Linux-Misc Digest #678, Volume #18 Mon, 18 Jan 99 13:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Mounting cdrom and floppy on Redhat 5.2 (Tom Gerrard)
Re: Beowulf Anyone? (Ed Nather)
Re: FoxPro for SCO UNIX & linux (Graham Nicholls)
Re: Message Queue Middleware for Linux? ("Anders �stling")
Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers ("Keith Peterson")
Beowulf into the fold? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Mounting cdrom and floppy on Redhat 5.2 ("Steve Sanyal")
Re: Which version (Vasilis Serghi)
Re: Compudex update (Gary Helbig)
Re: rexec? ("J. S. Jensen")
Re: login ignores shadow (Rob Komar)
Re: Mounting cdrom and floppy on Redhat 5.2 ("Olly Segwick")
linear mode under LILO (Upali Bandara)
Re: FoxPro for SCO UNIX & linux (Max Jerome)
Re: Which is the best colour printer for Linux? (M O'Reilly)
Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers (David Kastrup)
Re: How to print a man page? (Villy Kruse)
Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers
Re: Anti-Linux FUD (Jim Frost)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tom Gerrard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Mounting cdrom and floppy on Redhat 5.2
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:59:15 +0000
If you want the floppy and CDrom to be mounted every time you login, you
need add lines to your /etc/fstab to do it automatically. However you will
probably have to umount and mount again if you change CD for example
Tom
Olly Segwick wrote:
> You need to change the permissions on /mnt/floppy and /mnt/cdrom so that
> normal users can access them (I believe).
>
> Olly
>
> Steve Sanyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
> <n3Ho2.266$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been able to mount my cdrom and my floppy as root, using the
> following
> > commands:
> >
> > mount /mnt/cdrom
> > mount /mnt/floppy
> >
> > It works fine for that login session. However, I seem to have to keep
> > remounting. I also cannot access the cdrom or the floppy from a regular
> > user account.
> >
> > What do I need to do?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
------------------------------
From: Ed Nather <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Beowulf Anyone?
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:01:43 +0000
We (a grad student and I) have put together a "mini-beowulf" system with
32 nodes, using RedHat Linux and PVM as the software basis. Works like a
champ. We've written it up for Linux Journal, and it should be out in a
month or two.
Send me email if you want a copy of the draft we submitted.
ed
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Graham Nicholls)
Subject: Re: FoxPro for SCO UNIX & linux
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 1:04 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
wrote:
> On 15 Jan 1999 08:31:23 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
> > it's possible (using iBCS)? i can't get it work :( but badly needed..
> >
> > (MS FoxPro 2.6 for SCO Xenix/UNIX & RH 5.2 2.0.36)
> >
> > thnx
> > al
>
> You may also try FlagShip which produces native executables for Linux
> (and
> dozens other Unices). Free test drives are on http://www.fship.com
>
With all due respect, forget flagship if you wish to run existing FoxPro
programs. FlagShip's german support team pointed me in the direction of
their FoxPro compatibility system, but this is broken. It clearly hasn't
been maintained for a long while (the support person who I spoke to
confirmed this), as it refers to a coming, new release of FS, which is in
fact now well out of date.
I have a major client running FoxPro under SuSE, with iBCS, on several
boxes, in a mission critical environment, even on a couple of multi (well,
two) processor machines. It runs fine, albeit with one minor quirk .
FlagShip _may_be OK for developing from scratch - I can't comment. But as
far as deploying any moderately large existing FoxPro systems, expect a
long time spent porting.
This is not a flame at flagship - just that Mr Bolzern always posts
whenever anyone mentions FoxPro, and is being somewhat disingenuous, IMHO.
Look _very_ carefully before committing to FlagShip
Graham Nicholls
------------------------------
From: "Anders �stling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Message Queue Middleware for Linux?
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:56:08 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi
I have got the kit for evaluation. The demo runs fine on my RH 5.1
system@home.
/Anders
Christopher B. Browne wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:09:21 +0100, Anders �stling
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
> >Level8 Systems has ported their FalconMQ library to Linux. FalconMQ is
> >a multiplatform version of MSMQ. Runs on several Unix'es, OpenVMS and
> >MVS. Check www.level8.com
>
> That's not what they say; the nearest version is a SCO release...
>
> --
> Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
> -- Henry Spencer <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - "What have you contributed to Linux today?..."
--
========================================================
Anders �stling
IKEA Corporate Technology Group
Email: anders dot ostling AT neurope dot ikea dot com
Phone: +46-42-25 73 45
Fax : +46-42-25 73 70
Mobil: +46-70-753 70 39
========================================================
------------------------------
From: "Keith Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:27:50 -0700
Jim Richardson wrote in message ...
>On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:42:56 -0700,
> Keith Peterson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> brought forth the following words...:
>
>>
>><Lengthy reply snipped>
>>
>>For a guy with a lot to say on the subject, you apparently can't read.
>
>for someone who critisizes others reading abilties, it is amusing that
>you didn't seem to notice that he was replying to someone other than you.
I posted a message which was followed by a secondary reply, then came this
(which, as you will note, begins with a plural):
>>>You guys are a laugh. This is the most ignorant drivel I have
>>>seen in this NG. If there were any valuable anything in the ground
>>>on a reservation, the Indians would be mining it themselves.
>>>You are making them out to be a bunch of ignorant savages, when
>>>in reality they are some of the most shrewd business people
>>>around. You insult them by your assertion.
>>I never made that assertion you are claiming, nor did I even remotely
imply
>>it. Yet you lump me into this category.
>
Then you...
>what assertion did he claim that _you_ made?
Hmmm... more reading problems...
The assertion:
>>>You are making them out to be a bunch of ignorant savages,
>>Improve your reading skills.
>>
>>And just how, in your twisted logic, does the fact that many reservations
>>are doing well now justify the original actions? I know some wealthy
Jewish
>>people. Did the germans do them a favour?
>>
>
>where did you get this from. I read the same post, that's not what he said,
>perhaps you might like the name of a good reading comprehension instructor?
For the sake of brevity I did not quote the entire thread. Unfortunately my
server has expired the messages.
Any other questions?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Beowulf into the fold?
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:18:43 GMT
All,
Just a thought, but with the news today (http://www.kieser.net/linux.html)
about Compaq's support for Linux, as well as the major DB players reacting to
requests FROM CORPORATES for real support and deployment on Linux (was there
market research wrong or what? :-) isn't there now more reason to include
Beowulf as part of the "standard" Linux builds and distributions?
I am saying this because Linux is now very clearly on its way into the
corporate server world. I can see that IT departments will have a whole new
perspective on cost of ownership as not only do you get an OS of Linux's
calibre on dirt-cheap PC hardware, but you can also use Beowulf to cluster PC
hardware together into some very serious computing power indeed! And Linux
means that Legacy hardware is still useable and reuseable.
I also think that there is a second call for more integration of Beowulf to
make Linux for compelling to corporates: Because of the cheapness of the
hardware (and the OS!), projects that did not provide a return on investment
due to the cost of a Cray or IBM mainframe are now able to be re-evaluated. I
think that this is true for corporate applications (such as strategic
analysis or, say an algorithm for financial assessment) as well as research
(where maybe the cost stopped the research in some smaller Universities or
colleges).
So I can see Linux as actually creating a whole new software market due to its
price/performance enabling ratio. If all the means of achieving this were
distributed with Linux as "standard", then it would be more pervasive and even
more compelling (and NT 5 is dead in the water).
Well, that's my tuppence worth. Hope that it contributes to constructive
discussion.
Brad
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Steve Sanyal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Mounting cdrom and floppy on Redhat 5.2
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 13:55:31 GMT
Hi,
I've been able to mount my cdrom and my floppy as root, using the following
commands:
mount /mnt/cdrom
mount /mnt/floppy
It works fine for that login session. However, I seem to have to keep
remounting. I also cannot access the cdrom or the floppy from a regular
user account.
What do I need to do?
Thanks
Steve
------------------------------
From: Vasilis Serghi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which version
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 13:25:27 +0000
Chris Welch wrote:
>
> Vasilis Serghi wrote:
> >
> > Hi all, I'm getting very anti Win 95 at the moment, and have been
> > considering getting a Lynux OS. This whole thing is very new to me. I
> > understand that there are different variants of the Unix OS, such as
> > S.U.S.E and Red Hat etc. I bought a mag which had the SUSE OS on the
> > cover disk, although I read that the Red Hat version is easier to
> > install.
> >
> > What are the differences between these variants and which is better
> > suited for a complete novice.
> >
> > Any help is appreciated.
>
> Debian 2.0
>
> Red Hat still uses libc5 and not 6 (so I hear), so it's not moving along
> with the crowd. Personally, Debian 2 is easier to install than Windows
> ever was. It's US$2.95.
>
> PS-It's Linux, not Lynux. Hehe
> --
> /----------------------------------------------------------\
> | http://www.chaotic42.cx |
> | |
> | Brain: It must be inordinately taxing to be such a boob. |
> | Pinky: You have no idea. |
> \----------------------------------------------------------/
My mistake
------------------------------
From: Gary Helbig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Compudex update
Date: 18 Jan 1999 16:37:20 GMT
Um, Darren? You might get more visitors if you told us what
the URL is......
Darren Priestnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have finally got around to upgrading my Linux software web site.
> It now includes updated information about all my Linux CD's as well as links
> to useful Linux sites.
> Darren Priestnall
------------------------------
From: "J. S. Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: rexec?
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:16:42 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Doesn't linux have rexec? Couldn't find the command or the man page. I need it
> for remote execution of batch files.
rsh seems to be more used. The protocols are a little different, but accomplish
the same thing. RU definetely in need of using rexec?
--
J. S. Jensen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.Paramin.COM
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Komar)
Subject: Re: login ignores shadow
Date: 18 Jan 1999 16:34:12 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: All of a sudden (i.e. without doing any nasty configuration or restarting the
: system) a SuSe linux 5.2 box changed behaviour as follows: login (console and
: telnet) does not check /etc/shadow but /etc/passwd (Fortunately, there was
: still an active console login as root) pop3, ftp, su, and others *do* still
: check /etc/shadow The passwd command modifies /etc/passwd instead of
: /etc/shadow Rebooting did not change the situation (fortunately, I placed
: root's password in /etc/passwd in the mean time).
:
: How could this have happened??
It sounds like a different version of login is on your system.
If you didn't put it there upgrading some package, then you
might have been hacked. Get the original from your SuSe
distribution CD and re-install it, then start looking for
signs of a break-in.
Cheers,
Rob Komar
------------------------------
From: "Olly Segwick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Mounting cdrom and floppy on Redhat 5.2
Date: 18 Jan 1999 14:55:15 GMT
You need to change the permissions on /mnt/floppy and /mnt/cdrom so that
normal users can access them (I believe).
Olly
Steve Sanyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
<n3Ho2.266$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Hi,
>
> I've been able to mount my cdrom and my floppy as root, using the
following
> commands:
>
> mount /mnt/cdrom
> mount /mnt/floppy
>
> It works fine for that login session. However, I seem to have to keep
> remounting. I also cannot access the cdrom or the floppy from a regular
> user account.
>
> What do I need to do?
>
> Thanks
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Upali Bandara)
Subject: linear mode under LILO
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 20:19:38 +0100
In the users manual of RedHat 5.1 there's spoken about a "linear mode"
under LILO for some SCSI-Harddisks. I activated "linear mode". One
Harddisk is dead, the other one is detected everytime slower then before
by the Adaptec-SCSI-Controller.
What is "linear mode" and can this destroy hardware (don't think so)?
Samuel, 16
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Max Jerome )
Subject: Re: FoxPro for SCO UNIX & linux
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:59:30 GMT
On Tue, 19 Jan 1999 1:04 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Graham Nicholls) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
>wrote:
>
>> On 15 Jan 1999 08:31:23 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>> > it's possible (using iBCS)? i can't get it work :( but badly needed..
>> >
>> > (MS FoxPro 2.6 for SCO Xenix/UNIX & RH 5.2 2.0.36)
>> >
>> > thnx
>> > al
>>
>> You may also try FlagShip which produces native executables for Linux
>> (and
>> dozens other Unices). Free test drives are on http://www.fship.com
>>
>With all due respect, forget flagship if you wish to run existing FoxPro
>programs. FlagShip's german support team pointed me in the direction of
>their FoxPro compatibility system, but this is broken. It clearly hasn't
>been maintained for a long while (the support person who I spoke to
>confirmed this), as it refers to a coming, new release of FS, which is in
>fact now well out of date.
>
>I have a major client running FoxPro under SuSE, with iBCS, on several
>boxes, in a mission critical environment, even on a couple of multi (well,
>two) processor machines. It runs fine, albeit with one minor quirk .
>
>FlagShip _may_be OK for developing from scratch - I can't comment. But as
>far as deploying any moderately large existing FoxPro systems, expect a
>long time spent porting.
>
>This is not a flame at flagship - just that Mr Bolzern always posts
>whenever anyone mentions FoxPro, and is being somewhat disingenuous, IMHO.
>Look _very_ carefully before committing to FlagShip
>
>Graham Nicholls
Graham,
I must agree with you here, I tried porting some of my foxpro dos
programs to flagship with very little success, perhaps when they
release their next version that is talked about on their website it
will get better, but I was unable to make it work for me as it stands.
It is encouraging to here that someone has foxpro running on linux. i
have been trying to get either foxpro dos working under dosemu or
foxpro unix running for a few months now. Could you tell me what
youve got your FOXTERM set to? Are you running it in a multiuser
environment? Any help you could give me would be appreciated.
Al,
I am going to set another foxpro unix up on linux this week. I will
document it as I do it this time, and I will post it here.
------------------------------
From: M O'Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Which is the best colour printer for Linux?
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:23:25 +0000
Phillip Deackes wrote:
> Do we yet have a printer 'driver' for any colour printer for Linux which
> gives similar quality to what is achievable under Windows? It really is
> the last thing keeping Windows on my machine. I can use my scanner,touch
> up the image with The Gimp but have to save images to my Windows
> partition, boot up Windows and print from there. I might as well scan
> under Windows too.
>
> I have an HP 690C and can get reasonable quality using magicfilter and
> the 660/670 drivers under ghostscript. I have used hpdj, and the least
> good 550C drivers which come with apsfilter/magicfilter. I am not aware
> that there is anything better than this for my current printer.
>
> Is there an affordable colour postsript printer? Would postcript
> printers necessarily give better quality printing? Is there any printer
> manufacturer actually considering producing a Linux printer driver?
>
>
Have you looked at the Lexmark Oprta 40 colour inkjet, with photo quality
output? It has Postscript and PCl built in. Sells for around 340 UK Pounds
i.e. about one third more than the Epson 740 or HP 895Cxi.
I have just sent away for a sample printout, but the Feburary Personal
Computer World magazine does not give its photo quality output a very good
review.
--
Michael O'Reilly
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers
Date: 18 Jan 1999 18:24:27 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mayor Of R'lyeh) writes:
> On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 13:30:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stephen)
> chose to bless us all with this bit of wisdom:
>
> >Also, ZDNet's Charles Cooper says Boies is much more effective than
> >his
> >opponents from Sullivan & Cromwell.
>
> And what is it that makes his opinion so important?
>
> > (Of course, they have the
> >disadvantage
> >of having a guilty client. :-)
>
> I wasn't aware that the trial was over. Of course even after Microsoft
> is cleared of all charges you will, doubtless, still consider them
> guilty.
Anybody that has not by now noticed that they are playing the part of
a real messy, ugly and mean bully using all sorts of dirty tricks in
order to smash their opponents in the software industry with a
vengeance while not just relying on the renowned high quality of their
products should have his head examined.
They are clearly guilty of that, and the outcome of the trial does not
change it one bit. Whether they are more guilty of it than several of
its important opponents would be a different question. It is my
opinion that they are, but there might be different opinions.
It is not the purpose of the trial to figure out about either of this.
It *is* the purpose of the trial if their actions have not only been
loathsome, but illegal according to the laws of the United States.
This, of course, is a matter for which opinion polls cannot provide an
answer.
For this reason, Microsoft tries to make up all sorts of fantastic
claims about its ground swell support and is laughing in its fist if
its opponents try focusing on that argumentation. If the trial will
mostly focus about public opinion instead of the law, Microsoft will
have an easy play in the higher courts in order to have the decision
thrown out.
--
David Kastrup Phone: +49-234-700-5570
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +49-234-709-4209
Institut f�r Neuroinformatik, Universit�tsstr. 150, 44780 Bochum, Germany
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: How to print a man page?
Date: 18 Jan 1999 17:32:07 +0100
In article <77g2v9$22s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hey dudes! I'm trying to print man page on ipfwadm , but i can't find how to
>do that :-) I found that man page on ipfwadm is in the
>/usr/man/man8/ipfwadm.8 file, but it has some sort of special formatting that
>is kinda difficult to read in emacs,vi, or KDE's kedit. Is there any way to
>print the man or xman page in it's original formating? May be i have to open
>than man page file in some kind of special editor? Please help me out dudes.
>Thanx in advance :-)
>
If you want to make a file you can show in vi or emacs then run
man ipfwadm |col -bx
That gets rid of the x^Hx^Hx^Hx stuff.
Villy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Consumer Poll Says Microsoft Is Good For Consumers
Date: 18 Jan 1999 15:35:44 GMT
On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 18:59:31 GMT,
Jack Troughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 17:02:29, Jerry
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(I wrote, but somebody snipped the attribs):
>
>> > If one uses "Java speed", either Windows NT or Windows 95/98 (I forget
>> > which) is all-out tops of every platform out there. Even
>> > Solaris!
>>
>> Bullshit !! No MS software supports Java under any version of Windoze -
>> only MSes pathetic attempt at implementing Java - of course it runs
>> quicker under Windoze - MS hacked Java, took out the security features,
>> made it non-standard and you quote this against "true" Java - lets see
>> how quick an official Java release runs under Windoze and then compare
>> it to other platforms....
>
>Besides, at this point, the 1.1.7 JVM from IBM for OS/2 Warp is the
>fastest... go look it up on infoworld; it runs significantly faster
>than the fastest MS JVM under either NT or 9x...
Hm, I was not aware of that. :-) Of course, since OS/2 and Windows
have a more or less common basis, does IBM's JVM run under Windows?
I will note in deference to Jerry that there are some discrepancies
between MS's alleged (in the truest sense of the word) implementation
of Java, and the Java specification as originally published by Sun --
mostly in more arcane areas such as RPC, as I understand it.
So perhaps MS isn't the fastest Java after all -- it may be like
claiming a coffee without chocolate syrup is the best
tasting caffe mocha one ever had. :-)
Still...the original point of my post was that Windows is superior
in some cases, and Linux is superior in others.
>
>I'm using it now and it's quite quite fast indeed...
I'll admit, Java is interesting. Whether it will become what its
proponents claim is dependent on many factors -- speed being one
of them, but not the only one. :-)
(A reliable operating system helps a *lot*. OS/2 is as good as Linux
in that respect -- at least as far as I know.)
>
>Jack Troughton ICQ:7494149
>http://207.96.209.68:8000/
>jack.troughton at videotron.ca
>jaft at adan.kingston.net
>Montr�al PQ Canada
----
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- not always right, just looks that way at times :-)
------------------------------
From: Jim Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.conspiracy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.x,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux FUD
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 10:38:14 -0500
> No defaults for disk partitions ? Hello - have you tried Red Hat 5.2 -
> it has the benevolent option to partition all of your hard drive(s) [
> "Server Install" ] without asking a question.
I guess I missed that in my last install (which was 5.2).
> As a side benefit, it erases that "other operating system" from your
> hard drive - for free.
:-)
jim
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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-Misc Digest
******************************
