Linux-Advocacy Digest #691, Volume #33 Wed, 18 Apr 01 16:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:9 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:3 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN) (Rob
Robertson)
Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Am I fucked? HP Photosmart C500 and Win 2000 (Chad Everett)
Re: Communism
Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:3 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Paul Repacholi)
Re: Am I fucked? HP Photosmart C500 and Win 2000 (David Mosberger-Tang)
Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company (Chad Everett)
Re: beginner (David Steinberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:21:11 GMT
Edward Rosten wrote:
>> Well, stop using ISA and switch to PCI as it works?
>
> Yep, that's right. Now you have shelled out ��� for windows, go and shell
> out more ��� to replace perfectly servicable hardware that windows does
> not deem fit to run.
Oh I'm sorry, you can't aford �30?
> I feel great to be off the upgrade bandwagon. I still use a P133, but
> since I am not forced to upgrade the bits that work fine (like CPU, RAM)
> I can spend money on things that needed upgrading (Moniter, CD-RW). And
> it has been more than worth it.
I'm not on the upgrade bandwagon. I've never been on it.
> You lumping all of linux with KDE belies your inexperience.
I'm expressing the opinion of the majority.
> So? If you don't like KDE, don't use it.
So what happened to choice? I choose to use KDE!
> Yep. You've got it. Linux+(GNOME | KDE) is all there is. Period. FVWM2
> does not exist. It was made up by evil M$-Haters. As was Afterstep and
> Windowmaker and GWM and TWM and...
None of which come even close to KDE or for that matter GNOME...
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
Kylix: the way to go!
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:22:31 GMT
. wrote:
>> But it _should_ be a replacement for Windows, except it isn't.
>
> This, pete, is why youre an idiot. You for some reason have decided
> to believe this ridiculous posit. Who cares if its a replacement for
> windows?
Ah so you finally admit Linux cannot replace Windows?
> If it doesnt suit your needs, for the billionth time, DONT USE IT.
And if I say Linux has a few problems... don't use it? You don't get it do
you?
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
Kylix: the way to go!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:9 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 12:33:54 -0700
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 23:23:41 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >>
> >> "Gunner �" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 15:08:44 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Hehehehhehe
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I'm not registered to vote in this precinct, but since I'm a registered
> >> > >> Democrat does that matter? <G>
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >Since Democrats don't care about such niceties, you are allowed
> >> > >to vote AYE in the election, regardless of where you live.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > In fact Sue... you can even vote more than once. Feel free to fill out
> >> > the form in your hometown, and again while visiting Fresno.
> >> >
> >>
> >> In the spirit of the Democrat Party, I'll make that 5 AYEs for Sue
> >> 4 in her home town, and one in Fresno.
> >
> >As a Democrat I suppose I should demand some money for my votes, but
> >I've reformed over the last few years so you're welcome to 'em.
> >
>
> You must not be associated with any labor unions.
Not by personal choice. They take money out of my checks for a
"negotiating fee" (for which I have no choice), but that's less than the
regular union dues. I do not like nor have much respect for labor
unions as they are today. Too much negative personal exposure.
Sue
------------------------------
From: Rob Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:3 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 15:31:11 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>
> Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
> >>
> Aaron> Rob Robertson wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Rob Robertson wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Henry Glenworthy wrote:
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > "Rob Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> > > > > Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > > "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."
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > > > AYES:3
> >> >> > > > > > NAYS:0
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > > ABSTAIN:1
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > > An example of the dangers of pure democracy is all well and good,
> >> >> > > > > but I reject pure democracy even if Glen advocates it and wouldn't
> >> >> > > > > vote either way on the matter; there is no moral justification for
> >> >> > > > > the action or the mass decision behind it.
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > >>>>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > What!? You don't believe in "one person - one vote", even if
> >> >> > > > the result is the trampling of individual rights? Tsk, tsk. Shouldn't
> >> >> > > > the easily swayed, fickle general public get to determine the fate
> >> >> > > > of minorities it has suddenly grown to dislike? Shouldn't people
> >> >> > > > who drive while using a cell phone and drinking their Starbuck's
> >> >> > > > latte be shot on the spot?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Heavens, no! That's just,... it's immoral, first of all, and entirely
> >> >> > > incommensurate with the actual crime. What if we just firehosed them,
> >> >> > > instead?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Should not the murderer be subjected to the loss of his own life?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Therefore, someone (like Sliverdick) who advocates democracy (mob rule),
> >> >> > should be subjected to mob rule.
> >> >>
> >> >> I agree completely that Glen should be responsible for his actions, but
> >> >> I wanted to point out that since *I* don't believe in mob rule and view
> >> >> it as an abdication of moral responsibility, I'm not voting 'aye' -- I'm
> >> >> not voting at all on the question.
> >> >>
> >>
> Aaron> I think Sliverdick should be made to serve as an example to all others
> Aaron> who believe in his idiotic shit.
> >>
> >> Yes, by mocking his views and exposing his lies.
> >>
> >> Killing him for his ideas, as you advocate, is the
> >> act of a totalitarian, which you have often shown
> >> signs of.
>
> Rob> Aaron is not advocating killing Yeadon *directly* for his
> Rob> ideas, Andrew; he's putting Glen in a position of evaluating
> Rob> a system (pure democracy) that rejects inherent individual
> Rob> rights and uphold political, mass-derived rights. If Glen
>
> That was your idea, and not one I believe Mr. Kulkis smart enough
> to think up on his own. He has repeatedly called for the killing
> of people for their political beliefs, and I think that is exactly
> what he had in mind when he started this.
It's right up there at the top of the post, Andrew. Kulkis suggested
a vote and said "Let's see how much Sliverdick likes democracy now."
I think you're off-base on this.
> Rob> supports the 'will of the people' then it stands that any
> Rob> system that rejects his just claim to his own life allows
> Rob> a 'vote' as to whether or not Glen continues living.
>
> Rob> It's a valid point (even though I've chosen not to join
> Rob> in the voting) because, as Aaron *implies* in his example,
> Rob> the rejection of inherent individual rights will lead
> Rob> inexorably to a vote on who lives and who dies. Kulkis
> Rob> (and Glenworthy) both tacitly reject totalitarianism
> Rob> in this thread.
>
> >> Even when you are not making lying cowardly forged
> >> posts.
>
> Rob> What posts did Kulkis forge?
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah, I responded to that in your other post. I'd like to see what he
has to say in response, first.
> --
> Andrew Hall
> (Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
_
Rob
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:23:49 GMT
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> Well, I hear all these awful stories about Pete's experience with Linux,
> however, I have none of those problem. Maybe I have some sort of voodoo
> magic or something? Funny thing is that, he (Pete) would like Linux to
> succeed, well, thats the impression I got by him shelling out several
> grand for Kylix, why doesn't he do something about its so-called
> failings as not only will it help the linux community, but himself, for
> more people to use his software.
Several grand for Kylix? 8)
It cost me �550, how is that 'several grand'?
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
Kylix: the way to go!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: rec.photo.digital,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Am I fucked? HP Photosmart C500 and Win 2000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 18 Apr 2001 14:18:44 -0500
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 02:59:42 +0800, Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi.
>
>I work for HP. HP is attempting to suppor all devices under windows 2000 in
>anticipation of Window XP (since it will be both a consumer OS as well as a
>Business OS).
>
> [-- snip --]
>
>I don't speak for HP since it has a zillion employees, but I know enough to
>know that Linux is viewed at most as a server OS. (which implies no support
>for consumer oriented peripherals)
>
>-Todd
>
Seems like you need to keep up with employer's developments:
http://www.hp.com/products1/linux/index.html
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:36:04 GMT
>>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>>
Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>> >>
Rob> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
snip>
>> >>
>> >> >> what a maroon.
>> >>
Rob> Stop playing "More Libertarian than thou". It's unseemly.
>> >>
>> >> Kulkis is not vaguely libertarian. He repeatedly calls for the
>> >> murder of people that disagree with him.
>>
Rob> When reason fails, weapons prevail. I think his trip-wire temper
Rob> works against him, but for the most part I understand the attitude.
>>
>> I do not understand advocating killing people for their beliefs.
>> I only understand killing in self defense. And I only consider
>> physical force in defending oneself or another innocent from real
>> harm. Ideas should be fought with other ideas. He also recently
>> advocated a modern version of debtor prison. He is not fond of
>> liberty.
Rob> Self-defense in the face of rising totalitarianism is not a cut-and-dried
Rob> matter of facing down some jackbooted thug from a militia bunker; there is
Rob> the question of the initiation of violence and whether taxes taken at the
Rob> (implied) point of a gun constitutes the first strike against freedom. If
Rob> someone is merely parking their barrel-filled Ryder truck right next to
Rob> your car in a parking lot, how long do you wait before taking defensive
Rob> action, even to the point of 'violating' their right of personal property
Rob> by opening up the back of the truck to disarm the bomb?
Rob> I think the same holds true regarding the subversion of the Constitution
Rob> and individual liberties in America, and the question of when to act and
Rob> what actions to take in response to that very real threat deserves some
Rob> thoughtful consideration, though I have always held to the notion that
Rob> every rational response must be exhausted before taking the next step.
Yes, and advocating shooting people because they are democrats
does not qualify. Ever.
>> >> He is also deeply dishonest, stooping to forgery (of his own words
>> >> no less) to cover up his own disability to read his own words.
Rob> What did he forge?
http> groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http> groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http> groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Check the progression of his question to me in the thread. He later
>> claimed that I was the one that had forged the post, but that would
>> make no sense, as the forgery just covered up his own stupidity in
>> not having read his own words carefully.
Rob> It boils down to this;
Rob> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aaron> You know...name some Communist-style government policies that
Aaron> you disagree with.
>> >>
>> >> Can't think of any in the real world.
>>
Aaron> then you're a Communist.
>>
>> Because I do not agree with any of their policies?
Rob> You just said that you can't think of any that you do disagree with.
Rob> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob> His original statement read "name some Communist-style government
Rob> policies that you AGREE with" [emph. mine] and it does appear that
Rob> he changed it to "disagree" after he realized that you weren't
Rob> saying what he'd thought you said.
Rob> What's the deal with the forgery, Kulkis?
A cowardly inability to admit he failed to read his own words
correctly.
He went on in other posts in that thread to accuse me of doing
the forgery and of posting a forged cancel on one of the posts.
He is a liar and a scumbag.
>> >> He is a worse excuse for a libertarian than Mark Gibson.
>> >> And he lies, regularly.
Rob> About what?
>> Anything he wants to. One example is later in the above referenced
>> thread. Another one was in this thread where he declared that I vote
>> for democrats and later when he claimed I supported socialist programs.
Rob> I saw that. Hey, that's what you get for swapping targets on a regular
Rob> basis -- sometimes you have a long run of exposing lying left-wingers,
Rob> and as soon as they have you pegged as a 'fascist', you turn your guns
Rob> on conservatives, until *they* have you pegged as a 'socialist weasel'!
That is no excuse for lying.
Rob> I've dealt with other shoot-from-the-hip loose cannons before, and this
Rob> isn't all that different from my other past experiences.
He has had able time to correct his misconceptions. Clearly
truth means nothing to him next to his blustering.
>> He has also lied about my position on global warming, accusing me of being
>> a vociferous proponent of the man-made warming theory, when the reality
>> is that I claim no knowledge of the answer to that question (as you probably
>> inferred from our theoretical discussion of the role of government in a
>> solution to GW _if_ were to be proven true).
Rob> I thought you were awfully quick to default to a government solution to
Rob> the problem. The way I see it, you come to libertarianism from the old
I know you thought that, but the point I am making here is that I
have no opinion on whether or not GW is happening or if it is, if
it is caused by man. The point here is not our disagreement about
what might be the solution if in fact it proves to be a real but the
fact that he lied about my opinion. You asked for examples of his
lies, and this was one. When I corrected his lie, he did not retract
or apologize, he just ran away. Just like a weasel.
Rob> 'Democrats are for the little guy' school of thought, and the argument
Rob> of using the government to cure societal ills is still acceptable to you
Rob> on some level, whereas my views stem more from an ill-defined sense of
Rob> anarcho-capitalism, and I came to Libertarianism as an activist approach
Rob> to stopping the predations of the state. Maybe I'm just more reflexively
Rob> cynical than you, but I still didn't think that a) you were a proponent
Rob> of the GW theory, or 2) that you're ideologically shut off from a purely
Rob> market-derived solution to the problem. It was a fair and open exchange
Rob> of ideas, as it always has been.
Yes, and is a side point to the issue at hand of Mr. Kulkis' dishonesty.
(I would be happy to explore further practical solutions to environmental
problems in another thread).
Rob> Face it, Andrew; it takes a while to get a handle on where you're coming
Rob> from sometimes, and a hothead like Kulkis is going to jump at the slightest
He has had plenty of time.
Rob> whiff of what may be construed as advocacy of increased state power. That's
Rob> his error, but I see where it's coming from, even if it doesn't excuse it.
>> There are countless other
>> examples if you look closely. I have caught him in lies about the taxes
>> he pays, he has made false statements about science then ran when presented
>> with references that prove him wrong (just like Lochner and Yeadon).
Rob> Well, that doesn't do anyone any good, does it.
Nope.
>> >> He is the moral equivalent of the weasels.
Rob> I'd like to see you make the case for that.
>> See above. I meant in the way he "debates" on usenet, not the programs
>> he advocates.
Rob> Understood. I await his response.
That will be interesting, if he does not cut and run again.
Which of course, would say something in and of itself.
Boy, the market sure liked Greenspan's surprise move today.
Scary how much power that guy has!
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:26:44 GMT
Tom Wilson wrote:
> My systems are generally well behaved. I was simply wondering if some of
> yours were posessed. <g>
I did wonder if the propensity for the number '666' and the fire and
brimstone oozing out of the back of the monitor were normal...
> I've never seen KDE do half of those things you've described. About the
> only time I ever had X lock up to such an extent turned out to be flaky
> RAM on my old Voodoo card. (Windows, too, started locking up whenever a
> game or application indulged in heavy texture mapping at high resolutions.
> It just occured more frequently under X as the overall mapping and
> rendering were so much faster) Even then, telnet or ssh were functional
> and allowed me to shut the system down.
How much do you use KDE?
> Have you absolutely and positively ruled out flakey hardware of any sort?
> Linux does have a very low tolerance for misbehaving and marginal
> hardware.
I'd have thought flakey hardware would show up as problems under Windows
too. I suspect it's not flakey hardware but the software: Linux + X + KDE
2.1.
--
Pete
Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
Kylix: the way to go!
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:3 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:40:13 GMT
>>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>>
Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>> >>
Aaron> Rob Robertson wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Rob Robertson wrote:
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Henry Glenworthy wrote:
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > "Rob Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> > > > > Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > > "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."
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > > > AYES:3
>> >> >> > > > > > NAYS:0
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > > ABSTAIN:1
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > > An example of the dangers of pure democracy is all well and good,
>> >> >> > > > > but I reject pure democracy even if Glen advocates it and wouldn't
>> >> >> > > > > vote either way on the matter; there is no moral justification for
>> >> >> > > > > the action or the mass decision behind it.
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > >>>>
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > What!? You don't believe in "one person - one vote", even if
>> >> >> > > > the result is the trampling of individual rights? Tsk, tsk. Shouldn't
>> >> >> > > > the easily swayed, fickle general public get to determine the fate
>> >> >> > > > of minorities it has suddenly grown to dislike? Shouldn't people
>> >> >> > > > who drive while using a cell phone and drinking their Starbuck's
>> >> >> > > > latte be shot on the spot?
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Heavens, no! That's just,... it's immoral, first of all, and entirely
>> >> >> > > incommensurate with the actual crime. What if we just firehosed them,
>> >> >> > > instead?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Should not the murderer be subjected to the loss of his own life?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Therefore, someone (like Sliverdick) who advocates democracy (mob rule),
>> >> >> > should be subjected to mob rule.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I agree completely that Glen should be responsible for his actions, but
>> >> >> I wanted to point out that since *I* don't believe in mob rule and view
>> >> >> it as an abdication of moral responsibility, I'm not voting 'aye' -- I'm
>> >> >> not voting at all on the question.
>> >> >>
>> >>
Aaron> I think Sliverdick should be made to serve as an example to all others
Aaron> who believe in his idiotic shit.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, by mocking his views and exposing his lies.
>> >>
>> >> Killing him for his ideas, as you advocate, is the
>> >> act of a totalitarian, which you have often shown
>> >> signs of.
>>
Rob> Aaron is not advocating killing Yeadon *directly* for his
Rob> ideas, Andrew; he's putting Glen in a position of evaluating
Rob> a system (pure democracy) that rejects inherent individual
Rob> rights and uphold political, mass-derived rights. If Glen
>>
>> That was your idea, and not one I believe Mr. Kulkis smart enough
>> to think up on his own. He has repeatedly called for the killing
>> of people for their political beliefs, and I think that is exactly
>> what he had in mind when he started this.
Rob> It's right up there at the top of the post, Andrew. Kulkis suggested
Rob> a vote and said "Let's see how much Sliverdick likes democracy now."
Rob> I think you're off-base on this.
Perhaps in this case. Do you want me to dig up some of his
many calls for killing on the basis of political views?
How about his version of debtor prisons?
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
From: Paul Repacholi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 19 Apr 2001 03:35:29 +0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Gregorie) writes:
> This happened on the USN cruiser Yorktown - look up comp.risks
> archives for the gory details. You guys do all read comp.risks,
> don't you?
Giggle...
And while you are perusing the comp.risks archive, not the NT in the
factory story. Submitted anon, but the clues are Big Tellow and
Oklahoma.
--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: rec.photo.digital,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Am I fucked? HP Photosmart C500 and Win 2000
From: David Mosberger-Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:45:43 GMT
>>>>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 02:59:42 +0800, "Todd"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Todd> You won't have any luck under Linux... camera and scanner
Todd> support is non intuitive AT BEST under Linux.
That's a bit of a strong statement. I have been using an HP
PhotoSmart C912 camera exclusively under Linux for several months now.
No problem at all. I don't know about the C500 in particular, but if
it looks like a usb storage device, it's straight forward to get it to
work on recent Linux distributions (once that are 2.4.x based). For
example, Red Hat 7.1 would be fine.
A great way to copy pictures from the camera on laptops is to buy a
CompactFlash to PCMCIA adapter. They're very cheap (around $10) and
make the compact flash card appear like a normal (DOS-formatted) disk
drive.
--david
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 18 Apr 2001 14:37:27 -0500
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:26:44 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>I'd have thought flakey hardware would show up as problems under Windows
>too. I suspect it's not flakey hardware but the software: Linux + X + KDE
>2.1.
>
>--
>Pete
DHCP works for Peter if he starts it manually. It's what?...
A week later?... and he still hasn't figured out how to get
the manual command in his startup scripts? And he says this
is a problem with Linux + X + KDE 2.1
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: beginner
Date: 18 Apr 2001 19:54:00 GMT
Rajkumar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I would like to install RedHat 6.0. I have the CD. I don't know anything
: about linux.
If you are at all serious about trying Linux, I would recommend you at
least start with a more recent version. Expecially if you're interested
in getting any recent hardware to work, you'll have much more success with
software that isn't two years old.
I tried to do the same thing when I started with Linux. I bought the
thickest Linux book that I could find, and it came with a Red Hat 4.2
CD; 5,1 was the current release at the time. It couldn't even recognize
my PCI video card. :)
Red Hat's latest release is 7.1, and I've heard some good things about it.
If you have fast internet access, you can download it from Red
Hat; otherwise, you can buy it for $3.49 (plus S&H) from
http://www.cheapbytes.com/
You can find Red Hat's current installation documentation at
http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/installing_linux.html
Another good source for documentation about Linux, in general, is The
Linux Documentation Project at http://www.linuxdoc.org/
Another thing to keep in mind: if you have problems or questions, you're
probably off to take them to a newsgroup like comp.os.linux.setup, as this
one is intended more for advocacy/debate/flaming.
Good luck with Linux!
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
