From: Digestifier To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu Reply-To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu Date: Thu, 2 Sep 93 14:31:05 EDT Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #85 Linux-Misc Digest #85, Volume #1 Thu, 2 Sep 93 14:31:05 EDT Contents: Help with commpiling EPOCH (John Ngai) Is NT really a threat? (David C. Niemi) Re: Windows Pop Quiz Re: NT versus Linux (Wolfgang Strobl) Re: Speed testing different versions of POV (Michael Plate) Re: X11R5 on Linux ? (Orest Zborowski) Re: Stacker-like Compression? (Erkki Ruohtula) Ian Jackson (guest@hpacv.com) REMINDER: LINUX HARDWARE POLL WILL END SATURDAY (Matthew Dillon) Re: "Spying" on ttyS0 (Rogier Wolff) Re: Ian Jackson (Craig Burley) Re: Ian Jackson (Highlander) Re: Ian Jackson (Tor Arntsen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ngai@nova.bellcore.com (John Ngai) Subject: Help with commpiling EPOCH Reply-To: ngai@apostle.bellcore.com Date: Thu, 2 Sep 93 14:25:33 GMT I am trying to compile and install epoch-4.2 on my newly installed SLS-1.03. Since the current epoch binary on tsx-11.mit.edu (and sunsite.unc.edu) was linked with older libraries, I can no longer run it under SLS-1.03. So I ftp'ed the epoch source from ftp.uu.net. After some trial and error, I managed to compile epoch correctly with CANNOT_DUMP defined. And epoch runs well and correctly. However, I am unable to get epoch to dump its preloaded core so that it won't have to reload everything every time when I start it up. The core that I get after undefining CANNOT_DUMP always core dump on me (sorry if this is a bit confusing, but you will know what I mean if you have tried compiling epoch by yourself...) I suspect this has something to do with the fact that the epoch source was written without knowledge of Linux's shared library convention. So when it attempts to dump an executable core, it failed. So what do I need to modify/define in order to make epoch dump an executable core? Please help. Email reply is preferable. Thank you very much. -- John ------------------------------ From: niemidc@oasis.gtefsd.com (David C. Niemi) Subject: Is NT really a threat? Date: 2 Sep 1993 14:39:10 GMT Reply-To: niemidc@oasis.gtefsd.com I have been trying to follow Microsoft and NT fairly carefully (if from a distance). It does not appear that NT is much of a threat, particularly since it has "missed" the mainstream hardware target (486 DX/33 8 MB RAM) during a DRAM panic. Hence, NT is being re-targeted as a server-only OS, and it does appear to have a niche as an alternative to some Novell server setups. It is not much of a threat to UN*Xes due to its poor or nonexistent server capabilities in TCP/IP, NFS, and X. It was also supposed to be a threat for the "power-user" desktop, but it appears to have missed that one due to being too slow and too much of a memory hog. It will surely be used by people who have Win32 apps or who are committed to Win16 apps, like to play with multitasking, and are for some reason opposed to OS/2. So if you are a UN*X fan, don't worry too much about Windows NoT. It's not a threat. What you have to worry about now is Windows 3.1, followed by much hype about the barely-alpha "Chicago" successor which will likely follow it in 1995. I think there will be an interim upgrade (Win 3.2?) ca. 1994 that is far less ambitious than Chicago, but Microsoft has yet to announce any such product. Chicago is very ambitious, and it may be beyond Microsoft's capabilities to get it to come in on target (i.e. to run well on a 4 MB 386SX/16), but the hype is likely to be more powerful than the reality, as it was with NT (and most previous Windows versions). This gives UN*Xes with a Wabi a window of opportunity big enough to drive a truck through. A minimalist UN*X oriented towards standalone machines or small networks, with emphasis on easy installation and use, could be very competitive with Windows 3.1 in resource use and potentially faster. I am very interested in looking at what components are necessary to enable such a package; many of them already exist in Linux and/or *BSD, and the remainder are mostly already under development. WINE (Wine is no emulator!) is an absolute must for this market. Dosemu is also a must, and needs to be preinstalled and more integrated. Native DOS-like tools (perhaps a port of 4DOS?) Minimal version of X (lots of small games and demos for flash) Programming tools and big, ambitious tools optional (e.g. Emacs, TeX) Networking optional and repackaged (including UUCP, news readers, and mail) Sound/multimedia, SCSI support, Ethernet all options Kernel reconfigured and tuned, probably with loadable device drivers Abandon MINIX and ext file systems, integrate e2fsck/mke2fs into fsck/mkfs Update the user-creation and other administration commands Simplify use of LILO, including giving it a boot menu The biggest remaining challenges here are: 1) WINE and Dosemu 2) Make all the big stuff optional, but make options easy to install 3) Somehow make X transparently support a wide range of video options with minimal user expertise required 4) Make configuration of SCSI and Ethernet more automatic and reliable I know UN*X is inherently much more complex to configure than Winders, but making it easier can't hurt. --- David C. Niemi: David.Niemi@oasis.gtegsc.com I have seen th' darkness an' th' pain, Griffy... I have frolicked in th' Devil's Themepark...I have lain down with dawgs... ------------------------------ Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy From: strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) Subject: Re: Windows Pop Quiz Re: NT versus Linux Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 11:18:53 GMT In <1993Aug31.174959.7570@taylor.uucp> mark@taylor.uucp (Mark A. Davis) writes: >tzs@hardy.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes: >>Mark A. Davis wrote: >>>That presupposes that MS-"Windows" is an operating system, which by all >>>definitions I have known, it is not. Current temperature: 68 degrees? >>What are your definitions? Back each one up with a cite to a major operating >>systems text, please. >I don;t think that is necessary. MS-"Windows" cannot run by itself. >Need I say any more? Sure, if you can. Look, DOS can't run by itself, either. It too needs a bootstrap loader. Using an inferior OS as part of the bootstrapping sequence is common practice nowadays. My SGI Indigo has a tiny OS in ROM which has more functionality than DOS has - it even can do some networking, and, of course, it can load and run programs. Usually, it's only used for firing up the IRIX kernal and for maintenance purposes. IÄ'm told that SUN workstations have a complete FORTH interpreter contained in their monitor/boot ROM. My PC BIOS offers a lot of functionality, it manages resources (memory, devices) and even allows me to load and run a program. Usually, on my machine, it's only used for firing up DOS or NT. Does this make IRIX, SunOS, DOS or NT not an operating system, just because none can run "by itself", and needs something as a loader (and perhaps as an interface provider) which meets most of the criteria for an OS and *does* run "by itself"? Of course not! If it makes you feel better to call Windows not an OS, just because it has a three-step boot sequence (i.e. BIOS -> Boot record -> DOS -> Windows) instead of the more common two-step one (i.e. BIOS-> Boot record -> [NT/OS2/what have you]), feel free to do so. I prefer the more traditional view that an operating system is a hierarchically constructed or layered set of interacting programs which together manage the basic resources: time, memory, storage, I/O. Most textbooks I am aware of don't discuss the question where the exact lower boundaries (to the "bare machine") and the upper boundaries (to the "applications" or the "user") are. Some take a broad approach and include everything from compilers and utilities down to the bootstrap loader in their examples of OS components, others discuss more central components like memory managers, process managers, device drivers etc. only, and ignore everything else above and below. IMHO, this dosn't constitute a disagreement between the various authors, but just a different point of view, and most consider the question whether something *is* an operation system and whether something is part of it or not to be quite futile. So do I. If a piece of software contains most of the well known parts of an OS, and behaves like one, I'll call it an OS. [BEGIN OBQUOTE] Madnick/Donovan: "Operating Systems", McGraw-Hill 1974, p. 8: "We will present a framework for the study of operating systems based on the view that the operating system is a manager of resources. In this section we discuss these resources and define what the modules of the operating system must do to manage them; in Section 1-4 we present a model to demonstrate the sequencing of the management of these resources (process view); and in Section 1-5 we present a model to demonstrate the interrelationship and primitive functions of these modules (hierachical and extended machine view). These three views are not in conflict with one another; they represetnt three dimensions of one object - an operating system. Each view aids in the understanding and study of an operating system, and together they form the framework for this book. The models used are extensions of the work of others, most notably, Dijkstra (1968), Donovan(1972), Hansen (1970,1971), Saltzer (1966), and Madnick (1969). The primary view we take in this book is that the operating system is a collection of programs (algorithms) designed to manage the system's resources, namely, memory, processors, devices, and information (program and data). [...]" [END OBQUOTE] -- o ( Wolfgang Strobl Wolfgang.Strobl@gmd.de (+49 2241) 14-2394 /\ * GMD mbH _`\ `_<=== Schloss Birlinghoven, P.O. Box 1316, | #include __(_)/_(_)___.-._ 53731 Sankt Augustin, Germany | ------------------------------ Crossposted-To: comp.graphics From: plate@uni-kassel.de (Michael Plate) Subject: Re: Speed testing different versions of POV Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 12:32:47 GMT In article <264qvg$hfj@klaava.Helsinki.FI>, torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Torvalds) writes: |> In article <1993Sep2.121709.6788@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, |> >> |> >>The results were as follows: |> >> |> >> |> >>POV version | Render time (320x200) | Chesstones (pixels/sec) |> >>------------------+-----------------------+------------------------- |> >>Standard DOS | 337 seconds | 189.91 |> >> | | |> >>Fast POV for DOS | 289 seconds | 221.45 |> >> | | |> >>POV for Linux | 281 seconds | 227.76 |> >> |> >> |> >>The Linux version of POV was compiled with standard cc - would gcc or |> >>any other compiler produce faster code? |> > |> >I think that on linux, cc and gcc are the same program. |> > |> >However, to get the maximum speed, '-m486' and '-O6' should be |> >specified. (The former gets better performance on 486s at the price |> >of executable size. Supposedly, the performance on a 386 is the |> >same. I'm a bit suspicious of this, but oh well.) |> > |> >I'm not sure if specifying some of the -f flags on top of this (IE |> >-funroll-all-loops or the like.) will add more speed. |> |> "-m486 -O2 -ffast-math" would probably be the best optimization if |> povray uses lots of sin/cos/tan type instructions, as most math calls |> get compiled into just one 387 instruction in that case. |> |> This is of course assuming a math coprocessor present: the DOS binaries |> are likely to be faster when emulating the math codes (not due to |> excessive slowness of the linux emulator, but it's a bit more |> complicated than the code most DOS compilers are likely to use). |> |> Linus If you have some space left on disk, use '-finline-functions' ,too. I've compiled it on OS/2 and Linux, and on a 1024x768 pic with full quality (-q9 -a) it uses 2 minutes less (of 18 !) compiled with this. Shure, it grows awfully big, but what the hell.... Michael Plate ------------------------------ From: obz@Kodak.COM (Orest Zborowski) Subject: Re: X11R5 on Linux ? Date: Thu, 2 Sep 93 15:19:14 GMT Cobalt Stargazer (cam@adied.oz.au) wrote: >dwex@mtgzfs3.att.com (David E. Wexelblat) writes: >>What's the point of XFree86? It runs on Linux (as well as a dozen other >>OSs). X11R5 does not run on Linux. >Fair enough. But why isn't X11R5 on Linux? Hmmmm? I started with stock MIT X11R5 when porting it to Linux, using the X386 server therein and making the Linux kernel look like SVR4, since that was one of the best supported OS' in the distribution. X386 was a heavily massaged version of a 386 port of X11R4 by Thomas Roell, and MIT replaced much of the assembler code with straightforward C (for portability, no doubt). When the original folks of XFree86 got together, they wanted to merge the speedups that each had made to MIT's X11R5. What grew out of this is a very fine development and distribution team that is actively involved in server architecture, OS portability and driver delelopment. XFree86 is X11R5, with essentially the same copyright, and just as freely available as the original. One could take some of the XFree86 code pertaining to Linux and merge it back into stock X11R5, but there would be no advantage to be gained. -- Orest Zborowski (Zorst) obz@Kodak.COM ------------------------------ From: eru@tnso04.tele.nokia.fi (Erkki Ruohtula) Subject: Re: Stacker-like Compression? Date: 2 Sep 93 18:30:32 People interested in compressed file systems might find the following magazine article interesting: "Inside MS-DOS 6" (Byte, July 1993, p.197). After skipping the first page about the MemMaker stuff you find a relatively detailed and clear description of the DoubleSpace compressed file system. This system solves the problem of random access by having two levels of allocation blocks: Files are made up of some number of 8k FAT clusters, which are then compressed and stored into 1 to 16 512 byte sectors that do not have to be contiguous on the disk. The mapping from clusters to sectors is kept in a separate table. This compression scheme runs under a normal MS-DOS file system. I think some similar trick is also used in Stacker and its competitors, and I do not see any reason why this idea of two-level allocation could not be used in Linux, too. Might it be feasible to modify one of the existing file systems to use it? Another relevant article is "On-line Data Compression in a Log-structured File System" (Michael Burrows, Charles Jerian, Butler Lampson, and Timothy Mann, ACM SIGPLAN Notices vol. 27 #9, September 1992). The authors argue that on-the-fly compression and a LFS is a very good combination. They also provide summaries of other compression schemes. -- Erkki Ruohtula / Nokia Telecommunications Oy eru@tele.nokia.fi / P.O. Box 33 SF-02601 Espoo, Finland (My private opinions, of course.) ------------------------------ From: guest@hpacv.com Subject: Ian Jackson Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1993 12:44:15 GMT If this Ian Jackson is such a wonderful and helpful sole, why is then in the weeks we have carried comp.os.linux.all there has not been ONE post or helpful response or anything from this guy except his AMAZING dialy pointer, ie: "Dont bother me ... read these FAQs" annoyed. ------------------------------ From: dillon@moonshot.west.oic.com (Matthew Dillon) Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.development Subject: REMINDER: LINUX HARDWARE POLL WILL END SATURDAY Date: 2 Sep 1993 10:38:30 -0700 The linux hardware poll will end on Saturday Sep 4. I've been getting a wonderful response... 129 returns so far. For those of you who missed the poll, I am reposting it. This is the same poll I posted before, so if you have already answered it you don't need to do so again! -Matt Matthew Dillon dillon@moonshot.west.oic.com 1005 Apollo Way dillon@overload.berkeley.ca.us Incline Village, NV. 89451 ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop) USA Sandel-Avery Engineering (702)831-8000 [always include a portion of the original email in any response!] POLL ON LINUX HARDWARE CONFIGURATIONS, I/O BOARDS, AND PERCEPTIONS A. This is a poll on linux hardware configurations, I/O boards, and your perceptions as to the reliability of same. If you are a Linux user with knowledge of the hardware configuration of your machine then this poll is for you! B. If you have time, please answer the below questions and send the results to: poll@moonshot.west.oic.com POLL ENDS ON SATURDAY SEPTEMBER 4 1993 12:00 HOURS AT WHICH TIME I WILL POST THE RESULTS TO COMP.OS.LINUX.MISC. COMPLETE RESULTS WILL BE AVAILABLE VIA FTP. ALL RESPONSES WILL BE KEPT PRIVATE (EMAIL HEADERS WILL ALL BE REMOVED) If you do not have the answer to all the questions, please fill in those answers that you do have! This poll is being conducted by Matthew Dillon, dillon@moonshot.west.oic.com . Please email poll answers to poll@moonshot.west.com 0. How would you categorize yourself? Mark appropriate boxes. This will help me organize the answers and my comments to them. 0A. [ ] Joe end user with little technical knowledge and little application knowledge (i.e. only used a few commercial applications in your lifetime). Hint: if you check this box maybe you shouldn't be filling out this survey! 0B. [ ] Joe end user with some application knowledge but no technical (i.e. hardware knowledge) 0C. [ ] end user with a reasonable amount of ability installing boards and using applications but not much on programming languages (shell, interpreted, or compiled). 0D. [ ] power user who knows his way around PC boxes and maybe knows something about programming, but not so much about UNIX. 0E. [ ] power user who has no problem with hardware and can even write shell scripts and modify text files in /etc without too much havoc. 0F. [ ] expert UNIX user 0G. [ ] expert UNIX user, reasonable operating systems / machine management skills. 0H. [ ] power expert UNIX user - highly skilled in most things. 0I. [ ] UNIX guru - highly skilled in all things, experience modifying kernel code, writing device drivers... can pick up random source code you've never seen before and hack on it, etc... Can become an expert on a program after ten minutes of fiddling with it. 0J. [ ] UNIX god - 0I + over 1000 hours of kernel hacking, includes network protocol hacking but not system level hacking. Also must have posted at least one clandestine message to the internet (mail or news) in his/her lifetime and be able to become root on any machine he/she has an account on (in order to fix problems, of course!). Also must have crashed the kernel while hacking at least two dozen times (or you aren't on the leading edge :-)). 1. What type of machine do you have? 1A. Brand (e.g. Dell) -> 1B. Cpu (e.g. 486DX2/66) -> 1C. Math co-processor? (Y/N) -> 1D. Base memory (before any additions) -> 1E. Approximate price -> 1F. EISA or ISA computer? (if not an intel 486) -> 1G. Is this a localbus computer? -> 1H. Is this a portable computer? -> 1I. Please comment on any hardware problems you had installing and using Linux on this platform (i.e. dip switches you had to fool with, etc..) -> -> -> -> 1J. If available, please give an approximate price for this platform NOT including any additional boards you might have purchased for it. PLEASE INDICATE WHAT I/O BOARDS, IF ANY, CAME WITH THE PLATFORM. I am specifically interested in hard disk, video, and ethernet boards. -> -> -> -> 2. What brand of physical hard drive do you have? (the bare drive, not the controller. Do not answer this question if you have a hard-card): 2A. Brand (e.g. Quantum, Fujitsu..) -> 2B. Approximate price of bare drive -> 2C. Please comment on any hardware specific problems you might have had and the reliability of the drive itself. -> -> -> -> 3. What type and brand of hard drive controller do you have? Note that ISA cards can be stuck into EISA busses (reason for question #3B). THIS QUESTION APPLIES ONLY TO CARDS, NOT TO MOTHERBOARD-BASED CONTROLLERS. 3A. Type (e.g. SCSI, IDE, STANDARD) -> 3B. Approximate price -> 3C. Bus Interface (e.g. EISA, ISA) -> 3D. Brand -> 3E. Please comment on any hardware specific problems you might have had and the reliability of the card itself (if you can discern between drive reliability and card reliability :-)) -> -> -> -> 4. What are your perceptions as to the speed of your disk controller? The two categories will help separate out power user from joe user perceptions. You can answer this question even if you have a motherboard-based controller. 4A. If you are NOT using the disk heavily -> -> -> -> 4B. If you ARE using the disk heavily -> -> -> -> 5. Questions related to your video hardware. Answer only if you are running X-Windows (or other graphical environment). These are questions related to your video controller. 5A. on-Card or on-motherboard? -> 5B. Approx. price, include expansion-> 5C. What brand are you using? -> 5D. Bus interface(EISA,LOCAL,ISA..) -> 5E. Screen resolution you use -> 5F. Screen depth / colors -> 5G. How do you perceive the speed of this video controller. If you have made any comparisons with other controllers please indicate relative impressions of BOTH controllers, and list the second controller. -> -> -> -> 5H. Please comment on any installation problems you might have had installing the board. This includes dip switches, kernel patches you may have had to made, and Xconfig problems beyond the normal dumb stuff. Please differentiate between problems installing the board so the system would boot using it and problems installing the board to make it run under X-Windows (or other graphical environment). -> -> -> -> 6. Questions related to your physical screen, only if you have a multi-sync and run it in a high resolution graphics mode (i.e. under X-Windows or other graphical environment under Linux). 6A. What brand of monitor? -> 6B. Approximate price -> 6C. Size, in inches (or approx) -> 6D. Please comment on any problems you may have had interfacing the monitor to your video board, leave blank if you did not have any problems (most people will not have had any problems!) -> -> -> -> 6E. Please comment on special attributes of the monitor you like or dislike (e.g. has a nice stand, display exceptionally dull, etc...) -> -> -> -> 7. Questions related to your ethernet adapter, if you use one. 7A. What brand of adaptor? -> 7B. Approximate price -> 7C. Bus interface (EISA, ISA, ...) -> 7D. Please comment on any installation problems you might have had installing the board, including having to change default IRQ, Kernel reconfigurations, etc. If you had any difficulties getting packets to start running across it beyond the normal dumb stuff, please comment on them. Do not comment on difficulties getting ifconfig or routing setup unless they are hardware-related. -> -> -> -> 7E. Ethernet boards all run at about the same speed, but if you have done any comparisons and found any significant differences, please comment on them below! DMA *can* make a small difference though at 10 MBits/sec even ISA DMA doesn't have much of a problem. -> -> -> -> ------------------------------ From: wolff@liberator.et.tudelft.nl (Rogier Wolff) Subject: Re: "Spying" on ttyS0 Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1993 14:41:55 GMT : In article <25bqu5INN6d4@uwm.edu> zak@csd4.csd.uwm.edu : (Zachary S Smith) writes: : I run a dial-in system, and most of my users are new to unix. Is there any : way I can assign, say, tty8 to look like the remote user's screen? I just : need a way to see if they are floundering, so I can give them a hand. You could use the shell script #!/bin/sh exec tcsh | tee /dev/tty8 as the login shell for these users. This will give you a log. In straight text mode (ls, cat) you will have a clear impression of what is going on. If your users start using vi/emacs and other curses programs you might be in trouble. If your terminal is more or less the same (i.e. the modem user also has a 24 line vt100) your screen will still be more or less be the same. Good luck "spying" Roger. -- * Not that I have tested it - I just wrote the code and hope it works. * * "Real programmers" don't test: they assume it works the first time, * * and anyway, what do you think beta-testers are for? -Linus Torvalds * EMail: wolff@dutecai.et.tudelft.nl ** Tel +31-15-783643 or +31-15-142371 ------------------------------ From: burley@apple-gunkies.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley) Subject: Re: Ian Jackson Date: 2 Sep 93 14:13:33 In article <1993Sep2.124415.1275@hpacv.com> guest@hpacv.com writes: If this Ian Jackson is such a wonderful and helpful sole, why is then in the weeks we have carried comp.os.linux.all there has not been ONE post or helpful response or anything from this guy except his AMAZING dialy pointer, ie: "Dont bother me ... read these FAQs" Maybe because he's on vacation, with just a daemon auto-posting the helpful daily posting? Maybe because he hasn't seen a question he can answer better than some of the other helpful people on c.o.l.*? Maybe because just keeping up with the "READ THIS BEFORE POSTING" post is all the time and effort he can spare helping the Linux/USENET community? Maybe you'd care to explain why you use an apparently anonymous account to post idiotic diatribes against those who helpfully volunteer their time and effort helping people they've never even met, whereas you choose to attack people you've never even met in public? -- James Craig Burley, Software Craftsperson burley@gnu.ai.mit.edu Member of the League for Programming Freedom (LPF) lpf@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ From: tabaer@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Highlander) Subject: Re: Ian Jackson Date: 2 Sep 1993 18:25:16 GMT Before anybody takes this yutz TOO seriously, notice its username: guest. Can you say, "Flame bait?" In article <1993Sep2.124415.1275@hpacv.com> guest@hpacv.com writes: >If this Ian Jackson is such a wonderful and helpful sole, why is then in the >weeks we have carried comp.os.linux.all there has not been ONE post or >helpful response or anything from this guy except his AMAZING dialy >pointer, ie: "Dont bother me ... read these FAQs" They're called Frequently Asked Questions for a reason; they come up a lot, and they usually have simple answers. Face it, IF PEOPLE READ THE FAQS LIKE THEY'VE BEEN ASKED TO, THE TRAFFIC ON THIS GROUP WOULD GO DOWN BY HALF. (Sorry for shouting.) Not that reading the FAQs is very common; I'm guilty of not reading them closely enough myself. But if there's not a pointer to them like Ian's daily post, people don't know they exist. Not everybody bothers to check rtfm.mit.edu... The Linux groups need to calm down; some of the readers are biting the hands that feed them (Ian Jackson, Peter MacDonald), and if it keeps up, they'll leave. That would suck for everybody. --Troy, tired of watching Linux advocates get bashed +--------------------+---------------------------------------------------+ | Troy A. Baer | "I naver saw a MacGregor et a whole Inglisman | | tabaer@magnus.acs. | bafore, no doon ta the shoe..." | | ohio-state.edu | -- Jock Armstrong of the Syde, _The_Spiral_Dance_ | +--------------------+---------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ From: tor@spacetec.no (Tor Arntsen) Subject: Re: Ian Jackson Date: 2 Sep 1993 18:26:22 GMT Reply-To: tor@spacetec.no In article 1275@hpacv.com, guest@hpacv.com () writes: ^^ > If this Ian Jackson is such a wonderful and helpful sole, why is then in the > weeks we have carried comp.os.linux.all there has not been ONE post or > helpful response or anything from this guy except his AMAZING dialy > pointer, ie: "Dont bother me ... read these FAQs" > > annoyed. ^^^^^^^^ and anonymous. Just go away if you don't have any better to say. -- Tor (P.S. Ian is known to respond directly by mail to people's problems, just as a lot of other helpful people here are doing. If general enough and not a FAQ people may post a summary.) Followups to alt.flame --- +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Tor Arntsen - Spacetec A.S, N-9005 Tromso, Norway +47-83-84500 | | LA1RHA - tor@spacetec.no (1) - tor@tss.no (2) - tarntsen@bbb.no (3)| | Linux user | | #include | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ ** 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 ******************************