"On the other hand, even the most ardent Slackware fans would agree that
building a customized Slackware setup for a particular task, saying gaming,
might be tougher because of the tons of configuration needed and manual
dependency resolution. One thing I found on using Slackware is that you
find yourself working much more to get the software you need rather than
actually using that software to do something useful."
http://hari.literaryforums.org/2006/...erfect-distro/

Hey pups, you gonna let this 'nobody' blogger get away with this? Isn't
anyone going to go over there and beat the $#@! out of him? Geez, Louise,
you can't let someone be critical of YOUR Slackware without some kind of
pain and suffering! It's un-Slackwareian!!

And do you think I'd let a Sunday go by without a post that will raise the
dog-pack's blood pressure as well as play 'ken' like a fine violin? :-)

Have a good week everyone (I'm on the road again)... and I hope you enjoy
beatin' the hell out of this guy I found for you!! (And you say I never
contribute anything to the NG!) Raw meat for the dog pack!!! Sic 'em, Dan!!

anc

On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 19:51:50 +0000, ANC wrote:

<snip>

> Hey pups, you gonna let this 'nobody' blogger get away with this? Isn't
> anyone going to go over there and beat the $#@! out of him? Geez,

.....Yawn.....

> Have a good week everyone (I'm on the road again)...

Good. Stay there.

--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951

On Sun, 26 Mar 2006, ANC wrote:
>
> "On the other hand, even the most ardent Slackware fans would agree that
> building a customized Slackware setup for a particular task, saying gaming,
> might be tougher because of the tons of configuration needed and manual
> dependency resolution. One thing I found on using Slackware is that you
> find yourself working much more to get the software you need rather than
> actually using that software to do something useful."
> http://hari.literaryforums.org/2006/...erfect-distro/

(1)

The opinion is blatantly partisan, thus, meaningless.
eg., "why-debian-is-the-near-perfect-distro".

None the less:

(2)

The example problem given (difficult configuration + dependency checking)
is not one I've experienced.

Perhaps different experiences are due to different skills, different
methods, or different goals:

(3)

The example of 'do something useful' as given is, 'gaming'.

BFD. Gaming is not IMHO somthing useful. I use slackware to run web
servers, mail servers, billing application systems. Perhaps the gamer
feels the same about my billing. That's ok.

IMHO it is wise to use the right tool for the job.
The meaning of the 'right' tool depends both on the nature of the job
and the nature of the tool.

If Debian is right for one job and Slackware right for another, then
where is there a problem?

If a tool is designed for one job is applied to another job that it
was not designed for, it is not the failure of the tool, but rather
the application of it. BFD.

I don't recall seeing any statements from Pat or Slackware, Inc. that
Slackware is intended for gaming.

This is similar to ANC's faulty application of market share, which
fails to understand Slackware's intended market.


[...snip...]
>
> anc
>

(4)
the sadly typical ANC package of paranoia and insults,
snipped and ignored.


--
William Hunt, Portland Oregon USA

William Hunt wrote:


> This is similar to ANC's faulty application of market share, which
> fails to understand Slackware's intended market.
>
>

There is an 'intended market' for Slackware? OK, what IS that market? Give
me the demographics of this 'market'..... sex, urban/suburban/rural,
education level, income level, education level, occupation 'class', age,
race, nationality, home-owner/renter, and so on. Whom does Slackware appeal
to? Why? Whom does it not appeal to? Finally what are the personality
profiles of people in this market. How is this market reached? Two years
ago I could have given you all the above but I'm been beaten up so badly
over the issue I've come over to the other side and agree that it obviously
can't be about market share because there is no market! Now you say I'm
wrong?

Anyway, you said it... so prove it... or at least show some anecdotal
evidence about this so-called 'intended market.' And if you don't have that
then just spout your opinion... that's fine too. You're the first person in
three years that has ever used the word "market" with respect to Slackware
Linux, Inc.'s operating system software. Forget about the flames you will
get for going against the pack of wild dogs that seek to dominate this
group. I think there are bunch of us who might be interested in your
analysis. I know I am.

> (4)
> the sadly typical ANC package of paranoia and insults,
> snipped and ignored.

Ignored? You obviously read them... and have commented on them... so you
obviously have not 'ignored' them. Which was good because that was the BEST
part of the troll-post. I snared Admiral Dan (the Village People's navy
man) but I'm terribly disappointed that I didn't lure his other cloaked
collaborator 'ken' ... but I believe he is away on spring break in Florida
drinking Frozen Pina Coladas with buxom blonde college babes. Oh to be 21
again!

anc

ANC <anc@not_to_beadams-blake.not_tobe.com> trolled:

> "On the other hand, even the most ardent Slackware fans would
> agree that building a customized Slackware setup for a particular
> task, saying gaming, might be tougher because of the tons of
> configuration needed and manual dependency resolution. One thing I
> found on using Slackware is that you find yourself working much
> more to get the software you need rather than actually using that
> software to do something useful."
> http://hari.literaryforums.org/2006/...erfect-distro/

That's great, Al. The thing is, most slackware users run slackware
because they are hobbyists. And getting slackware running is their
hobby. They don't actually use it for anything more complex than
usenet/email flaming. Most of these people like solving crossword
puzzles, too, although, some of them aren't very good at that
because they can't read.

cordially, as always,

rm

William Hunt <wjh@prv8.net> trolled:
> On Sun, 26 Mar 2006, ANC wrote:

> > "On the other hand, even the most ardent Slackware fans would
> > agree that building a customized Slackware setup for a
> > particular task, saying gaming, might be tougher because of the
> > tons of configuration needed and manual dependency resolution.
> > One thing I found on using Slackware is that you find yourself
> > working much more to get the software you need rather than
> > actually using that software to do something useful."
> > http://hari.literaryforums.org/2006/...erfect-distro/

> (1)

> The opinion is blatantly partisan, thus, meaningless.
> eg., "why-debian-is-the-near-perfect-distro".

Actually, _your_ opinion is the "blatantly partisan." You haven't
addressed the issue at all.

You're a hobbyist. There is nothing wrong with that. A
professional would never use slackware, but since you're not a
professional, and the assholes you talk to in here are not
professionals, that shouldn't be a problem for any of you.

> None the less:

> (2)

> The example problem given (difficult configuration + dependency
> checking) is not one I've experienced.

That's because you've never tried a professionally setup linux. And
that's ok, because you are a hobbyist. You wouldn't want a
professional setup because that kind of setup is designed to get
running as quickly as possible, with as little fuss as possible. A
professional would never come to this ng to ask hobbyists how to do
things, now would he?

> Perhaps different experiences are due to different skills, different
> methods, or different goals:

That's right. We are talking about the difference between hobbyists
and professionals. You are both building ships. The difference is
that your ships are built in a bottle while the professional builds
ships for the seas. Different skills.

> (3)

> The example of 'do something useful' as given is, 'gaming'.

Games are mostly run on the most professional of all systems and
that is windows. The reason that windows attracts most gamers is
because the games install easily with no fuss. Trying to install a
game more modern than Doom I on a linux system can be an absolute
nightmare.

> BFD. Gaming is not IMHO somthing useful. I use slackware to run web
> servers, mail servers, billing application systems. Perhaps the gamer
> feels the same about my billing. That's ok.

No, you run linux to run simulated servers. And simulated
application systems. But mostly you run linux because you like to
fiddle with shit. It makes you feel useful and intelligent to fix
slackware problems. And that's ok, because you are a hobbyist.

> IMHO it is wise to use the right tool for the job.

If you really were running servers then you wouldn't be running
linux at all, unless of course, you only have a hobbyist's, or
amateur understanding of what it is you are trying to do.

And that's ok. We can't all be professionals.

cordially, as always,

rm

ANC <anc@not_to_beadams-blake.not_tobe.com> trolled:
> William Hunt wrote:

> > This is similar to ANC's faulty application of market share, which
> > fails to understand Slackware's intended market.

> There is an 'intended market' for Slackware? OK, what IS that market? Give
> me the demographics of this 'market'..... sex, urban/suburban/rural,
> education level, income level, education level, occupation 'class', age,
> race, nationality, home-owner/renter, and so on. Whom does Slackware appeal
> to? Why?

Slackware is a hobbyist distro. It appeals to amateurs and
hobbyists. People who run enjoy running slackware are the same
people who build ships in bottles and make remote control cars and
airplanes.

> Whom does it not appeal to?

It doesn't appeal to people who just want to get the system up and
running. It doesn't appeal to people who want an easily
maintainable system. It doesn't appeal to people for whom time is
money. IOW, slackware doesn't appeal to professionals.

> Finally what are the personality profiles of people in this
> market. How is this market reached? Two years ago I could have
> given you all the above but I'm been beaten up so badly over the
> issue I've come over to the other side and agree that it obviously
> can't be about market share because there is no market! Now you
> say I'm wrong?

The average slack user has a community college diploma at best,
although usually they are dropouts, most of whom claim that they
knew more than their instructors and there was no reason for them to
remain in their schools. You have trash like Coward Hicks and Poser
Keller, and most of the rest of the PGP garbage who feel that using
PGP somehow compensates for the lack of a degree hanging on the
wall.

The Sopranos are on. Gotta go.

cordially, as always,

rm

On 2006-03-27, ANC <anc@not_to_beadams-blake.not_tobe.com> wrote:
> There is an 'intended market' for Slackware?

"The Official Release of Slackware Linux by Patrick Volkerding is an
advanced Linux operating system, designed with the twin goals of ease
of use and stability as top priorities. Including the latest popular
software while retaining a sense of tradition, providing simplicity
and ease of use alongside flexibility and power, Slackware brings the
best of all worlds to the table."

"Since its first release in April of 1993, the Slackware Linux Project
has aimed at producing the most "UNIX-like" Linux distribution out there."

Source: http://www.slackware.com/info/

Now, it should not be hard to deduct the intended market from that:
people who want a UNIX-like Linux system that focuses on stability
and simplicity.

> profiles of people in this market. How is this market reached? Two years
> ago I could have given you all the above but I'm been beaten up so badly
> over the issue I've come over to the other side and agree that it obviously
> can't be about market share because there is no market! Now you say I'm
> wrong?

The market seems to be large enough to put food on the table for Pat. And
everybody is happy. The 'intended market' has a UNIX system it likes, Pat
can make a living out of it. What more can we wish for?

BTW., on a more personal note, if you allow me: you mentioned on several
occasions that you are interested in Indian philosophy. From my limited
experience with Yoga I know that harmony and peace are one of the central
values to become a good yoghi. It seems that this newsgroup has a very
negative influence on your peace of mind (since think there is a wild pack
of dogs), and your posts seem to be disturbing to many in this newsgroup.
Wouldn't it be best for all of us if you and AOLS part ways?

This is by no means intended as a personal attack, just a 'trying to be
helpful' note from a fellow traveler of reality.

-- Daniel

Hi,

It's lovely to see my article linked from here. And being described as
a "nobody blogger" is quite a thrilling experience too, since it shows
that I'm now getting popular :-)

It is a very biased opinion, I agree. Nobody needs to agree with me.
It's just my review and opinion on Debian and nothing else.

Feel free to disagree!

Thanks....

Daniel de Kok wrote:

> BTW., on a more personal note, if you allow me: you mentioned on several
> occasions that you are interested in Indian philosophy.

I'm interested in Eastern philosophy and by that I mean non Judeo-Christian
paradigms of belief structure and normative societal structures.

> From my limited
> experience with Yoga I know that harmony and peace are one of the central
> values to become a good yoghi.
(sic)

The key word here is "limited experience." You are right as far as you go,
but you don't seem to understand HOW many of the "old" scriptures (Vedas)
instruct one to get this so-called peace of mind.

I won't go into a treatise on this as it is not my mission to convert anyone
to any one belief structure... but to simply follow my own. And I'm only
familiar with the Bhagavad Gita which is actually a small section of the
much longer Mahabharata.

Like the Christian Bible and all other written belief-texts you can find
verses to support just about any position. However I don't think that
removal of oneself from a source of conflict is a teaching of the TOTAL
Gita, yet I can see how such could be construed if you take some of it out
of context.

So no, I don't take offense at your suggestion and you basing it on "Indian"
philosophy. It would be like me telling a Christian "Would you be 'happier'
if you renounced violence and evangelicism" when we know that for the past
2000 years most of the wars have been fought in the name of Christianity
and that this is a prime motivation of Christian thought. The idea of
Christians or Muslims being 'happy' in a climate that is absent of conflict
would be taking "thou shall not kill" way out of context of both the Old
and New Testaments.

In the Gita, Arjuna WANTS to give up the battle, but he is told by Krishna
that it is his responsibility to fight... but that there is much else that
he needs to do to attain so-called self-realization. You can see a good
summary of the Gita here:

http://hinduwebsite.com/summary.asp
and
http://www.srivaishnava.20m.com/gita/gist.htm



> It seems that this newsgroup has a very
> negative influence on your peace of mind (since think there is a wild pack
> of dogs), and your posts seem to be disturbing to many in this newsgroup.
> Wouldn't it be best for all of us if you and AOLS part ways?
>

Are you asking or are you telling? And how would you know the 'state' (or
non-state) of 'my mind'? Sounds somewhat presumptuous of you, if you ask
me. I don't say the above in anger, just in puzzlement.


> This is by no means intended as a personal attack,

I don't take it as such.

> just a 'trying to be
> helpful' note from a fellow traveler of reality.

Well you obviously have NOT done your research before you reached your above
conclusion. After you have read the Gita and perhaps the total Mahabharata
you might be in a better position to suggest methods for practicing Bhakti
Yoga and we should have this discussion again.

Better yet, you ought to take it up with P.V. as he is far more versed in
Eastern thought than am I. You might invite him to come on to a.o.l.s. and
explain why he does not participate. Perhaps as you say it is because he
believes that it is disruptive to his journey to self-realization. He's
read far more than I have and perhaps he is in a position to support your
position. I, however read the Gita (it's short... you can do it in a few
hours) and it teaches me that we all have certain responsibilities and that
we need to meet them (that is over-simplified) but at the 20,000 foot level
that is part of Krishna's message to Arjuna.

I agree with the following summation. Again I include it NOT to convert
anyone (I could care less what anyone here believes or does not believe)
but to maybe educate on some of the precepts I find important and which I
believe YOUR 'guru' (P.V) also finds important (although I don't for a
minute purport to speak for him on these or any other matters.). Some of
you use the concept of having or attaining "Slack" or "clue". Perhaps some
of what you mean is below. Perhaps not.:

***************
As Arjuna surveyed his opponent just before the war, he noticed countless
relatives, gurus and friends on the opposite side. He realized that only by
killing them would he regain his lost kingdom. Being a sAtvika with pious
qualities, Arjuna felt repulsed by the thought of killing his loved ones.
He felt that to kill them would be a sin, and in his anguish, he laid down
his bow and arrow and refused to fight. He asked Sri Krishna to advise him
of what course would be good for him. Krishna, the well wisher of the whole
universe, took pity on the confused and grief-stricken Arjuna, and unveiled
the Gita to him and directed Arjuna to go ahead with the war which was his
duty as a kshatriya. So the Gita is a shastra, given to clear our confusion
about various aspects of life and to direct us to perform our duties. It is
absolutely relevant to each one of us in this modern world. It does not
talk about something abstract.

Arjuna reveals his anguish at the prospect of battle. The chapter starts
with Dhritarashtra, the father of the Kauravas, asking his messenger
Sanjaya about the happenings in Kurushetra. Sanjaya begins his narration
with the words of the eldest Kaurava Duryodhana as he prepared for the
battle, and then introduces Arjuna and his lamentation of his plight.
Arjuna fears that papa karma caused by his misdeeds will engulf him. He
explains that acharyas who are fit to be honored every day should not be
killed. One cannot build his throne on the altar of his relatives. The
chapter then ends with Arjuna abandoning his bow and arrow and sitting
silently in his chariot.

Krishna uses Arjuna's moral dilemma as a pretext for getting at the root
confusion which Arjuna faces. Arjuna erroneously thinks that he will really
kill Bhishma and others, only because he is confused that the body and the
self (atma) are one and the same. He has not understood that even by
shooting countless arrows at Bhishma, Bhishma's atma cannot be destroyed.
Even if Arjuna stays away from fighting for thousands of years, Bhishma?s
body cannot be saved. The idea is that the body is subject to destruction,
but the atma is eternal.

This is the tattva-jnana (true knowledge of the nature of atma and the body)
which one has to get first. These are explained up to verse 39. Once one
knows the greatness of jivatma, one would certainly long to realise it and
see it as it is. Next, Krishna goes on to explain karma-yoga which is the
means to realise this atma. By practicing karma-yoga, one will be led to
jnana-yoga which is penultimate to atma realisation.

It would be apt here to define karma-yoga and jnana-yoga. Yoga here means
"way" or "path". Karma-yoga is the path of action and jnana-yoga is the
path of knowledge. These paths lead to the goal, which is atma-realisation.

The order given in the second chapter is:

* Basic knowledge about jivatma -- karma-yoga, manas suddhi (one's mind
is cleansed) -- jnana-yoga -- atma realisation. Perform your duty without
fixing your eye on worldly goals. This is the way to jnana-yoga which
ultimately leads to atma-sakshatkara, the vision of the self.
* Karma-yoga -- disciplined performance of religious acts and one's
prescribed ritual duties with three things in mind, or the threefold
sacrifice:
1. kartrtva buddhi tyaga -- do not think you are the doer.
2. mamata tyaga -- do not think that this action is for you or
belongs to you
3. phala tyaga -- do not think or perform karma-yoga for any
objective other than atma-realisation. Every karma has to be performed as a
service to the Lord with an underlying thought that you are his absolute
servant.
* Jnana-yoga -- to meditate on one's atma without any hindrance, by
controlling one's senses and without straying after worldly pleasures.

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

Busy week ahead. But just for you Dan, I'll try to pop in when I can for a
little violin practice :-) But more important WHERE is 'ken'? Spring break?

anc