Linux-Misc Digest #507, Volume #24 Wed, 17 May 00 21:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux Distribution (Christopher Browne)
Re: Motif release to Open Source Community leads to Open Motif Everywhere
(Christopher Browne)
Re: WYSIWYG web page generator (Christopher Browne)
Check it out (Charles P Koerner)
How to query Linux version info from C/C++? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: WYSIWYG web page generator (I R A Darth Aggie)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (eyez)
Re: Burning a Redhat 6.2 CD (Mark Bratcher)
Re: How to query Linux version info from C/C++? (Andreas Kahari)
Re: Calendar? (Andreas Kahari)
Re: Why .bashrc not take effect? (Mark Bratcher)
Re: Useful tip (Mark Bratcher)
Re: Help!: Root password messed up (Mark Bratcher)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Corel Linux and WINE (Blake LeBaron)
How can I read the volume id of a CDROM? (rgb)
Re: How to query Linux version info from C/C++? (Mark Bratcher)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Linux Distribution
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 00:13:25 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Paul Kimoto would say:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Koen Aerts wrote:
>> Some distributions are easier to install, others are more difficult.
>
>Some distributions are easier to _upgrade_; others are more difficult.
>(Remember, you need install only once per machine.)
... Responding to the parenthetical bit ...
(That's only true for distributions that are designed to _nicely_
contemplate _extensive_ upgrades. It appears that most distributions
get "crufted up" over time, so that it is more sensible to upgrade via
doing a complete reinstall. Debian-based systems seem a _bit_ better
able to cope with substantial upgrades than RPM-based distributions,
but I haven't found it a _flawless_ process all the same...)
--
Did you hear about the dyslexic agnostic insomniac who stays up all
night wondering if there really is a Dog?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/linuxsysconfig.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Motif release to Open Source Community leads to Open Motif Everywhere
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 00:13:28 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Russell Nelson would say:
>Mark Hatch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Today, May 15, 2000, The Open Group released the source code of Motif
>> 2.1.30 to the Open Source community.
>
>No they didn't. It's not Open Source code. It's not sufficient to
>say that *we* can use it. It has to be usable by everyone, including
>commercial interests, to be Open Source.
Russell, Russell, Russell... How can it _not_ be Open?
a) It's coming from The _Open_ Group. <http://www.opengroup.org/>
b) They produce software for _Open_ Systems.
"The Open Group's mission is to deliver assurance of conformance to
Open Standards through the testing and certification of suppliers'
products.
c) They call it _Open_Motif. <http://www.opengroup.org/openmotif/>
d) What more Open license can you have than the _Open_ Group Public
License? <http://www.opengroup.org/openmotif/license/>
e) It's "for use with Open Source operating systems." See the third
sentence of the press release.
f) Their web site references Open Source.
"For more information on Open Source, including the Open Source
Definition, visit the Open Source Initiative web site at
http://www.opensource.org/osd.html."
How, after that bounty of uses of the word "Open," could OpenMotif
possibly _not_ be a release to the Open Source Community? :-)
<footnote>
For the sarcasm-impaired, see:
<http://www.opengroup.org/openmotif/faq.html>
QUESTION:
Does the Open Group Public License for Motif meet the Open
Source Guidelines?
ANSWER:
No. The Open Group Public License for Motif grants rights only
to use the software on or with operating systems that are
themselves Open Source programs. In restricting the
applicability of the license to Open Source platforms this does
not meet term 8 of the Open Software Definition
(http://www.opensource.org/osd.html).
</footnote>
--
Windows and Icons and Mice, OH MY!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.powerpc,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: WYSIWYG web page generator
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 00:13:28 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Mark Wilden would say:
>Christopher Browne wrote:
>>
>> <P> <B> A shortage of Linux specialists has driven one Dallas software </B>
>> <BR> <B> entrepreneur to create a network of programmers and
>> consultants in </B>
>> <BR> <B> about a dozen countries. </B>
>> </P>
>>
>> <P> <B> Tom Adelstein, chief executive of Bynari Systems, said he has
>> found it</B>
>> <BR> <B> easier to recruit experts in the Linux operating system in
>> Malaysia</B>
>> <BR> <B>and Portugal than back home in Texas.</B>
>> </P>
>>
>> This happens to be "standards-conformant," but it is _UGLY_ to say the
>> least.
>
>I don't see much difference, myself... What am I missing?
You're missing that if the width of the viewing "pane" is changed, the
formatting can _substantially_ change.
>Anyway, it's clear that no code generator (which is what a WYSIWYG
>editor, as well as a visual dialog box editor, really is) can produce
>code as clean as a human.
I think that's less evident than you apparently think; while any of
the WYSIWYG tools that I have encountered have generated quite
uniformly HORRIBLE output, it's not obvious that this HAS to be the
case.
>> The thing is, _competent_ use of HTML pretty much mandates using HTML
>> in the way it was designed, which is to provide _structural_ tagging.
>>
>> <B>This text here is bold.</B>
>> <em> This text is emphasized.</b>
>
>Doesn't this sort of disprove your argument? <b> is visual, not
>structural. <b> is also HTML.
<B> indicates that the text should be "emboldened." For the most
part, I care not if this means that:
a) The viewer uses boldly loud colors,
b) The viewer uses emboldened fonts,
c) The viewer uses darker grayscaling, or
d) The viewer uses an underline to "set off" the bit of text.
I wanted to call attention to the text, and therefore indicated that
<b> it should be bolder. </b>
That seems more structural than visual, to me.
>> The facilities are well-used when they are descriptive of the
>> structure of the document; when you get overly particular about the
>> visual layout, when composing a document, there is a high likelihood
>> that the results won't look good _somewhere._
>
>It's hard to imagine a situation where that would happen with <b>... or
>even (dare I say it) <center>.
I can't see much likelihood of <B> being a big problem; <center> is
also not a tag that is likely to "behave badly under stress."
Neither puts _heavy_ stress on precise layout, certainly not
comparable to:
a) Using <BR> to break lines with extreme prejudice, which, if used on
each line, indicates that, at production time, you're assuming the
physical page layout at render time will agree with your line breaks,
and
b) Having pages that are enclosed in giant <table> environments, so
that if the pane width is sufficiently disagreeable, layout gets
pathologically bad.
The "case in point" is the up-and-coming technology, that of "cellular
web access." Which provides three notable constraints:
i. Screen size of no more than 8cm x 8xm,
ii. Bandwidth that "sucks,"
iii. No color; only greyscale.
A web site that breaks down completely (e.g. - is not usefully
readable) when these three factors get "strained" is a site that will
not cope happily with "Cell Browsers."
The interesting thing is that the sites that "play well" with those
"obsolete" text-oriented web browsers like Lynx very strangely appear
not to break down as badly on "Cell Browsers." The flip side being
that sites that _don't_ work well with Lynx also appear not to work
well with "Cell Browsers."
It is not safe to _over_generalize about this, but it sure seems to me
that there's _some_ correlation here...
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
>
>(BTW, I've found your site really useful.)
Enjoy the colophon; it doesn't mention "cell browsers," but has other
relevant opining...
--
Windows and Icons and Mice, OH MY!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/colophon.html>
------------------------------
From: Charles P Koerner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Check it out
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 00:21:36 GMT
George,
Check out "comp.os.linux.misc" Monday May 15 @ 9:45
VIRUS ALERT-Linux/"BSD honour
It's funny.
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How to query Linux version info from C/C++?
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 00:21:33 GMT
Title says it all, is there any API in C/C++ that allows me to query
the Linux version string (like Redhat 6.2, kernel 2.14 etc)?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I R A Darth Aggie)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.powerpc,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: WYSIWYG web page generator
Date: 18 May 2000 00:26:07 GMT
Reply-To: no-courtesy-copies-please
On Wed, 17 May 2000 21:16:04 +0100,
Mark Wilden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+ I R A Darth Aggie wrote:
+ >
+ > *yawn* Same ol' "gotta be new to be good" arguement.
+
+ Well, such arguments do have some merit, unless you think that
+ perfection was achieved with the Good Old Way, and that it will never be
+ improved on. It seems pretty clear that improvements in anything must
+ needs come from the future, not from the past.
Well, let's see...I still think that emacs with the sgml color mode
does are really nifty job of allowing me to edit html. And golly gee,
I can use a template as a default! What a concept!
+ > By your arguments, email and Usenet (text/plain media) should have been
+ > buried long ago...
+ I do feel that there are improvements to be made.
Such as? they're simple media for a simple usage: communicating a written
word. Period. Neither need HTML tags. *Emphasis* can be had for *two*
characters, not <B>seven</b>.
Let's face it: do you really need to send your email in html, with
highlights and bells and whistles? no, because while the bells and whistles
may make your email "pretty" or "clever" or whatever the intended effect,
it will _still_ and _always_ be what words you use that are _important_.
And Usenet is much the same. Instead of embedding an GIF or JPG of a person
smiling or grinning, :-) and :-> where developed. Cost: 6 bytes, not
6 kbytes.
And it may come as a shock to you, but bandwidth costs money, real money.
You may not see it, because you may be subscribed to an ISP that allows you
unlimited access, the idea being that you *won't*.
You know, there is something to be said for "simple".
+ > + (whatever you may think about them, MS's HTML DOM and CSS implementations
+ > + are much more functional then Netscape's or W3C's), we will not make
+ > + progress.
+ > That wouldn't be due to the number of programmers M$ throws at the
+ > problem, would it?
+ Ooo, bad argument.
Not really...
+ First, if a product is good, it's good no matter how many programmers
+ are 'thrown' at it.
Actually, I'd argue that a handful (or one) with sufficient desire to
achieve their goal is adequate, depending on the scope of the project.
+ Second, one of Open Source's claims is that it produces better code
+ because thousands of programmers work on projects, not just tens or
+ hundreds.
You're new to Open Source, aren't you? That's not the claim. The claim
is the code is better because it is open, and it is likely to be looked
and, and viewed by *many* programmers, not just a small programming team
and their manager(s). People not associated with the project are more
likely to spot flaws, as they aren't blinded to them by tunnel vision.
Further, no one in the Open Source gets an assignment to complete. They
work on whatever they feel like. If they lose enthusiasm, or time, or
motivation, the project stalls unless someone takes it over.
James
--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
The Bill of Rights is paid in Responsibilities - Jean McGuire
To cure your perl CGI problems, please look at:
<url:http://www.perl.com/CPAN/doc/FAQs/cgi/idiots-guide.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (eyez)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 00:33:00 GMT
quoting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (eyez) writes:
>> quoting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >Mongoose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> >In order to beat Windows, client-side, we need:
>
>> >1. A GUI interface to *all* configuration files;
>
>> Ugh. that's why i LEFT windows.
>
>I'm not saying that you should *have* to go through the GUI, just that
>you can if you want to.
True Enough. However, it seems in my mind that that can cause an evil
spiral. Once you can do it with a gui, you may never learn the RIGHT way,
and especially with the way commercial distributions are, They probably
will all be separate models for doing so.
>
>I concur, though, that for some applications (recovery and
>auto-configs/-installs, to name two) it's a really bad idea. And it's
>a trap that Windows has never managed to get out of. (It's why the
>"Windows Resource Kit" includes a bunch of UNIX utilities.)
>
>> maybe the whole world SHOULDN'T run linux. It's not a system that's
>> made to be like windows.
>
>Perhaps it wasn't made to have a GUI (and I'm not saying "Windows," I'm
>saying "a GUI"), but it's certainly become a part of it over time.
I wouldn't say it wasn't made to have a GUI, i say it wasn't made to DEPEND
ON the GUI.
>
>--
>Eric P. McCoy ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
>non-combatant, n. A dead Quaker.
> - Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_
--
Rando Christensen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<perception is reality>
------------------------------
From: Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Burning a Redhat 6.2 CD
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 20:47:32 -0400
JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> If you have a fast connection, burning your own cd really isn't
> all that much trouble. The options for cdrecord aren't that
> complicated and the image itself is pretty much ready to go for
> you... shake-n-bake.
>
> The trickiest bit is setting up the burner for the first time.
Agreed. Alas, I have a 56K modem, so I tend to take the cheapbytes
route. For $5 it's worth
even saving the little bit of trouble (which turns into more trouble if
I hose it up due to
my operator error :->).
--
Mark Bratcher
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
From: Andreas Kahari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to query Linux version info from C/C++?
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 00:46:48 GMT
In article <8fvd1u$fhf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Title says it all, is there any API in C/C++ that allows me to query
> the Linux version string (like Redhat 6.2, kernel 2.14 etc)?
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
See the manual page for uname(2) (that's not the same as uname(1)).
/A
--
# Andreas K�h�ri, <URL:http://hello.to/andkaha/>.
# All junk email is reported to the appropriate authorities.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Andreas Kahari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Calendar?
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 00:51:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Fyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello all,
> Does anyone know where I could find a text based calendar program for
> Linux like the one that comes with SunOS or BSD? I searched freshmeat
> and RH's RPM page but all I could find were web or X based ones.
Which calendar program comes with SunOS or BSD?
There's always the 'cal' program, but you can't do your time planning
with it...
/A
--
# Andreas K�h�ri, <URL:http://hello.to/andkaha/>.
# All junk email is reported to the appropriate authorities.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why .bashrc not take effect?
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 20:52:21 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi there.
>
> I am using RedHat 6.1 Linux with kernel of 2.2.12. My shell is bash,
> and I edit my ~/.bashrc as following:
>
> # .bashrc
> if [ -f /etc/bashrc ]; then
> . /etc/bashrc
> fi
>
> alias l='ls -l'
>
> However, every time when I login, my .bashrc seems takes no effect at
> all. The mod of .bashrc is 644, same as others. As a result, I have to
How is the shell specified in the /etc/passwd file? If it is specified
as /bin/sh, then the .bashrc will be skipped. If it is specified as
/bin/bash, then .bashrc should execute.
--
Mark Bratcher
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
From: Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Useful tip
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 20:56:38 -0400
Prasanth Kumar wrote:
>
> I just noticed that you can press [scroll lock] while Linux is booting
> to
> pause the flow of information in case it goes by too fast! Press it
> again
> to resume. I never thought of this before some maybe it will be useful
> to
> others when they are troubleshooting.
That's _cool_! Thanks! :-)
--
Mark Bratcher
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
From: Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help!: Root password messed up
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 20:55:43 -0400
David Bell wrote:
>
> [sbnip]
> I rebooted again, this time typing Linux
> 1 at the Lilo prompt to get into single user mode. I used su to gain root
> access,...
Why did you 'su' in single user mode? In single user mode, you already
have root privledges. You didn't need to do the inittab mod and go into
console mode. You should be able to run Xconfigurator right from the
single user prompt.
Did you try running single-user and setting password for root from
there?
--
Mark Bratcher
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 01:00:45 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
[installing from source]
> Odd, I've got an xemacs from the default install...
Really? I haven't used a bleeding-edge RH, but all the ones I *have*
used don't have XEmacs packages.
> >I want to click on a damn button and have the program install. I want
> >the option to do it by hand if I have to, but installing anything on
> >Linux is a nightmare if you have to build it from the source. Note
> >also that "make install" will occasionally break, depending on your
> >distribution. And they all seem to be going in tangential directions
> >on this one.
> Have you found something you wanted where you couldn't find a
> recent source rpm already tuned for your base installation
> that you could tweak and rebuild with a couple of rpm commands?
Actually, I use Debian, not RedHat. Basically the same situation
(though Debian doesn't package their sources). No, my only point
there was that, frex, Debian makes extensive use of /usr/share,
whereas some other distros use /usr/local for the same thing.
Actually, Debian is now putting all docs in /usr/share/doc instead of
/usr/doc, which is certainly a big departure. (Although they've been
good about putting symlinks in, so far.)
> >There's just no excuse for not having an adequate installer. We have
> >two excellent package-management tools, dpkg (and apt) and rpm. All
> >we have to do is put a shiny new GUI front-end on them.
> What is wrong with clicking on an rpm file with the kde
> file manager/browser? It will automatically start kpackage
> so you can click the install button. Toss in the powertools
> CD and go wild.
Oh, nothing's wrong with it. But some (non-free) programs require you
to, for example, first download the program to /tmp and then "install"
the package. And packages often run behind the latest release,
because the maintainers can't be bothered to wrap them up in anything
but a tarball.
I didn't know RH/KDE had a GUI installer. That's great. Debian
doesn't have one. (I'm talking about something other than gnome-apt.)
> >Not that I am bitter.
> Have you been doing it the hard way?
Sometimes, that's the only way to do it.
[too many Linux packages]
> If it is free and useful you'll probably find it in either the
> RedHat or Mandrake base RPMs or on the powertools CD. Or
> the VALinux variation - all pretty much binary-rpm compatible.
Searching through billions and billions of packages is no fun. Maybe
I'm in worse shape because I use Debian (where if it ends in ".dpkg"
it's on the master list of packages).
Actually, Debian seems to have some nice categories (optional, extra,
important, required) that would be useful, if they were implemented
properly. Well, in time, maybe.
> >I much, much, much prefer being able to right-click on something and
> >hit "Properties." I also like being able to press F1 when the mouse
> >is over a confusing field and get an explanation of it. (The
> >explanation often isn't a help, and I expect that would carry over to
> >Linux, but at least there's no flipping around between screens.)
> So what is the problem with doing this in the KDE desktop?
KDE isn't free.
And GNOME is nowhere near fully-developed.
> >Please excuse the rant. But Linux has been a pain in the ass to
> >configure since I started using it in the early 90's, and it's
> >improved not at all since then.
> Huh? A recent Mandrake/RedHat does most of what you say
> is missing right out of the box.
Perhaps. I've never actively administered a RedHat system. Are all
of RH's configuration tools proprietary or non-free? If they were
open source and portable between distros, I'd think they'd show up in
Debian. (After all, Bonobo and friends have.)
--
Eric P. McCoy ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
non-combatant, n. A dead Quaker.
- Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_
------------------------------
From: Blake LeBaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Corel Linux and WINE
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 01:04:07 GMT
Chad Lemmen wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Giles Hamlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am in the process of learning Corel Linux Deluxe 1.0 and wanted to
> try to
> > run a couple of Windows Apps in it.
> >
> > However, to a newbie, the WINE site is confusing to say the least. Can
> > anyone give me any tips - what parts to download, how to install it,
> how to
> > run it etc?
> >
> > Much obliged!!!
> >
> > Giles
> >
>
> I've never tried WINE, but I just installed Win4Lin and it works great
> for running Windows apps. It's different than WINE as it actually has
> you install Windows from the Win CD. So you then run the apps right in
> Windows. WINE lets the apps run on Linux natively. Win4Lin is just
> like Merge for SCO UNIX. The price is $49.95, but I think its worth it.
> Their web site is http://www.win4lin.com and you can read a review of
> it at http://www.aplawrence.com/Reviews/win4lin.html
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
This is interesting. Has anyone had any experience with both vmware
(www.vmware.com) and win4lin? How do they compare?
--
Blake LeBaron
------------------------------
From: rgb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How can I read the volume id of a CDROM?
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 20:05:49 -0500
I'm a refugee from the WinDoze world. I've tried obvious names,
apropos, etc. and for the life of me I can't seem to find a Linux
command that will return the volume ID of a mounted CDROM. I can't
imagine there isn't such a command, I must just be looking in the
wrong places. Can someone point me in the right direction?
Thanks,
Dick
------------------------------
From: Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to query Linux version info from C/C++?
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 21:00:31 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Title says it all, is there any API in C/C++ that allows me to query
> the Linux version string (like Redhat 6.2, kernel 2.14 etc)?
>
/etc/redhat-release has the "Red Hat Linux release 6.2 (Zoot)" string in
it.
/proc/version has the kernel version.
--
Mark Bratcher
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
