microsoft might
need a government oversight if they aren't broken up. You brought
it up, not me.
------------------------------
From: Chris Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: 13 Apr 2001 10:21:44 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Douglas Siebert) writes:
> Chris Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Douglas Siebert) writes:
>
> >> Even today, I'm sure a majority of corporate desktops are Windows 95 or
> >> 98.
>
> >My limited experience contradicts this - it's more often Windows NT in
> >our support calls - so could you back this up, I'm interested, perhaps
> >our customers are unusual. Thanks
>
>
> Well, I don't have any official survey results, I think we would both
> be interested in such. But in my experience as a consultant, the places
> I go almost always are running Win9x on their desktops. However, as I
> do consulting in big-iron Unix systems (SAP environments, that sort of
> thing) maybe I'm not getting a representative look.
Our customers are financial professionals. On their desks it's mostly
Windows NT judging by the problem reports we get, and something DOS
based (95/98/ME) on their laptop. Never actually seen a bug report
mentioning 2000 or ME so far. So I guess we can add our two
unrepresentative samples together and conclude ... nothing ! :)
So yes, some hard data would be welcome here.
>Places that bought the MS line that Win9x suddenly became unsuitable
>for corporate desktops with the release of WinME and Win2K (i.e.,
>when they decided that revenue from millions of upgrades would help
>their ailing stock price) are also probably attempting to run their
>enterprise applications on Windows :)
We use NT on the desktop, but run the software that makes the money on
Unix. The PC support teams attempts at PC servers have been pretty
laughable.
By the way, Win9X _is_ pretty unsuitable for corporate desktops, IMO,
due to little gotchas like the single (64k?) memory area for all GDI
resources - you may well have a gig of RAM, a 1GHz processor, a
gazillion megs of free disk space, but run a program that leaks a few
resources here and there and your PC will eventually crash inside the
operating system (not very good for subsequent stability of, e.g. the
filesystem).
>
> I'm sure MS probably will tell you that the personal version of WinXP
> is unsuitable for corporate desktops, and that the more expensive
> professional version should be used. Though I've never seen anything
> listing exactly what features that the professional version will have
> that the personal one won't, and why they are needed, to justify the
> price differential.
I would like to know too.
Cheers,
Chris
--
Chris Morgan <cm at mihalis.net> http://www.mihalis.net
Temp sig. - Enquire within
------------------------------
From: Rob Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 10:20:25 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gunner � wrote:
>
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 16:47:32 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> >Let's take a nice, Glen "Sliverdick" Yeadon style pure-democratic vote:
> >
> >All for putting Glen "Sliverdick" Yeadon up against the wall, and
> >filling him full of lead, say "AYE!" All opposed, say "NAY"
> >
> >
> >Let's see how much Sliverdick likes democracy now.
>
> AYE! And Ill donate the ammo!
Well, that's pretty silly, especially when we can use Glen's
own tax money to pay for the ammo and the firing squad.
Thank God we live in a country founded on the principle of
inalienable, individual rights, eh?
_
RR
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tor Arntsen)
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.development.system
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:28:41 GMT
Ken Tough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Paul Shirley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>>>Syntax highlighting is useful for NOVICE programmers.
>
>>>Most experienced programmers have used one-color text
>>>for program code for years...
>
>>...although the ones that earn a living at it mostly side with the
>>novices.
>
>I think there's probably a UNIX/realtime - "enterprise" divide
>here. Quick straw poll -- how many UNIX programmers use 1 colour?
None where I work (although we used to use 2 colours way back :-)
All of us, many with "enterprise"/Unix experience going decades back,
are using XEmacs w/colour highlighting. Those that claim that experienced
programmers have no use for more than 1 (sic) colour don't know what they
are talking about. It simply means they have never really tried it.
-Tor
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So much for modules in Linux!
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 16:28:36 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Everett"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
> No. boot.local is NOT the same thing as rc.local on other systems. Don't
> lead him down that path again.
>
>
Ok,
But that's what I meant. Maybe a tech support person, or Pete, confused
boot.local with rc.local.
It might be interesting to see what happens if Pete adds his network
scripts to rc.local. That might help him fix his problem (ok, it's a
workaround not a fix, but at least it'll keep him quiet for a while).
Mart
--
Write in C, write in C,
Write in C, yeah, write in C.
Only wimps use BASIC, Write in C.
http://www.orca.bc.ca/spamalbum/
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:32:55 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> WesTralia wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > >
> > > Chad Everett wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 00:19:12 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >Chad Everett wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 23:26:01 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> > > > >> >WesTralia wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, WesTralia
> > > > >> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > >> >> > wrote
> > > > >> >> > on Tue, 10 Apr 2001 10:12:23 -0500
> > > > >> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > >> >> > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > > >> >> > >>
> > > > >> >> > >> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> > > > >> >> > >> >
> > > > >> >> > >
> > > > >> >> > >[...]
> > > > >> >> > >
> > > > >> >> > >> > Assembly might become a lost art....
> > > > >> >> > >> >
> > > > >> >> > >>
> > > > >> >> > >> Personally, it's still my favorite type of programming...
> > > > >> >> > >> followed by microcoding.
> > > > >> >> > >>
> > > > >> >> > >> Because elegance and efficiency are closely tied at that level.
> > > > >> >> > >>
> > > > >> >> > >
> > > > >> >> > >
> > > > >> >> > >I think I am going to be sick!
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > Eh? Please explain. Unless it's related to some personal vendetta
> > > > >> >> > between you and Aaron, in which case don't bother. :-)
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Well, it's like this, I am going to be sick in Aaron's case in the same
> > > > >> >> sense that I would become sick if I saw Barbara Striesand (Babs)
>preaching
> > > > >> >> foreign policy and energy conservation.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> For a Wintendo98 DosLuser, Aaron and microcoding seem like strange
>bedfellows.
> > > > >> >> Translation: BS!
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >Actually, I microcoded the PDP-11 instruction set, after writing
> > > > >> >a microcode simulator for a proposed CPU architecture.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >And yes,....it ran PDP-11 object code flawlessly.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Have you written any code in the last ten years? How about the last five
> > > > >> years? What about this year?
> > > > >
> > > > >Most of what I've done in the last 5 years has been shell scripting.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Well shell scripting is a noble activity. Cheers.
> > >
> > > I tend to do this:
> > >
> > > Get a new job. Write shell scripts to rectify all the common problems
> > > After a couple months, write a few more shell scripts to go out and
> > > diagnose the problems before they become "show-stoppers", which
> > > then call the problem-rectifying scripts.
> > >
> > > After about 6 months, I'm bored to tears, because the machines totally
> > > take care of themselves...so, I go find a new job (and MORE $$$$)
> > >
> >
> > Then you need to change you sig.
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > Script Kiddie
> > DNRC Minister of the basement
> > IDORK # 3056642
>
> Wrong, dork. *I* ***WRITE**** the scripts, so that some script-kiddie
> can pretend to be an administrator.
Are any of your scripts available online?
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:36:49 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> Jan Johanson wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > ALL newsreader software that has an ID string has it embedded
> > > > > > > > within the source code. It's a simple matter or editing it with
> > > > > > > > vi and running make to disguise both the newsreader and the OS.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > And since on Linux...you have the source code....
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Well, I'll leave the rest as an exercise for the reader.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hey fuck head - yea you, dildo breath.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reply to this message, but change the header to indicate you are
> > > > posting on
> > > > > > > a Mac instead.
> > > > > > > Should be effortless for a l33t programmer like yourself.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you can do that I'll believe a tiny fraction of what you say.
> > > > > > > If you cannot or will not that you are a fucking liar and we've
> > all
> > > > known it
> > > > > > > forever.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > JJ, go to ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/source/
> > > > > > and download one of the tar.gz files yourself.
> > > > > > Oh, you might not know how to unpack it, so go ahead
> > > > > > and download the ZIP version instead.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It unpacks to only about 22 Mb of code and text, so you should
> > > > > > find it effortless to track down what you're looking for, JJ.
> > > > >
> > > > > Grep is your friend.
> > > >
> > > > And I see you failed to do as I challenged. You are a liar.
> > >
> > > I see that you failed to JUMP as I challenged. You are a liar.
> >
> > And you CONTINUE to prove you are a useless waste of skin...
>
> I have absolutely NOTHING to gain from recompiling my code for
> a SINGLE post just to satisfy your inane request....especially
> since THREE other people have demonstrated already how easy it is
> to do.
>
> now, be a good little twit and FUCK OFF.
Sorry Aaron, until you prove that you can post in something other than
Windows 98 we're just not going to believe you.
Look at this objectively, why should we believe you?
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: Chris Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: 13 Apr 2001 10:36:26 -0400
Jerry Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Quite the contrary: he (Judge Jackson) decided that Microsoft had a
> monopoly position because as a "finding of fact" he ruled that
> Windows was the entire market being judged. Since that's a Microsoft
> product, of course Microsoft has a monopoly on it.
Please don't play so fast and loose with the facts.
Judge Jackson ruled the market to be Intel-Compatible PC operating
systems. He then went on to specifically address substitutes including
server operating systems, Non-Intel-Compatible PC operating systems,
information appliances, network computers, middleware etc.
So you appear to be just making things up.
They didn't (and
> don't) have the requisite market share to even be considered for
> "monopoly" standing if you take all computers into account, or even
> all desktop computer, or basically do anything other than simply
> ignore everything except what you feel like.
>
> IOW, a company does NOT have to have a market-leading position to be
> considered a monopolist by Judge Jackson. A company could have only
> one product that's only ever sold one copy, and by his logic, they
> still have a monopolistic position because they're the only company
> that sells that exact product.
I prefer his logic to yours. I think it's essential to read his
findings of fact before commenting on them.
Cheers,
Chris
--
Chris Morgan <cm at mihalis.net> http://www.mihalis.net
Temp sig. - Enquire within
------------------------------
From: Phlip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.object,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.theory,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: Ah Sweet Dreams are Made of This (Was: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: 13 Apr 2001 14:38:38 GMT
Proclaimed 2 + 2 from the mountaintops:
> [it's predicting the PAST]
> [slaps it upside it's HEADBALL]
> just like java
> where's the hype gone?
> it's gonna do wonderful things
> soon,
> Scott: "They ran over MY BABY!!!"
That was like a sermon.
--
Phlip [EMAIL PROTECTED]
============== http://phlip.webjump.com ==============
-- It's a small Web, after all... --
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:40:43 GMT
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
> Jan Johanson wrote:
> >
> > And I see you failed to do as I challenged. You are a liar.
>
> JJ, I hardly think that Aaron should feel compelled to go
> through an edit-make-post-edit-make cycle just to prove
> to a prick-headed little troll such as yourself that he
> can obtain and modify source code on Linux.
>
> Chris
Because he has never posted with anything other than a Win 98 header,
NOT EVEN ONCE! He could make one post on a non-modified *nix newsreader,
just one, and this whole thing would stop... now.
But that's not going to happen.
> --
> This application has crashed unexpectedly.
> Hit OK to terminate, or Cancel to debug it.
>
> Doh!
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: This is a fucking miracle! CD-R Follow up story
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 10:39:13 -0400
Can we get a 'nah nah -nah-nah nah'
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The manual was used to double check what I already knew.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
>
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
> >
> > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >
> > > For those who had followed the luser a couple of posts back,
> > > complaining, no, that is too soft, bitching because he could get his
> > > CD-R work'in. Well, my experience is contry to his experience, in
that
> > > I only needed to edit to files and run one program, reboot, CD-R is
> > > ready to roll. Guess how I did it? I read the fucking manual, I know,
> > > bloody miracle!
> >
> > I got CD-R to work on Linux _without_ reading the manual. Worked first
time.
> > One thing Mandrake 7.2 got right.
> >
> > --
> > Pete
> > Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
> > Kylix: the way to go!
>
> --
> I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operater from Hell)
>
> If you donot like it go [#rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 13 Apr 2001 09:32:13 -0500
On Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:40:43 GMT, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>> Jan Johanson wrote:
>> >
>> > And I see you failed to do as I challenged. You are a liar.
>>
>> JJ, I hardly think that Aaron should feel compelled to go
>> through an edit-make-post-edit-make cycle just to prove
>> to a prick-headed little troll such as yourself that he
>> can obtain and modify source code on Linux.
>>
>> Chris
>
>Because he has never posted with anything other than a Win 98 header,
>NOT EVEN ONCE! He could make one post on a non-modified *nix newsreader,
>just one, and this whole thing would stop... now.
>
>But that's not going to happen.
>
I've asked him to just add a couple of spaces to his header in a few
places and he just starts shouting about jumping or something. He
really pulled a boner last night when he started suggesting that
the few people who HAVE demonstrated how easy this is by posting
with modified headers did so with instructions provided by him!
What a crock!
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 10:45:44 -0400
Rob Robertson wrote:
>
> Gunner � wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 16:47:32 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > >Let's take a nice, Glen "Sliverdick" Yeadon style pure-democratic vote:
> > >
> > >All for putting Glen "Sliverdick" Yeadon up against the wall, and
> > >filling him full of lead, say "AYE!" All opposed, say "NAY"
> > >
> > >
> > >Let's see how much Sliverdick likes democracy now.
> >
> > AYE! And Ill donate the ammo!
>
> Well, that's pretty silly, especially when we can use Glen's
> own tax money to pay for the ammo and the firing squad.
>
> Thank God we live in a country founded on the principle of
> inalienable, individual rights, eh?
So far, we have two AYEs and zero NAYs.
>
> _
> RR
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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.
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 14:47:25 GMT
Ed Allen wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I haven't worked at all with AIX so I suppose I will accept that it's
> >more of a malevolent commercial UNIX than a benevolent one. But... I
> >have heard that Linux will run on S/390 as a VM in a dynamic memory
> >partition only, and underneath it's really just S/390 anyway. So why not
> >just run S/390 (I work on an IBM ES/9000 system at work by the way)?
> >
> Because OS/390 is not Unix. It is even more at odds with "The Unix Way"
> than AIX is. At least AIX looks like Unix if you remain in user space.
>
> Other reasons...
>
> Because IBM customers want Linux so they can scale up to loads that
> Intel hardware and even Alphas cannot get to ?
>
> Because most of the world uses ASCII instead of EBCDIC ?
>
> Because Samba works better with Linux or any other Unix ? Although it
> does work really well with AIX.
>
> Because you want to replace an Exchange server with something that can
> handle hundreds of mails a second without going bonkers and corrupting
> half of them ?
> http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-04-12-013-20-PR
>
> ======
>
> Linux can run as a 'guest' under VM but it can also run in an LPAR (Logical
> Partition) on equal footing with other OSs, like OS/390 and VM. It even
> has its own little brother to VM called VIF.
>
> It can also run as the only OS. Right on the bare iron.
>
> Obviously you do not know much about Linux. I cannot judge your
> knowledge of IBM hardware but your software expertise is lacking.
I never claimed to be an expert...
> Linux -- The Unix defragmentation tool.
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
