Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #840
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, 20 Mar 94 06:13:08 EST

Linux-Misc Digest #840, Volume #1                Sun, 20 Mar 94 06:13:08 EST

Contents:
  Re: NEW PRODUCT : 3 Linux CD's and a T-Shirt for $29. (Jeffrey M. Dill)
  Re: Opinions wanted about SCO-unix (vs AIX/Linux). (Dan Wilder)
  Re: Linux Journal in UK? (was Re: Linux Journal (Linux Journal Automatic Response Server)
  Re: pronunciation of linux (Mark Line)
  Re: Opinions wanted about SCO-unix (vs AIX/Linux). (Tom Fitzgerald)
  Re: Playing Sounds from Mosaic (was Re: Linux pronounciation HOWTO) (Michael McDonnell)
  Telnet under linux (Yuval Oren)
  Re: Effective rights in Linux/Unix (Howard Poe)
  Re: Opinions wanted about SCO-unix (vs AIX/Linux). (Steve Fuller)
  Re: Effective rights in Linux/Unix (John F. Haugh II)
  Does Linux support BusLogic BL445S VLB SCSI controller (root@jaxnet.com)
  Can I use a non SCSI tape backup with Linux? (Scott M McLewin)
  Re: NEW PRODUCT : 3 Linux CD's and a T-Shirt for $29. (Teng-Wen Chang)
  Re: DOOM for X (Bret Orsburn)
  Re: DOOM for X (Bret Orsburn)
  Re: Linux and Hayes 28,800's - anyone have them working? (Rubber Duck)
  Re: Linux and Hayes 28,800's - anyone have them working? (Rubber Duck)
  Re: Linux 1.0 comes out on same day Apple announces new machines (Donald Jeff Dionne)
  Re: pronunciation of linux (root)

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

From: jmd@bass.ssd.ray.com (Jeffrey M. Dill)
Subject: Re: NEW PRODUCT : 3 Linux CD's and a T-Shirt for $29.
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 19:41:51 GMT

In article <cavenewtCMtx2E.CFC@netcom.com> cavenewt@netcom.com (James F Small Jr) writes:
>In article <2m9rnt$h6c@lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu> sarr@citi.umich.edu writes:
>>Just out of curiosity, has ANYBODY gotten the "response within 24 hours"
>>that the JANA folks promised?
>>-- 
>Nope, I sent them a message, and haven't received anything back from them.

Me too. Shucks, I hope I didn't get my hopes up for nothing.....

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

From: danw@hebron.connected.com (Dan Wilder)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,biz.sco.general
Subject: Re: Opinions wanted about SCO-unix (vs AIX/Linux).
Date: 19 Mar 1994 19:21:54 -0800

rolff@svea.eurokom.ie (Anders Rolff) writes:

>In article <2m77i4$a8m@lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu> sarr@citi.umich.edu (Sarr J. Blumson) writes:
>   2) The C compiler is Microsoft, not Gnu or any other descendant of UNIX

>Isn't pcc included in the standard System V distribution? Why not ship
>pcc as well as Microsoft's cc? Pcc is probably worse, mind you.

>Anders.

My ancient SCO 3.2.2.0 has rcc, the heritage AT&T compiler that doesn't 
barf when I try to compile gcc or other large programs like the
Microsoft-derived one does.

---
Dan Wilder

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

From: lj@lasermoon.co.uk (Linux Journal Automatic Response Server)
Subject: Re: Linux Journal in UK? (was Re: Linux Journal
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 94 01:33:10 GMT
Reply-To: B.

In article <2m95e0$d2q@cs6400.mcc.ac.uk> zzassgl@cs6400.mcc.ac.uk writes:
>
>Is anyone distributing the Linux Journal in the UK?
>
YES!!!

   Lasermoon Ltd are the European Distributors for the Linux Journal.

Although the Linux Journal is published in the USA, it is targetted at a
Worldwide Audience and we will surely be pushing for a high European
content. ACC Corp, Publishers of the Linux Journal and Lasermoon welcome
your comments and suggestions for future issues.

For further information, please contact us :

OUR ADDRESS IS :

        Lasermoon,
        2a Beaconsfield Road,
        Fareham,
        Hants,
        England.
        PO14 4SF
        Tel: +44 (0) 329 826444
        Fax: +44 (0) 329 825936


email : lj@lasermoon.co.uk           Semi-automaton.
        lj-desk@lasermoon.co.uk      Human response.
        info@lasermoon.co.uk         General Information


--
Lasermoon Ltd, 2a Beaconsfield Road, | Linux Journal - European Distributors
Fareham, Hants, England. PO16 0QB    | lj@lasermoon.co.uk
Tel : +44 (0) 329 826444  Fax: +44 (0) 329 825936
The Linux Journal - the Monthly Magazine for the Worldwide Linux Community.


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

From: markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Mark Line)
Subject: Re: pronunciation of linux
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 02:22:21 GMT

paul@myrddin.isl.cf.ac.uk (9) writes:

>In article <1994Mar15.085643.830@lod.amaranth.com> marauder@lod.amaranth.com (marauder) writes:
>>: Well, I have to agree with previous the previous poster pointing out how
>>: incredibly awkward that is for English speakers :)  I'm glad to know
>>: what the most "proper" way is to say it, but I think I will have to
>>: continue calling it  /'Lie-nucks/.  Besides, it matches the English 
>>: pronunciation of Linus and Unix combined...
>>

>I keep coming across English speakers who say Lie-nucks and I totally fail
>to see why they think that is the correct pronunciation.

>In English the vowel sounds are governed (as much as can be possible in a
>totally irregular language) by the use of 'e' at the end of words.

>For example:

>pane, bane, sane has the 'a' sound that you would use when reciting the
>alphabet, as opposed to pan, ban and sand.

>Likewise for 'i'. pine, dine, dime as opposed to pin,din,dim etc.

>So, the lin in linux should be pronounced as in lint and not as in
>line. I really don't see anything awkward about this for English
>speakers.  Now, american might be different :-)

If it were that simple, there'd be no quandary. What about:

pint (but mint)?
Linus (but linear)?
climate (but clinic)?

Linus' name is pronounced very differently in English than in Swedish.
That would be the only real reason to pronounce Linux in English to
rhyme with the usual English pronunciation of Linus. If you take
something closer to how Linus' name is really pronounced, plus the
fact that it's supposed to also be derived from Minix, then I suppose
the only *correct* pronunciation in English would have to be the one
that rhymes with clinics. I'm trying hard to break the lie-nix habit,
which is how almost everybody pronounces the word when they first see
it, due to the usual English pronunciation of Linus.

Let's debate these matters a whole lot more, though, and cross-post
everything into sci.lang and alt.usage.english. ;)

-- Mark

====================================================================
Mark P. Line                       Phone: +1-206-733-6040
Open Pathways                        Fax: +1-206-733-6040
P.O. Box F                         Email: markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu
Bellingham, WA 98227-0296
====================================================================





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

Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,biz.sco.general
From: fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald)
Subject: Re: Opinions wanted about SCO-unix (vs AIX/Linux).
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 1994 02:15:52 GMT

> Tom Fitzgerald:
> .  If you don't already know everything you need to know about Linux,
> .  then you probably shouldn't be using it.

rockwell@nova.umd.edu (Raul Deluth Miller) writes:

> That sounds like a cop out.  It's ok that you don't know much about
> Linux.  But, it's silly to recommend others don't use it on that
> basis.

My comment deserves more explanation.....  the original poster was
comparing Linux to two commercial OSs (SCO and AIX), and vaguely implied
that the choice would which one to use in a business environment.  Both SCO
and AIX have commercial support available.  Regardless of the technical
flaws in IBM products, their support is outstanding - in a class of its own
compared to most of the computer industry.  Linux is unsupported; you can
hope for help from the net, but you can't get anyone to commit to
supporting it.  In a business environment support is critical.  If
something dies and part of your operations grinds to a halt, that's a
really really bad time to have bring in a logic analyzer to work out a
subtle misinteraction between the disk and ethernet drivers.

That's why I said that he shouldn't consider Linux unless he was already
*very* familiar with it.  I know everything I need to know about Linux
(not much, but enough), but the original poster should consider what he's
getting into.

-- 
Tom Fitzgerald   Wang Labs   Lowell MA, USA   1-508-967-5278   fitz@wang.com
Pardon me, I'm lost, can you direct me to the information superhighway?


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

From: michaelm@thincof.remote.ualberta.ca (Michael McDonnell)
Subject: Re: Playing Sounds from Mosaic (was Re: Linux pronounciation HOWTO)
Date: 20 Mar 1994 05:58:07 GMT

Bill Heiser (bill@bhhome.ci.net) wrote:
: mdw@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh) writes:

: >Of course, you'll need to be able to play sound through your WWW client;
: >Mosaic fires off as process called "showaudio" to do this. I have
: >"showaudio" linked to /usr/local/bin/play on SunOS systems, which
: >does the trick.

: How would one do this with Mosaic 2.2 in LINUX?

do you have Mosaic 2.2 compiled for LINUX?  I'd love to get the binaries
if you do.  I've had no luck compiling it.  The appropriate Makefile
would please me just as much. :-)


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

From: yuval@violet.berkeley.edu (Yuval Oren)
Subject: Telnet under linux
Date: 20 Mar 1994 05:06:45 GMT

Hi. I'm thinking of installing linux on my machine, which is not
connected to the internet. I'm wondering if linux will let me run a
program that uses a port, and then if I could "telnet" to myself and
connect to that port -- multiple times.

Ex:

program "merc" takes over port 5000 on my standalone machine.
Can I do this? :

telnet localhost 5000 &
telnet localhost 5000 &

Please respond via e-mail to yuval@violet.berkeley.edu (this address)

Thank you,

Yuval Oren

-- 
________________________________________________________________________
|Yuval Oren -- yuval@violet.berkeley.edu                               |
| Moronic quote of the day: "Nuclear Attack: Quick! Under your desks!" |

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

From: hpoe@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Howard Poe)
Subject: Re: Effective rights in Linux/Unix
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 94 00:44:21 GMT

WRONG!
The S bit the the SetUID bit.  It's sets the user ID to the ID that owns the
program.
The T bit is the "sticky" bit.  It's used on subdirectories to make it
impossible for others to erase files that don't belong to them.
(Look at /tmp, and /bin/su for examples.)
-Howard J. Poe
hpoe@nyx.cs.du.edu

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

From: sfuller@picard.infonet.net (Steve Fuller)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,biz.sco.general
Subject: Re: Opinions wanted about SCO-unix (vs AIX/Linux).
Date: 20 Mar 1994 06:55:36 GMT

fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald) writes:


>My comment deserves more explanation.....  the original poster was
>comparing Linux to two commercial OSs (SCO and AIX), and vaguely implied
>that the choice would which one to use in a business environment.  Both SCO
>and AIX have commercial support available.  Regardless of the technical
>flaws in IBM products, their support is outstanding - in a class of its own
>compared to most of the computer industry.  Linux is unsupported; you can
>hope for help from the net, but you can't get anyone to commit to
>supporting it.  In a business environment support is critical.  If
>something dies and part of your operations grinds to a halt, that's a
>really really bad time to have bring in a logic analyzer to work out a
>subtle misinteraction between the disk and ethernet drivers.

I've used Linux for about 7 months now and have recently started dealing with 
SCO at my job and on the side as well. I would have to agree with the poster 
on his points. Linux is a fine OS and as a cheap way to get introduced to the 
basics of system administration and UNIX itself, as well as UUCP, SLIP, etc. 
However for commercial applications support I'd have to pick SCO as well. 
Both of these pieces of software have their appropriate place and as long as 
people are wise enough to chose what will best suit their purposes, everyone 
should be happy.....



>That's why I said that he shouldn't consider Linux unless he was already
>*very* familiar with it.  I know everything I need to know about Linux
>(not much, but enough), but the original poster should consider what he's
>getting into.


-- 
Steve Fuller                I will choose the path that's clear  
sfuller@ins.infonet.net     I will choose freewill  -- N. Peart  
INS User Development Group 


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

From: jfh@rpp386 (John F. Haugh II)
Subject: Re: Effective rights in Linux/Unix
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 02:52:00 GMT

In article <1994Mar17.002518.3035@compiler.tdcnet.nl> jvoosten@compiler.tdcnet.nl (J.S. van Oosten) writes:
>: I know that there is a way to run a file and inherrit the 
>: rights associated with the file, but I can not seem to find exactly how 
>: to do it.  
>
>What you're looking for is the (in)famous 's'-bit. Its an attribute just
>like the 'r', 'w' and 'x' bits on files. It's called the 'sticky' bit,
>because it "sticks" the EUID (effective userID) to the program while
>running, hence changing its access and privileges. Check for example your
>'smail' binary, it should have either an 's' bit on the user or the
>group (the latter is safer). It replaces the 'x' letter from the attributes.

The "t" bit is the "sticky bit" because it used to make the program
text prototype "stick" to swapping space after the starting program
exited.  (This is "Save Text on Swap" ...)

The "s" bits are just "set user-ID" and "set group-ID".

>Now we're on this bit anyway: I've seen some 's' bits on directories, in the
>user & group field: can anyone enlighten me what function they have there ?
>I know the 't' bit, which is handy in /tmp, but I can't notice any
>difference while there's an 's' bit on a directory... Or is it just plain
>useless ?

Group inheritence.  The group of a file created in a directory with "g+s"
is the group of the directory.
-- 
John F. Haugh II  [ NRA-ILA ] [ Kill Barney ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151 [GOP][DoF #17][PADI][ENTJ]   @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
 There are three documents that run my life: The King James Bible, the United
 States Constitution, and the UNIX System V Release 4 Programmer's Reference.

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

From: root@jaxnet.com
Subject: Does Linux support BusLogic BL445S VLB SCSI controller
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 1994 10:50:13 GMT

The BusLogic 445s scsi controller is listed in the hardware FAQ but,
it doesn't specifically mention that this is a VESA local bus controller
and I wanted to be sure Linux supported it before I dropped $300 bucks
on it.

Also, how about some opinions about using this controller on a 8 users
system with a full usenet feed on the same box.

Should I dump my motherboard and get an EISA board instead?  Right now
I have 6 ISA slots and 2 VLB slots.  I have a VLB multi-io board for
my IDE drive.  I do not need Xwindows so I thought that the extra VLB slot
would be a good option for my SCSI controller.

I heard that VLB is a bus hog... is this going to be a bad choice for my
system?
--
Karl Renaut
root@jaxnet.com

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

From: smclewin@ultrix.ramapo.edu (Scott M McLewin)
Subject: Can I use a non SCSI tape backup with Linux?
Date: 19 Mar 1994 04:13:34 GMT

I am looking to purchase a tape backup (250M range) for my system.  Looking
at the compatability list, I noticed that only SCSI drives are listed.  I
am hoping this document is wrong....Is anybody out there running with
a non SCSI tape drive?  If so, which is it...and how did you get it to 
work (I also need it to function under DOS, but I figure this is pretty
simple).
 
I'm running 0.99pl13 (but I have 15 on cd just waiting to load...I purchased
this kernel on cd for the soundblaster cd support :)  oops...).
 
I would appreciate it if you mailed any responses to me.  Our news reader
has just come back up after three months of being "temporarily unavailable", 
and is now listed as "potentially stable".  
 
Thanks for the help!
 
Scott
smclewin@ultrix.ramapo.edu

--


Scott M McLewin                                 smclewin@ultrix.ramapo.edu


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

From: Teng-Wen Chang <tc38+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: NEW PRODUCT : 3 Linux CD's and a T-Shirt for $29.
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 1994 02:53:28 -0500

Finally, I got response from Jay and Christine. They just need time to
set the system up.

tengwen

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

From: borsburn@mcs.kent.edu (Bret Orsburn)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.386bsd.apps
Subject: Re: DOOM for X
Date: 20 Mar 1994 07:59:19 GMT

[I have deleted more context than I would have liked, because the news posting
software here enforces that execrable heuristic about the ratio of new material
to quoted material. Sorry if I have distorted anybody's comments.]

In article <1994Mar17.132757.12534@taylor.wyvern.com> mark@taylor.wyvern.com (Mark A. Davis) writes:
>borsburn@mcs.kent.edu (Bret Orsburn) writes:
>
>>But if you think about it for two minutes instead of one, you might
>>conclude otherwise.
>
>>Whatever else it may be, a window manager is an application program.
>
>Yes
>
>>An application program needs an application run-time environment, and
>>for an X application that environment is probably going to be UNIX.
>
>Not really.  Most Xterminals are not running Unix, which is far overkill...

UNIX (at least a stripped-down run-time version) isn't overkill if the vendor
has to port Xlib and Xt and and several other application libs. (Motif?)

>>So, to provide a general solution for local clients, your X Terminal
>>has to provide a UNIX application run-time environment (including all
>>of the application libraries your local clients might need).
>
>Nope.  But the mini OS in the Xterminal does have to support certain
>functionality- most of which is necessary to run the Xserver software anyway.

The X server has a very small OS porting layer (osx).

The Client side does not.

Porting the client side of X to a non-UNIX platform is at least an order
of magnitude larger problem than porting the server. And the task can be
made arbitrarily difficult by postulating the inclusion of additional
application libraries.

(Granted, recent releases of the server have started to violate the
OS-independence policy, for instance the BlockHandler and WakeupHandler
interfaces assume the OS uses a "select" style device polling interface.
The new font handling code more or less ignores OS independence. On the whole,
though, server OS dependencies are still managable.)

>>That ratchets your system design a large notch closer to being a workstation.
>
>Actually, yes.  But evey then, there is still a large, large gap between
>the two.

Actually, the largest gap (in terms of component cost) is likely to be virtual
memory support (a local hard disk), but if you want to develop serious local
clients, you'll have to cross that bridge eventually.

>>And, just to make things interesting, you just designed an open system
>>instead of a closed system. I hope you're prepared to go into the programming
>>support business.
>
>Granted, it is only logical to even attempt to run a local client on an
>Xterminal if:
>
>1) It does not require storage
>2) It does not consume large amounts of resources locally
>3) It can still be remotely configured and upgraded
>4) It is very tied to the Xserver in some way (like the window manager)
>5) It produces benefits which outweigh the efforts and side effects

OK, how about this hypothetical situation:

You've got a heterogeneous network (that X allowed you to build, to your
great advantage) including X terminals from three different vendors. You
have among your user population people with strong preferences for four
different window managers.

So, as the site administrator, you have to make four different window managers
work under 3 different, arbitrarily restricted, (perhaps proprietary)
"mini OS"es.

For those of you following along at home, that's 12 ports.

Twelve ports using three different collections of low-volume, ad hoc cross
development tools and three rag-tag processions of vendor-developed application
support libraries.

Are you absolutely sure that using a non-local window manager was such a
big problem that you are willing to discard everything you know about
software development and maintenance methodologies in order to "fix" this
theoretical "problem"?

---

    Bret Orsburn
    borsburn@mcs.kent.edu

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

From: borsburn@mcs.kent.edu (Bret Orsburn)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.386bsd.apps
Subject: Re: DOOM for X
Date: 20 Mar 1994 08:35:54 GMT

[See my comments elsewhere in this thread.]

In article <2mb2bb$8m@u.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) writes:
>>
>>So, to provide a general solution for local clients, your X Terminal
>>has to provide a UNIX application run-time environment (including all
>>of the application libraries your local clients might need).
>
>Well, first off, the only thing I'm really interested in is moving the
>window manager to the X terminal ... but as far as application environment,
>that's what xrdb an XInternAtom() are for.

Sorry, terminogy conflict. By "UNIX run-time environment" I mean more than
a bunch of strings....

>As far as API environment
>is concerned, a clock, a window manager, a print server, and an X telnet
>or rlogin or CTERM (DECNet) window all consume only those interesting
>resources that must be there for an X terminal to be an X terminal (ie:
>networking, display, and mouse/keyboard input services).

This drastic oversimplification simply ignores all of the client-side
X libraries.

>For print
>services, I guess you'd need a local printer port (check the back of NCD,
>NCR, or GraphOn X terminals lately? Even a Wyse-50 has a printer port...).

There are no print services in X. We seem to be talking past each other here.

>[stuff about RPC'ing widgets deleted]
>
>Finally, you are arguing from the specific to the general, which is logically
>invalid in any case.

Huh? Precisely where did I commit this fallacy?

>>That ratchets your system design a large notch closer to being a workstation.
>>(In fact, the only thing that distinguishes this design from a workstation
>>is the compromises you make to a "real" UNIX environment to save costs.
>>Those are the same compromises that all of those enlightened programmers
>>are going to come back and tell you about later.)
>
>This is the argument Sun tried to use (an failed at).  Sun is now selling
>workstations running X server software under the name "X terminal".  Sun
>wasn't very successful selling that world view, and they had a marketing
>department being paid big $ trying to back their story up.  8-).

Actually, you've made my case for me. The price point for X terminals has
been kept so high (by creeping featurism) that workstations can compete
against them head-to-head.

>[...] given what AT&T now charges for the
>beasts, they can afford to support a couple of programmers here and there.
>8-).

And you've made my point again.

If X terminals aren't cheaper than workstations, the motivation for using
them becomes *very* weak.

I think X terminals are useful and important, so I think we (as customers)
should try *not* to apply pressure on the vendors to add features that drive
the costs up and ultimately undermine the market.

But, I'm afraid that train may already have left the station....

---

    Bret Orsburn
    borsburn@mcs.kent.edu


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

From: mike@dormrat.sosi.com (Rubber Duck)
Subject: Re: Linux and Hayes 28,800's - anyone have them working?
Date: 20 Mar 1994 02:32:01 -0700

I bought a Zoom v.fc 28.8kbps internal at Best Buy for $199 and a Hayes v.fc
28.8kbps external at Computer City for $465.

They work GREAT together.  I have the Zoom at 115,200bps DTE and the
Hayes at 57,600.  I get ~150ms ping times and ~3Kbytes/sec on gzipped
files.

Mike

P.S.  To check it out (and get some nifty GIF's) try
166.93.11.2:/pub/multimedia/graphics
-- 
AMN Michael S. Aos  Preferred->mike@dormrat.sosi.com     This      egf-bbs.uucp
PSC Box 70989      .forward  ->aos@rainbow.sosi.com     message      Sun 2/120
Peterson AFB       ALSO->msaos@nyx.cs.du.edu            delayed   (719) 573-5761
CO, 80914-5630     OR->mike@egf-bbs.sosi.com            24 hrs  Login as 'guest'

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

From: mike@dormrat.sosi.com (Rubber Duck)
Subject: Re: Linux and Hayes 28,800's - anyone have them working?
Date: 20 Mar 1994 01:45:08 -0700

I bought a Zoom v.fc 28.8kbps internal at Best Buy for $199 and a Hayes v.fc
28.8kbps external at Computer City for $465.

They work GREAT together.  I have the Zoom at 115,200bps DTE and the
Hayes at 57,600.  I get ~150ms ping times and ~3Kbytes/sec on gzipped
files.

Mike

P.S.  To check it out (and get some nifty GIF's) try
166.93.11.2:/pub/multimedia/graphics
-- 
AMN Michael S. Aos  Preferred->mike@dormrat.sosi.com     This      egf-bbs.uucp
PSC Box 70989      .forward  ->aos@rainbow.sosi.com     message      Sun 2/120
Peterson AFB       ALSO->msaos@nyx.cs.du.edu            delayed   (719) 573-5761
CO, 80914-5630     OR->mike@egf-bbs.sosi.com            24 hrs  Login as 'guest'

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

From: jeff@ee.ryerson.ca (Donald Jeff Dionne)
Subject: Re: Linux 1.0 comes out on same day Apple announces new machines
Date: 17 Mar 1994 19:54:27 GMT

Chris Kelley (cdk@bnr.ca) wrote:
: In article <CMrKpD.EAr@world.std.com>,
: Lawrence Foard <entropy@world.std.com> wrote:
: >In article <14MAR199417503194@rigel.tamu.edu>,
: >Gerard R. Lazo <grl6732@rigel.tamu.edu> wrote:
: >>I overheard on NPR that Apple announced their new line of PowerPC
: >>computers today. It was touted that the prices/performance challenged
: >>Intel's Pentium. I thought it was ironic, coincidental, interesting
: >>that Linux 1.0 would make its debut on the same day. With all the
: >>applications that can be ported to Linux, it will be interesting to
: >>see how the different OS environments evolve.
: >
: >Now lets get Linux ported to the Power PC before Windows NT :)

: [ ... ]

: Yes, please :)

: Maybe we should all chip in and buy Linus a PowerMac...

: Cheers,
: chris

You've got my $$$ how many people want to chip in?

Jeff@EE.Ryerson.Ca

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

From: root@gdansk.iguana.com (root)
Subject: Re: pronunciation of linux
Date: 20 Mar 1994 03:04:31 -0600

Doug DeJulio (ddj+@cs.cmu.edu) wrote:
: >>Charlie Brown and his friends are wrong!
: >
: >Right!  But only if they are referring to Linus Torvalds.  I feel that
: >someone's name should be pronounced as *they themselves* pronounce it.

: Not me.  When I speak English, I pronounce names with the common
: American pronunceations, no matter what.  Louis is always "LOO-iss",
: and Linus is always the way Charlie Brown pronounces it.

Now that's really some attitude. Were you born a peasant
or did somebody teach you how to act like one?

: So, I, like everyone I talk to around here, will keep pronouncing
: Linux as "LIE-nucks".  I'll occasionally mention that it's pronounced
: differently in other languages, just as Louis is pronounced "LOO-ey"
: in French.

: -- 
: Doug DeJulio
: ddj+@cmu.edu

Andrzej Von Chamie Borowiec

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


** 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
******************************
