Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #365
From: Digestifier <Linux-Misc-Request@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Date:     Sun, 3 Jul 94 10:15:20 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #365, Volume #2                 Sun, 3 Jul 94 10:15:20 EDT

Contents:
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Guido Sohne)
  Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2) (Guido Sohne)
  Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2) (Guido Sohne)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Guido Sohne)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Guido Sohne)
  Re: Wordperfect and other Dos questions  (Rob Janssen)
  Re: VP/ix for Linux? (Rob Janssen)
  Re: LJ #3? (Patrick Reijnen)
  Motif (Jenny Liu)
  Re: CD Recorder Driver? (Dan Gillis)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (R S Rodgers)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Chun Hsu)
  InfoMagic Linux Developer's Resource (Slackware 2.0) (Joel Goldberger)
  Re: Only 7000 Linux boxes, Re: Multiport Bored ... (Aris Stathakis)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wgsohne@flagstaff.Princeton.EDU (Guido Sohne)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 22:10:05 GMT

In article <Cs82BE.C4x@seas.ucla.edu>,
Scott Michel <michel@whirlwind.seas.ucla.edu> wrote:
>>      Linux is free and I am free.
>>You OTOH are locked into the upgrade cycle.
>
>As if frequent patches arent upgrades? Linux is hardly free, if you
>cost in the time it takes to get the thing downloaded and installed.
>There are some good installation packages, but that depends who you
>get your distribution from.
>

However much it costs you to download patches, upgrading Linux (reasonable
upgrading say every other kernel release - about once a month) will cost
much less than upgrading OS/2. If you have net access, its basically free
to upgrade.

You might pay for your net access (by which I mean TCP/IP access) but I
don't think anyone has a net connection just for upgrading Linux so no one
should say you pay for FTPing Linux. The network is there to be used and
you pay the same thing regardless of whether you upgrade your Linux every
day or not.

--
Guido
>But I'd hardly say that I'd bet my enterprise on Linux. There's no
>"compelling" application to make Linux attractive. In fact, that's the
>reason why some of us bet on OS/2 or SCO (I'm in the SCO camp). It
>may not be that SCO is perfect [in fact, far from it], but it is known
>for some stability and has a volume market. Linux is a hacker's dream.
>
>-scottm



------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wgsohne@flagstaff.Princeton.EDU (Guido Sohne)
Subject: Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 22:20:08 GMT

In article <ajross.773071531@husc10.harvard.edu>,
Andrew <ajross@husc10.harvard.edu> wrote:
>wgsohne@tucson.Princeton.EDU (Guido Sohne) writes:
>
>>That's where you are wrong. A single Linux disk can be used to transform
>>*any* networked (Ethernet) PC into a system running a complete GUI and
>>having full internet access. OS/2 just can't do this.
>
>>--
>>Guido
>
>Alright Guido, this keeps getting better; we're up to a 'complete GUI'
>and 'full internet access' now?  Prove it.
>

Its not rocket science. There are two approaches to doing it. Maybe even
three. You can have almost no binaries on the disk except for ethernet
configuration and have a startup script mount your Linux machine NFS after
asking you for the pertinent info. You can also use RARP and make the PC
into an X terminal. You could hack the kernel and hard code the mount to
your machine by asking for bootp to get info on network. Set up the netmask
etc with kernel calls and hardcode the mount. All doable in a single
function.

I have stored my machine for the summer. I'm sure you'll find this
convenient or hard to believe but ask any seasoned Linuxer whether it can
be done and you find out that it can.

Later

--
Guido
>One disk: should be easy enough to put together.  Post an image.
>
>Seriously, put your kernel where your mouth is and show us all how a
>fully functional Linux system can be installed from a single 1.44MB
>floppy.  I, for one, do not believe you.  Granted, I've never really
>tried, but _every_ distribution I've checked comes on two disks at
>least -- boot and root, and those are just enough to get a shell up to
>run the install script along with drivers for whatever devices you are
>installing from/to.  No X, no TCP/IP beyond a basic NFS system.
>
>Now I like Linux, I really do.  I use linux and am happy doing so.  I
>am growing more and more fed up, however, with your bigotry.  Now it's
>nothing new, of course.  USENET is filled with bigots -- Mac bigots,
>Amiga bigots, NT bigots, Gnu bigots.  I'm just a little distressed at
>this new rash of Linux bigotry.  I mean, this is an OS that, uniquely
>among OS's, is not _built_ on competition.  We ought to be happy with
>our choice, working to improve it with each other.  Instead people
>like you, Guido, continue to blather on like all the other USENET
>bigots out there trying to cut down everyone else's system.  Stop it.
>
>But by all means show us all how wonderful Linux is.  Post your one
>disk Linux installation.  I would (quite honestly) love to see it.  
>
>Andy Ross
>ajross@husc.harvard.edu



------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wgsohne@flagstaff.Princeton.EDU (Guido Sohne)
Subject: Re: OS/2 and Linux discussed (Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 22:28:07 GMT

In article <ajross.773010288@husc10.harvard.edu>,
Andrew <ajross@husc10.harvard.edu> wrote:
>Leo L Turetsky <professor+@CMU.EDU> writes:
>
>You also seem be missing the fact that OS/2 _also_ has extensive
>character mode features, and can be booted using CMD.EXE (or 4OS2, or
>even bash) as the shell.  There are quite a few character mode
>applications out there that make no use of PM -- including most of the
>gnu stuff.  Eliminate X and you still have Unix.  Eliminate PM and you
>still have OS/2.  Where is the difference?
>  

The difference is the reason why OS/2 *really* sucks and bites the dust.
Unix has lots of functionality in the form of many useful little efficient
programs like cut, tee, cat and many others (I have not named a good set of
such little programs because I can't be bothered - if you want proof just
express doubt and a Linux advocate will be happy to oblige). Unix has a
great shell (the lowliest of them all sh is still miles above OS/2 command
line). Using the command line under OS/2 hurts.

Combine the incredible functionality, robustness and speed with a
superlative kernel, turbocharged to the extreme and you have a killer. OS/2
on the other hand has nothing to offer the commandline user. No job
control , no process management etc.

Without the excuse of a GUI and shell that OS/2 has (PM and WPS) OS/2
drowns in its own puke.

>>> And a one disk installation of Linux can't really do anything, can it?  OK,
>>> you could feasibly make a boot disk with a few TCP/IP clients on it,
>>but you'd
>>> have to remove so much stuff that it would be severely crippled.
>
>>It can do plenty.
>
>OK, come on now.  If we are going to have rabid flame wars here, you
>are going to have to try harder.  The poster above made the point that
>you really can't do much with a one-floppy unix system (or OS/2
>system, for that matter).  He even went out of his way to admit there
>might be a few things you _could_ stick on it -- telnet, etc...
>
>You responded:  It can do plenty.
>

Read the rest of the thread for a fine example of what the plenty is.
Its plenty good. However, even if all he had was telnet, he could still do
some useful work on another computer. OS/2 cannot do this. Maybe its too
much of a kludge ?

>Plenty of what?  Come on now, _that's_ not advocacy.  Let's see some
>effort ;)
>
>Andy Ross
>ajross@husc.harvard.edu
>

--
Guido

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wgsohne@flagstaff.Princeton.EDU (Guido Sohne)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 22:38:40 GMT

In article <Mi4oUSK00WB35_qlIm@andrew.cmu.edu>,
Leo L Turetsky  <professor+@CMU.EDU> wrote:
>Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.linux.misc: 30-Jun-94 Re: Linux better
>> But I'd hardly say that I'd bet my enterprise on Linux. There's no
>> "compelling" application to make Linux attractive. In fact, that's the
>> reason why some of us bet on OS/2 or SCO (I'm in the SCO camp). It
>> may not be that SCO is perfect [in fact, far from it], but it is known
>> for some stability and has a volume market. Linux is a hacker's dream.
>

You should seriously consider moving to Linux. It has better device support
than SCO, is more stable than SCO and will run most if not all SCO
binaries. You get the best of both stability and volume advantages. Linux
is not just a hacker's dream, its also an ordinary, savvy users dream. Your
SCO apps will probably run on Linux. It won't cost you anything to try it
and you'll probably be extremely pleased with the results.

--
Guido

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wgsohne@flagstaff.Princeton.EDU (Guido Sohne)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 22:47:00 GMT

In article <2v0g33$gvv@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, Chun Hsu <hsuc@egr.msu.edu> wrote:
>Leo L Turetsky (professor+@CMU.EDU) wrote:
>
>> > But I'd hardly say that I'd bet my enterprise on Linux. There's no
>> > "compelling" application to make Linux attractive. In fact, that's the
>> > reason why some of us bet on OS/2 or SCO (I'm in the SCO camp). It
>> > may not be that SCO is perfect [in fact, far from it], but it is known
>> > for some stability and has a volume market. Linux is a hacker's dream.
>
>> Linux is free. All applications are compelling. It wasn't designed to be
>> used in the office, and yet there are plenty of companied who do so.
>> OS/2 is broken; the only thing you depend on it to do is not be
>> compatible (like Linux) and cost money (not like Linux). SCO is SCO.
>
>> -Leo
>
>All applications are compelling?  I am not sure what you mean by
>that.  Please stop driveling about OS/2 being broken.  There are
>satisfied and unsatisfied OS/2 users.  There are satisifed and

Perhaps there are satisfied OS/2 users. First of all that doesn't fix OS/2
problems. He is not drivelling about OS/2 being broken and I believe he has
a valid point there. OS/2 *is* broken in several crucial aspects and I'm
sure you are aware of those.

>unsatisified Linux users.  Your extreme bias against OS/2 only
>makes your arguments more ineffective.
>

Not at all. The fact that he doesn't like OS/2 does not make his arguments
ineffective. Facts stand on their own and furthermore an argument should
not be judged based on whether it is palatable to you.

I have the strong impression that comp.os.os2.advocacy is full of OS/2 fans
who detest hearing anything bad about OS/2 however true it may be. The main
theme here is generally that of back-slapping - "Yeah, OS/2 is great;
Totally, man; I love X feature" Of course, I may be wrong but that is my
opinion.

>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Chun Hsu                                     E-mail: hsuc@egr.msu.edu   
> Masters of Science
> Electrical Engineering                       Michigan State University
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Guido

------------------------------

From: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Re: Wordperfect and other Dos questions 
Reply-To: pe1chl@rabo.nl
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 1994 09:33:57 GMT

In <1994Jul03.023855.14595@taylor.infi.net> mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis) writes:

>rob@pe1chl.ampr.org (Rob Janssen) writes:

>>In <1994Jul01.030325.3336@taylor.infi.net> mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis) writes:

>>>simmonr5387@cobra.uni.edu writes:

>>>>I have 2 questions for you all: and forgive me if they are redundant:

>>>>1) Everyone is talking about XWordPerfect and using the sco version of the
>>>>program on linux boxes so a) what is the cost of this package

>>>About $295 for a single SCO license from your favorite Unix vendor. This
>>>is the same retail price as all other versions of WordPerfect.

>>Actually, the DOS version of WP 6.0 costs only about half of that in
>>local currency equivalent...

>I said retail price, not street price.  Besides, could you be thinking
>of an upgrade?  In any case, street prices will vary depending on volume.

No, it is not an upgrade, and they are the official advertized prizes
on TV and in the newspapers, by the Dutch offices of MS and WP.
(I presume there is no rebate from that)

As explained before, this is a battle between MS and WP.  WP has by far
the largest share of the market in the Netherlands, and MS wants to change
that.  To do it, they launched a campaign "Netherlands switches to MS-WORD"
selling Word plus Windows for Workgroups (together called Word 10+) for
DFL 295,=  (about US$ 175 these days, with the falling US$ rate)

This triggered WP to lower the price as well :-)

Rob
-- 
=========================================================================
| Rob Janssen                | AMPRnet:   rob@pe1chl.ampr.org           |
| e-mail: pe1chl@rabo.nl     | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8UTR.#UTR.NLD.EU     |
=========================================================================

------------------------------

From: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Re: VP/ix for Linux?
Reply-To: pe1chl@rabo.nl
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 1994 09:45:38 GMT

In <1994Jul03.025247.14801@taylor.infi.net> mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis) writes:

>It is not my intention to batter DOSEMU.  I greatly appreciate the time
>and effort which went/goes into it.  There are those, however, who tend
>to believe that it solves the problem of running MS-"DOS" programs for Linux.
>Currently, it does not (at least for me).  Of the two machines I have
>tried it on, one it will not work on at all.  The other, which is a fast
>machine, absolutely craws in DOSEMU (even text mode stuff).  And 75% +
>of what I try to run fails.  Granted, this is an older version, I intend
>to upgrade to a more recent version soon (when I can get ahold of a new
>CD).  The comparison to Merge is not terribly fair; but then, I would
>pit Linux as an OS against some commercial Unixes.

You must have a very old version, and/or have made errors during its
installation.  The current (0.52) version is fast, runs many programs,
and runs on many machines.
Of course, there are limitations (like "no protected-mode software"), but
it runs most of the software that I would normally run under DOS.  Of course
that can be different for you.

Judging those things on an earlier version is not fair either.  I can tell you
I have used VP/ix under XENIX some years ago, and it was *crap*.  It would
only run ONE specially adapted version of DOS, it would allocate lots of
locked-in-core memory, and when it crashed (it often did) it made the console
keyboard unusable because it was still in scancode mode.
Compared to this, the current DOSEMU is a lot better.  But I would not
compare DOSEMU with VP/ix like this in the open, as I don't know what
VP/ix is like today.

Rob
-- 
=========================================================================
| Rob Janssen                | AMPRnet:   rob@pe1chl.ampr.org           |
| e-mail: pe1chl@rabo.nl     | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8UTR.#UTR.NLD.EU     |
=========================================================================

------------------------------

From: patrickr@cs.kun.nl (Patrick Reijnen)
Subject: Re: LJ #3?
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 1994 11:35:53 GMT

In <2v4tpu$aeh@bigboote.WPI.EDU> joev@garden.WPI.EDU (Joseph W. Vigneau) writes:

>Noticing the mention of the Linux Journal #4 in c.o.l.a., I was
>wondering, when was #3 mailed?  I haven't received mine yet...

I received #3 last week IN europe.............


>-- 
>joev@wpi.edu, joev@hotblack.schunix.dmc.com     WPI Computer Science     Linux!
>    <a href="http://www.wpi.edu:8080/~joev"> Click Here! </a>



Patrick Reijnen

--
*******************************************************************
* Patrick Reijnen                                                 *
* Department of Computer Science, Catholic University of Nijmegen * 
* Email: patrickr@{sci,cs}.kun.nl    (Make your choice)           *

------------------------------

From: liuj@cs.pitt.edu (Jenny Liu)
Subject: Motif
Date: 1 Jul 1994 16:27:47 GMT

Where can I find Motif package for linux?

Thank you.

liuj@cs.pitt.edu (Jenny Liu)



------------------------------

From: dgillis@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Dan Gillis)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development
Subject: Re: CD Recorder Driver?
Date: 1 Jul 1994 10:15:04 -0600

stefan@pippi.tu-bs.de (Stefan Markgraf) writes:

>>I have heard a rumour that there is a Phillips CD-R (recordable CD) dri
er
>>for Linux.  Does anyone know anything about this driver?  Anyone actual
y
>>been able to use the CD-R with linux?
>Do you really believe you can convert a CD-ROM into a writable CD?
>I think there was a warning that this driver is a virus 
>which destroys the harddisk.

>Okidoki,
>       Stefan.

The Philips CD-R *IS* a recordable cd-rom player/recorder.

So the question still stands, is there a driver for Linux to support the
Philips CDD521?

And if there is, what is the likely hood of under-buffer runs?  Recordabl

CD's are very particular about continuous data flow.

CYA!
     DJ  (hds@wsdot.wa.gov)









C


------------------------------

From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (R S Rodgers)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 1994 16:38:11 -0500
Reply-To: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu

In article <oi5QaHS00YUn0BTasj@andrew.cmu.edu>,
Leo L Turetsky <professor+@CMU.EDU> wrote:
> Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.linux.misc: 2-Jul-94 Re: Linux better than
> OS/2 .. by Chun Hsu@msu.edu 
> > Is it so difficult for you to understand that IBM does not
> > profit from providing these fixes?  Once again, by your own
> > argument, patches for Linux are also not free.
> 
> I don't believe this at all. My father is a licsensed IBM dealer and
> makes money of the silliest things. Just from what I've seen, I don't
> believe. Provide me a figure from IBM and I'll change my mind.

You're being ridiculous.  IBM may try to profit from SOME the patches
(they wanted $40+ for the CDROM of the OS/2 2.1 service pack, but have
since reduced it to $22 or so), but they almost certainly don't make
enough to matter worth spit on the balance sheets.

If you think IBM's free patches are covert profiterring, let's see
your model for how this would work.

--

Yippee for uqwk!

------------------------------

From: hsuc@msu.edu (Chun Hsu)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: 2 Jul 1994 04:01:44 GMT
Reply-To: hsuc@egr.msu.edu

Leo L Turetsky (professor+@CMU.EDU) wrote:
: Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.linux.misc: 1-Jul-94 Re: Linux better than
: OS/2 .. by Chun Hsu@msu.edu 
: > As many others have already pointed out, the fixes are free.
: > I may be wrong, but it doesn't yet seem to be the norm in the
: > software industry to send out free fixes.  I have accumulated
: > hundreds of dollars of software and thousands of dollars of 
: > hardware.  Yet, not one company has sent me a free patch for
: > their software or drivers.  Patches for OS/2 cost just as
: > much as Linux, nothing.

: The fixes are free only to those with Internet access. Is this so
: difficult to understand? Why do Linux users pick up on this right away?
: It is the norm to provide costly patches onlt by IBM and MS. Better
: companies provide them free. This is a generality, yes, but it almost
: always holds.

Is it so difficult for you to understand that IBM does not
profit from providing these fixes?  Once again, by your own
argument, patches for Linux are also not free.

I truly hope that I am wrong and that most companies send
users patches for free.  However, it has not happened for
me yet.  I am curious, does anyone know which companies
"send" patches for free and which ones don't.  Is it really
the norm for better companies or just for more expensive
products?  I suspect the latter.

: If you don't understand what the fuss is about and don't care either...
: stop posting, I don't want to waste my time replying to someone who
: doesn't care.

: -Leo

Unfortunately, I do care. :-(


--
===========================================================================
 Chun Hsu                                     E-mail: hsuc@egr.msu.edu   
 Masters of Science
 Electrical Engineering                       Michigan State University
===========================================================================

------------------------------

From: Joel@InfoMagic.com (Joel Goldberger)
Subject: InfoMagic Linux Developer's Resource (Slackware 2.0)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 1994 03:59:55 GMT

InfoMagic is pleased to announce the JUNE 94 release of the  
"LINUX Developer's Resource" 2-CD Set which will begin shipping
on 11 July.

Includes TWO CD-ROMs with COMPLETE materials to install and run LINUX!
Slackware & SLS can be installed directly from the CD.

The complete linux archives from tsx-11.mit.edu and sunsite.unc.edu. 
The COMPLETE GNU archive from prep.ai.mit.edu

"LIVE" filesystem! Uncompressed binaries with matching compressed sources
from the Slackware 2.0 distribution just announced by Patrick Volkerding.
All packages and utilities can be run directly from the CD! (except X-Windows)

HOWTO docs formatted for use with an included Microsoft Windows browser
supporting full-text search !  (Requires Microsoft Windows)
All docs are also included in plain text format.

Current version numbers:  
> Slackware 2.0
> SLS 1.05 with kernel 1.0
> Debian 0.91 Beta
> MCC 1.0+
> TAMU 1.0-A (binary only)
> JE distribution
> kernel sources version 1.1.23
> XFree86 Version 2.1.1
> Preliminary versions of the WINE code (Micorsoft Windows Emulator)

Complete file list available at ftp.uu.net:/vendor/InfoMagic/linux or 
InfoMagic.com:/pub/Linux

The "Linux Developer's Resource" is updated every two months.  This release
was slightly delayed while we waited for Patrick to complete Slackware 2.0 !!

The set is priced at $20.00 plus shipping ($5-North America; $10-Overseas).
Subscriptions are also available for $125/yr-NA; $135/yr-Overseas (Includes 
shipping).  1yr = 6 releases.

For more information or to order contact InfoMagic:

Tel:    (800) 800-6613 or (609) 683-5501
Fax:    (609) 683-5502
EMail:  Orders@InfoMagic.com

Customers in Europe may contact Lasermoon, Ltd:

Tel:    +44 0329-826444
Fax:    +44 0329-825936
EMail:  ian@lasermoon.co.uk


------------------------------

From: aris@unisup1.mpd.co.za (Aris Stathakis)
Subject: Re: Only 7000 Linux boxes, Re: Multiport Bored ...
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 1994 00:47:16 GMT

In <2uqo4o$lbj@news.u.washington.edu> tzs@u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:

>Tim Cutts <tjrc1@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>Microsoft isn't ripping disk compression out of DOS.
>>
>>Which planet do you live on?  Microsoft lost their case against Stac and had
>>to remove DoubleSpace from subsequent copies of DOS 6.2.

>I live on Earth.  Where do you live?  On Earth, Microsoft and Stac settled.
>They cross licensed their patents, Microsoft bought $40 million worth of
>Stac preferred stock, and agreed to pay royalties of $1 million/month for
>about the next 40 months, and Microsoft doesn't have to remove or recall
>anything.

>You should consider pulling yourself away from the net long enough to
>look at a newspaper now and then!

I thought Microsoft removed DoubleSpace in 6.21 and added a new compression
utility in 6.22 (which doesn't infringe any patents).

But I could be wrong of course ;-)

Aris

-- 
Aris Stathakis            Tel: +27 11 887 1040       Snail Mail:  
SCO ACE / Novell CNE      Fax: +27 11 887 5158       P.O. Box 781228
M&PD (Pty) Ltd.           Fax: +27 11 887 5158       Sandton, 2146
E-Mail: aris@mpd.co.za    Cell:+27 83 601 0206       R.S.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: Linux-Misc-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:

    Internet: Linux-Misc@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
    nic.funet.fi				pub/OS/Linux
    tsx-11.mit.edu				pub/linux
    sunsite.unc.edu				pub/Linux

End of Linux-Misc Digest
******************************
