Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #172484

Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates

From	Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject	Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates
Date	2013-04-08 10:39 -0700
Message-ID	<CD884EF1.18B9D%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink)
References	(9 earlier) <kjp2m0$475$1@dont-email.me> <CD85B902.1890B%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <20130407011905.59@usenet.drumscum.be> <CD8616CA.18980%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <20130408184619.747@usenet.drumscum.be>

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/8/13 9:56 AM, in article 20130408184619.747@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
<tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2013-04-07, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> On 4/6/13 4:44 PM, in article 20130407011905.59@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
>> <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 8<
> 
>>>> I think you are misunderstanding my point. The fact that you have
>>>> spinoffs such as the ones you list *back* my view - they do not
>>>> contradict it.  Programs made for Gnome work well in any of those
>>>> environments. And let me define "work well": I do not mean they
>>>> just run, or to run without crashing, I mean they "fit in" with
>>>> each of the environments
>>> 
>>> Not at all. While programs developed with Gnome 3 in mind will
>>> generally look well under Cinnamon (which is a fork of Gnome 3),
>>> they will look out of place under Mate, because Mate is a fork of
>>> Gnome 2 and still is based on Gtk2 instead of Gtk3. Try it out if
>>> you like.
>>> 
>> I have worked with Cinnamon some and Mate even less. But if Gnome
>> made it so that programs that are made for Gnome 2 do not work well
>> under Gnome 3 they made a big mistake. Not that there might be
>> *some* changes - after all, that is how progress happens - but they
>> should work mostly (and from what I have seen they do). Do you have
>> any examples?
> 
> Any Gtk2 program on Cinnamon; any GTK3 program on Mate. See this
> article to understand what I mean:
> 
> http://www.kirsle.net/blog/kirsle/gnome-s-impact-on-everything

Ah, get what you mean - and I had ran into this but did not know the reason
(did not spend any time searching). This affects the window chrome - but as
far as I know this does not affect the menu placements, names, hot keys,
etc. Not that it should not be fixed... and not that it has not been
recognized as a problem... you showed that it *has* been.

Similar stuff happens even on OS X .... not with the chrome of the windows
but with some features. Newer OS X programs have new options in the menu bar
(and a removal of the black dot to show a file has been edited - that info
is now more clear): <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/NewMenu.png>.

Older programs do not get this without an update. Perhaps worse than that,
there are significant differences in how files are saved - newer programs
automatically save files on Quit (if you want... it is configurable). Older
programs do not (except some databases and the like which always have).

I mention this simply because I point to OS X as the "gold standard" in UI
consistency... but *too* much of a focus on consistency can lead to
stagnation. I would not want that on Gnome or OS X, even though transitions
can lead to some inconsistencies and other problems.

>>>> With KDE and Gnome: Just because they have not co-operated more
>>>> fully than they already do
>>> 
>>> Already do? Can you give some examples of the Gnome and KDE teams
>>> actively working together?
>> 
>> Below I quote the KDE team talking about it. But just a few seconds
>> on their sites will show more examples. Here, just searching the KDE
>> site for a few seconds (literally):
>> 
>> <http://accessibility.kde.org/developer/atk.php>
>>     -----
>>     GNOME Accessibility Architecture (ATK and AT-SPI)
>> 
>>     This description of the GNOME Accessibility Architecture was
>>     written by Gunnar Schmi Dt as part of our development efforts
>>     for interoperable accessibility solutions.
>>     ----- 
>> 
>> There is also the KDE and GNOME Desktop Summit and other areas where
>> they work together.
>> 
>> Seriously, look at each site and see how much they speak of the
>> other:
>> 
>> <http://bit.ly/14NBkyM>
>> <http://bit.ly/16D1f8X>
>> 
>> It is not as if each project is unaware of or hostile toward the
>> other, nor as if they are not aware of how their actions affect the
>> other.
> 
> I actually meant actively working together toward integration of
> applications in both environments. You know, the stuff you've been
> taling about.
> 
> As I noted in another posting I'm well aware of cooperation on IPC
> stuff and the like, but that's not the stuff we're talking about here.
> We're talking about menu lay-out, usage of icons, dialogs...

I have seen discussions about this but do not know of any specific work on
it. Yet. I have seen specific comments from the Firefox team (and others,
including OpenOffice and, I believe, GIMP) about the challenges of having
their software fit the different environments they run on.

>>> But this doesn't mean at all that there's even the slightest bit of
>>> cooperation between the Gnome and KDE teams to make both
>>> environments integrate with each other.
>> 
>> I do not think anyone is asking to have the environments themselves
>> "integrate" with each other - the idea is to allow program to
>> integrate well with either.
> 
> That's what I meant.

I could repeat your rather derogatory comments about clarity and accuracy
that you used against me the other day but I am above that. :)

-- 
"Actually, I would like to know from Snit exactly how watching movies of
naked people having sex is harmful to children." - Mark S Bilk

Proof: the Stallman cult is repulsive.

Thread

Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-03-30 17:15 -0400
  Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 06:42 +0000
    Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 10:10 +0100
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2013-03-31 12:30 +0200
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-03-31 07:34 -0400
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-03-31 23:00 +0100
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:16 -0700
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 23:33 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:55 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2013-04-01 01:07 +0200
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 16:10 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 18:14 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 14:27 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 13:47 +0200
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-04-06 08:30 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 13:53 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:50 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:44 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-03-31 20:04 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 17:20 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-03-31 22:50 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 03:54 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 20:12 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 19:54 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-04-01 10:58 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-02 07:44 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 06:54 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-02 07:59 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 07:01 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-04-03 08:53 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 06:58 +0100
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 23:12 +0100
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2013-04-01 17:56 -0400
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2013-04-01 16:29 -0600
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:14 -0700
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:07 -0700
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:05 -0700
    Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:03 -0700
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 15:41 +0000
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-01 13:11 -0700
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 22:26 +0000
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-03 16:48 -0700
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 06:08 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 00:24 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 14:01 +0200
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-04-06 08:33 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 13:53 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-04-06 08:57 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 14:05 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:53 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:52 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:50 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:35 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 23:44 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 18:15 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 16:56 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-08 10:39 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-09 20:12 +0200
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-04-09 16:19 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-09 13:56 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2013-04-09 14:01 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2013-04-09 14:18 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-10 20:58 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-10 14:42 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-11 18:29 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-11 12:50 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-12 15:55 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-12 09:56 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-04-11 15:09 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-11 13:44 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-12 10:40 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-12 06:34 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 20:57 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-21 14:10 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-22 01:57 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-21 19:04 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-23 17:05 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-23 10:45 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-04-23 14:09 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-04-23 13:49 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-23 12:34 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-04-22 05:58 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-22 07:50 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2013-04-24 09:21 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 15:31 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2013-04-07 08:49 +0200
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-07 09:06 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-07 17:02 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-07 10:43 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-08 07:36 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-10 21:30 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-10 14:45 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-11 07:28 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-11 06:36 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-04-08 11:28 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-08 09:44 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-04-06 14:49 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 12:04 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 20:16 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 13:28 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-04-06 22:56 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 15:09 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-08 07:45 -0500
                chrisv proves his cult-like tendencies again Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-08 06:57 -0700
                Re: chrisv proves his cult-like tendencies again Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 07:03 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-04-06 07:00 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-04-06 12:52 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:48 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:46 -0700
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Sinister Midget <fardblossom@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 20:27 -0500
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-01 19:46 -0700
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-04-02 10:27 +0100
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Sinister Midget <fardblossom@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 05:46 -0500
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 06:53 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Gregory Shearman <ZekeGregory@netscape.net> - 2013-04-02 13:22 +0000
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 07:01 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 06:53 -0700
  Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:02 -0700
  Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2013-03-31 22:45 +0000
    Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-03-31 18:49 -0400
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 16:02 -0700
    Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 15:54 -0700
      Onion Knight posts decent article on Linux Advocates 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2013-04-01 00:05 +0100
    Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-03-31 20:05 -0400
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 17:24 -0700
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-03-31 20:43 -0400
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-03-31 19:03 -0700
    Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Marti Van Lin <ml2mst@dontevenbother.invalid> - 2013-04-01 19:56 +0200
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates "Cola Zealot" <Cola_Zealot@fuckoff.com> - 2013-04-01 21:25 +0200
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Marti Van Lin <ml2mst@dontevenbother.invalid> - 2013-04-02 15:59 +0200
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 07:05 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-04-02 12:32 -0400
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 14:25 -0700
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-02 09:11 -0500
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 07:19 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-04-02 17:57 -0400
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 06:56 +0100
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2013-04-02 21:42 -0600
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-04-03 08:53 -0400
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-04-02 12:21 -0400
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-02 14:24 -0700
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2013-04-02 17:57 -0400
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-01 13:12 -0700

csiph-web