On Thursday 20 April 2006 20:02, Carl Bowden wrote:
> On 20/04/2006, at 5:31 PM, Christopher Sawtell wrote:
> > On Thursday 20 April 2006 08:07, Carl Bowden wrote:
> >> We are looking for a Linux (Gentoo mainly) system admin
> >
> > Most members know my details, so I'll be brief.
> >
> > First compiled a program:- 1969
> > First typed 'vi' and expected to see an editor:- 1988
> > First serious use of SYSVR3:- 1992 or was it 1993,
> > First install of Gentoo:- Version 1.2
> >
> > Windows knowledge:- Zero
> >
> > However, seeing as you have your index page forwarding to:-
> > http://www.e2-media.co.nz/flash.html
> > which displays as a plain dark blue motionless background in a
> > standards
> > conforming browser, you'd better know that I'll probably not want
> > to work
>
> Would you mind telling me what the browser is?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ $ konqueror --version
Qt: 3.3.6
KDE: 3.5.2
Konqueror: 3.5.2
> (I appreciate it may be 'standards' confirming, but is the flash
> plugin?)
Goodness only knows, It's Macromedia Flash Player 7 for Linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ $ eix netscape-flash
* net-www/netscape-flash
Available versions: 6.0.79 6.0.81 7.0.25 7.0.61 7.0.63
Installed: 7.0.63
Homepage: http://www.macromedia.com/
Description: Macromedia Shockwave Flash Player
> what I'm more interested is why the detect has not bounced you
Because I have an acceptable player installed.
Interestingly as soon as I loaded the page in Mozilla-Firefox, leaving
Konqueror running, the page immediately worked in both Firefox as well as
Konqueror.
> > either full-time or permanently in that kind of intellectual
> > surroundings.
>
> well, for now, just the user-agent signature of your browser will
> greatly improve your 'suroundings'
Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/3.5; Linux) KHTML/3.5.2 (like Gecko)
> > btw, the use of any wording which infers that there an age range
> > within
> > which an offer of employment for the prospective employee will be
> > made is
> > against the law.
>
> I sincerely apologise if you felt I implied the 'age' was in
> reference to the position, it was merely a refection of the people we
> currently employ.
accepted. I realize that sometimes it is only too easy to misinterpret the
meaning behind short sentences.
btw, Exactly what do you want the applicant for this job to do, and be able
to do? There are almost certainly some folks on the list who might be
genuinely interested.
--
CS
