Prove That You Know GNU/Linux

[F Russell]

I do not use that abomination called "systemd."

I use the traditional boot scripts that are still enshrined at
Linux From Scratch.

Gentoo updated the "shadow" package from 4.8 to 4.9.

As a consequence, my system would boot but it would ask
for a password.

What the friggin' fuck?

I could not proceed and faced being locked out of my own
GNU/Linux system.

My inittab file contains the entry for system start:

# Run gettys in standard runlevels
1:2345:respawn:/bin/login -f root

This should automatically log me in as "root" user.

This has worked for many, many years but suddenly it asks
me for a fucking password. What the friggin' fuck???!!!

I solved the issue is less than 40 minutes (I had to first boot
with systemrescue USB).

What is the solution?

If you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then you will not have
much difficulty.

However, if you are a fucking dilettante user of Ubuntu/Mint
then you won't have a clue.

Therefore, unless you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then
please the get the fuck out.

[Branimir Maksimovic]

Post by F Russell
I do not use that abomination called "systemd."
I use the traditional boot scripts that are still enshrined at
Linux From Scratch.
Gentoo updated the "shadow" package from 4.8 to 4.9.
As a consequence, my system would boot but it would ask
for a password.
What the friggin' fuck?
I could not proceed and faced being locked out of my own
GNU/Linux system.
# Run gettys in standard runlevels
1:2345:respawn:/bin/login -f root
This should automatically log me in as "root" user.
This has worked for many, many years but suddenly it asks
me for a fucking password. What the friggin' fuck???!!!
I solved the issue is less than 40 minutes (I had to first boot
with systemrescue USB).
What is the solution?

Go play with your VM, live us rest to spend time on more usefull things..
BTW i started carrier as Unix admin on Motorola worsktations....
Have you ever set up UUCP on dial up?
Have you set up serial central for dumb unix terminals compatible with vt100?
Have you ever made termcap for new terminal?

Post by F Russell
If you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then you will not have
much difficulty.
However, if you are a fucking dilettante user of Ubuntu/Mint
then you won't have a clue.
Therefore, unless you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then
please the get the fuck out.

Linux is for pussies :P

[F Russell]

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
Linux is for pussies :P

Translation:

Duh... I don't fucking know.

I have bypassed the greatest OS in the history of mankind
for the pseudo-convenience of some inferior commercial
product.

End of translation.

But GNU/Linux continues to fuel the computing intelligentsia
in ways that the common idiot, like you, could never fathom.

Hail Linux!

Hail GNU and the FSF!

Hail Stallman!

And fuck all the pathetically ignorant peons that can only utilize the
commercial trash.

[John McCue]

Post by Branimir Maksimovic

Post by F Russell
I do not use that abomination called "systemd."

Go play with your VM, live us rest to spend time on more usefull
things.. BTW i started carrier as Unix admin on Motorola
worsktations.... Have you ever set up UUCP on dial up?

Attempted that and failed, that was using Taylor UUCP
which was suppose to be "easy". I ended up using
Kermit with dial back.

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
Have you set up serial central for dumb unix terminals
compatible with vt100?

yes, but only for 2 or 3 terms

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
Have you ever made termcap for new terminal?

termcap was nice, I still do not like termios. But I
only cloned and made simple mods for terminals not
supported by the included termcap

<snip>

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by F Russell
However, if you are a fucking dilettante user of Ubuntu/Mint
then you won't have a clue.

SOME of us USE linux as a tool, like we use a car to get to places.

If you are simply interested in tinkering with the engine, and polishing
the tailpipes, you can fuck off.

[F Russell]

Post by The Natural Philosopher
SOME of us USE linux as a tool, like we use a car to get to places.

A very poor analogy that has been adduced merely to bolster a very
weak counter-argument.

One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
understands completely the operation of that thing.

But how can I even use GNU/Linux if I can't log on to my own system?

The solution:

Login info is contained, at least on a sane, non-systemd system, in
the files /etc/login/access and /etc/login.defs.

The upgrade to shadow-4.9 included, without warning, some extra
lines in login.defs:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#
# Prevents an empty password field to be interpreted as "no authentication
# required".
# Set to "yes" to prevent for all accounts
# Set to "superuser" to prevent for UID 0 / root (default)
# Set to "no" to not prevent for any account (dangerous, historical default)

PREVENT_NO_AUTH superuser
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dangerous? To what idiot?

Setting "PREVENT_NO_AUTH = no" allowed me to log on to my own
fucking system.

The point is undeniable:

GNU/Linux developers have gone insane over "security" and have
totally overlooked the fact that a LOT of users operate personal
workstations that are totally exempt of such idiotic security concerns.

I wasted about an hour of my life diagnosing and fixing a problem
that stems from the inane security madness of distro developers.

All I can say is "what the fuck next?"

[Snit]

Post by F Russell

Post by The Natural Philosopher
SOME of us USE linux as a tool, like we use a car to get to places.

A very poor analogy that has been adduced merely to bolster a very
weak counter-argument.
One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
understands completely the operation of that thing.

Are you an expert on the combustion engine?

[Andreas Kohlbach]

(followup to advocacy refused)

Post by F Russell
One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
understands completely the operation of that thing.

Absolutely false.
Millions of efficient drivers know next to nothing about their
vehicle's
engines and can not do any repair on them.

While cars today are more or less computers on wheels some (most?)
drivers today cannot perform the easiest tasks.

Some years ago I helped a neighbor to move something with his can and
noticed a warning on the display (heck, in the old days we had just a
lamp coming on which was probably not even an LED yet) to check the
oil. I asked him if he noticed. He said something that he had but always
forgets to pay a visit to the shop. Later I checked it and the level was
low indeed. Checked the manual (amazing cars today have them not just a
single page leaflet telling you to check Google for something [1]) what oil
the car needed. We filled up at the gas station and the warning
vanished. I wonder how much it would had cost him to have the shop taken
care of it.

True. Manuals in the 50's told you how to adjust the valves.
Now they tell you not to drink the battery fluid.

Yes, first adjust the valves, then it's safe to drink the battery fluid. ;-)

X'post and F'up2 comp.os.linux.advocacy.

[1] If the car runs on Linux it might instead point to the man page - to
get a little more ontopic. ;-)

[Siri Cruise]

Only biblically.

[Charlie Gibbs]

Post by Andreas Kohlbach

(followup to advocacy refused)

Post by F Russell
One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
understands completely the operation of that thing.

Absolutely false.
Millions of efficient drivers know next to nothing about their
vehicle's
engines and can not do any repair on them.

While cars today are more or less computers on wheels some (most?)
drivers today cannot perform the easiest tasks.
Some years ago I helped a neighbor to move something with his can and
noticed a warning on the display (heck, in the old days we had just a
lamp coming on which was probably not even an LED yet) to check the
oil. I asked him if he noticed. He said something that he had but always
forgets to pay a visit to the shop. Later I checked it and the level was
low indeed. Checked the manual (amazing cars today have them not just a
single page leaflet telling you to check Google for something [1]) what
oil the car needed. We filled up at the gas station and the warning
vanished. I wonder how much it would had cost him to have the shop taken
care of it.

Probably less than they'd charge if he ran it until it seized...

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by Charlie Gibbs

Post by Andreas Kohlbach

(followup to advocacy refused)

Post by F Russell
One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
understands completely the operation of that thing.

Absolutely false.
Millions of efficient drivers know next to nothing about their
vehicle's
engines and can not do any repair on them.

While cars today are more or less computers on wheels some (most?)
drivers today cannot perform the easiest tasks.
Some years ago I helped a neighbor to move something with his can and
noticed a warning on the display (heck, in the old days we had just a
lamp coming on which was probably not even an LED yet) to check the
oil. I asked him if he noticed. He said something that he had but always
forgets to pay a visit to the shop. Later I checked it and the level was
low indeed. Checked the manual (amazing cars today have them not just a
single page leaflet telling you to check Google for something [1]) what
oil the car needed. We filled up at the gas station and the warning
vanished. I wonder how much it would had cost him to have the shop taken
care of it.

Probably less than they'd charge if he ran it until it seized...

some companies used to run their car fleets by buying new, and selling a
year later - with 100,000 miles on the clock and no service record
whatsoever. They didn't even bother to check the oil.

[F Russell]

Absolutely false.
Millions of efficient drivers know next to nothing about their
vehicle's
engines and can not do any repair on them.

WTF??!! We are "discussing" computer operating systems here
(I would hope) and not cars.

A computer is a general purpose machine. IOW, it does nothing
until it is programmed to do something.

The issue with GNU/Linux is simple: who the fuck does the
programming?

The popular distros, like M$ Windows, think that it is THEY who
do the programming, i.e. make decisions for the user.

I, and many others, emphasize that it is the USER that does
the programming and makes the decisions.

If the user needs help, then let him go to M$/Apphole.

GNU/Linux was never intended for such an unsophisticated
animal.

All who disagree belong in the stables of M$/Apphole.

[TJ]

Post by Andreas Kohlbach
(heck, in the old days we had just a
lamp coming on which was probably not even an LED yet)

In the truly old days, we didn't have any lamps. We had mechanical
analog gauges. Oil pressure was one of them, coolant (we called it
"water" back then) temperature and an ammeter were others.

TJ

[F Russell]

Post by The Natural Philosopher
SOME of us USE linux as a tool, like we use a car to get to places.

A very poor analogy that has been adduced merely to bolster a very
weak counter-argument.

One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
understands completely the operation of that thing.

But how can I even use GNU/Linux if I can't log on to my own system?

The solution:

Login info is contained, at least on a sane, non-systemd system, in
the files /etc/login/access and /etc/login.defs.

The upgrade to shadow-4.9 included, without warning, some extra
lines in login.defs:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#
# Prevents an empty password field to be interpreted as "no authentication
# required".
# Set to "yes" to prevent for all accounts
# Set to "superuser" to prevent for UID 0 / root (default)
# Set to "no" to not prevent for any account (dangerous, historical default)

PREVENT_NO_AUTH superuser
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dangerous? To what idiot?

Setting "PREVENT_NO_AUTH = no" allowed me to log on to my own
fucking system.

The point is undeniable:

GNU/Linux developers have gone insane over "security" and have
totally overlooked the fact that a LOT of users operate personal
workstations that are totally exempt of such idiotic security concerns.

I wasted about an hour of my life diagnosing and fixing a problem
that stems from the inane security madness of distro developers.

All I can say is "what the fuck next?"

[ray]

Post by F Russell
I do not use that abomination called "systemd."
I use the traditional boot scripts that are still enshrined at
Linux From Scratch.
Gentoo updated the "shadow" package from 4.8 to 4.9.
As a consequence, my system would boot but it would ask
for a password.
What the friggin' fuck?
I could not proceed and faced being locked out of my own
GNU/Linux system.
# Run gettys in standard runlevels
1:2345:respawn:/bin/login -f root
This should automatically log me in as "root" user.
This has worked for many, many years but suddenly it asks
me for a fucking password. What the friggin' fuck???!!!
I solved the issue is less than 40 minutes (I had to first boot
with systemrescue USB).
What is the solution?
If you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then you will not have
much difficulty.
However, if you are a fucking dilettante user of Ubuntu/Mint
then you won't have a clue.
Therefore, unless you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then
please the get the fuck out.

One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
everyone has to start somewhere.

[DFS]

Post by ray
One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
everyone has to start somewhere.

Even raytards?

[F Russell]

Post by ray
One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
everyone has to start somewhere.

I thank you for your sincere response.

However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.

This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs. The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.

My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work. The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.

My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

[DFS]

Post by F Russell

Post by ray
One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
everyone has to start somewhere.

I thank you for your sincere response.

Yeah, he sincerely labeled you a total jackass, which you are.

He wanted to say total fucking jackass but he's more courteous than you
deserve.

Post by F Russell
However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.
This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs. The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.
My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work. The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

What's up with the less-condescending-than-usual tone?


It's not a real Feeb post without your inane screeching (hypocritically
posted via a common-man GUI app of course.).

[SilverSlimer]

Post by F Russell

Post by ray
One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
everyone has to start somewhere.

I thank you for your sincere response.
However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.
This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs. The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.
My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work. The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

The funny thing is that you're not actually wrong. GNU/Linux should
indeed cater to the hardcore so as to stop appearing alluring to the
people who are looking for an alternative to Windows or MacOS. If it's
clear, from the very beginning, that it's not a suitable replacement or
that it requires constant use of a manual, people are less likely to be
tempted to replace whatever it is that they're using and those people
might spare themselves some headaches.

Of course, this will also embolden both Microsoft and Apple to force
some of their stupider decisions onto the user.

[RonB]

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by F Russell

Post by ray
One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
everyone has to start somewhere.

I thank you for your sincere response.
However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.
This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs. The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.
My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work. The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

The funny thing is that you're not actually wrong. GNU/Linux should
indeed cater to the hardcore so as to stop appearing alluring to the
people who are looking for an alternative to Windows or MacOS. If it's
clear, from the very beginning, that it's not a suitable replacement or
that it requires constant use of a manual, people are less likely to be
tempted to replace whatever it is that they're using and those people
might spare themselves some headaches.

And I think anyone should do whatever they want with Linux. (And since it's
open source and free, they can.) I'll never be sorry that I replaced Windows
with Linux 15 years ago, or so. I can't even imagine being forced to use
Windows or a Mac now. Basically crap in my estimation.

Choice is good.

Post by SilverSlimer
Of course, this will also embolden both Microsoft and Apple to force
some of their stupider decisions onto the user.

Like that would be something new?

[chrisv]

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

The funny thing is that you're not actually wrong.

What's funny is that Fabian is actually wrong, and "Slimer" is
stupid-enough to agree with him.

Is "Slimer" ever right, about *anything*?

Post by SilverSlimer
GNU/Linux should
indeed cater to the hardcore so as to stop appearing alluring to the
people who are looking for an alternative to Windows or MacOS.

These idiots underestimate the importance of a viable alternative to
the "big two", even if only a tiny percentage of "normal people" use
it.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by F Russell

Post by ray
One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
everyone has to start somewhere.

I thank you for your sincere response.
However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.
This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs. The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.
My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work. The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

Oh put a sock in it. Linux is in the end just a piece of code. It runs
on everything from a consumer router or a smart phone to a supercomputer.

I guess we should force all android users to use a command line.

Desktop environments are just one facet of its use.

And you have no right to attempt to force people not to use them, nor
developers not to develop them.

Who do you think you are? Bill Gates?

[SilverSlimer]

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by F Russell

Post by ray
One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
everyone has to start somewhere.

I thank you for your sincere response.
However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.
This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs.  The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.
My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work.  The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

Oh put a sock in it. Linux is in the end just a piece of code. It runs
on everything from a consumer router  or a smart phone to a supercomputer.
I guess we should force all android users to use a command line.
Desktop environments are just one facet of its use.
And you have no right to attempt to force people not to use them, nor
developers not to develop them.
Who do you think you are? Bill Gates?

Fabian Russell is about as influential as one of Bill Gates' poops, to
be honest. He's like a raving homeless person who's raving about the
government. He's not wrong though: if Linux were to cater to just the
highly technical, those who aren't prepared to put in the work won't
adopt it and then realize how their life was ruined. Anyone who DOES use
it will know that it's like driving a manual transmission when everyone
else is using an automatic.

[chrisv]

But just keep using Windows if that makes you happy (as long as you don't
have license issues)

Microsoft is actually far more loose about licensing than it used to
be. You can even install Win10 with no license and run it that way
indefinitely.

Obviously, they have figured-out the modern money-making scheme
pioneered by Google, and it doesn't require "selling software". (At
least, not your own software.)

[SilverSlimer]

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by F Russell

Post by ray
One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
everyone has to start somewhere.

I thank you for your sincere response.
However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.
This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs.  The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.
My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work.  The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

Oh put a sock in it. Linux is in the end just a piece of code. It runs
on everything from a consumer router  or a smart phone to a supercomputer.
I guess we should force all android users to use a command line.
Desktop environments are just one facet of its use.
And you have no right to attempt to force people not to use them, nor
developers not to develop them.
Who do you think you are? Bill Gates?

Fabian Russell is about as influential as one of Bill Gates' poops, to
be honest. He's like a raving homeless person who's raving about the
government. He's not wrong though: if Linux were to cater to just the
highly technical, those who aren't prepared to put in the work won't
adopt it and then realize how their life was ruined. Anyone who DOES use
it will know that it's like driving a manual transmission when everyone
else is using an automatic.

I like manual transmissions, but your Linux/Windows analogy is false. Linux
Mint Mate's desktop is more customizable and more efficient than Windows.
Getting around in Windows is a pain in the butt.
But just keep using Windows if that makes you happy (as long as you don't
have license issues)... and I'll keep using the Linux Desktop because that
DEFINITELY makes me happy.
Non-problem solved.

I figure that it should have any kind of license issues at this point
since I'm using the installation of Windows which came with the device
and simply upgraded it to Pro with the license I had... which was
validated and upgraded to a legitimate Windows 11 Pro license. If it
somehow screws up at _this_ point then these guys are seriously not
trying anymore.

[Andreas Kohlbach]

Post by F Russell
However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.

Disagreeing here. Almost none of today's technologies are for the common
man, if he needed to service it. The example of cars was already
mentioned. But while they can use it they might seek help if problems
occur.

Most Windows users today are helpless if it doesn't boot. That's why
services (or friendly neighbors like us geeks here ;-) exist to solve a
problem.

Post by F Russell
This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs. The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.
My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work. The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.

But they do. Another problem here is when a user "knows" a particular
operating system already he provably will have a problem to adjust to a
different OS.

Talking about neighbors, my 70 year old bought his first computer a few
years ago to have contact to friends and relatives abroad. Soon he
installed malware on Windows. Knowing that I'm kind of savvy when it
comes to computers he asked me for help. Knowing that malware removal (or
a reinstallation) would only be a temporary "solution" I said I'll only
help for free (otherwise want to get paid every time he asks for help) if
he agrees to use Linux. He had no idea what Linux is, but agreed. Been
years now I installed him Linux (am also his admin) and he is still happy
with it. Linux (or Windows or any other operating system) is just a
tool. Everybody can use it.

Not to forget that Android runs on Linux. 99% of the users don't know or
care about it as long as Facebook and other apps work. And they don't
need to.

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

FUD!

[RonB]

Post by Andreas Kohlbach

Post by F Russell
However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.

Disagreeing here. Almost none of today's technologies are for the common
man, if he needed to service it. The example of cars was already
mentioned. But while they can use it they might seek help if problems
occur.
Most Windows users today are helpless if it doesn't boot. That's why
services (or friendly neighbors like us geeks here ;-) exist to solve a
problem.

Post by F Russell
This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs. The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.
My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work. The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.

But they do. Another problem here is when a user "knows" a particular
operating system already he provably will have a problem to adjust to a
different OS.
Talking about neighbors, my 70 year old bought his first computer a few
years ago to have contact to friends and relatives abroad. Soon he
installed malware on Windows. Knowing that I'm kind of savvy when it
comes to computers he asked me for help. Knowing that malware removal (or
a reinstallation) would only be a temporary "solution" I said I'll only
help for free (otherwise want to get paid every time he asks for help) if
he agrees to use Linux. He had no idea what Linux is, but agreed. Been
years now I installed him Linux (am also his admin) and he is still happy
with it. Linux (or Windows or any other operating system) is just a
tool. Everybody can use it.
Not to forget that Android runs on Linux. 99% of the users don't know or
care about it as long as Facebook and other apps work. And they don't
need to.

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

FUD!

Yep. And who really cares what Russell thinks? It's not like all the Linux
desktop developers are going to read some nobody's opinion and say... oh, we
need to stop developing Gnome, or KDE, or Mate or Xfce or... because someone
name Russell doesn't like desktops on Linux!

[b***@sdf.org]

Post by RonB
Yep. And who really cares what Russell thinks? It's not like all the Linux
desktop developers are going to read some nobody's opinion and say... oh, we
need to stop developing Gnome, or KDE, or Mate or Xfce or... because someone
name Russell doesn't like desktops on Linux!

same thing can be applied to people reguritating propagandized screed from
wingnut kooksites and social media. it serves exactly zero purpose other
than being, at best, a bit of entertainment.

it has been over a decade since i last used Usenet and read
comp.os.linux.advocacy. it used to be a lively group and despite all the
banter and trolling at the time one could glean lots of
insightful informtion out of it. now it's pretty much just a cesspit 90%
full of utter nonsense.

[chrisv]

Post by b***@sdf.org
it has been over a decade since i last used Usenet and read
comp.os.linux.advocacy. it used to be a lively group and despite all the
banter and trolling at the time one could glean lots of
insightful informtion out of it. now it's pretty much just a cesspit 90%
full of utter nonsense.

Yeah, but that's OK, because the OS wars are over, and Linux has won.
8)

I know you were being funny there, but I actually think there's a very
real sense in which Linux did win the OS wars - that is, it isn't very
widely used as a desktop OS, but it has stayed relevant as one, and
has become a very viable alternative to the commercial OSes. I mean,
if the expectation was that everyone would be running it, that's
simply unrealistic, but when you see that even Microsoft is getting
into Linux pretty heavily, it's clear that Linux has made its place in
the desktop OS industry.

Exactly right, and that's considering only the "desktop". Linux
dominates almost everywhere else.

[SilverSlimer]

Post by RonB

Post by Andreas Kohlbach

Post by F Russell
However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.

Disagreeing here. Almost none of today's technologies are for the common
man, if he needed to service it. The example of cars was already
mentioned. But while they can use it they might seek help if problems
occur.
Most Windows users today are helpless if it doesn't boot. That's why
services (or friendly neighbors like us geeks here ;-) exist to solve a
problem.

Post by F Russell
This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs. The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.
My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work. The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.

But they do. Another problem here is when a user "knows" a particular
operating system already he provably will have a problem to adjust to a
different OS.
Talking about neighbors, my 70 year old bought his first computer a few
years ago to have contact to friends and relatives abroad. Soon he
installed malware on Windows. Knowing that I'm kind of savvy when it
comes to computers he asked me for help. Knowing that malware removal (or
a reinstallation) would only be a temporary "solution" I said I'll only
help for free (otherwise want to get paid every time he asks for help) if
he agrees to use Linux. He had no idea what Linux is, but agreed. Been
years now I installed him Linux (am also his admin) and he is still happy
with it. Linux (or Windows or any other operating system) is just a
tool. Everybody can use it.
Not to forget that Android runs on Linux. 99% of the users don't know or
care about it as long as Facebook and other apps work. And they don't
need to.

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

FUD!

Yep. And who really cares what Russell thinks? It's not like all the Linux
desktop developers are going to read some nobody's opinion and say... oh, we
need to stop developing Gnome, or KDE, or Mate or Xfce or... because someone
name Russell doesn't like desktops on Linux!

Especially considering how unhinged he appears to be in all of his other
posts. I'm sure that very few Linux developers want to cater to the
naked, bearded hermit who lives in a cave in the middle of nowhere.

[John McCue]

<snip>

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

Well said, freedektop.org has morphed from trying to come
up with a common set of APIs for Linux/BSD and others into
cloning M/S Windows and seems to be doing everything it
can to lockout the BSDs.

Example, who in their right mind would want auto-mount ?
That seems to be the largest reason for using dbus, udev
and other background deamons Linux is forcing on others.
Auto-mount is the first thing I disable on Linux when I
bring up a system.

At least, so far, the BSDs are trying to keep sane, but
even they needed to clone dbus in order to use Firefox
and some X-functions. But hardware support still lags
behind Linux by 6 months to a year.

[RonB]

Post by John McCue
<snip>

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

Well said, freedektop.org has morphed from trying to come
up with a common set of APIs for Linux/BSD and others into
cloning M/S Windows and seems to be doing everything it
can to lockout the BSDs.
Example, who in their right mind would want auto-mount ?
That seems to be the largest reason for using dbus, udev
and other background deamons Linux is forcing on others.
Auto-mount is the first thing I disable on Linux when I
bring up a system.
At least, so far, the BSDs are trying to keep sane, but
even they needed to clone dbus in order to use Firefox
and some X-functions. But hardware support still lags
behind Linux by 6 months to a year.

And why wouldn't you want to use automount? But you and Russell can join up
and form a Luddite Linux Group and I'll keep using the Linux Mint Mate, like
I've been doing for almost 15 years now.

Non-problem solved for both of us.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user --

And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

[F Russell]

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER
And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

You are just another idiot that can't tell the difference between
a DESKTOP ENVIRONMENT and a GUI.

Read this for help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_metaphor

Idiot.

[DFS]

Post by F Russell

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER
And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

You are just another idiot that can't tell the difference between
a DESKTOP ENVIRONMENT and a GUI.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_metaphor
Idiot.

You didn't answer the question, bozo.


From the get-go you've been a 'do as I say not as I do' shitheel here
on cola. What's the point with your incessant, moronic comments:

"A GUI is primarily to support idiots."

"Only crippled asshole idiots require the GUI crutch (nay
wheelchair)."

"GNU/Linux users, OTOH, can do without the stupid GUI."


No, they definitely CANNOT.



Fact: You push "ersatz buttons on a GUI" to read and post to Usenet,
because it's all you can do.

A "REAL MAN" would be writing NNTP commands at his terminal.

[Branimir Maksimovic]

Post by DFS

Post by F Russell

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER
And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

You are just another idiot that can't tell the difference between
a DESKTOP ENVIRONMENT and a GUI.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_metaphor
Idiot.

You didn't answer the question, bozo.
From the get-go you've been a 'do as I say not as I do' shitheel here
"A GUI is primarily to support idiots."
"Only crippled asshole idiots require the GUI crutch (nay
wheelchair)."
"GNU/Linux users, OTOH, can do without the stupid GUI."
No, they definitely CANNOT.

I started to use GUI with Windows XP in 2001. Worked on terminals
and with textual consoles until then. Russel is idiot, full time
and he uses GUI pan, which is pointless as textual slrn/vim
is far superior. Also i am 100% sure that he uses Windows,
while playing with Gentoo in VM.

Post by DFS
Fact: You push "ersatz buttons on a GUI" to read and post to Usenet,
because it's all you can do.
A "REAL MAN" would be writing NNTP commands at his terminal.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
I started to use GUI with Windows XP in 2001. Worked on terminals
and with textual consoles until then.

GUIs are great, even for text based activities, because they provide a
way to have multiple terminals displayed at the same time. Even the
barking dog who despise them use them.

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
Russel is idiot, full time and he uses GUI pan, which is pointless as
textual slrn/vim is far superior. Also i am 100% sure that he uses
Windows, while playing with Gentoo in VM.

And what about using only Windows while looking at videos about Gentoo on
youtube?

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Post by F Russell

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER
And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

You are just another idiot that can't tell the difference between
a DESKTOP ENVIRONMENT and a GUI.

You are confusing Desktop Environment, Windows Manager and Graphical
User Interface. Like it or not, your mouse driven Windows Manager is a
GUI. You wouldn't be able to use your graphical toy to answer my message
without it.

Tell me, why a genius in pretence like you needs a mouse to write and
read some text?

[SilverSlimer]

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user --

And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

That's a strangely dumb question. There's slrn that's available through
the command-line and "real men" like Fabian exclusively use that.

[Branimir Maksimovic]

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user --

And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

That's a strangely dumb question. There's slrn that's available through
the command-line and "real men" like Fabian exclusively use that.

What can be said, that Russel prefers GUI editors on *Linux*.
Not vim, not emacs, but some GUI editor that is no longer
maintained :P

[F Russell]

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
What can be said, that Russel prefers GUI editors on *Linux*.
Not vim, not emacs, but some GUI editor that is no longer
maintained :P

Cooledit is maintained, you ignoramus throwback:

Cooledit is probably the best editor that exists, but
an idiot like you could not even build it, let alone
use it.

The distros don't carry Cooledit, but the distros
are junk.

This is GNU/Linux, baby. A REAL MAN has to fend
for himself.

[F Russell]

Post by F Russell
http://youtu.be/tgrPDgHOOM8

Oopsie doopsie! Me give wrong linkie winkie.

Here be the correct-o linkie winkie:

ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/apps/editors/X/cooledit/

Hail Linux!

Hail GNU and the FSF!

Hail Stallman!

And fuck all the Microshit/Apphole patsies.

[Branimir Maksimovic]

Post by F Russell

Post by F Russell
http://youtu.be/tgrPDgHOOM8

Oopsie doopsie! Me give wrong linkie winkie.
ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/apps/editors/X/cooledit/
Hail Linux!
Hail GNU and the FSF!
Hail Stallman!
And fuck all the Microshit/Apphole patsies.

Fabian "GUI" Russel :P

[F Russell]

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
Fabian "GUI" Russel :P

3 am in shit-hole Serbia.

Can't sleep? Stick a prickly pear up your fucking asshole.

[Branimir Maksimovic]

Post by F Russell

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
Fabian "GUI" Russel :P

3 am in shit-hole Serbia.
Can't sleep? Stick a prickly pear up your fucking asshole.

Heh I sleep 17-24 :P
Rest of the day i am woke ;p

[DFS]

Post by Branimir Maksimovic

Post by F Russell

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
Fabian "GUI" Russel :P

3 am in shit-hole Serbia.
Can't sleep? Stick a prickly pear up your fucking asshole.

Heh I sleep 17-24 :P
Rest of the day i am woke ;p

You're woke, eh? No wonder you suddenly embraced Apple.

[J***@.]

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
Heh I sleep 17-24 :P
Rest of the day i am woke ;p

" From midnight to 5pm, I'm awake. 😛 ".

Please don't (unintentionally) insult yourself like that.
"Woke" people are disgusting.

What is happening at midnight that's waking you up ?

China is calling ?

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Post by F Russell

Post by F Russell
http://youtu.be/tgrPDgHOOM8

Oopsie doopsie! Me give wrong linkie winkie.
ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/apps/editors/X/cooledit/

The *full* content of the README is:
======================================================
README for apps/editors/X/cooledit

What you'll find here: Full-featured X Window text editor
======================================================

It's the useless README I ever saw. It's a joke, like you.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Post by F Russell

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
What can be said, that Russel prefers GUI editors on *Linux*.
Not vim, not emacs, but some GUI editor that is no longer
maintained :P

http://youtu.be/tgrPDgHOOM8
Cooledit is probably the best editor that exists, but
an idiot like you could not even build it, let alone
use it.

Any vim or Emacs user could switch to cooledit anytime if vim or Emacs
were unavailable. They would just be less productive.

Post by F Russell
The distros don't carry Cooledit, but the distros
are junk.

You are using it to do nothing. You just open it to prove yourself you
were able to compile it. You can't understand the true superiority of
vim and Emacs above your toy which nobody never heard about for a
reason.

[rbowman]

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
What can be said, that Russel prefers GUI editors on *Linux*.
Not vim, not emacs, but some GUI editor that is no longer
maintained :P

http://youtu.be/tgrPDgHOOM8
Cooledit is probably the best editor that exists, but
an idiot like you could not even build it, let alone
use it.

Any vim or Emacs user could switch to cooledit anytime if vim or Emacs
were unavailable. They would just be less productive.

Post by F Russell
The distros don't carry Cooledit, but the distros
are junk.

You are using it to do nothing. You just open it to prove yourself you
were able to compile it. You can't understand the true superiority of
vim and Emacs above your toy which nobody never heard about for a
reason.

This Cooledit:

http://freshmeat.sourceforge.net/projects/cooledit

with the last release July 26, 2004?

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Post by rbowman
http://freshmeat.sourceforge.net/projects/cooledit
with the last release July 26, 2004?

He provided a link which looks like more recent:
<ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/apps/editors/X/cooledit>

But it still needs a GUI.

[rbowman]

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by rbowman
http://freshmeat.sourceforge.net/projects/cooledit
with the last release July 26, 2004?

<ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/apps/editors/X/cooledit>
But it still needs a GUI.

I'm not partial to ftp sites unless I know what I'm getting.

[RonB]

Post by rbowman

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by rbowman
http://freshmeat.sourceforge.net/projects/cooledit
with the last release July 26, 2004?

<ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/apps/editors/X/cooledit>
But it still needs a GUI.

I'm not partial to ftp sites unless I know what I'm getting.

Same here.

[RonB]

Post by rbowman

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell

Post by Branimir Maksimovic
What can be said, that Russel prefers GUI editors on *Linux*.
Not vim, not emacs, but some GUI editor that is no longer
maintained :P

http://youtu.be/tgrPDgHOOM8
Cooledit is probably the best editor that exists, but
an idiot like you could not even build it, let alone
use it.

Any vim or Emacs user could switch to cooledit anytime if vim or Emacs
were unavailable. They would just be less productive.

Post by F Russell
The distros don't carry Cooledit, but the distros
are junk.

You are using it to do nothing. You just open it to prove yourself you
were able to compile it. You can't understand the true superiority of
vim and Emacs above your toy which nobody never heard about for a
reason.

http://freshmeat.sourceforge.net/projects/cooledit
with the last release July 26, 2004?

So it just had its 17th anniversary of zero development. And it's not
available on the linked site. (None of the applications listed there are.)
Now I see why it could be difficult to build — it's an antique.

[DFS]

Post by F Russell
http://youtu.be/tgrPDgHOOM8

"The Murderous Trucker: Driven to Kill | The FBI Files S3 EP1 | Real Crime"


You're trying to learn a new technique to get laid: drag them screaming
into your truck.

Pathetic incel.

[rbowman]

Post by DFS

Post by F Russell
http://youtu.be/tgrPDgHOOM8

"The Murderous Trucker: Driven to Kill | The FBI Files S3 EP1 | Real Crime"
You're trying to learn a new technique to get laid: drag them screaming
into your truck.
Pathetic incel.

Having spent some time on the road they are sometimes screaming to get
into your truck. Florida 'rest areas' are the worst; keep your doors locked.

[RonB]

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user --

And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

That's a strangely dumb question. There's slrn that's available through
the command-line and "real men" like Fabian exclusively use that.

I've been using slrn for a while now. Mostly because I can use Jstar as the
editor.

[Branimir Maksimovic]

Post by RonB

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user --

And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

That's a strangely dumb question. There's slrn that's available through
the command-line and "real men" like Fabian exclusively use that.

I've been using slrn for a while now. Mostly because I can use Jstar as the
editor.

Other choice is GNUS, for those that Like Emacs https://gnus.org/
BTW emacs has GUI and text modes :P
Guess that Russell would use Gui mode :P

[SilverSlimer]

Post by RonB

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user --

And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

That's a strangely dumb question. There's slrn that's available through
the command-line and "real men" like Fabian exclusively use that.

I've been using slrn for a while now. Mostly because I can use Jstar as the
editor.

There's nothing wrong with that. I like the command-line on underpowered
hardware but admittedly won't use it unless I'm absolutely forced to.
When I ran garbage hardware in the 90s, necessity made me use and
appreciate it.

[pothead]

Post by RonB

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user --

And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

That's a strangely dumb question. There's slrn that's available through
the command-line and "real men" like Fabian exclusively use that.

I've been using slrn for a while now. Mostly because I can use Jstar as the
editor.

I've been using slrn for years but I admit I'm a pussy and use a gui
editor like kate because I like automatic spell check and other items.
I could never figure out vim or emacs. The closest I've come is nano.

[RonB]

Post by pothead

Post by RonB

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user --

And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

That's a strangely dumb question. There's slrn that's available through
the command-line and "real men" like Fabian exclusively use that.

I've been using slrn for a while now. Mostly because I can use Jstar as the
editor.

I've been using slrn for years but I admit I'm a pussy and use a gui
editor like kate because I like automatic spell check and other items.
I could never figure out vim or emacs. The closest I've come is nano.

I know very little about either vim or Emacs. I use Fountain-Mode in Emacs
all the time but it's all automated and I don't really have to know anything
about Emacs to use it. Jstar is basically like using WordStar, which I used
for years, so the keystrokes and "built in" to my fingers. No automatic
spell check but Ctrl+Q then "l" brings up Aspell — which works well for
spell checking — not so well for grammatical errors, or leaving words out
altogether. That's all on me.

[RonB]

Post by pothead

Post by RonB

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER

Post by F Russell
My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user --

And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

That's a strangely dumb question. There's slrn that's available through
the command-line and "real men" like Fabian exclusively use that.

I've been using slrn for a while now. Mostly because I can use Jstar as the
editor.

I've been using slrn for years but I admit I'm a pussy and use a gui
editor like kate because I like automatic spell check and other items.
I could never figure out vim or emacs. The closest I've come is nano.

Well, vim has z= for spell check :P

It does, but it's a PITA to use.

Aspell in Jstar has a nice Menu.

[John McCue]

Stpphane CARPENTIER <***@fiat-linux.fr> wrote:
<snip>

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER
And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

Are you joking or maybe trolling ?

You do not need a GUI to access usenet, tin, slrn, nn and
even Emacs (text mode) can allow you get to usenet without
any kind of GUI.

[Joel]

Post by John McCue
<snip>

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER
And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

Are you joking or maybe trolling ?
You do not need a GUI to access usenet, tin, slrn, nn and
even Emacs (text mode) can allow you get to usenet without
any kind of GUI.

He was just mocking Russell for using Pan instead of a terminal app.

[Branimir Maksimovic]

Post by Joel

Post by John McCue
<snip>

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER
And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

Are you joking or maybe trolling ?
You do not need a GUI to access usenet, tin, slrn, nn and
even Emacs (text mode) can allow you get to usenet without
any kind of GUI.

He was just mocking Russell for using Pan instead of a terminal app.

:P

[John McCue]

<snip>

Post by Joel

Post by John McCue
Are you joking or maybe trolling ?

<snip>

Post by Joel
He was just mocking Russell for using Pan instead of a terminal app.

thanks
as the say "Dawn breaks over Marblehead" for me :)

[Joel]

Post by John McCue
<snip>

Post by Joel

Post by John McCue
Are you joking or maybe trolling ?

<snip>

Post by Joel
He was just mocking Russell for using Pan instead of a terminal app.

thanks
as the say "Dawn breaks over Marblehead" for me :)

To be really honest with you, I've made worse mistakes around here.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Post by John McCue
<snip>

Post by Stéphane CARPENTIER
And how would you be able to access usenet without their GUI?

Are you joking

Answering to Fabian is always a joke. There is no other way. At least
it's related to Linux.

Post by John McCue
or maybe trolling ?

Here's the right place to do so.

Post by John McCue
You do not need a GUI to access usenet, tin, slrn, nn and
even Emacs (text mode) can allow you get to usenet without
any kind of GUI.

I know my English needs improvements but it's not that bad in the only
sentence you quoted. I didn't asked Fabian how *I* but how *he* would be
able to access usenet without GUI. Look again, I'm using slrn. I know
how to avoid the mouse when possible. He is the one pretending the GUI
are for retards being unable to avoid the mouse.