Linux-Misc Digest #235, Volume #19 Sun, 28 Feb 99 19:13:13 EST
Contents:
Re: Can Linux run on NT for stability? (Gregory Leblanc)
Windows Printing System ("Lars-Göran Andersson")
Re: slrnpull and modem problem (William Cornett)
Re: Adding something to PATH? (Mykool)
Win95 vs. Win98 and Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Mouse Response (Wildman, the Cuberstalker)
Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion (Roger Espel Llima)
Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)) (Gregory L.
Hansen)
Re: What if software could think? (Gregory L. Hansen)
Re: Making Programs SUID root (Peter F. Curran)
Re: domain name reg and IP setup (Matt)
Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion (Emile van Bergen)
Need to capture the 'raw' mouse under X ("G. Georgiev")
Re: hda irq timeout ("D. Vrabel")
Re: Windows Printing System (John Garrison)
Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion (Emile van Bergen)
Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion (Emile van Bergen)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Bill Vermillion)
Re: Pentium III Boycott and survey info (Jerry Lynn Kreps)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory Leblanc)
Subject: Re: Can Linux run on NT for stability?
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 00:23:25 GMT
I'm going to ask this to be generous. Do you mean that you've found
the hardware that you're running NT on very reliable and want to run
linux on the same hardware?
If you mean "Can I run linux the same way that I would a normal
program?" then the answer is basically no. You could manage to run it
through an emulator, but that would be completely absurd, and would
probably crash even more than My NT boxes do, which would be scary.
Greg.
On 26 Feb 1999 12:15:49 -0800, moi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have found my NT server very reliable, and want to run Linux on it. Is this
>possible? I know some people say Linux is stable, but I don't want to take a
>chance.
>
>moi
Greg Leblanc
Network Admin
Concordia University Portland
gleblanc at cu-portland.edu
------------------------------
From: "Lars-Göran Andersson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Windows Printing System
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 23:43:25 +0100
I'm an owner of an Canon LBP-660 laser printer designed for
WindowsNT/95. Now I wonder if there is an existing driver for that
printer. It would be nice to be able to use it even in Linux!
Thank's in advance for all possible answers.
Lars-Göran Andersson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William Cornett)
Subject: Re: slrnpull and modem problem
Date: 28 Feb 1999 21:01:19 GMT
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 01:22:45 GMT, William Wueppelmann wrote:
: A few times when I've aborted slrnpull (using ctrl+c) in the middle of
: grabing news and used poff to kill pppd, my modem seems to refuse to hang
: up. I can remove the phone jack from the wall and get a dialtone from
: another phone off of another jack, but when I reattach the line, my modem
: is still trying to send data.
:
: pppd is already killed so I can't kill it again. I've tried echoing
: commands directly to /dev/modem (which I have symlinked to /dev/cua2) to
: try to get it to hang up, but apparently that's not legal. The only way to
: reset my modem that I've found has been to reboot, but there must be a way
: to force the modem connection to close.
:
: I'm running kernel 2.0.34 and I'm using Debian 2.0 with pon and poff to
: start/stop dialup connections. My modem is a Motorola VoiceSurfr56K, if
: that makes any difference.
My Debian 2.0 installation doesn't have any /dev/cua*. I use ttyS1 for
my modem (Com2). Newer versions of Linux are getting away from using
/dev/cua, for what reason I don't know. Try changing all reference to
the modem port as ttyS2. Also, use the 'lock' option in
/etc/ppp/options. I assume that "poff" is a script that kills the
pppd process.
--
Remove the period from my email address to reply.
------------------------------
From: Mykool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Adding something to PATH?
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 21:19:18 +0000
GC wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> How do I add a directory to my PATH in linux?
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Please post, no e-mail.
Edit your /etc/profile or ~/.bash_profile
--
Michael Barnhill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte294f
ICQ 13526262
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Win95 vs. Win98 and Linux
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 22:10:45 GMT
As a long time Linux user, I have left my "other" partition in the hands of
Win3.1. Now I am considering upgrading to either Win95 or Win98. My primary
OS will still be Linux. But some packages I need to use will not even unpack
under win 3.1 (e.g. FreeIBComponents for use with Delphi & Interbase). So,
considering all aspects - which is the least grief? Which occupies the least
disk space? Which is easier to handle in a mixed environment (using Wine
etc.)?
All views welcome, of course.
John Culleton
url http://www.carr.lib.md.us/~john/
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 28 Feb 1999 15:01:32 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Newman) writes:
> In article <7b933k$97i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Lee) writes:
> > Yeah. Too bad for you that Linus took steps to prevent people like you from
> > stealing the work he and others have put into linux and other OSS software.
> >
> > A damned shame, isn't it. NOT.
>
> Have any of the Linux developers acknowledged Ken Thompson?
> Do most of them even now who he is?
oh my god!
they killed kenny!
those bastards!
;-)
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wildman, the Cuberstalker)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Mouse Response
Date: 28 Feb 1999 23:12:32 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:21:25 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I just installed Red Hat v5.2 and the XFree86.
>
>I find my mouse is not as responsive as with MS Windows even if I use
>the Acceleration. Is this normal for Linux?
>Is there any software I have to load to make it better?
Microshaft, in their infinite wisdom, designed Windows so that the mouse had
a very high responsiveness. Of course, this was at the expense of
performance for *everything else*.
--
The Wildman
Five is a sufficiently close approximation to infinity.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roger Espel Llima)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion
Date: 28 Feb 1999 23:04:00 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Francois-Rene Rideau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That's the typical fascist approach to programming:
>when a wrong is possible, build a barrier to FORBID the wrong,
>making things even more difficult without solving any real problem,
>by forcing you to explicitly enforce your implicit assumptions.
That's also the problem that all "purist" programming languages have.
With a purist OO language, you have to go through hoops to jump through
layers in ways that don't fit the exact model the language uses.
With a purist functional language, you have to write code to *emulate*
having variables.
I find both quite distasteful.
--
Roger Espel Llima, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.eleves.ens.fr:8080/home/espel/index.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?))
Date: 28 Feb 1999 23:18:45 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brian moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 28 Feb 1999 03:43:48 GMT,
> Gregory L. Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> This is something I've wondered about. I've mounted floppies under
>> Linux, and I had to tell the OS what the device is called (but first I had
>> to ask the guy who set up the computer, because I didn't know) and I had
>> to tell it what the file system was.
>
>/dev/fd0 on every system I've seen. :)
>
>> When I'm doing that sort of thing on my Mac, I run a disk utility and it
>> TELLS me what devices I have on my computer, the file formats on all the
>> partitions, and if they're writeable (e.g. the CD-ROM is not). When I
>> stick a floppy in the drive it will automatically mount, and the icon will
>> have a "PC" on it if it's DOS formatted.
>>
>> I have to assume Linux is capable of things like that. Is there some
>> handy utility that I don't know about?
>
>A lot of that is due to the nature of PC hardware. Macs (and Suns) have
>smart floppy drives with no easy way for the user to eject a disk when
>they are mounted and they nicely generate an interrupt when a new disk
>is inserted. (Most CD-ROM drives even on crappy PC hardware do this
>correctly: it's just the floppies that are stupid in this way.)
>
>On a Sun, for example. there's a daemon which sees the interrupt from
>the drive ("oh, lookie, a disk!") and automatically mounts it. Removing
>the disk involves using the 'eject' command which ensures it is
>unmounted.
>
>Alas, with PC hardware, though, that's not feasible. I don't know if
>the SPARC and Mac versions of Linux do it nicely: they at least don't
>have the stupid hardware to fight with.
>
>(I have a baby sun SS1+ that has a neat eject: I can send disks flying
>about a foot. Fun to shoot them at people standing near the machine.
>:))
Heh! Would that have an "eject" and a "hurl" option?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: What if software could think?
Date: 28 Feb 1999 23:22:35 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
NF Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Fred Flatstone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens) writes:
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX The real difference
>>> between John (and the other GPLophobes) and the GPLophiles
>>> is to whom "free" software is free. John thinks freedom means
>>> the freedom for developers to use it in other (jproprietory, money
>>> making) works. Those on the other side want the software to be
>>> free for users to use. These two definitions of freedom are of
>>> course incompatible.
>>
>>John apparently thinks freedom means freedom. Why don't you?
>>
>You, and John, seem to think that your definition of freedom is
>the only one. Somewhere the freedom to own private goods
>and the freedom to appropriate other people's goods collide
>head on.
>
>But the discussion wasn't about "freedom". It was about "free
>software". Since GPL code is free for use, and will remain
>free for use, it _is_ "free software".
>
>Norman
I.e. you don't have to pay any money for it. And you never will. Ever.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter F. Curran)
Subject: Re: Making Programs SUID root
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 22:33:36 GMT
In article <7bbql3$kl0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
Whoa!
You really don't want to run anything more than necessary
as root. Crashes in root-run programs can cause a LOT more
damage than one running as a regular user. (For instance a
root-run program could wipe your entire hard disk.)
Application programs meant for regular users should never
be run as root, because they may in fact be written
carelessly yet still be safe when run by regular users.
The best thing to do is fix Star Office to run as it was
originally intended. If there are executable files which
regular users need to run, but are currently only allowed
to be root-run, you can change the permissions with the
chmod program.
Ex:
chmod ugo+x <filename>
If the program indicates that it _needs_ to be run as root,
then that is something else again. Some programs need
special servers running in the background, with root-perms
enabled. You can either start the program AS root when the
system boots using rc-files, or you can use the suid feature.
Ex:
chmod u+s <filename>
Note that a suid program must also be executable by others
to be run. (chmod ugo+x)
--
Peter F Curran
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
dough knot male: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use address in Organization line, finger
for PGP key. Antispaam test in progress.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 13:11:42 -0500
From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: domain name reg and IP setup
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.help
Thankyou for your kind advice, now I would like to
get to the bottom of this please bear with me...
So,
All I have to do is think of a unique name for my site
ask InterNIC to register the site and assign an IP address
for it and to OK it.
Setting up the server..
Use BIND etc.. as one does for PPP and setting up the
standard www apache server that comes as standard on
most Linux Dist.. (In my case I have setup the JavaWebSever1.1
from JavaSoft). Making sure that the Registered IP address is
ok from InterNIC.
Use a standard Telephone line to maintain a connection to it,
or make sure that the telephone line and server is operational/up
for at least 90days but can't be down for more than 90days in a
strech as per DNS req (www.dns.net).
Is that all ?
If I need to use email etc all I will do is disable my own
server for the duration of usage for my call online to my
ISP. ie use my ISP for the local rate dialing and services
and use my www server for other people to use and dial into.
Or do I have to keep the line on and incur telephone charges
at all times paying for 24hrs perday and 365days per year.
Or can people use it as if they were dialing into a normal
telephone line/answering machine service.
Many thanks
Matt
PTW wrote:
>
> The InterNIC is the place responsible for maintaining
> name to IP address mapping and assignment.
>
> They distribute their list regularly to second level
> DNS servers, which then allow others to get addresses
> for names from them, and so on all the way to your
> home computer (which asks your ISP DNS for the info.)
>
> One thing that was overlooked.
>
> The InterNIC requires that your server be up continuously
> in order to maintain the name. They do have an actual
> time that the named site can be down before they suspend
> it.
>
> It is a good idea to have your ISP host a backup site
> that can say your server is in a maintenance phase.
>
> TS Stahl wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >In a nutshell:
> >Get a static IP account with some ISP
> >Go to the internic.NET site, NOT .com and register your domain. Your
> >ISP will probably do this service for you, for a small additional fee.
> >
> >Your ISP (well, internet DNS) will then direct all traffic bound to
> >yoursite.com to your static ip address. What you do then is completely
> >up to you.
> >
> >Matt wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> What HOWTODO can help me setup a domain name for my own internet
> >> connection and what are the requirements, I know there are sites
> >> that you can register under but how can I set up my own.
> >>
> >> Also are there any sites that can help too.
> >>
> >> Many thanks
> >>
> >> Matt
> >
> >--
> >Scott Stahl
> >MIS Asst.
> >Illinois Housing Development Authority
> >
> >
------------------------------
From: Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 00:50:01 +0100
Francois-Rene Rideau wrote:
> Every part of a µK-based design is simple, sure,
> because you've butchered the system into small parts!
> Now, if you consider same-functionality systems,
> the only thing µK does is introduce stupid low-level barriers between
> services. The services are still there, and their intrinsic complexity
> isn't reduced: for every small part of the µK-based system,
> you could find a corresponding, smaller part, in the non-µK system,
> the one that implements the same functionality
> without having to marshall data to cross barriers.
> The µK design only introduced increased complexity at the server
> barriers!
Among those 'stupid' low level barriers is address space separation. I
wouldn't want to live without it, now would you? As to the requirement
of data to be marshaled and un-marshaled: this has a rather nice
side-effect, in that most developers will design the necessary links
between modules as clean and stateless as possible. This in itself is
beneficial, mainly for re-useability and debugability reasons.
Also, a modularised design with simple links that can be made
network-transparent (message passing), will scale better towards large
scaling distributed environments, without much re-design.
Formally, you're absolutely right. In the real world, you're absolutely
not. Program functions are almost never formally/mathematically
'proven', so I want those protectional barriers so that fail-safety
mechanisms are more easily implemented. Apart from that, there will
never be clean and uniform inter-module interfaces unless 'forced' upon
designers by the barriers (i.e. protocols) you mention.
--
M.vr.gr. / Best regards,
Emile van Bergen (e-mail address: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
This e-mail message is 100% electronically degradeable and produced
on a GNU/Linux system.
------------------------------
From: "G. Georgiev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Need to capture the 'raw' mouse under X
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 18:27:20 -0500
Reply-To: "G. Georgiev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi,
I need to read the raw mouse data from /dev/ttyS0 while under X
for a signature-capture purposes. Is it possible to tell the X server to
give me the mouse or to pass me the raw mouse data? I need to be able as
well to send some strings to the mouse - to change the speed for example.
If X is not running everything is O.K., but I need to display the
signature in an X application simultaneously.
So, some ideas of how to do it? (without using second mouse!).
George.
------------------------------
From: "D. Vrabel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: hda irq timeout
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 22:15:04 +0000
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, James Lewis wrote:
> Milos Prudek wrote:
>
> > The following suddenly appeared on my console:
> > hda: irq timeout: status=0xd0 (Busy}
> > ide0: reset: success
>
> I use to get the "error" on an old 486 I had. It had a really slow hard
> drive in it, and every so often this would appear. It generally means
> the kernel tried to communicate with the hard drive [controller] and
> failed. So then the kernel issues a ide reset, and as you can see it
> succeeded in finially getting the drive's attention.
>
> Unless you start gettting a large amount of these 'errors', things are
> usually okay.
I tend to get lots of these when trying to access both the harddisk and
CD-ROM at the same time (both harddisk and CD-ROM are on the same adaptor)
David
--
David Vrabel
Engineering Undergraduate at University of Cambridge, UK.
------------------------------
From: John Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows Printing System
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 22:48:05 GMT
I'm afraid I can't tell exactly what driver to use bt I have a cannon
bjc-620 inkjet printer that was designed for windows 95 and the windows
printing system (although I never have understood why, as so much more
stuff is being done by hardware to improve the performance the idiots at
MS would actually take power away from hardware and give it to
software), but my point is my "Win95" printer works fine under Linux so
you should be able to find a driver.
"Lars-Göran Andersson" wrote:
>
> I'm an owner of an Canon LBP-660 laser printer designed for
> WindowsNT/95. Now I wonder if there is an existing driver for that
> printer. It would be nice to be able to use it even in Linux!
>
> Thank's in advance for all possible answers.
>
> Lars-Göran Andersson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 01:02:31 +0100
Barry Margolin wrote:
[SNIP]
> Reliability was achieved through
> the use of Lisp as the implementation language; it doesn't have explicit
> pointers (although they added pointer-like objects for use by low-level OS
> code, so it's possible to bypass the abstractions if you try hard, but at
> least these pointers interacted with the GC properly) and garbage
> collection prevented most dangling pointer problems.
>
> A number of "modern" operating systems, like MacOS and Windows 9X, are
> monolithic like this, but since they, and their applications, are written
> in less safe languages we suffer from many memory management bugs that can
> take down the entire system.
Exacly. As long as different components of a system come from different
sources that one can never fully trust, i.e. as long as Utopia doesn't
exist, I want process separation.
I'm sorry mr. Rideau, but I think you should get both your feet on the
ground. By the way, why this zealousness? In the software world as it is
now, more problems are caused by the absence of narrow interfaces and
component separation than are caused by this 'abstraction inversion' you
scream about. I'm sorry if I'm not too polite to you, but in the world
we live in I see no reason for such hot-tempered statements as those
expressed by you.
--
M.vr.gr. / Best regards,
Emile van Bergen (e-mail address: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
This e-mail message is 100% electronically degradeable and produced
on a GNU/Linux system.
------------------------------
From: Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 01:08:15 +0100
Francois-Rene Rideau wrote:
> Indeed. The problem is in the programming language.
> Requiring the system programmer to emulate, by hand, in C,
> a strongly typed concurrent agent programming model,
> and shooting him if he makes the slightest mistakes,
> is not only a REAL STUPID design decision, it's also deeply EVIL.
> The solution is, again:
> to achieve a system that follows the above mentionned model,
> use a strongly typed concurrent agent programming language! [duh!]
This is exactly the 'fascist' (your wording!) approach that you so
strongly oppose. What is the formal difference in discipline enforced by
the language and discipline enforced by the run-time environment?? I
prefer the latter, personally, I like the freedom of C. To quote an old
C reference manual: "With C, you've got enough rope to swing with, and
enough rope to hang yourself with."
--
M.vr.gr. / Best regards,
Emile van Bergen (e-mail address: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
This e-mail message is 100% electronically degradeable and produced
on a GNU/Linux system.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 23:27:16 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion) writes:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> I always call "#" the "number sign" myself.
>> >in the uk, the shifted three gives the proper pound symbol and what in
>> >the us is displayed as # is in the uk shown as the wacky L.
>> So if you order something and say you want three pounds worth,
>> does that mean you want the amount which 3 pounds sterling will
>> buy, or do you get 3 pounds by weight - which may cost a lot more
>> than 3 pounds sterling.
>and (to continue this useless thread) it may cost less.
>> I think lb is perfectly good abreviation.
>for weights yes. for british money, no.
Correct. What I was trying to get across - but failed miserably at
doing - was to reserve the shift 3 key for the local currency.
>in the US the $ is originally a thin U over top of an S. (think of
>the double line $). why shouldn't US100 be an acceptible substitute
>for $100?
I've typically seen it $100US, vs $100A ('strine), or $100CDN.
--
Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com
------------------------------
From: Jerry Lynn Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Pentium III Boycott and survey info
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:47:51 -0600
brian moore wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:25:21 -0600,
> Jerry Lynn Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Bill Unruh wrote:
> > >
> > <snip>
> > > Or the users own program could send a fake one. I do not believe that
> > > security is what this is for. I believe it is for copy protection. I
> > > suspect that MS put pressure on for such a chipid so that they could
> > > code their programs to the chipid making multiple use impossible.
> > > ( and with the new copyright laws, any attempt to get around this would
> > > be a criminal offense.) The next Word you buy will not be able to be
> > > installed or run if the ID is switched off, and there will be no word of
> > > this on the box(prediction).
> > > And buy a new computer and replace all your software as well.
> >
> > You've hit the nail on the head, Bill. Remember that email shown at the
> > M$ trial in which Gates and friends were discussing how to get MORE
> > revenue from their software sales? Their solution: license the software
> > ANNUALLY! Combine that little ploy with the ID chip and your monopoly
> > is TOTAL and complete. IF the DOJ doesn't do it's job then only Linux
> > is left to stem the tide...
>
> Oh, I dunno: I hope Microsoft does it. I hope they install coin slots on
> PCs so that users can "insert 25c for the next 30 minutes of Word" and
> such.
That is probably Gate's next license step, right after he gets people
use to bleeding er.. paying for the Annual License fee. Heat those
toads up one degree at a time and they never notice that they are near
the boiling point and ready to be bunned and sauced.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
