Linux-Misc Digest #116, Volume #20 Sat, 8 May 99 19:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Sound now broken in 2.2 (**Nick Brown)
I did something stupid and now I can't boot... (Mladen Gavrilovic)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Jim Richardson)
Re: Boycott Intel on your own webpage ("JS/PL")
SuSE useradd ("d. martin")
Hardware failure or an attack? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Firewall and SOCKS5? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: How can X be so slow? (Donn Miller)
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Bill Gunshannon)
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Bill Gunshannon)
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Bill Gunshannon)
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (was: Wanted: Database/Contact mgr with
backend on Linux/FreeBSD, web frontend) (Bill Gunshannon)
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Bill Gunshannon)
Re: Boycott Intel on your own webpage (Andrew Comech)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: **Nick Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sound now broken in 2.2
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 13:44:46 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Go back to the .config file you were using for 2.0.36 and check that you
have the same DMA, etc, values. Even if you copied your .config file
from 2.0 to 2.2, it might not have got the right values across. The
defaults (in make xconfig, anyway) for this sound modules often don't
match the hardware requirements.
"Eric L. Rovner" wrote:
> Sound worked perfectly in 2.0.36 for me, but since I installed 2.2.7, I
> get nothing at all.
> sndconfig tells me that there is an error in
> /lib/modules/2.2.7/misc/cs4232.o, in that there are "too many values for
> DMA (max 1)."
--
===============================================================
Nick Brown, Strasbourg, France (Nick(dot)Brown(at)coe(dot)int)
Protect yourself against Word 95/97 viruses, free - check out
http://www.geocities.com/NapaValley/Vineyard/1446/atlas-t.html
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: Mladen Gavrilovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: I did something stupid and now I can't boot...
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 18:05:19 -0400
In my epic battle to upgrade my glib to 2.1, in a moment of stupidity I
renamed my /lib to /oldlib instead of copying it. Now nothing works. I
can't rename it back because mv doesn't work. Basically only cd works.
I am running RedHat 5.0. I can boot off the CD into a live system
(rescue mode) but I have no idea how to mount my the linux partition
(hda4) to rename the directory back to /lib. Can anyone help me?
Regards,
Mladen
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
Date: 8 May 1999 19:58:00 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 08 May 1999 00:42:18 -0700,
Michael Powe, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>>>>>> "Mike" == Mike Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Mike> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco Anglesio) writes:
> >> And there's freedom from action - if your arm-swinging prevents
> >> me from doing something, should I have the right to prevent you
> >> from doing it? The latter is the question I was really asking.
>
> Mike> That depends on what you want to do. What do you have in
> Mike> mind?
>
> Mike> That was rhetorical, because I don't think this is the right
> Mike> place to get into a far-ranging discussion about
> Mike> libertarianism. There are places that specialize in that
> Mike> and do it ad nausium. I just poked my nose in to correct
> Mike> some pretty blatant and obvious misrepresentation of the
> Mike> libertarian position. I'll butt out now.
>
>Actually, your one-liner has practically no relation to the
>implementation of libertarianism as described both by libertarians
>infesting political newsgroups and in magazines like Reason.
>
>The icon of libertarianism is Ayn Rand, a cruel, selfish bitch who
>hammered everyone around her in demonstration of "The Virtue of
>Selfishness" (the libertarian motto as well as the title of one of her
>books).
>
>"My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being,
>with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with
>productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only
>absolute." -- Ayn Rand
>
>You'll notice there's nothing in there about avoiding smacking someone
>else's nose.
>
>mp
>
perhaps you should read more Rand, a philosophy like objectivism, is just
as hard to condense into a single paragraph as a religeon like christianity.
You'll also note that there is nothing in the paragraph about avoiding
being a welfare leech, yet that is a part of the philosophy of Rand.
>- --
>powered by GNU/linux since Sept 1997 Penguin spoken here
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.trollope.org
>Michael Powe Portland, Oregon USA
> "Would John the Baptist have lost his head if his name was Steve?"
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v0.9.0 (GNU/Linux)
>Comment: Encrypted with Mailcrypt 3.5.1 and GNU Privacy Guard
>
>iD8DBQE3M+rU755rgEMD+T8RAkCwAJ9AKosOYCeZu+VTe63eEIl3vzBONgCeNUkK
>efJ9fKE5ng7q0f+kxJHXmOM=
>=mN/q
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson
www.eskimo.com/~warlock
All hail Eris
"Linux, where do you want to go tomorrow?"
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Boycott Intel on your own webpage
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 17:21:27 -0400
That was there when they bought the company, it wasn't MS's idea to build it
into the set boxes. It was probably spawned from the idea that anyone who
uses webtv is so goddamn stupid that they deserve to have their privacy
violated in such a manner.
--
The half spammed link to my site follows:
http://www.ohiosites.net
William Burrow wrote in message ...
>On 6 May 1999 17:56:39 GMT,
>brian moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I think your time would be better spent on dealing with real privacy
>>issues, such as WebTV's reporting of TV viewing habits and what
>>Microsoft (owners of WebTV, after all) will do if they manage to get
>>WinCE into cable boxes.
>
>WinCE is going into cable boxes, AT&T is all buddy-buddy with MS now.
>
>
>--
>William Burrow
>Copyright 1999 William Burrow
------------------------------
From: "d. martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: de.comp.os.unix.linux.misc
Subject: SuSE useradd
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 17:10:51 -0500
The SuSE 6.1 distribution does not support the -r or -n switch with
"useradd". This causes packages that use it to fail during installation. I
have gotten around this by copying a redhat version over and using it during
installations. I am setting up core packages so I don't know if I will run
into more similiar situations.
Question:
Why the different versions of standard utilities? Is this common in Linux
distributions?
thanks,
Reply via email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Hardware failure or an attack?
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 22:14:47 GMT
We've a damaged server, and opinion is divided over whether it's damaged
because of some software/hardware failure or due to an attempt to crack it.
OS: Redhat Linux v5.2
Hardware: Compaq Presario, IDE drive, AMD-K6, nothing exotic
Symptoms: - root filesystem is full. (was at 24% for about a month) -
lost+found directory is 12 MB. That's the directory, there are no files
visible in it. - empty wtmp - telnet (port 23) into box OK, but on SMTP and
POP ports connection is refused (we're running Communigate Pro as a mail
server) - system clock has moved back several hours. - machine has rebooted
unattended (by anyone we know anyway :-) - w reports that I restarted and
logged in about 20 mins before I really did. - fsck reports no (other)
problems. - rpm -Va reports nothing untoward, except for some missing
startup and shutdown scripts (they're not changed, they're missing) - vi
reports unable to open swap file (presumably due to the full root FS,
although there is a separate swap partition).
Anyone heard of anything similar? Anything to look for?
advTHANKSance
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Firewall and SOCKS5?
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 22:14:25 GMT
I run ICQ while using SOCKS5, and not via Sockscap. Here are the settings
that I use. Preferences > Connection
Select I am behind a firewall or a proxy.
Firewall settings are "I am using a socks5 server"
In my socks5.conf file I have:
set SOCKS5_V4SUPPORT
set SOCKS5_RECVFROMANYONE
set SOCKS5_USECLIENTSPORT
I am not sure how relevant the socks5 settings are, just outlining the
configuration that works for me.
Good luck.
John Chapman
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alexander Stanovoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> My problem is configuring socks5 of my linux-router based firewall.
> I have two interfaces, external eth0 and internal eth1.
> my socks5.conf is:
> interface AAA.BBB.CCC. - eth1
> interface - - eth0
> permit - - - - -
>
> When I'm triing to connect ICQ client through my socks5 server( started in
> debug mode), i got the message
>
> 00650: UDP Proxy Established: (AAA.BBB.CCC.8:1363) for user
> 00650: UDP Receive: Selecting on outer sockets...
> 00650: UDP Receive: Selecting on inner socket...
> 00650: UDP Receive: Selecting...
> 00650: S5IOCheck: Checking socket status
> 00650: S5IOCheck: recv failed: Bad file descriptor
> 00650: Proxy: cleaning command context
> 00650: UDP Proxy Termination: (AAA.BBB.CCC.8:1363) for user ; 0 bytes out
> 0
> bytes in
>
> Maybe I need additional configuration for UDP packets forwarding ?
> Or maybe some other?
> What is wrong?
>
> Please help.
>
> +---------------------------------------------------------------+
> Alexander Stanovoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Internet and Intranet services developer and administrator
> Lietelija Ltd., Juozapaviciaus 6/2, Vilnius 2005, Lithuania
> Phone: +370-2-730970; FAX:+370-2-730959; Mobile:+370-99-14421
> +---------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How can X be so slow?
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 17:20:16 -0400
"Peter T. Breuer" wrote:
>
> Probably because you're trying to use an i740 at 24bpp and 1024x768.
>
> Don't. Use 16bpp, like its "designers" intended. Try it and see.
I never could understand why people want to use 1024x768 on a 15"
or smaller monitor. How can they see anything? 800x600 should
be OK. Also, can the human eye tell the difference between 16bpp
and 24bpp? There's probably a slight improvement, but it's not
worth straining the HW when 800x600x16bpp is a reasonable
compromise between appearance and performance.
--
Donn
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Gunshannon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?
Date: 8 May 1999 15:34:22 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy,
Jr.) writes:
|>
|> win95 can share, but it is entirely with other
|> winXX systems and only if you install the network
|> portion and ONLY if set the sharing. It's relatively
|> simple, but requires a person to do this.
And the reverse applies to the UNIX system as well. So what's the
point?? The only difference seems to be that the defaults are
reversed and UNIX offers the user the ability to do things that
Windows doesn't.
|>
|> Additionally, win95 has no facilities to
|> have programs started remotely; unless
|> special packages are installed.
"Special packages" like Netscape and IE.
I wonder what the most commonly used applications by the majority
of Windows users (especially home users!) is??
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Gunshannon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?
Date: 8 May 1999 15:14:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy,
Jr.) writes:
|>
|> >Yes, they can. As long as your machine is connected to the net it is
|> >wide wide open.
|> >
|> 'wide open' in what sense. certainly no one can install
|> programs on your machine without your knowledge.
|>
Of course they can. Ever hear of "Back Orifice"? How many Windows
users do you think agreed to having this put onto their machine and
started every time they turn the machine on?? And then there are all
the neat virus programs like Melissa. I am sure all the Windows users
wanted that installed on their machine.
|> >] With a UNIX box you enter someones computer
|> >] from the outside world via the internet.
|> >
|> >Not if it is not connected to the net. It is not necessary to connect a
|> >unix machine tothe net. It is not necessary not to connect a Win95
|> >machine to the net. How about comparing equivalent situations.
|> >
|> Why should I compare? There is no value in this comparison.
|> If a UNIX box is not connect to the internet,
|> then it has no value to this discussion or my point.
OK, as long as the same rules apply to the Windows machine.
|>
|>
|> >] While it is true anyone can walk up to a win95
|> >] machine and simply get on it; this is really a *feature*.
|> >
|> >Anyone can walk up to a Unix machine as well and simply get on it.
|> >
|> No, not true. Unless someone has left a console open
|> then it takes an act of open aggression.
Do you consider typeing ctl-alt-del an "act of open aggression"??
Without Physical Security nothing is truly secure. Not Windows, not
UNIX, not your brand new Lexus, nothing.
|> Not my point
|> at all. My point is ease of access for the average
|> user, NOT security issues as you might want to
|> point out.
I maintain PC Labs in a college. These labs are open (physically) to
anyone who walks in. The "average user" has full access. He can even
pull the plug out to reboot it them if he wants. By the same point, I
have UNIX servers locked in the computer room that are accessed over
the network. Which do you think is more secure?? And other than giving
everyone full access, how would you propose to make this lab available??
Oh wait, I can see your next answer already. I don't have average users.
Must be nice living in your own little world where you get to define all
the terms yourself.
|>
|> >The
|> >xdm can be presented as a screen saver. All windowsusers are used to
|> >entering something to get the screenscaver to go away.
|> >
|> No, let's be clear if we can.
|> First let's agree that 'all' is subjective.
|> Therefore, saying 'all' you can't mean everyone.
|>
|> Second, since NOT every person uses a screen saver
|> and definitely every person does not use a password
|> on their win95 machine. So your statement is not
|> remotely true or relevant.
But you keep sidestepping the issue that just as the Wondows box CAN
be set up with a username (and password if desired) so to the UNIX box
can be set up to deliver a GUI with no need to ask for or require a
userid or a password. And if the default user is "root", then it has
the exact same security model as Windows. (This is, of course, ignoring
NT, which can not be set up to run without entering a userid of some
sort.)
|>
|> >You can furthermore trivially get the system to log on as some user on
|> >bootup if youwant-- and have it run whatever version of an X desktop you
|> >want. This is trivial. I still do not understand your point.
|> >
|> I'll try some more points if you like.
I don't see the point, none of them have made any sense up to now.
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Gunshannon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?
Date: 8 May 1999 15:29:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy,
Jr.) writes:
|>
|> As to the file system, I might be well versed, if you
|> could explain to me "how you can run a program on
|> my computer, without installing special software".
|>
|> That is to say, this (special) software is not
|> shipped with win95, so how would you get on my system.
|>
Do you use Netscape or IE?? As shipped and installed (remember, you
keep harping on the fact that we are talking about "the average user"
who doesn't know all the capabilities of these programs and is totally
unaware of how to turn any of them off.) both of these programs will
happily run garbage thrown at them by various web pages. And that is
how programs like "Back Orifice" actually get on most machines because
no one but a complete idiot would voluntarily install it!!
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Gunshannon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (was: Wanted: Database/Contact
mgr with backend on Linux/FreeBSD, web frontend)
Date: 8 May 1999 15:36:30 GMT
In article <7guojg$sts$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gordon
Scott) writes:
|> Larry Blanchard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
|> : Rolf Marvin B�e Lindgren wrote:
|> : >
|> : I seem to remember something about
|> : that type of argument from a long-ago logic class :-). What are the
|> : words for "it does not follow" in Latin?
|>
|> Not good on Latin --- something like `parlus annus ex' I should think :->
|>
Actually, the term he is looking for is "non sequitor".
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Gunshannon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?
Date: 8 May 1999 14:42:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesus Monroy,
Jr.) writes:
|>
|> The point he is making is not relate to wheter "users"
|> can accomplish tasks, put rather the sub-administration.
|>
|> Let me give you an example, if I might.
|>
|> Let's say you have run an ISP. This ISP has 100 machines.
|> Root access is define and well secure. You firmly beleive
|> that the machines are secure.
|>
|> Users have rights and can accomplish the task they need
|> on any machine they need. In short, all users are very
|> happy and don't require any hand holding or assitance.
|> (Boy what a pipe dream I'm building.)
|>
|> Anyhow, let's say for a moment you assign a task to
|> a junior (or senior) admin person to do task on some
|> machines.
|>
|> Now here's the catch. One day you find that all the
|> machines have been upgrade to a new buggy version of
|> the OS which you never authorized. What do you do?
|>
Fire him. That's a Human Resources problem and is in no way related
to the which operating system you are running. What if you were running
VMS 7.2 and came in one day to find out that this person had loaded
ULTRIX?? Or VMS 5.0?? Or even VMS 7.3 for that matter. No operating
system, not even VMS, can protect the system from an idea with the key
to the computer room. And this also has nothing to do with wether or not
UNIX is single/multi user. What if you were running Windows NT 4.0SP4Y2K
and he installed NT 3.5 or Windows 95 over the top of it??
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Comech)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Boycott Intel on your own webpage
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 8 May 1999 14:27:24 -0500
Hi everybody, I figured I want to post another followup, because
something what I said "gets twisted round some other way"..
I hope this will be the last one (at least, from me).
On 7 May 1999 06:11:23 GMT, brian moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Actually, machines are much more often shared at home than at work.
>
>Most families don't have a computer for every person. And what of the
>neighbor kids coming over and playing? Or guests that want to check
>email while on vacation? Or the babysitter doing her homework whilst
>parents are off at a movie?
You can not be serious. OK, assume there is a computer literate family
where everybody (say, six people) use a computer. Let us even say there
is a six year old neighbors who's checking her email and stocks on that PC.
BUT certainly everyone has distinct habits: different applications,
different sites on the internet, different level of familiarity with
shortcuts in menu, different typing speed, different mailboxes, for god's
sake! There is really no big deal to tell one from another, given that
you are choosing out of below ten folks. (Say, I'd offer you five grand
for writing a code which would tell one user from another, out of 10;
would not this be easy money?.. I am sure this could be easily implemented
both on the OS level and on an individual application level.)
As to reselling CPUs, again, this does not happen often (on the average,
_at most_ once a year, right?), while THE BIG GUYS will notice the change
in the ownership the same business day, and will reassign the PSN to someone
else's driver's license. (It is not that they will certainly do this, but
this is _easy_.)
>> BUT, don't you think that by that time more law-abiding citizens (who can
>> not e.g. change the size of disk cache in Netscape) will be running Linux?
>> And that microsoft and other species will be writing applications for
>> Linux platform? I am not sure you want to bet.
>
>Microsoft won't be writing applications for Linux certainly not in the
>next year, and unlikely in the next five. Linux is evil incarnate as
>far as they are concerned, and porting applications to it would be
>violating their FUD rules.
They do not mind writing things for Macintosh, do they? I guess there will
be (already is??) a comparable amount of Mac and Linux users, so why would
not they release IE for Linux? To mention, I know someone who says that
IE is much better than Netscape; I am not sure about that, but Netscape
certainly sucks (although I do not know anything which would be... "less
bad"), so there will be a serious demand for an alternative...
Have a look at http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html --
Browser Jan Feb Mar Apr May?. June?.. December???..
Navigator 4.x....71% 65% 62% 60%
Microsoft IE.....22% 28% 30% 33%
Keep in mind that these are people who are thinking about Linux....
This certainly sucks.
>As for anyone else, you do know that there's a kernel patch to break the
>PSN, don't you?
> ...
>A simple patch and no userland program would have access to the PSN.
>(Would have been really slick if the CPUID instruction were trappable:
>then you could forge them and applications would have no idea you were
>doing it. Of course, things like vmware or bochs could do that now.)
OK, let's say this will work for Linux..
Now your argument looks like this: this CPU is great because _although
it tries to bug me_, I know how to overcome that. I do not care about
those who use other OSes (although many people use dual boot system,
and that's quite possible that a Linux fan would be often _doing
something quick_ on the home PC when someone booted Windows up.)
Let me draw the following parallel (which is certainly not perfect):
Someone says "It's fine if you set mines on my lawn as long as I know
where they are". This someone is forgetting that there could be
kids/guests/pets involved, and that he may need to mow the lawn some day...
>> If you have a spare time for this sort of things, you can stay PSN-free
>> even running IE under windows on pentium III, but common people are not
>> computer wizards.
>
>Then they shouldn't trust companies such as Microsoft with their
>privacy. That's got nothing to do with Intel.
This _has_ to do something with Intel. Is has provided another very
nice thing which Microsoft or someone else would be glad to use. (Would
you say that the physicists who invent some nice toys for military are not
in any way responsible for weird bombs? Well that's right _they do their
job_, but on there are many physicists who keep a distance from military
applications; just, you know, in case...)
>> This is called invasion of privacy or something.
>
>Nope, it's not. It's just a number which you can trivially supress on a
>modern OS. On Linux, you can trust that it's suppressed: on Windows,
>well, you'll have to trust Microsoft, but that's already the case for MS
>users. (And their trust is highly misplaced.)
Would you agree to have feds' videocamera in your bathroom (which you are
allowed to turn off every time you pee) or a serial number tattooed on your
hand (which you are allowed to conceal under the sleeve)?
And, again, there are so many dual-boot questions-answers in newsgroups
that I wonder how many Linux users stay Microsoft-free...
And although PSN may be fought, this practice sucks, and I am not
quite sure what the consequences may be. Since we _do_ have a choice
between PIII and K6-3 (with K7 coming, hopefully), this is a good idea
to avoid the plaque.
Best,
a.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
