- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bill Smith

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 16:14:44 -0400 Bob George <mailings02(a)ttlexceeded.com> wrote: > Yes, it was very weird. Unfortunately, he was buddies with the guy who > ran the server, and since it wasn't LUG "official" (sort of like WLUG's > current) he couldn't be de-op'ed. <shaking head> there's more than one way to skin a cat. > > before being allowed onto the 'Net. something BASIC (<ahem> pun > > intended), > > Hmm... am I dating myself when I admit that I remember when computers > actually ran BASIC? <g> we can start a discussion of "i remember when..." statements, but i think it will quickly disintegrate into a pissing contest. ;) > > maybe a test of some sort... "What is the difference between a hard > > drive and a floppy drive? (holding up a 3.5" floppy) Which one is > > THIS?" > > Hold up a 5 1/4" floppy and watch 'em glaze over. :) imagine the look when i show 'em one of my 8" floppies! :) "Huh? I didn't know they made 'em THAT big!" :D > I agree at a general level, but cringe when I think what our dear ol' > government might consider "proper credentials." Visions of lobbyists and > special interests sticking all sorts of propaganda in, politically > correct, sensitive questions, and the like. "RAM" and "hard drive" > deemed hostile, "RBLs" deemed discriminatory, "cache" deemed > discriminatory to the financially challenged. I might fail whatever they > manage to concoct. i try not to put anything past the government, but i really doubt that they would be able to implement any sort of qualification list on computer users at this stage of the Game... they'd have to require the general populace to pass a test to buy a blender... (come to think of it, maybe that wouldn't be a /bad/ thing... <g>) > Then again, maybe I'm just too cynical. They've managed to institute a > series of tests and checks to ensure that anybody taking to our roads is > well-versed in the rules, and able to operate their vehicle properly, right? it's been a while since you drove on Route 128 in rush hour, hasn't it? <gd&r> > > <shrug> some days, i just want to pull out my Apple IIgs and stick > > to THAT. ...then i realize how slow it is, compared to my current > > system. :) > > I do want to get my old Apple (the REAL apple, not that Mac impostor!) > hooked up to my Linux box someday, maybe doing something "useful" like > 'tail -f' on log files. the easiest way i have found for that is to rig a serial connection to the Linux box (serial cable and a null modem) and use the Apple II as a dumb terminal. I've seen getty configurations for getting the Apple to play nice, and it worked like a champ about five years ago, when i played with it... other than that, there are ethernet cards one can buy for about $200 (!), but that's not happening in my house for a long while. i'd /love/ to have the space for GNO/ME, though... it's a unix-ish overlay for GS/OS. :D -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA

April 7, 2004

Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bob George

Martin, Eric wrote: > [...] Worst one is when you ask and aol user for their email addy, > and they tell you HappyGoLucky127 (generally you can just assume the > @aol.com) Erm... there ARE other email systems out there. They're not WRONG, just on today's Internet. - Bob (formerly 75730.2030 on CI$)

April 7, 2004

Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bob George

Bill Smith wrote: > [...] let's see if i got this right: a guy volunteered to design a > website for a LUG and insisted on using M$-specific tools. ummm... Yes, it was very weird. Unfortunately, he was buddies with the guy who ran the server, and since it wasn't LUG "official" (sort of like WLUG's current) he couldn't be de-op'ed. > [...] at the risk of sounding technocratic, i think a person should > have some level of functionality I too advocate human functionality :) > before being allowed onto the 'Net. something BASIC (<ahem> pun > intended), Hmm... am I dating myself when I admit that I remember when computers actually ran BASIC? > maybe a test of some sort... "What is the difference between a hard > drive and a floppy drive? (holding up a 3.5" floppy) Which one is > THIS?" Hold up a 5 1/4" floppy and watch 'em glaze over. :) I agree at a general level, but cringe when I think what our dear ol' government might consider "proper credentials." Visions of lobbyists and special interests sticking all sorts of propaganda in, politically correct, sensitive questions, and the like. "RAM" and "hard drive" deemed hostile, "RBLs" deemed discriminatory, "cache" deemed discriminatory to the financially challenged. I might fail whatever they manage to concoct. Then again, maybe I'm just too cynical. They've managed to institute a series of tests and checks to ensure that anybody taking to our roads is well-versed in the rules, and able to operate their vehicle properly, right? > <shrug> some days, i just want to pull out my Apple IIgs and stick > to THAT. ...then i realize how slow it is, compared to my current > system. :) I do want to get my old Apple (the REAL apple, not that Mac impostor!) hooked up to my Linux box someday, maybe doing something "useful" like 'tail -f' on log files. I could still stand a game of Karateka once in a while. :) - Bob

April 7, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bill Smith

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 09:06:51 -0400 "Martin, Eric" <MartinE(a)worc.k12.ma.us> wrote: > Here Here!!! Granted I've gotten into a debate with a friend of mine and > have slowly came to the conclusion that not everybody needs to know > *everything* about a computer to work one, but directories and applications > are a good start :) Worst one is when you ask and aol user for their email > addy, and they tell you HappyGoLucky127 (generally you can just assume the > @aol.com) I'll take that.... trying to know the why's and wherefore's of a computer before using one is like trying to know the intimate details of how a car works before driving one. all i ask from a user is that s/he know enough about the system they are using so that if i ask "what OS are you using?", i don't get a blank look. (i've gotten a lot of them, believe me.) -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA

April 7, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bill Smith

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 10:59:32 -0400 Bob George <mailings02(a)ttlexceeded.com> wrote: > For our poor little IRC channel, it was particularly bad. This kid had > joined the LUG list, and offered to do all kinds of web development etc. > with the hopes he'd get some free advertising for his "big business > venture." No problem there, but he proceeded to rant on-list about > wanting to use ASP etc., arguing against open-source content management > tools as "boring." let's see if i got this right: a guy volunteered to design a website for a LUG and insisted on using M$-specific tools. ummm... > That carried over to the IRC channel, and he'd essentially scare off any > potential Linux converts with his lousy attitude. that's not Good. > We'd best watch it, or they'll start mandating the equivalent of > seatbelt and helmet laws for computers. I agree that users should be > responsible, but I don't want the government dictating how "safe" > software should be developed. I like the idea of an INFORMED user base. at the risk of sounding technocratic, i think a person should have some level of functionality before being allowed onto the 'Net. something BASIC (<ahem> pun intended), maybe a test of some sort... "What is the difference between a hard drive and a floppy drive? (holding up a 3.5" floppy) Which one is THIS?" <shrug> some days, i just want to pull out my Apple IIgs and stick to THAT. ...then i realize how slow it is, compared to my current system. :) -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA

April 7, 2004

Re: [Wlug] 64 bit architechture

by Karl Hiramoto

my deskdtop has Kernel 2.4.22 and the config has processor options for AMD64. You might be best though with a 2.6.X kernel though I'm running 2.6.3 in gentoo-dev-sources now on my laptop, and it is going very well. > Greetings all; > > Sorry i've not been able to attend the meetings in a while... still trying > to get past some health problems... > > can any one tell me which kernel version would be suitable for a machine > with 64 bit architechture? > > thanx in advance > > dave goss > > assimulation is futile > > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > -- Karl Hiramoto <karl(a)hiramoto.org> Work: 978-425-2090 ext 25 Cell: 508-517-4819 Personal web page: http://karl.hiramoto.org/ AOL IM ID = KarlH420 Yahoo_IM = karl_hiramoto

April 7, 2004

Re: [Wlug] 64 bit architechture

by Gregory Boyce

64 bit architectures have been supported for a rather long time in Linux, depending on the arch. If you're compiling a new kernel, I would suggest the 2.6 series (2.6.5 is the current version). It has a lot of improvements and is much speedier. I'm not sure which 64 bit arch you're talking about, but you may need patches to get the kernel fully stable. There are seperate sets of PPC/PPC64, Alpha and Sparc64 patches. There are probably some out there for ia64 (Itanium) and x86-64 (Athlon64) as well. On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 10:57, David Goss wrote: > Greetings all; > > Sorry i've not been able to attend the meetings in a while... still trying > to get past some health problems... > > can any one tell me which kernel version would be suitable for a machine > with 64 bit architechture? > > thanx in advance > > dave goss > > assimulation is futile > > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 7, 2004

Re: [Wlug] 64 bit architechture

by Gary Hanley

Well the obvious question is, "Which architecture?" I hope it's not Itanic. :-) If it's AMD64, I suspect Gentoo may be preferable. I plan on splurging on the new AMD chip in the near future and have also been trying to decide which distro to use. Any other architecture, sorry, I have no idea. -- Gary On Fri, 2 Apr 2004, David Goss wrote: > can any one tell me which kernel version would be suitable for a machine > with 64 bit architechture?

April 7, 2004

RE: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Martin, Eric

Here Here!!! Granted I've gotten into a debate with a friend of mine and have slowly came to the conclusion that not everybody needs to know *everything* about a computer to work one, but directories and applications are a good start :) Worst one is when you ask and aol user for their email addy, and they tell you HappyGoLucky127 (generally you can just assume the @aol.com) Eric -----Original Message----- From: orbitz(a)ezabel.com [mailto:orbitz@ezabel.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 10:12 AM To: Worcester Linux Users Group Subject: Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere? Having tried to fix many peoples Windows XP installs I find XP very unmanagable. The guts (generally what I need to fix) is so hidden from the user in an attempt to keep up the facade of 'ease of use' it's a PITA to get around just to fix a screwy network connection. How many windows users don't even know what a directory is? I don't call that ease of use, merely keeping them ignorant. It's a sad state of computer use:) On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 09:51:56 -0400 Bill Smith <wsmith(a)chezsmith.com> wrote: > On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 08:43:57 -0400 > Bob George <mailings02(a)ttlexceeded.com> wrote: > > > Hey, at least there's not some kid constantly griping that Windows > > was > > so much easier (what happened to the Phoenix LUG channel - now #plugaz). > > I often find myself sighing at the "Windows is easier" crowd. i want > to educate them to what is available to them, to show them that > "easier" does not necessarily mean "best for the job". Easier might > be just that (easy), but it sometimes means making the wrong choice. > > If a person wants to favor an operating system simply because it's > "easy", then that person deserves all the resulting heartache s/he > gets. often, the person looking for "easy" will think "ease of use" > instead of "ease to get going without immediate worry"... If that > became a major concern instead, I think we would see a decided shift > towards unix variants. Sure, Win* might be easy to USE, but if you > want it networked, there's a bit of know-how and effort involved to > make it SECURE. (that could probably be said for any OS, but it is > more true for Win* than for many others.) > > > A lot of LUG channels are largely idle, but I tend to lurk and > > occasionally there are some gems worth waiting for. > > :) granted. can't argue that one. > > -- > > William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com > Fall River, MA > _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 7, 2004

Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?/Windows

by doug waud

Hi (Can't resist my two bits worth! :-) ) >>Hey, at least there's not some kid constantly griping that Windows was >>so much easier If it is so "easy", why is it that PC Magazine has been able to generate pages and pages of how to fix things in Windows, every issue for 10 to 15 years? :-) doug

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Keith Wright

> From: "Charles R. Anderson" <cra(a)WPI.EDU> > > Yeah there is this one called Eliza...you should talk to it > sometime... You seem to be interested in Eliza. Would you like me to help you to should talk to it sometime...? -- Clippy

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Jeff Moyer

==> Regarding [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?; Bob George <mailings02(a)ttlexceeded.com> adds: mailings02> Keller, Tim wrote: >> I generally find that linux irc channels fall into two categories. >> >> 1. Neophytes + Zealots (of windows and linux) duking it out online >> 2. Elitists discussing highly esoteric topics such as altering disk >> timing performance via hot kernel patches to /proc/kmem mailings02> 3. "Good morning" and "how's the weather?" :) 4. Newbie questions galore. -phro

April 6, 2004

Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bob George

Keller, Tim wrote: > I generally find that linux irc channels fall into two categories. > > 1. Neophytes + Zealots (of windows and linux) duking it out online > 2. Elitists discussing highly esoteric topics such as altering disk timing > performance via hot kernel patches to /proc/kmem 3. "Good morning" and "how's the weather?" :) > I'll take category 2 any day, generally through lurking I'll learn > something. I'm mostly lurking trying to get a feel for the local community. So far, I get the feeling everyone's still hibernating from winter. Hopefully it'll pick up ... some. - Bob

April 6, 2004

RE: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Keller, Tim

I generally find that linux irc channels fall into two categories. 1. Neophytes + Zealots (of windows and linux) duking it out online 2. Elitists discussing highly esoteric topics such as altering disk timing performance via hot kernel patches to /proc/kmem I'll take category 2 any day, generally through lurking I'll learn something. Tim. -----Original Message----- From: Bob George [mailto:mailings02@ttlexceeded.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 11:00 AM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere? Bill Smith wrote: > [...] I often find myself sighing at the "Windows is easier" crowd. > i want to educate them to what is available to them, to show them > that "easier" does not necessarily mean "best for the job". Easier > might be just that (easy), but it sometimes means making the wrong > choice. For our poor little IRC channel, it was particularly bad. This kid had joined the LUG list, and offered to do all kinds of web development etc. with the hopes he'd get some free advertising for his "big business venture." No problem there, but he proceeded to rant on-list about wanting to use ASP etc., arguing against open-source content management tools as "boring." That carried over to the IRC channel, and he'd essentially scare off any potential Linux converts with his lousy attitude. > If a person wants to favor an operating system simply because it's > "easy", then that person deserves all the resulting heartache s/he > gets. often, the person looking for "easy" will think "ease of use" > instead of "ease to get going without immediate worry"... There was a great post a few years back (forgot which list) comparing web development using front page to the (original, good) Matrix movie precept. It got into the "warm, wet, comfortable goo" of FP, and how long and painful it was extricating himself and his code. Although it fit apple better in years previous, I think "Freedom From Choice" is what a lot of people want (with apologies to Devo). > If that > became a major concern instead, I think we would see a decided shift > towards unix variants. Sure, Win* might be easy to USE, but if you > want it networked, there's a bit of know-how and effort involved to > make it SECURE. (that could probably be said for any OS, but it is > more true for Win* than for many others.) We'd best watch it, or they'll start mandating the equivalent of seatbelt and helmet laws for computers. I agree that users should be responsible, but I don't want the government dictating how "safe" software should be developed. I like the idea of an INFORMED user base. - Bob _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 6, 2004

Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bob George

Bill Smith wrote: > [...] I often find myself sighing at the "Windows is easier" crowd. > i want to educate them to what is available to them, to show them > that "easier" does not necessarily mean "best for the job". Easier > might be just that (easy), but it sometimes means making the wrong > choice. For our poor little IRC channel, it was particularly bad. This kid had joined the LUG list, and offered to do all kinds of web development etc. with the hopes he'd get some free advertising for his "big business venture." No problem there, but he proceeded to rant on-list about wanting to use ASP etc., arguing against open-source content management tools as "boring." That carried over to the IRC channel, and he'd essentially scare off any potential Linux converts with his lousy attitude. > If a person wants to favor an operating system simply because it's > "easy", then that person deserves all the resulting heartache s/he > gets. often, the person looking for "easy" will think "ease of use" > instead of "ease to get going without immediate worry"... There was a great post a few years back (forgot which list) comparing web development using front page to the (original, good) Matrix movie precept. It got into the "warm, wet, comfortable goo" of FP, and how long and painful it was extricating himself and his code. Although it fit apple better in years previous, I think "Freedom From Choice" is what a lot of people want (with apologies to Devo). > If that > became a major concern instead, I think we would see a decided shift > towards unix variants. Sure, Win* might be easy to USE, but if you > want it networked, there's a bit of know-how and effort involved to > make it SECURE. (that could probably be said for any OS, but it is > more true for Win* than for many others.) We'd best watch it, or they'll start mandating the equivalent of seatbelt and helmet laws for computers. I agree that users should be responsible, but I don't want the government dictating how "safe" software should be developed. I like the idea of an INFORMED user base. - Bob

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by orbitz＠ezabel.com

Having tried to fix many peoples Windows XP installs I find XP very unmanagable. The guts (generally what I need to fix) is so hidden from the user in an attempt to keep up the facade of 'ease of use' it's a PITA to get around just to fix a screwy network connection. How many windows users don't even know what a directory is? I don't call that ease of use, merely keeping them ignorant. It's a sad state of computer use:) On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 09:51:56 -0400 Bill Smith <wsmith(a)chezsmith.com> wrote: > On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 08:43:57 -0400 > Bob George <mailings02(a)ttlexceeded.com> wrote: > > > Hey, at least there's not some kid constantly griping that Windows was > > so much easier (what happened to the Phoenix LUG channel - now #plugaz). > > I often find myself sighing at the "Windows is easier" crowd. i want to > educate them to what is available to them, to show them that "easier" does not > necessarily mean "best for the job". Easier might be just that (easy), but it > sometimes means making the wrong choice. > > If a person wants to favor an operating system simply because it's "easy", > then that person deserves all the resulting heartache s/he gets. often, the > person looking for "easy" will think "ease of use" instead of "ease to get > going without immediate worry"... If that became a major concern instead, I > think we would see a decided shift towards unix variants. Sure, Win* might be > easy to USE, but if you want it networked, there's a bit of know-how and > effort involved to make it SECURE. (that could probably be said for any OS, > but it is more true for Win* than for many others.) > > > A lot of LUG channels are largely idle, but I tend to lurk and > > occasionally there are some gems worth waiting for. > > :) granted. can't argue that one. > > -- > > William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com > Fall River, MA >

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bill Smith

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 08:43:57 -0400 Bob George <mailings02(a)ttlexceeded.com> wrote: > Hey, at least there's not some kid constantly griping that Windows was > so much easier (what happened to the Phoenix LUG channel - now #plugaz). I often find myself sighing at the "Windows is easier" crowd. i want to educate them to what is available to them, to show them that "easier" does not necessarily mean "best for the job". Easier might be just that (easy), but it sometimes means making the wrong choice. If a person wants to favor an operating system simply because it's "easy", then that person deserves all the resulting heartache s/he gets. often, the person looking for "easy" will think "ease of use" instead of "ease to get going without immediate worry"... If that became a major concern instead, I think we would see a decided shift towards unix variants. Sure, Win* might be easy to USE, but if you want it networked, there's a bit of know-how and effort involved to make it SECURE. (that could probably be said for any OS, but it is more true for Win* than for many others.) > A lot of LUG channels are largely idle, but I tend to lurk and > occasionally there are some gems worth waiting for. :) granted. can't argue that one. -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA

April 6, 2004

Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bob George

Bill Smith wrote: > [...] <shrug> Chuck's right, though. I've popped in a couple times > since he told us about this channel, and there is next to no traffic > whatsoever. Apparently Chuck leaves his IRC client on to monitor > traffic levels there, 'cause he wasn't even talking with me when i > joined in. (no snide comments from the peanut gallery!! <g>) Hey, at least there's not some kid constantly griping that Windows was so much easier (what happened to the Phoenix LUG channel - now #plugaz). A lot of LUG channels are largely idle, but I tend to lurk and occasionally there are some gems worth waiting for. - Bob (bobstro)

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bill Smith

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 18:40:13 -0400 "Charles R. Anderson" <cra(a)WPI.EDU> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 05:50:18PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: > > Chuck, you sit on irc channels by yourself? Doesn't that kind of defeat > > the purpose? Or do you have bots to talk to? > > Yeah there is this one called Eliza...you should talk to it > sometime... ayuh... Eliza... she's been my best friend since high school... <sniffle> she's the only one that /truly/ understands... :D -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bill Smith

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 17:50:18 -0400 Jeff Moyer <jmoyer(a)redhat.com> wrote: > cra> irc.freenode.net > > >> wlug > > cra> I discovered this about a year ago, and it was being (rarely) used by > cra> the Western Linux Users Group: > > cra> http://www.westernlug.org > ... > cra> There hasn't been any activity on the channel, and I have been its > cra> only joined member for many many months now. I say we start using it > > Chuck, you sit on irc channels by yourself? Doesn't that kind of defeat > the purpose? Or do you have bots to talk to? <shrug> Chuck's right, though. I've popped in a couple times since he told us about this channel, and there is next to no traffic whatsoever. Apparently Chuck leaves his IRC client on to monitor traffic levels there, 'cause he wasn't even talking with me when i joined in. (no snide comments from the peanut gallery!! <g>) -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Charles R. Anderson

On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 05:50:18PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: > Chuck, you sit on irc channels by yourself? Doesn't that kind of defeat > the purpose? Or do you have bots to talk to? Yeah there is this one called Eliza...you should talk to it sometime...

April 5, 2004

Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Jeff Moyer

==> Regarding Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?; "Charles R. Anderson" <cra(a)WPI.EDU> adds: cra> On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 05:20:56PM -0500, Bob George wrote: >> Just wondering if there's a WLUG IRC channel or similar about? cra> irc.freenode.net >> wlug cra> I discovered this about a year ago, and it was being (rarely) used by cra> the Western Linux Users Group: cra> http://www.westernlug.org cra> There hasn't been any activity on the channel, and I have been its cra> only joined member for many many months now. I say we start using it Chuck, you sit on irc channels by yourself? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose? Or do you have bots to talk to? ;-P -phro

April 5, 2004

Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Charles R. Anderson

On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 05:20:56PM -0500, Bob George wrote: > Just wondering if there's a WLUG IRC channel or similar about? irc.freenode.net #wlug I discovered this about a year ago, and it was being (rarely) used by the Western Linux Users Group: http://www.westernlug.org There hasn't been any activity on the channel, and I have been its only joined member for many many months now. I say we start using it for ourselves :) Seriously, if there is enough interest I can ask these folks to give us control over the channel....

April 2, 2004

Re: [Wlug] question

by Charles R. Anderson

On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 10:53:16AM -0500, Charles R. Anderson wrote: > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 03:21:32PM -0400, John Sawyer wrote: > > not sure if ive asked this, but i am unsure of how to uninstall > > something taht i have compiled in, such as gaim, through a .tar.gz ... Timewarp! This question was originally asked on October 24, 2000, but the OP had their clock set to July 23, 2012 so when I sorted my folder by date I thought it was new...

April 2, 2004

WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bob George

Just wondering if there's a WLUG IRC channel or similar about? - Bob

April 2, 2004