Linux-Misc Digest #318, Volume #21 Sat, 7 Aug 99 06:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: RW ATAPI CDROM how to use (Keith Wright)
Re: Need good sites for unix/linux (Aaron Ginn)
Re: What I think of linux. (Rob Brown-Bayliss)
Re: Must root and swap partitions be primary? (Robert Nichols)
Re: Tracing Netscape crash in Java startup ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: System copy to new harddisk (Dave Brown)
Re: helping the Third World (Richard Kulisz)
Re: helping the Third World (Richard Kulisz)
Re: currencies (Richard Kulisz)
Re: yet another denial of society (Anthony DeRobertis)
Re: Linux reference OR bOOK (James Knott)
Re: Must root and swap partitions be primary? (James Knott)
Re: Is there an e-mail program for Linux that can read Eudora mailboxes? (Gergo
Barany)
Re: Compiling C programs on RedHat 6.0 (Gergo Barany)
Re: helping the Third World (Richard Kulisz)
Re: newbie: what is "Segmentaion fault"? (Chris Mahmood)
Re: how to send mail out of my system? (Chris Mahmood)
Re: character based word processor?? (Chris Mahmood)
Re: how to queue mail? (Chris Mahmood)
Re: change default runlevel depending on kernel? (Chris Mahmood)
Re: currencies (Richard Kulisz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Keith Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: RW ATAPI CDROM how to use
Date: 03 Aug 1999 16:25:31 -0400
Robin Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm running a home brew linux based on 2.0.36. I can read my memorex
> crw22 atapi cdrom, but don't know how(or tools) to use it for writing
> cds.
ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix/cdrecord/
I am not sure this supports your CD drive, it is meant for SCSI CDs,
but includes some kludge that makes ATAPI look like SCSI for some
purposes. If it doesn't work you may be SOL, because it's all
there is as far as I know. Also look for the CD-Writing-HOWTO.
You must build this from source, even if you have RedHat already.
RH does not include a package for it. Do they use MicroSoft
software to record their CD's, or are they trying to keep
competition down by not packaging the software they use?
--
-- Keith Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Programmer in Chief, Free Computer Shop <http://www.free-comp-shop.com>
--- Food, Shelter, Source code. ---
------------------------------
From: Aaron Ginn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need good sites for unix/linux
Date: 06 Aug 1999 16:33:41 -0700
If you do RPMs, you can't beat
http://rufus.w3.org/linux/RPM/
Aaron
------------------------------
From: Rob Brown-Bayliss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.linux.sux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I think of linux.
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 19:32:26 +1200
Robert Crawford wrote:
> > > > > You're right, somewhat. I would be curious as to the average age of Linux
> > > > > users. I'm 34. First computer I ever had my hands on was a Commodore PET.
Me, I'm 29, first used Apple II at school, then VIC20 followed soon by
C64. Worked in a PC factory in days when 286 rulled and 386 was 2 days
old. I had acces to the laest and greatest in hard ware and software
and...
Dos sucked so I brought an Amiga!
The Amiga Ruled. But the company was run by morrons who thought they
made the C64 a success, they went broke in 93. Finaly last year I
brought a PC. Less than one year latter I ditched Windows 98 for Linux.
Linux is very cool. Very like the Amiga (or rather the Amiga is very
Unix-ish, kind of a custom Unix for single user machines)
Long Live Linux!
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zoo Station
--===<|>===--
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Nichols)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Must root and swap partitions be primary?
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 04:43:42 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Hankel O'Fung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:[Doug DeJulio wrote:]
:
:> > You can't put LILO's boot block thingy on a logical partition.
:> >
:> > You *can* put it on an extended partition that *contains* logical
:> > partitions, but some Linux tools don't know about this and don't
:> > permit it (I remember a RedHat install not permitting this for
:> > example; don't know what version).
:
:["Duy D.", in response to Doug DeJulio's message, wrote:]
:
:> You *can* put LILO on a logical partition, but not an extended
:> partition. You can't write data to an extended partition.
:
:Hmmm, any third party wants to discuss who is right?
While you can indeed put LILO on a logical partition, it's pointless to
do so unless your MBR contains some boot loader that's willing to load
that logical partition's boot sector. The standard DOS/Windows MBR code
won't do that, but I've heard that there are other boot loaders that
will.
Yes, you can put LILO on the extended partition itself. The first block
of the extended partition is writable. The DOS/Windows MBR boot code
will recognize an extended partition marked "active" and will load LILO
from there. The only problem is that some disk checking utilities get
mildly upset when they find the extended partition marked "active" in
the primary partition table.
--
Bob Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP public key 1024/9A9C7955
Key fingerprint = 2F E5 82 F8 5D 06 A2 59 20 65 44 68 87 EC A7 D7
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Tracing Netscape crash in Java startup
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 06:03:23 GMT
Two things to try:
1) Type this, remember, case sensitive.
chkfontpath --add /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi
The chkfontpath program is usually found in
/usr/sbin, and this must be run as root. (switch
real quick with su -)
2) Follow the instructions at this address:
http://help.netscape.com/kb/client/990221-4.html
Cheers!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tim McNerney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm running a pretty stock Redhat 6.0 system. Netscape 4.61 is
crashing
> on me when it tries to start Java.
>
> Is this a known problem? Is there a known solution? Is there any
utility
> similar to truss which works on Linux?
>
> --Tim
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Brown)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: System copy to new harddisk
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 7 Aug 99 04:49:11 GMT
In article <7oe0hr$7m9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthias Meixner wrote:
>try (as root):
>
>cd /
>tar clf - | (cd /your_new_disk; tar xf -)
To make sure that no permissions are affected, set your
umask to 000 before doing this... or use the "-p" option
on the second "tar".
--
Dave Brown Austin, TX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: helping the Third World
Date: 7 Aug 1999 08:10:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 1 Aug 1999 21:59:36 GMT, Richard Kulisz wrote:
>>We can work collectively to force redistribution of wealth from
>>the rich to the poor.
>
>Ah, it's there in a nutshell. In other words, you want to
>force *other people* to give their money away, rather than
>do so yourself.
I want to force the people who *HAVE* the money to give it away,
or at the very least I want the workers to do so in a coordinated
and intelligent manner according to a well-thought out strategic
plan. Exactly the way billionaires work. Anything else is just
throwing it away.
>> Socialists can also work collectively to
>>wrest political and economic power away from the rich, though
>>this might take decades.
>
>They could give to worthy causes now, and it wouldn't take
Like what? That "save a child" crap from Christian International?
Give me a fucking break!
>decades. I am not saying that this constitutes a complete
>and comprehensive answer, but I severely question the people
>who are so zealous in their quest to take money from others
>for redistribution, but are not even moderately willing to
>voluntarily redistribute any of what they own.
I don't /have/ anything to redistribute so the question is moot.
Besides, there's a *LARGE* fundamental difference between a
billionaire who doesn't need any of "his" money and a retired
worker whose wealth amounts to his own home.
>>They expect the left to do the utterly futile. And it seems you do too.
>
>I just expect to see the left to *lead by example* , as opposed to
IOW, you expect the left to do the utterly futile. From the point of
view of the left, right-wingers are all selfish evil fuckers, so what
good does it do to lead by example? You want us to be martyrs?!
>leading by extortion. I am not saying that it will solve the worlds
>problems if you lift a finger to make the world a better place.
>However, it will put you in a much better position to take the
>"moral high ground" without being laughed off stage.
Well, that's funny because I've always taken the moral high ground
and I haven't been laughed off stage yet. I'm not a right-winger to
argue how virtuous it is to starve people to death (as A.T.Z just
did).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: helping the Third World
Date: 7 Aug 1999 08:52:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Wealth is also redistributed in the USA. Just because *excessive*
>>redistribution may be detrimental doesn't mean that *any* redistirution
>>is.
>
>Anything above 10-15% of GDP is too much.
Which correspondence school did you get your Economics degree from?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: currencies
Date: 7 Aug 1999 09:07:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 1 Aug 1999 23:13:34 GMT, Richard Kulisz wrote:
>>This isn't correct. The USA is the only nation that can print as much
>>money as it wants to without any repercusions to itself because the US
>>dollar is the de facto international currency.
>
>Let's get this straight ... from the above, we can infer the following:
The cost of barrels of oil is dollar-denominated. So if the USA wants
more oil, all it has to do is print more money; it doesn't matter if
the price of the dollar sinks as a result since that will just cause
the price of oil to sink by the exact same amount. If another nation
tries to print more money in order to pay off its debt, it will just
sink into hyperinflation. Not so with the USA; everyone *else* will
bear the brunt of the USA's mistakes and the USA will only feel the
secondary effects of destroying the world's ecoonomies. The point is
that if it's careful, the USA can utterly butcher other nations just
by playing financial games; and that's precisely what it's done.
>* if everyone else's currency gos *down* relative to the US dollar,
> this will not have any effect on exports, or the competitiveness
> of the US's products overseas, because the US dollar is the
> "de-facto international currency"
You're assuming that if the USA prints more dollars then its currency
will go down. That's precisely my bloody point; it will *not*.
>* if everyone else's currency gos *up* against the US dollar, it
> will not have any impact on the price of imported goods in the US.
>
>* in fact the US currency can do what it likes, and it has no
> bearing on the US economy, because everybod uses US dollars since
> it's the "defacto international currency".
When France wants to do business with its own colonies, it frequently
had to convert French francs to dollars and then back again. That
sounds like the dollar is the international currency to me.
>Are you serious ???? What you are saying would only be true if the US
>economy existed in a vacuum ( which would make any foreign deficit
>impossible ... )
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony DeRobertis)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: yet another denial of society
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 05:21:24 -0400
In article <7ogdcs$ibe$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz) wrote:
>What is "a set of individuals" if not a de facto society? You keep
>harping about Individuals as if societies are random collections of
>people and human beings are atomic, islands unto themselves.
I like that line: "human beings are atomic, islands unto themselves."
Great line, if I may add.
As to if a group of individuals is a de-facto society, that depends on
definitions. By most, I'd immagine so. But I know you have
some...ummm...different definitions, so I guess I'd best ask to hear
yours.
>
>>This indicates that while individual action has been disparaged as
>>pointless, individual action is *necessary* to implement collectives.
>>No contradiction there, right?
>
>In the formation of a society, you're never actually working alone.
Well, yeh, if two people get together and work together, they're not
working alone. Though hopefully each is working for himself.
>Always, you must be working with others whether they are present or
>absent, whether their cooperation is explicit or implicit.
How'd you come to this conclusion? A hermit works with others?
Interesting...never knew of that.
>Even in
>the most vulgar "I will brainwash this horder of morons" schemes,
>you are always relying on others and never acting individually.
Yeh, I agree fully that tyrants are never acting individually. But by what
method can you go from showing some people never act as individuals to
claiming that none do?
>
>Even a solitary political activist is *NOT* an individual.
That simply makes no sence. What kind of definition of individual do you have?
--
Windows 95 (win-DOH-z), n. A thirty-two bit extension and graphical
shell to a sixteen bit patch to an eight bit operating system
originally coded for a four bit microprocessor which was used in a PC
built by a formerly two bit company that couldn't stand one bit of competition.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James Knott)
Subject: Re: Linux reference OR bOOK
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999 08:45:28 -0400
Reply-To: James Knott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Sun, 01 Aug 1999 13:14:51 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(Rod Smith) wrote:
>
>>>I have. O'Reilly tends to leave their books for years without updating
>>them, so they lose relevance over time. For instance, the O'Reilly book,
>>
>what about linux in a nutshell ?
>i was thinking of buying it.
It's a command reference, and I don't imagine the commands would
change that much.
--
E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________________
The above opinions are my own and not those of ISM Corp., a subsidiary of
IBM Canada Ltd.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James Knott)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Must root and swap partitions be primary?
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999 08:50:12 -0400
Reply-To: James Knott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <7oc8qv$bu8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Doug DeJulio) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Hankel O'Fung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>(1) If all linux partitions (except the hosting extended partition, of course)
>>can be logical, what is the rationale or advantage for creating a primary
>>partition in the first place? For example, if I want to fit the root partition
>>below the 1024th cylinder, I can create an extended partition first and use
>>fdisk to allocate the cylinders for a logical root partition. There is no need
>>for a primary partition.
>
>Managing the bootup process is easier if there's at least one primary
>partition. LILO needs to install into either the MBR or the boot
>record of a primary partition, and many people don't like to interfere
>with the MBR. (For example, if you leave the MBR intact and use a
>partition instead, it's *much* easier to repair things when some
>Microsoft OS interferes with your boot process -- just switch the
>active partition back to your Linux one, and things are fixed.)
>
>You can't put LILO's boot block thingy on a logical partition.
Hmmm... Better not tell that to my computer. Here's the listing in
OS/2 fdisk.
Disk 1 2
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������
Partition Information
Name Status Access FS Type MBytes
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������
Startable : Primary BOOT MANAGER 1
DOS Bootable : Primary FAT 29
Warp 4 Bootable C: Primary HPFS 225
Linux Bootable : Logical Type 83 216
None : Logical Type 82 44
--
E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________________
The above opinions are my own and not those of ISM Corp., a subsidiary of
IBM Canada Ltd.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gergo Barany)
Subject: Re: Is there an e-mail program for Linux that can read Eudora mailboxes?
Date: 7 Aug 1999 08:45:08 GMT
Stephan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I currently have Eudora Pro 4.x on Win98 and I'm about ready to switch
>over to Linux as my primary OS. However, I would like to know if there is
>an e-mail program for Linux (GNOME/X preferably) that can read Eudora
>mailboxes and address books (or is there a tool that can easily convert
>them to a format that can be read), or would I be stuck trying to do it by
>hand?
IIRC, Eudora uses a standard format that pretty much any mail client can
read.
Gergo
--
I know you think you thought you knew what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you understood what you thought I meant.
GU d- s:+ a--- C++>$ UL+++ P>++ L+++ E>++ W+ N++ o? K- w--- !O !M !V
PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP+ t* 5+ X- R>+ tv++ b+>+++ DI+ D+ G>++ e* h! !r !y+
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gergo Barany)
Subject: Re: Compiling C programs on RedHat 6.0
Date: 7 Aug 1999 08:43:59 GMT
Peter Rodriguez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am trying to learn C, and previously with RH 5.2 I had no trouble
>compiling my pathetic little bits of code. However, now I have
>upgraded to RH 6.0, the compiler does not want to work. GCC no
>longer resides on my disk as far as I can see, bu EGCS does.
>Anyway when I run the following:-
>
>gcc (or cc, or egcs) -g -ofile file.c
>
>I get the following:-
>
>/usr/bin/ld: cannot open -lc: No such file or directory
>collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
Make sure you have libc-devel (or whatever it's called) on your system.
Gergo
--
I know you think you thought you knew what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you understood what you thought I meant.
GU d- s:+ a--- C++>$ UL+++ P>++ L+++ E>++ W+ N++ o? K- w--- !O !M !V
PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP+ t* 5+ X- R>+ tv++ b+>+++ DI+ D+ G>++ e* h! !r !y+
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: helping the Third World
Date: 7 Aug 1999 09:24:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Kenneth P. Turvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 04 Aug 1999 12:31:35 GMT, MK
>>>What real economy that you would like to live under does not
>>>redistribute wealth?
>>
>>The one that uses it for securing negative rights of citizens only.
>
>What is this supposed to mean?
He's talking shit based on his force and contract dogma. In Libertarian
theology, forcing a billionaire to feed a starving child is Wrong; the
only right the child has is to buy (with what? maybe Libertarians favor
child prostitution -- the "jewel of capitalism" that is Thailand seems
to demonstrate it) the food he or she needs. Libertarians don't see
beating a child for stealing food as "initiating force". They also do
not see laying an ownership claim to desperately needed food as force.
On the whole, Libertarianism is a very convenient ideology for property
owners; "force" is defined as what the propertyless do.
>>Thus, it looks like they are able to operate for their own interest,
>>after all. And if so, it looks like they will enter only deals that
>>benefit them, short of facing monopoly. And the other side
>>will do the same thing, too.
>
>And how does your free market system prevent them from facing a
>monopoly?
That's where Magic enters the picture. Either that or <fast hand movements>.
And of course, anything short of a billion-year rule cannot be a monopoly,
never mind such subtleties as a buyer's market vs a seller's market.
>>Marx deserves no credit whatsoever. He created belief system
>>consistent and closed philosophically. Aka religion.
>
>Your adherence to the ideas Adam Smith seems to have some of the same
>qualities.
Adam Smith wasn't even a capitalist since capitalism didn't exist in
his day. But that doesn't stop Libertarians from claiming him and Nozick
for their own. At least Marxists can claim that intellectuals genuinely
believe in their philosophy, not so for Propertarians.
------------------------------
From: Chris Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: newbie: what is "Segmentaion fault"?
Date: 05 Aug 1999 16:28:15 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Siemel Naran) writes:
>
> I've noticed that my new system never dumps core, even for a segmentation
> fault. How can I make it dump core again?
see my response to the original post. OK, don't...set 'ulimit -c
20000' (or whatever you want the max size to be) in your bashrc or
profile.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: Chris Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: how to send mail out of my system?
Date: 05 Aug 1999 16:46:53 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Siemel Naran) writes:
> I want to send mail out from my computer at home? I don't have my own
> domain name and domain address. When I send out mail to another user
> on my local machine, it works. But when I send mail to the outside
> world, it fails.
Many (most?) site don't relay mail anymore b/c of spammers. See the
mail-queue mini and the isp-connectivity howto's--they explain in
detail how to properly set mail for a machine with dial-up access.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: Chris Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: character based word processor??
Date: 05 Aug 1999 16:29:45 -0700
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999 10:02:16 -0800, Eric Wyles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I am looking for a good, character based word processor for
>Linux. The character based requirement is due to the fact
>that it will be used by many users on text-only dumb
>terminals.
>
>This needs to have the features of a standard word
>processor, not just text editing functions.
>
>Any ideas (commercial or free) would be appreciated.
Use LaTeX, word processors suck.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: Chris Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: how to queue mail?
Date: 05 Aug 1999 16:43:13 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Siemel Naran) writes:
> I'd like to queue mail and send it all off at once. Is this possible?
Of course. Start sendmail w/out the -q option (so it will be
something like 'sendmail -bd -om'). When you want to send out the
mail, type sendmail -q.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: Chris Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: change default runlevel depending on kernel?
Date: 05 Aug 1999 16:52:01 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Siemel Naran) writes:
> I have two kernels. One is fully graphical (ie, the bootup is fully
> graphical), and the other is text.
This is not windows. Unless you are doing something with the
frame-buffer stuff, the kernel has nothing to do with graphics.
>For the graphical kernel, the
> default runlevel should be 5 and the system should run kdm. For the
> other kernel, the default runlevel should be 3 and the system should
> not run kdm.
>
> I've noticed that my /etc/inittab has this line
> # Default runlevel.
> id:5:initdefault:
> And also this
> # Run kdm in runlevel 5
> kdm:5:respawn:/opt/kde/bin/kdm -nodaemon > /var/log/kdm 2>&1
>
> I want it to be
> id:(graphics?5:3):initdefault:
> Possible?
I don't understand what you mean. Siemel, this is the third question
of yours that I've responded to on topics that are completely covered
in the HOWTOs that people have been kind enough to write for your free
use--please make sure that your question is not covered in them before
posting.
-ckm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kulisz)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: currencies
Date: 7 Aug 1999 09:31:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Thanks for a refreshingly sensible post. I happen to live in the US now,
>and I have found that it is an obnoxious few that makes everyone look bad.
It isn't even the obnoxious few, it's the *powerful* few that makes
the Yankee the hated enemy of all humanity. If it were only about
arrogance, pomposity or obnoxiousness then nobody would give a damn,
but peoples around the world have witnessed their nations, and them-
selves, raped by the USA and *that* is the source of the enmity.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
