Linux-Advocacy Digest #581, Volume #34 Thu, 17 May 01 23:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Good and Good things about Linux Advocacy (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS (GreyCloud)
Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum: ("Interconnect")
Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS (GreyCloud)
Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS (Paul Colquhoun)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: Sea Change ("Interconnect")
Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum: (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Sea Change (Charlie Ebert)
Here we go: Mundie vs GPL, round two... (Dave Martel)
Re: Aaron Kookis: over 340 posts in 6 days! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux LCD problem ("SilentNight")
Re: Win 9x is horrid (Dave Martel)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Chris Lee")
Re: Why did Eazel shutdown? (Anonymous)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Good and Good things about Linux Advocacy
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 02:03:21 GMT
Well,
I felt it was time to talk about the Ups and Ups of using Linux.
First let's get the Up's out of the way.
#1. You get a more thorough understanding of how a PC actually works.
By installing your own drivers you understand the names and
functionality of everything.
#2. You have an OS which never crashes. I know amongst some people
this is debateable but I'm running Debian. So it's not debatable.
#3. You don't have to worry about security risks anymore. Windows
is a security risk as there must be over 10,000 seperate viruses
and worms eating away at every verson of Windows desktop or
server ever made. There are less than 100 registered worms,
which have attacked Linux since it's inception. Lately they've
been attacking BIND in Linux which is the same BIND shared across
a broad UNIX camp. There working on it.
Anyway, VB scripts written by 9 year olds don't seem to affect
Linux in any way. E-mail attachments don't have to be audited
in Linux encampments as they can't take the OS down but merely
corrupt YOUR home directory.
A big part of the problem with Windows is they have to run
everything from the WEB server down to Active X at an
ADMINISTRATOR {ROOT} priority so it can quickly GUT your PC.
#4. I don't have to pay for additional licenses to run my SAMBA
server for my other Windows powered machines in my home.
I don't have to pay for additional licenses to run the APACHE
WEB server! Nor my FTP server! Nor my NFS server! Nor my
archive server! They are all limited to the HARDWARE HORSEPOWER
ONLY. I can stack as much as the box will handle.
Which brings us to point #5.
#5. Linux with the 2.4 kernel runs RINGS AROUND W2k anything.
Windows 2000 is quite possibly the most piggy, slowest OS
on the planet. My wife's casio personal address book has
better reponse time than our W2k box our daughter has.
Why does MY daughter have a W2k box? Cause she want's to.
#6. I don't have to buy $900 worth of MS Office to be productive.
My wife and I use Star Office or Applix right now.
My wife uses her machine to do work 2-3 hours every night.
Compared to her W2k business machine at work, she say's the
performance and usability is superior on her Suse 7.1 machine.
#7. When people find out your a Linux User you have fewer
{freinds}. They have less of a tendency to come to you
with their DVD, printer, CDROM, HARDDRIVE, or other Windows
VIRUS related problems. Amazingly, even if you have been
praised by name in over a dozen magazines around the world
for your work in Windows NT, you instantly loose all your
friends once you've become an Linux user. People of the
Windows world will make jokes about you being a communist,
ask when the next MAYDAY parade is, complain about your
writing viruses and just a whole array of braindead -
moronic crap which you simply wouldn't believe. So there's
some entertainment value for you once you've started using
Linux.
This appearently has no effect on Mother In Laws however.
It's very akin to have a family MOAT but without having
to put up with mosquitoes nor feed the gators. But yes,
that drawbridge still get's a little loose in the chains
when it comes to the mother in law.
Come to think about it, it doesn't seem to have an effect
on daughters either.
Now for the UP things.
#1. You get to watch your freinds and colleges who've been
working with you gasp in horror when they drag the first
RedHat powered servers in the office.
#2. You get to watch your freinds and colleges who've been
working with you gasp in horror when they find out the
mainframe manufacturer is doing away with their version
of Unix only to replace it with something very much like
LINUX! HA, specifically like DEBIAN the OS they said
you were a retarded blockhead for running!
#3. You get to watch the VB insects squirm when they see
client app Linux being introduced! Remember how they
use to point at you and say "MAINFRAME" and laugh!
#4. You get to watch your leadership slowly die
of business cancer from their heavy involvement in
Microsoft!
#5. When you go to your Users group meeting for Linux,
the crew get's to make comments about your present
employer and how their just throwning money down
the drain by investing in all that VB trash!
Truely, these former employee's are just waiting
vulchers! But you have to give them credit for
being more intelligent!
#6. FREE APPS, FREE APPS, FREE APPS, GNU and GPLed FREE APPS!
I will never be fitted with an orange suit and
sent on a government vacation for using Linux.
#7. I get to play god with a REAL OS!
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 19:02:34 -0700
Greg Copeland wrote:
>
> GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >
> > I've never seen a clean port of C written code to another platform.
> > Its always something tugging at you.
> >
>
> I have done this without problem before. The only catch that I've run
> into has been on Microsoft platforms that didn't implement some of the
> library calls correctly or simply had bugs. I can't tell you how many
> "application bugs" we hunted down that turned out to be Microsoft
> c-library bugs. Worse yet, some even odder bugs that happen when
> you have C++ applications making use of some of the c-libraries. As
> for other platforms, I rarely have problems as long as an eye is turned
> toward addressing portability issues at the beginning.
>
> I've written code that worked well on Linux, SCO, OS/2, and Win32
> platforms equally well. It can be done.
>
> --
> Greg Copeland, Principal Consultant
> Copeland Computer Consulting
> --------------------------------------------------
> PGP/GPG Key at http://www.keyserver.net
> DE5E 6F1D 0B51 6758 A5D7 7DFE D785 A386 BD11 4FCD
> --------------------------------------------------
Oh, I believe you on this, its just that I had never had any luck
porting MS software to a VAX. As you've stated so well, there are too
many bugs or differences in the C libraries.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum:
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:14:48 +1000
Flacco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:iB_M6.13870$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > *cough* Many end users are lazy. This attitude leaves them without the
> > skills to perform BASIC tasks making them appear Stupid. ( REM: A moron
> > is a feeble minded person )
> >
> > BTW this also translates DIRECTLY to the Windows community, there are
> > multitudes of ignorant Windows users out there. People are ignorant by
> > CHOICE!
> >
> > If you've ever done help desk type work, you can easily spot the
> > difference between someone who has made a modocum of effort to
> > understand their environment, compared to the TV cabbages that whine
> > about how *unreliable* computers are.
> >
> > I mean if your using a computer for day to day work and call up a Help
> > Desk you should at least know the following terms, i.e. have a *general*
> > understanding of what they mean when someone talks to you about them.
> > E.g. is your operating system Win98 or 95? Is your computer networked?
> > Is the modem internal or external?
> >
> > Operating System
> > Desk Top
> > Application
> > Icon
> > Network
> > Modem
> > Screen Resolution
> >
> > Give a man a fish you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish...
>
> Pure arrogant bullshit.
Hmmm?? I would think more along the lines of common sense and a desire to
help your business cut down on service costs.
>There is no reason to expect a man to fish for
> his dinner if he's a blacksmith. That's what fishermen are for.
What we are talking about is teaching fishermen to fish! You work with your
computer every day get to know the *BASICS* of it's operation. At least know
what icon and desktop mean. Know what the word directory means. This is
NOT arrogant this will SAVE your business money over the long term.
Alternatively your'e saying we should have *shoelace tying experts*, or
*comb your hair experts*. Division of Labor right? Wrong there are certain
BASIC activities that users of certain objects should be aware of if they
want to save money. SURE if you've got the $$ you don't have to know a thing
just pay someone to do it for you.
>
> There is no reason for an end-user to know how his or her computer works.
> Believe it or not, some people actually use computers to perform work
> that is not computer-related at all. If the Linux community fails to
> understand this and does not give the user the simplicity and
> transparency he wants and expects, you can kiss the desktop market
> goodbye.
>
> if it makes you feel superior to know this while others do not, good for
> you - but don't pretend like you're advancing the cause of Linux while
> you're at it.
No it's like driving a car or a truck. To *USE* these objects for *WORK* you
need to have a *BASE* understanding of how to operate them. (Emphasis on
the *BASIC* ) I can't expect to purchase a truck or car and then ring up and
Whine because I can't drive one?
NOTE: You don't have to know how to *install* a new engine or *install* a
new radio or *install* new brakepads etc... etc... But God dang you should
at least know how to drive the vehicle, you should know what the steering
wheel does, you should know what the brake pedal does, you should know what
the tyres are for, you should know how to READ the gauges of the vehicle.
I'm saying that at least learn how to drive your operating system. ( This is
NOT limited to Linux it includes ***Windows*** users! ) You don't have to be
a computer science MAJOR! You don't have to know how to cut code, or set up
network clusters. But for heavens sake even Joe Bloggs the car driver knows
the basic terminology when the steering is not right, or the engine is
sluggish or the hand brake is not working, or the vehicle is overheating.
The above applies to Windows users, not just the Linux community. It is
specifically aimed at *end users* who are Lazy and make NO effort to
understand the BASICS of their operating system. Sorry there are NO excuses
for being a Lazy whining peanut.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 19:06:34 -0700
billwg wrote:
>
> "Ian Davey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Nope, that's not how it works at all. Each application uses a GUI toolkit,
> and
> > will require the libraries for that toolkit. Provided you have the
> required
> > libraries you can run any application under any window manager. I've
> started
> > using KDE2.02 now, but still occasionally use BlackBox (a very minimal and
> > fast window manager) and all Linux applications will run under either.
> >
> Are all the interfaces, "APIs(?)", used by the various GUIs syntactically
> identical then? Are the differences between them cosmetic only? That just
> doesn't seem right to me. In Windows, there are periodic additions made to
> the GUI capabilities in the form of new controls and/or changed behaviors.
> To take advantage of them, the source code has to change, sometimes
> significantly. How can Linux avoid that? Windows has a "toolkit" or SDK as
> well, but it evolves. How is it that doesn't happen with Linux?
I would say that all of them have their roots in Xlib. Xlib is very
primitive and forms the foundation for Motif and others.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Colquhoun)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 02:10:04 GMT
On Fri, 18 May 2001 00:49:35 GMT, billwg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
|"Ian Davey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
|news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
|>
|> Nope, that's not how it works at all. Each application uses a GUI toolkit,
|and
|> will require the libraries for that toolkit. Provided you have the
|required
|> libraries you can run any application under any window manager. I've
|started
|> using KDE2.02 now, but still occasionally use BlackBox (a very minimal and
|> fast window manager) and all Linux applications will run under either.
|>
|Are all the interfaces, "APIs(?)", used by the various GUIs syntactically
|identical then? Are the differences between them cosmetic only? That just
|doesn't seem right to me. In Windows, there are periodic additions made to
|the GUI capabilities in the form of new controls and/or changed behaviors.
|To take advantage of them, the source code has to change, sometimes
|significantly. How can Linux avoid that? Windows has a "toolkit" or SDK as
|well, but it evolves. How is it that doesn't happen with Linux?
Do these additions stop old programs from working? They don't under Linux.
Unix GUI's work a bit like this:
5 Application
4 GUI Toolkit/Library
3 X Window toolkit
2 X Window primitives
1 X Server
Each layer calls routines from the layers below it. It is possible to skip
layers. Only the bottom layer actually draws to the screen, reads the keyboard,
responds to the mouse, etc.
KDE, Gnome, etc live at layers 4 & 5.
You can have multiple versions at layers 3 & 4, and each application will
talk to the library/toolkit it was compiled to use.
Layer 1 does not need to be on the same machine as all the other layers,
which is why X applications can be run remotely with no special coding needed.
New GUI capabilites come with new versions of the layer 3 & 4 toolkits/libraries
and depending on the change applications may or may not need to be recompiled to
take advantage of it.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Universal Life Church http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
xenaphobia: The fear of being beaten to a pulp by
a leather-clad, New Zealand woman.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 19:10:51 -0700
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <9dtn0q$93u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > I'm bored of all these benchmarks, since benchmarks are just marks and
> > meaningless out of context. So Win2K served up an extra transcation per
> > second or Linux manages an extra web page per second? So what?
>
> Because that's what everyone wants?
>
> > To get a better idea, you need to look at the real world.
>
> Now, let's see what you consider the "real world"...
>
> > If you look in the real world, you see Linux having several spots in the
> > top 100 fastest supercomputers. If Win2K/NT is so great and so scalable
> > and gives such a great price/performance ratio, then why is there not a
> > *single* Windows cluster in the top 100 supercomputers list?
>
> Ah, I can go into my local PC world and buy one of these supercomputers
> can I? It's an off the shelf easily affordable machine, is that so?
>
> No!
>
> > The reason is simple: Linux scales better, is more efficient and gives a
> > much better price/performance *in the real world*.
>
> Well I knew that.
>
> Your definition of "real world" is fascinating. Out here in the _real_
> real world, it's Windows that is dominating, not Linux.
>
Dominating isn't the same as "scales better".
Dominance can come from other factors unrelated to performance or cost.
> > Linux wins, again.
>
> In one small percentage of the whole market. Not enough.
>
> --
> ---
> Pete Goodwin
> All your no fly zone are belong to us
> My opinions are my own
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sea Change
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:29:29 +1000
Mike Martinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Charlie Ebert wrote:
> >
> > I assume properllorhead refers to video games.
>
> It means I like machines and what makes them run. At least, that's what
> it means to me.
>
If it *works* for you fine, my guess is...
You like Napster and MSmedia Player. i.e Things that make your machine *RUN*
Your e-mail consumes 4hours plus a day, of trivial text messages and video
snippets that MS Windows runs perfectly.
CLI is evil.
You wait for the day for MS Visual Studio lets you write efficient programs
with a simple Wizard.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum:
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 19:22:26 -0700
Flacco wrote:
>
> > *cough* Many end users are lazy. This attitude leaves them without the
> > skills to perform BASIC tasks making them appear Stupid. ( REM: A moron
> > is a feeble minded person )
> >
> > BTW this also translates DIRECTLY to the Windows community, there are
> > multitudes of ignorant Windows users out there. People are ignorant by
> > CHOICE!
> >
> > If you've ever done help desk type work, you can easily spot the
> > difference between someone who has made a modocum of effort to
> > understand their environment, compared to the TV cabbages that whine
> > about how *unreliable* computers are.
> >
> > I mean if your using a computer for day to day work and call up a Help
> > Desk you should at least know the following terms, i.e. have a *general*
> > understanding of what they mean when someone talks to you about them.
> > E.g. is your operating system Win98 or 95? Is your computer networked?
> > Is the modem internal or external?
> >
> > Operating System
> > Desk Top
> > Application
> > Icon
> > Network
> > Modem
> > Screen Resolution
> >
> > Give a man a fish you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish...
>
> Pure arrogant bullshit. There is no reason to expect a man to fish for
> his dinner if he's a blacksmith. That's what fishermen are for.
>
> There is no reason for an end-user to know how his or her computer works.
> Believe it or not, some people actually use computers to perform work
> that is not computer-related at all. If the Linux community fails to
> understand this and does not give the user the simplicity and
> transparency he wants and expects, you can kiss the desktop market
> goodbye.
>
> if it makes you feel superior to know this while others do not, good for
> you - but don't pretend like you're advancing the cause of Linux while
> you're at it.
I feel that people should buy a good copy of Linux and let it install
itself onto the computer. They can then judge for themselves if they
like it or not.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 02:27:22 GMT
On 18 May 2001 01:41:18 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
wrote:
>On Thu, 17 May 2001 17:02:12 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 17 May 2001 04:16:02 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Umm ... why yes, Max is my clone brother, from the Linux advanced
>>>bot labs!
>>
>>>Kind Regards
>>>Terry
T-Bone and to a lesser degree you are the ones who like the name
calling and tend to leave any facts out of your posts. I simply
respond.
flatfish
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Sea Change
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 02:30:19 GMT
In article <9e20pl$btf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Interconnect wrote:
>
<SNIP>
>CLI is evil.
>
>You wait for the day for MS Visual Studio lets you write efficient programs
>with a simple Wizard.
>
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!
Thanks Sir, I needed a good laugh before this night ended.
Thanks for stopping by and brightening up our evening!
Goodbye no!
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Here we go: Mundie vs GPL, round two...
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 20:22:33 -0600
More of the same old FUD but I figured people here would want to know
about it:
Mundie: Why open source is still questionable
<http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20010517/tc/mundie_why_open_source_is_still_questionable_1.html>
His point is mostly that it's hard to make money selling GPL'd code.
Consumers couldn't care less if GPL damages commercial software
profits so who is he really talking to here?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Aaron Kookis: over 340 posts in 6 days!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 02:35:00 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, chrisv wrote:
>Is there anyone else in the world so full of himself, so sure of
>himself, so in love with the sound of his own voice, so devoid of a
>life that on some days he'll post well over 50 obnoxious,
>argumentative messages into a single newsgroup?
>
Flatfish doubles that.
So does Erik Fuckenbush.
So does Chad Myers.
Simply put, COLA is Linux Advocacy and we have knot heads
on COLA known as WINTROLLS who post a pile of shit and we
have to answer it.
And AK is merely answering it in the most effecient manner
possible for a Wintroll.
So fuck em. There you go buddy.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: "SilentNight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake,comp.os.linux.hardware,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: Linux LCD problem
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 11:09:43 +0900
"Jerry Wong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9e0pbm$p0s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Can anybody help?
>
>
> X_ESP $B%7%+%7(Bg$B%%�&j5%1(B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >I am using CTX PV520 LCD monitor...
> >after I installed Linux 7.0, I cannot use graphical login....
> >I tried all the generic monitor type in Xconfigurator but it didn't
> >help...
> >Please help me ...thanks a lot
> >
when install, there is a generic display mode, look for that word: generic
in the alphabetical list of makers.
choose the nearest resolution, or simply Generic SVGA, 1024x768 or 800x648
or so. I do this with my LCD display. A test is available immediately
after
selecting the monitor.
hope this may help.
SN
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 20:30:54 -0600
On 18 May 2001 00:08:52 GMT, Daniel Tryba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> It's much easier for Microsoft to spy on their users via data
>>> transmitted in encrypted form over the Internet . Most users will be
>>> blissfully unaware
>>> even if 40-50k, perhaps even 100k of data - a full inventory of their
>>> hard disks, for example - were to be sent to Microsoft.
>>
>> Again, MS could send 1 byte of data extra in a TCP header every time
>> you connect to microsoft.com and do the same thing. They do *NOT*
>> need to do it through activation. It simply makes no sense whey they
>> would choose this method, and not some other less visible method, *IF*
>> they were going to do this. Merely using their software is enough.
>
>You don't _need_ to connect to *.microsoft.com or whatever host they
>could use to collect data (you might even not be on a network at all),
>but you _have to_ get an activation code.
>
>If I had to do some (illegal) datacollection I would probably do it
>during activation.
I think the goal here is not data collection, but the ability to tie a
real identity to your machine.
------------------------------
From: "Chris Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:45:32 -0400
In article <sTQM6.27495$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Daniel Johnson wrote:
>> > It's because the software they want to run, runs on Windows. Only.
>> >
>> >
>> Because m$ stole the market.
>
> That's "earned the market". please. :D
>
>> > Except for MS Office, which runs on Macs too. But that's not enough
>> > by itself, as I'm sure you realize.
>> >
>> > MS Windows won the hearts and minds of the developers of desktop
>> > applications.
>>
>> m$ didnt win ANY developer's hearts. Developers HATE micro$oft because
>> they know if they market something that catches m$'s eye, m$ will take
>> it.
>
> Not at all. Developers just keep on flocking to Microsoft's banner, when
> MS is the best solution.
>
> Sure, they know that MS might try to buy them out if they are successful
> enough. They *like* that, it means MS drives up with a dump truck full
> of money.
>
> They also know that if for some reason MS can't or won't do that, they
> can still compete with Microsoft and *win*. Others have; MS doesn't have
> black magic.
>
> The anti-MS zealotry you see from developers is pretty much the
> exclusive province of the he open source community. That is still pretty
> small potatoes, all told.
Yeah . That's why you and so many Microsoft .net lapdogs are so eager try
and sucker the open source community in supporting C# and the rest of
Microsoft's crap. To bad for the most part it isn't really working.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:51:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Why did Eazel shutdown?
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It's a very well publicized
form of crime. Well, you can
take your chances, it's your life.
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> Or maybe the boogie man may hunt you down, and live under you bed to scare
> you.
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
