Linux-Misc Digest #179, Volume #20 Thu, 13 May 99 02:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: RedHat price... (Christopher B. Browne)
Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?) (Leslie Mikesell)
Help Again - Copy problem (John)
Re: Pro-Unix vs anti-WinTel (Christopher Browne)
Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?) (Alexander Viro)
Re: Is Unix a single user operating system? (Steve Lamb)
Re: Windows NT vs. Linux testing by mindcraft (Bill Vermillion)
Supermount ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Install problem (Jeffrey Bannister)
Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?) (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: What's on the RH6 Applications CD? ("Prasanth Kumar")
Re: RoadRunner (cable modem) in Linux? (Alex Lam)
mailing myself (not_here)
Re: How can X be so slow? (Jim Henderson)
Re: Help Again - Copy problem ("Prasanth Kumar")
Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?) (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Need Presentation Graphics Software (Gerald Willmann)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Jim Richardson)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Greg Yantz)
Re: Ken Thompson on Linux (Leslie Mikesell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher B. Browne)
Subject: Re: RedHat price...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 04:08:33 GMT
On Wed, 12 May 1999 20:26:46 -0400, Jerry Normandin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
posted:
>There's a kid selling copies of redhat 6.0 for $3.95.
>Hey It's GPL he's not breaking any rules.
>
>$80 is crazy... to make it worth it you need to get 10 people
>to chip in and burn 9 additional copies!
If you've got the skills to burn your own CDs, then you most
definitely don't need the $80 "boxed set," and if you know someone who
can burn the CDs, you probably have a suitable resource to consult
with and *also* don't need it.
The value of the $80 box is to provide enough "bits of dead trees" as
well as (hopefully improved) installation support so as to assist
those that have "less clue" or that want the "warm fuzzies" of having
someone that they think they can call for "commercial" assistance.
--
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 free software today?..."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?)
Date: 12 May 1999 22:41:50 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >snip<
>: But if your system upgrade includes new shared libraries, you are much
>: less likely to hit this kind of problem if you replace everything at once
>: with a new combination that has already been tested together.
>
> This is *only* the case in the insane libc of the week games that
> Linux distributions like to play.
Glibc isn't just for Linux anymore. Other people can play too.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John)
Subject: Help Again - Copy problem
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 04:17:34 GMT
Well I edited my fstab file through someones request and I did make a
backup but the fstab file is destroyed and Linux will not boot past
it. I want to copy the fstab.bak to fstab so it will boot. It now
says read-only mode. I try cp, mv, etc to copy file and it will not
work because of read-only mode. Any help.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Pro-Unix vs anti-WinTel
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 02:54:41 GMT
On Sun, 09 May 1999 00:46:03 -0700, jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>david parsons wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Peter Mutsaers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Just look at the mess that distributors made of glibc 2.0/1. Even
>> >though glibc2.0 was not intended for production use, they shipped it
>>
>> As much as it's tempting to blame the distributors for gl*bc 2.0,
>> alas, you must also blame the developers. The developer of libc 5
>> dropped libc 5 like a hot potato as soon as glibc 2.0 was even
>> slightly viable, and many many other developers scrambled to get on
>> the glibc bandwagon as soon as they could. And the glibc developers
>> weren't extraordinarily good at announcing that "this is beta
>> software and you shouldn't use it!"
>
>What is it that glibc2 offers over libc5 that would cause this mass
>migration besides hype? Something I have always wondered.
- glibc2 works on non-IA-32 platforms. libc5 only works on IA-32
platforms, with (perhaps) a brief period of *nearly* working on Alpha.
- glibc2 is (or is nearly) thread-safe, allowing applications to
support SMP. libc2, um, isn't.
- glibc2 diminishes dependance of applications on Linux-specific
kernel code, thus making code "play better" with other platforms.
>> david parsons \bi/ It's to FreeBSD's credit that the core team had to
>> \/ be forced at gunpoint into switching from a.out to
>> ELF.
>
>What is wrong with the ELF file format? What does it offer over a.out?
>If a lot, then no it is not to their credit....if a.out is better then
>they should have stuck with it.
It was quite a pain building shared libraries with a.out; ELF handles
this in a far more friendly manner.
ELF was designed after a.out had been deployed for many years; would
it make sense to go through the (admitted) pain of moving to a new
object format in order to have a clearly *inferior* object format?
--
"There isn't any reason why Linux can't be implemented as an enterprise
computing solution. Find out what you've been missing while you've been
rebooting Windows NT." - Infoworld
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?)
Date: 12 May 1999 23:35:23 -0400
In article <7hdfsa$1at8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> How do you *think* we "maintain" them?! With the ports system and
>> package database!
>
>You put your own local programs into ports?
Why not? It's not a rocket science. BTDT. Both on FreeBSD and Debian. Takes
(oh horror!) 20 minutes on each. *Lazy* 20 minutes. BTW, I suspect that even
with RPM it's not a rocket science.
>> Even if you do a non-port/non-package install you'll still be *far*
>> better off if you register them in the package database to *help*
>> you *maintain* them yourself. It's really quite trivial.
>
>So if I take the time to do this for the freebsd boxes, build RPMS
>for the Linux boxes, and whatever the equivalent is for the solaris
>boxes, what do I get in return? How does this end up being easier
>than just grabbing the source from cvs or nfs mounting a master
>copy for the install in a new or updated system?
Dependencies.
>I really don't want to track every program that other people are
>maintaining, I want to upgrade everything to the newest in one shot
>and be done for a while. That means I'll blow away the package
>database anyway and then put my own programs back if necessary.
Barbarian. WTF would you do it? Let me guess: each time you are going
to rebuild your programs you are blowing away all object files and doing
complete recompile, right? Les, meet make. Make, meet Les. Decent package
management system should be able to do upgrade in place with minimal
interaction on your part and minimal rebuild/download/reinstall efforts.
Preferably from cron task. Of three packaging systems in question RPM
is the only one unable to do that. Both dpkg/dselect/apt and ports can
do it quite fine.
>> This isn't Linux; We don't have random a.out vs ELF, g?libc[0-9],
>> etc BS to deal with after a system upgrade.
>
>I have no problems with that under Linux. There were some versions
>where the compatibility libs were broken. I don't use those versions.
RedHat released two beta versions as stable. 5.0 and 5.1. After that they
got a stable tree (5.2). Funny thing being, if you will compare them with
the contemporaneous snapshots of Debian -unstable you'll see that amount
of problems was more or less same. Except that RH had put their betas as
public releases. If you are running -unstable/-CURRENT/RawHide(or how the
heck does RH call their *official* unstable tree) you are expected to
meet bugs, broken dependencies, etc. But not with the public releases.
--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Lamb)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?
Date: 13 May 1999 03:40:32 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 06 May 1999 13:42:35 +0200, Rolf Marvin B�e Lindgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>all of this convinced me that an operating system that does not support
>an OPERATOR concept is fundamentally single-user. there muse be a user
>midway between user and root.
Did someone say sudo?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
===============================+=============================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Windows NT vs. Linux testing by mindcraft
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 04:06:16 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pascal
Gienger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Westerdale wrote:
>
>>> I don't doubt this at all and I don't disagree. MS FUD is a
>>> pernicious thing - implicit in this choice of words is that it
>>> cannot be stopped - only met. We have to fight fire with fire,
>>> by hiring our own whores.
>>Why not turn the table around (like MSFT does) and define what
>>makes a computer usefull. Raw output/thruput is cool.... But
>>certainly there are other reasons why computers rock. Imagine a
>>stage cut in half. On one side there are 50 NT boxes simulating a
>>NT centric environment. On the other there are 4 Linux Boxes doing
>>the same tasks. Then look at all the NT technicians scrambling
>>aroung! Now, compare the performance in a
>And now SGI smelled the money of "NT" and stops producing good .
>Aworkstations ll new SGIs come with NT.. .
But those are still basically proprietary designs with iNTEL
processors. Few machine can match them when it come to grabbing
four live video streams, processing these streams with effects in
real-time, and delivering the processed streams.
Thing like the 1.2Gbit/second backplane do wonaders.
--
Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Supermount
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 04:31:53 GMT
Does anyone know what happend to the old Supermount patch?
It doesn't look like it's being maintained for the latest
kernel anymore.
Is there a better why to allow folks to pop CDs in and out
at will w/o having to mount/umount them manually? (Since
there isn't much talk about this in the groups, is there
some reason why the manual way is better?)
Thanks
Greg
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: Jeffrey Bannister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Install problem
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 12:02:25 +0800
I have a problem.
I've successfully installed RedHat Linux 5.1 in the past. However, I was
attempting to install it to an old 486/33 with 170Mb HD. The first
install crashed because I tried to load too much software, so I went
back and repartitioned the HD using Disk Druid. This time, once the
installation got just beyond the point of selecting software, when it
sets up the root partition, it bombs out giving an error of incorrect
mount point. Any attempts to repartition won't update, and if I delete
all partitions to start again, it tells me that there isn't enough space
left. I tried to go back out altogether, boot into DOS from a floppy and
use fdisk, but this just hangs.
Any suggestions other than throw away the HD?
Thanks in advance,
Jeff Bannister.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?)
Date: 12 May 1999 23:03:05 -0500
In article <7hcjsq$uct$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Fieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>A couple observations on this thread:
>
>1. Separating the "core" OS from add-on gizmos is basically
> impossible to do in Linux because there is no clearly defined (or
> agreed upon) core. The BSD systems make a pretty clear line
> between vendor maintained code and third party packages. When the
> distinction is there, it is most sensible to maintain it rather
> than going against the grain.
Well, with linux there is the kernel and then there are third
party packages. A clear distinction as well, but not a very
useful one.
>2. People seem to be forgetting that there are more than two options
> (/ and /usr/local). Is it so hard to grasp three distinct
> trees?
>
> a) the core OS
> b) packaged 3rd party software
> c) local stuff
>
> This allows (relatively) independent release cycles and upgrades
> of each piece. I can upgrade the core OS just by clobbering the
> old and installing the new, all without disturbing any of the
> third party or local software.
Good point. All I'm really after is the ability to mkfs the system
partition(s) without losing anything of my own. However, most
everything you grab in source form wants to install itself in
/usr/local, so it's extra work to modify the install destination
of your locally tweaked stuff so you can turn over /usr/local
to the stock packages.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Prasanth Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's on the RH6 Applications CD?
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 03:57:14 GMT
John Brock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7hctgk$qda$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> $80 for Official Red Hat Linux 6.0 seems a bit steep, so I'm
> considering one of their other editions, the $40 Red Hat Linux Core.
> The difference between the two is support (don't care), the Getting
> Started Guide (should I care?), and the Linux Application CD (???).
>
> So is the Applications CD is worth the extra $40? It would be helpful
> if I could get answers to the following questions:
>
> 1) Is the Applications CD all stuff from commercial vendors, as Red
> Hat's page, http://www.redhat.com/corp/corp_partners_cd.html, would
> seem to suggest, or is there GPL'd software on it as well? Can I
> assume, for example, that all the contents of contrib.redhat.com are on
> the two base CD included in the Core edition?
No just commercial software.
>
> 2) Is everything on the Applications CD freely downloadable (albeit
> perhaps on a trial basis), or are there apps that you can't get at all
> via the Net?
Many of them are downloadable but not all of them I would guess. But then
I haven't checked into that carefully. One thing I heard is that the Star
Office
that Redhat has is a newer version which works with Glibc2.1.
>
> 3) Do you think that royalties for apps on the Application CD
> contribute to the high price of the Official edition, or does support
> totally account for that?
I doubt there are any royalties in that CD since it is just promotional
stuff.
>
> I will point out that except for the support (which I never really
> used) Red Hat Linux Core seems to be the exact equivalent of earlier,
> less expensive, Red Hat editions, which just included CDs and an
> Installation Guide (and a Boot Floppy... *HEY*, what happened to the
> Boot Floppy?!?).
> --
> John Brock
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Alex Lam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RoadRunner (cable modem) in Linux?
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 21:59:24 -0700
Joe Strout wrote:
> I'm thinking of switching my home machine entirely from MacOS to
> LinuxPPC, after Apple kicked me in the teeth this week. There's one
> potential show-stopper: the cable modem. The computer's practically
> useless to me if I can't access the net.
>
> Does anybody know whether it's possible to use a cable modem
> (specifically, the Time-Warner RoadRunner service) from linux?
>
> Many thanks,
> -- Joe
Try http://usmcug.usm.maine.edu/~kpesce/rr/
It's written for RoadRunner.
Alex Lam.
*** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Remove the X from my email address if reply by e mail.
**************************************************
------------------------------
From: not_here <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: mailing myself
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 23:17:31 -0500
/etc/HOSTNAME
linuxbox
/etc/hosts
127.0.0.1 localhost linuxbox
/etc/resolv.conf
search prodigy.net
nameserver xxx.xx.xxx.xxx
nameserver xxx.xx.xxx.xxx
(forgot the numbers here for posting... but I am sure i have the correct
ones in my box)
IF i try to send mail to myself from the prompt (sendmail? I think for
rh5.2) to my isp account I get "service unavailable" while talking to
mxblah..blah.. blah... WHy???
If I add the line:
Djprodigy.net
to my /etc/sendmail.cf
I get the mail right away to /var/spool/mail/my_username
but it never touches the prodigy server! Which is what I need
sometimes... I want to keep some messages in my isp mail server.
So, what am I screwing up?
Thanks for your time....
------------------------------
From: Jim Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How can X be so slow?
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 10:43:52 -0600
Somehow I don't think processor speed is as big of a factor here as
people think. I've got a Celeron 300A with 64MB of RAM and it runs just
fine at 1280x1024 with 2 virtual screens per X server, running 4
simultaneous X servers.
But I've also got a Diamond Viper V550 AGP with 16 MB of video RAM, not
some low-end S3 card.
Jim
Mattias Dahlberg wrote:
>
> > It goes very fast, but then I also have a 400MHZ machine with 512MB of ram.
>
> Well, I have 450MHz and it crawls...
>
> Matt
--
Jim Henderson
Novell Support Connection SysOp - http://support.novell.com/forums
Homepage at http://www.bigfoot.com/~jhenderson (email instructions
located here)
Please note that as an NSC SysOp, I do not provide support for Novell
products on a personal basis - if you need help with a Novell product,
please post a reply in the public newsgroup or visit the Novell support
forums at the URL above.
------------------------------
From: "Prasanth Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help Again - Copy problem
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 04:56:55 GMT
Boot using a "rescue disk" (which hopefully you created when installing
Linux) then mount the real root paritition somewhere as read/write and edit
to your desire.
John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Well I edited my fstab file through someones request and I did make a
> backup but the fstab file is destroyed and Linux will not boot past
> it. I want to copy the fstab.bak to fstab so it will boot. It now
> says read-only mode. I try cp, mv, etc to copy file and it will not
> work because of read-only mode. Any help.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?)
Date: 12 May 1999 23:58:40 -0500
In article <7hcvjd$v29$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Mass-installation of extra packages is what's causing the problem -- if
>you don't mass-install, the risk of "accidentally" overwriting modified
>local copies is much less.
I want to be able to mkfs the system partition, install something
entirely different and lose a minimum of my own local programs.
How long does it take to select every individual package you
want? How do you know what you want if you don't load them all and
try them out?
>> I thought the freebsd ports/packages system installed things under
>> /usr/local which then become mingled with the things that you
>> need to maintain yourself. I'm easily confused.
>
>What difference are you seeing between packages and things you need to
>maintain yourself? The way I see things, they are one in the same. The
>only software I don't expect to "need" to maintain myself are system
>binaries, which is precisely what's installed in /usr.
There are times you need to be ahead of the distribution with
bugfixes or new features. In these cases you expect the next
system upgrade to include what you needed, so these don't really
need to be maintained on your own in the long run.
The things you really need to keep separate are the ones that
will always need local tweaks, like amanda with it's patched
gnutar and smbclient (at least until someone comes up with
useful defaults for binaries), and locally developed programs.
>> Ah, I get it. If you can predict the future you can decide what
>> belongs under /usr/local. You have to know when the next revision
>> will happen.
>
>No, it's the other way around. Something goes in /usr/local *until*
>there are no more revisions.
Oh, you just have to know when it won't happen???
>Think of it this way: /usr/local is for things that are still changing
>or which are extremely optional [like gimp, doom, etc].
I think of /usr/local as *my* space to install things, and I
expect things to stay there regardless of distribution updates.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Gerald Willmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need Presentation Graphics Software
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 21:58:38 -0700
On Wed, 12 May 1999, Jack Steen wrote:
> I work for a company which makes UNIX based engineering desktop
> applications. We recently ported our flagship product to Linux and I run
> it on RH 5.2 on a laptop. Often during sales presentations I need to
> display slides a la MS Powerpoint or SGI Showcase. I am unaware of any
> software to do this under Linux. Can anyone suggest something? Any
> comments from experienced users would be welcome.
Jack: Applixware should to this - haven't used this part of it but what I
have used works really well and reliably. It's commercial, though. Costs
about $100.
Gerald
------------------------------
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: 13 May 1999 04:50:34 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 12 May 1999 01:05:57 -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> Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> That's nonsense. Libertarianism is founded on the principle of
> >> `might makes right.' It's Social Darwinism in a pin-striped
> >> suit.
>
> Mike> NO, *that's* nonsense. Libertarianism is founded on the
> Mike> principle that might *doesn't* make right. You have managed
> Mike> not just to be wrong, but to be precisely wrong, 180
> Mike> deg. wrong, utterly wrong, wholly wrong, completely wrong.
> Mike> You have achieved the absolute apex of mistakeness; you have
> Mike> scaled the lofty peaks of counterfactualism, you have
> Mike> encompassed erroneousness; you have achieved a zen state of
> Mike> speciousness.
>
>Because you say so doesn't make it so. I've had the misfortune to
>spend hours -- hundreds of hours, in fact -- exposed to libertarian
>drivel of all degrees of stupifying complacency. I certainly have had
>enough exposure to that nonsense to know that I <do> know whereof I
>speak. I even wasted money on several issues of that rag from Port
>Townsend.
because you say so, doesn't make it so.
>
>That libertarian icon, Robert Heinlein, puts the libertarian
>philosophy in the mouth of one of his heroes: "Violence has solved
>more of the world's problems than any other method." (Starship
>Troopers).
>
1) It's *fiction*
2) It doesn't say might makes right, or even imply it.
>mp
>
>- --
>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
>
>iD8DBQE3OTZJ755rgEMD+T8RAoB6AJ4nqemTEMEz6/dEg7dRHKfu7dgBOACfSFsl
>JxShEn1FYWL6PKXn32FV2rg=
>=f8f7
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson
www.eskimo.com/~warlock
All hail Eris
"Linux, where do you want to go tomorrow?"
------------------------------
From: Greg Yantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
Date: 13 May 1999 01:27:42 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (NF Stevens) writes:
>
> Mike Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> That's nonsense. Libertarianism is founded on the principle of `might
> >> makes right.' It's Social Darwinism in a pin-striped suit.
That sounds an awful lot like something you read somewhere that you
thought was cool. I'll bet you've been itching to find a good chance
to say that. Unfortunately, it doesn't apply.
Libertarianism is founded on the recognition that strength wins fights
(not exactly might makes right) and that, human nature being what it
is, the strong will tend to dominate the weak, or at least try to.
Libertarians ABHOR this. They aknowledge the reality, and HATE it.
The whole idea behind Libertarianism is to find a way for *everyone* to
live free of any form of coercion, for everyone to have a fair chance
to live without interference, from the neighborhood bully or anyone else.
> >NO, *that's* nonsense. Libertarianism is founded on the principle
> >that might *doesn't* make right. You have managed not just to be
> >wrong, but to be precisely wrong, 180 deg. wrong, utterly wrong,
> >wholly wrong, completely wrong. You have achieved the absolute apex
> >of mistakeness; you have scaled the lofty peaks of counterfactualism,
> >you have encompassed erroneousness; you have achieved a zen state of
> >speciousness.
Yes, he is so badly mistaken in his facts that he has most people
convinced he *must* be an idiot.
> Libertarianism may not be founded on the principle of "might
> makes right" but that state of affairs is the logical outcome
> of trying to implement libertarian ideals.
You seem to have no idea what you're talking about.
> >(Got to keep contradicting the Big Lies. :-)
>
> The biggest lie is that libertarianism would increase freedom
> for any but the select few.
Ah, a paranoid. Get this- there IS no "select few" who would hold
all the freedom. It's LIBERTARIANISM. That's like saying if we
implemented Anarchist ideals, we'd have to be careful of the State
Secret Police.
If you were a proper cynic instead, with some capacity for critical
thought, you might be inclined toward libertarianism.
> Norman
-Greg
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Ken Thompson on Linux
Date: 13 May 1999 00:06:37 -0500
In article <7he6v8$p7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>It's my understanding that the way Corel intends to do that is by
>>helping to complete WINE.
>
>Not quite. Corel is in fact helping with the WINE project, but one
>component of WINE is "winelib", a library that supplies Win16 and
>Win32 API functions under X (and eventually GGI and whatever). So,
>Corel is completing WINE, but the goal is a native Linux version of
>their suite that won't actually require you to install WINE.
I'm kind of surprised that it took so long for a MicroSoft competitor
to understand the significance of WINE actually working. I expected
a bunch of them to be involved by now.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
