Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #685920
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again |
| Date | 2025-02-15 14:18 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <voq7og$2b01$2@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (11 earlier) <ZT1rP.468602$YsRf.357723@fx18.iad> <vok46l$2pp5m$2@dont-email.me> <vFmrP.237006$dxRc.216642@fx13.iad> <voms6b$3c8p8$4@dont-email.me> <E2IrP.186725$if26.14639@fx13.iad> |
On 2025-02-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 2025-02-14 2:43 a.m., RonB wrote:
>> On 2025-02-13, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 2025-02-13 1:41 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>> On 2025-02-12, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-02-12 1:24 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>>> On 2025-02-11, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-02-11 1:23 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-10 2:54 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-09, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-08 12:07 p.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-08, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-08 10:40 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-08, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-08 3:49 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess checking the battery capacity is the last thing my Latitude 5300
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will ever do on Windows 11. When I exited it did a small update. When I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rebooted after the update it wanted to do a disk check (and I stupidly let
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it do so). After doing that and rebooting it ran into a BSOD ("we ran into a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem"). It then wants to run diagnostics, attempts a repair and... we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> start the whole loop all over again. (I tried this about six times and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finally told myself, "well, enough of that bullshit.")
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adios WinCrap 11. the space can better be used by Linux Mint anyhow (which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still boots fine). Another computer that will be completely freed from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would be lying if I said that it never happened to me before.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was beginning to think Windows 11 was fairly solid. This surprised me. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't why, but I had a bad feeling when I let it do a "disk check." I was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more worried that Windows would trash my Linux grub setup for booting,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, I didn't think it would trash itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I went ahead and deleted the Windows partitions with GParted and installed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Debian 12 in its place. I'm experimenting with creating .deb packages for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trelby (which I found isn't that hard to do) so it'll be nice to have a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Debian install for testing purposes. (Linux Mint is more like Ubuntu and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Debian and LM are actually different enough that I have to test both.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Speaking of Ubuntu, I've come to despise it and it's damn Snaps. I found out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the Snap version of Firefox refuses to read .html files if they're not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the home (and/or, I suppose, the Snap) directory. The documentation for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trelby can't be read by it (installed in its normal directory). When I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uninstall the Snap version of Firefox, it won't allow me to install the .deb
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version. They're definitely turning into control freaks at Ubuntu (kind of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like Windows and Mac OS).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not a fan of Flatpak or Snap anymore and see them both as something
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to use if you don't have a choice. I like the theory behind both, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they often ignore your theme, take longer to load or have trouble
>>>>>>>>>>>>> integrating with the rest of the system. If I absolutely had to go for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> one or the other though, I would choose Flatpak even though Snap is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> theoretically superior.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't like Snaps at all. I do tolerate FlatPaks (and use a few of them)
>>>>>>>>>>>> but if I knew how to make AppImages that's what I would prefer for Trelby.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And it's not Snaps I really dislike, it's Ubuntu forcing them on you.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There's other things I don't like about Ubuntu. It would definitely not be
>>>>>>>>>>>> in my top 20 list.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have to admit that during the short period of time during which I used
>>>>>>>>>>> Ubuntu recently, I was surprised that just about everything I was
>>>>>>>>>>> running was a Snap. For security reasons, it made sense (the browser,
>>>>>>>>>>> the e-mail client), but certain other things would have run just as well
>>>>>>>>>>> if they were simple .deb files. They want to make Snap a standard, that
>>>>>>>>>>> much is clear, and they're taking advantage of the distribution's
>>>>>>>>>>> popularity to do so.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think you're right. I think they're completely sold on the "container"
>>>>>>>>>> idea — everything in its own "silo" (or whatever they call it, "sandbox"
>>>>>>>>>> maybe). To me that means you lose the advatage of Linux, where small
>>>>>>>>>> applications are combined to create bigger applications, in one nice "flow."
>>>>>>>>>> This may be a good idea for servers, but I don't think there are other ways
>>>>>>>>>> to secure (harden) servers. I don't like it on a personal computer at all.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think they call these "container" distributions. Fedora has one, CoreOS,
>>>>>>>>>> but they keep it separate from their standard install. That's what I wish
>>>>>>>>>> Ubuntu would do as, apparently, they have something called Ubuntu Core. Save
>>>>>>>>>> the damn Snaps for that. I guess the big one (so far) is Alpine. I don't
>>>>>>>>>> know if these use special containers, or Snaps or Flatpaks, or what.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have no doubt that taking an all .deb or all .rpm approach might
>>>>>>>>> result in some things breaking along the way. However, there is no doubt
>>>>>>>>> that it's quite secure and much faster than the container approach. When
>>>>>>>>> all the software you're getting is coming out of a repository which has
>>>>>>>>> been checked thoroughly by professionals, and not anywhere on the web,
>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what the need for contained software is. Granted, Flatpak
>>>>>>>>> and Snap make software which _isn't_ available to a repository available
>>>>>>>>> to your choice of a distribution, and that is definitely an advantage.
>>>>>>>>> Security, however, should not be the main reason for using Snap or Flatpak.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Personally I like (well made) AppImages better than either Flatpaks or
>>>>>>>> Snaps, but I do use about five Flatpaks. I quit using Snaps when I
>>>>>>>> discovered they showed up like drive partitions when I did a _df_ to check
>>>>>>>> my drive space. I didn't like that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure why they bothered making Flatpaks and Snaps when AppImages
>>>>>>> work pretty much everywhere. I mean, how can you beat something which
>>>>>>> requires nothing more than for you to make it executable?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agreed. But some people make AppImages that don't include all the
>>>>>> dependencies, so they can be "mis-made."
>>>>>
>>>>> Considering AppImage exists since 2004, it's a wonder that Red Hat and
>>>>> Canonical felt the need to create their own. It might have been easier
>>>>> to just improve it and make sure that it integrates properly with the
>>>>> system.
>>>>
>>>> I think Canonical wanted to control an Apple style "app store." I didn't
>>>> realize that Red Hat was a big supporter for flatpak. But I do know I like
>>>> flatpaks better than snaps. As far as not using AppImage... I have no idea
>>>> why they (at least Red Hat) didn't go that direction.
>>>
>>> Actually, I read that Snaps were superior to Flatpaks. The problem is
>>> that Canonical has ultimate control over their storage and distribution.
>>> I don't mind that Canonical was trying an Apple-style approach since
>>> Shuttleworth made a significant investment in Linux and wants to get
>>> that money back, but I do think that Flatpak is a smart alternative to
>>> ensure that Canonical doesn't control the operating system as much as it
>>> does Ubuntu itself. What Canonical does with Ubuntu is their own
>>> business and people are free to use it or ignore it.
>>
>> In my opinion Snaps are not superior to Flatpaks. Snaps are invasive,
>> Flatpaks are easily removed. As I mentioned in another post, Trelby
>> (screenwriting software) includes an HTML manual. It's normal location is
>> /usr/trelby/trelby (up until a recent release, it's now under
>> usr/lib/python3.xx/dist-pkgs... — something like that). But the Snap version
>> of Firefox can't read anything in the /usr subdirectoryy (actually I don't
>> think it can read *any* file in the root directory). So Snap forces you to
>> try to work around it's non-standard BS, making a .deb installation package
>> fail that works with any other Firefox installation. (This is just one
>> example.)
>>
>> I won't Snaps, even if there's an application that only is available as a
>> Snap. That's how much I don't like them.
>
> I honestly feel that most people think the way that you do as it relates
> to Snaps. That might be why Ubuntu's popularity is steadily decreasing
> with time.
Ubuntu wants to control how their users interact with their OS. Kind of like
Microsoft and Apple. Maybe there is some reason for this, but I know that,
over the years, I've moved from being enthusiastic about Ubuntu to not
wanting to use it at all (at least not on the Desktop). I've currently got a
Ubuntu server running as a test bed for my wife and her teaching software
(Moodle).
--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-08 08:49 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-08 08:01 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-08 09:11 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-08 15:40 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-08 11:05 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-08 17:07 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-09 08:22 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-09 20:03 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-10 07:54 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-10 10:27 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-11 06:23 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-11 08:51 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-11 20:49 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-11 19:47 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-12 03:09 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-12 09:02 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-12 19:12 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-12 19:03 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-13 06:44 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-13 07:27 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-13 08:43 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-14 07:44 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-14 09:04 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-14 00:52 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-14 09:00 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-14 22:21 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-14 18:53 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-15 06:53 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-15 05:41 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-16 00:10 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-12 06:27 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-12 06:47 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-12 00:33 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-11 19:43 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-11 19:50 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-12 02:54 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-12 06:38 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-02-11 20:39 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-12 04:33 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-15 11:27 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-15 21:08 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-15 22:03 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 00:46 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 04:07 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-16 09:01 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 03:53 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-16 09:04 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-15 19:32 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 04:10 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-16 09:06 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-15 21:26 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-15 22:36 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-16 00:09 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-16 08:49 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 00:36 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-16 01:36 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 03:46 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-02-16 02:09 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-15 21:13 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 04:01 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-15 23:39 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 08:40 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-17 05:29 +0000
(more on) Pan (was: Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-17 11:34 +0000
Re: (more on) Pan (was: Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-17 19:03 +0000
Re: (more on) Pan snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-02-17 19:33 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-17 07:13 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-17 21:47 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 04:18 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-15 23:48 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 05:32 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 00:39 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 08:14 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 04:10 -0500
Agent isn't open source. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 12:39 +0000
Re: Agent isn't open source. % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 05:47 -0700
Re: Agent isn't open source. Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-16 13:11 +0000
Re: Agent isn't open source. % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 06:18 -0700
Re: Agent isn't open source. Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-17 06:17 +0000
Re: Agent isn't open source. Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-16 13:20 +0000
Linux and Pan are open source (was: Re: Agent isn't open source.) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 14:56 +0000
Re: Agent isn't open source. Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 07:48 -0500
Re: Agent isn't open source. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-02-16 07:56 -0500
Re: Agent isn't open source. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-02-16 13:13 +0000
Re: Agent isn't open source. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 13:22 +0000
Re: Agent isn't open source. % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 06:33 -0700
[OT] Ice cream (was: Re: Agent isn't open source.) snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-02-16 13:37 +0000
Re: [OT] Ice cream % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 06:38 -0700
Re: [OT] Ice cream (was: Re: Agent isn't open source.) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 14:14 +0000
Re: [OT] Ice cream snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-02-16 14:37 +0000
Re: [OT] Ice cream (was: Re: Agent isn't open source.) chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-02-16 20:32 -0600
Re: [OT] Ice cream (was: Re: Agent isn't open source.) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-17 05:20 +0000
Re: [OT] Ice cream Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 11:47 -0600
Re: Agent isn't open source. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-02-16 07:53 -0600
Re: Agent isn't open source. Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 15:14 -0600
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-02-16 07:50 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 13:17 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 06:20 -0700
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Adison Vohn Caterson <Adison@Caterson.invalid> - 2025-02-16 13:27 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 06:32 -0700
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Adison Vohn Caterson <Adison@Caterson.invalid> - 2025-02-16 13:42 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-02-16 13:28 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 19:52 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 08:44 -0500
Pan (was: Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 03:56 +0000
Re: Pan (was: Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again) pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-02-16 04:39 +0000
Re: Pan (was: Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 04:59 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-12 06:24 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-12 09:04 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-12 19:16 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-12 19:07 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-13 06:41 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-13 08:42 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-13 21:23 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-14 07:43 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-14 09:03 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-14 21:09 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-14 18:51 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-15 00:38 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-15 14:18 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-15 12:39 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-15 21:18 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-15 19:36 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 04:12 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 08:51 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 08:50 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 08:46 -0500
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-14 20:45 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-14 21:43 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-15 00:28 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-16 04:19 +0000
Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-02-10 18:30 +0000
csiph-web