Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #350884 > unrolled thread
| Started by | 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-04-19 21:54 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-04-26 19:54 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 443 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-04-19 21:54 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-19 15:02 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-19 22:13 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye brexit insanity <aslsfijasslkjfhwe22jads@oasdfasfs.org> - 2016-04-19 22:22 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-19 15:44 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-19 17:47 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-04-20 21:51 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-20 15:06 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-20 15:27 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-21 12:13 -0500
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-21 20:13 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-21 12:02 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-21 13:15 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-21 13:52 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-21 15:03 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 00:04 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-22 10:13 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 01:25 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-22 14:22 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-22 07:35 -0500
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 09:27 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-22 23:21 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 14:38 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-23 00:03 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 15:10 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-23 00:23 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 15:33 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-23 01:00 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 16:13 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 02:07 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 17:15 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 02:34 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 17:37 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 02:56 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 18:06 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 03:29 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 18:32 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 03:46 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 18:49 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 03:55 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 19:08 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-23 12:32 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 12:34 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-23 08:08 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-23 09:23 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-23 09:22 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 09:41 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-23 09:53 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-23 09:33 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 10:01 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-23 10:24 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 11:13 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-23 11:34 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 12:20 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-24 10:52 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-24 16:01 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-24 13:36 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 16:36 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-24 23:28 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 12:05 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-25 12:10 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 12:12 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-25 12:18 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 12:35 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-25 12:58 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 13:10 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-25 13:17 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 13:20 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 14:24 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 14:31 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-24 23:28 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 17:37 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-23 20:00 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-23 23:38 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-24 15:58 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-24 10:33 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-24 18:52 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-24 12:00 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-24 19:31 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-24 12:37 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-24 21:12 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 12:48 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-25 22:14 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 15:43 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-25 23:07 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 16:15 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 02:13 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 19:38 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 02:46 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 19:50 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 19:49 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 02:57 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 19:59 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 03:35 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 20:46 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 03:58 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 21:03 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 04:13 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 21:22 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 04:41 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 21:50 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 05:09 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 22:13 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 05:39 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 22:41 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 05:58 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 22:59 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 06:06 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-26 08:52 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 09:35 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-26 09:38 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 09:48 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-26 09:54 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 09:56 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-26 10:04 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 16:57 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-26 10:13 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 05:38 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-27 00:37 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 05:29 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-27 00:36 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 14:18 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-27 20:06 -0600
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-28 04:15 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-28 15:32 -0600
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-26 06:25 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 21:28 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-26 06:37 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 21:49 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-26 06:58 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 22:12 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-24 15:11 -0600
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 12:52 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-25 13:35 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-25 13:43 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-25 18:16 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-25 15:20 -0600
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 14:58 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-26 15:48 -0600
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 15:45 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-23 00:59 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 16:13 -0700
Plonk Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 19:57 -0400
Re: Plonk "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 20:15 -0400
Re: Plonk Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 21:02 -0400
Keep talking Chris Ahlstrom Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 21:19 -0400
Re: Plonk "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-24 17:46 -0400
Re: Plonk Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-24 23:30 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 19:32 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 09:26 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 19:30 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 16:32 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 04:55 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-27 00:35 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-27 04:01 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 05:24 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-22 06:06 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 07:04 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-22 08:04 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 08:30 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-22 09:56 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 10:28 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-22 12:44 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 13:44 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-22 14:19 -0700
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 13:07 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 16:38 -0400
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 14:36 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 18:07 -0400
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 15:20 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 19:48 -0400
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 20:44 -0400
"Richand King", yet another nym of a long-time troll Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 21:00 -0400
Ask Chris Ahlstrom about.... Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 21:22 -0400
Re: "Richand King", yet another nym of a long-time troll chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-25 07:48 -0500
Re: "Richand King", yet another nym of a long-time troll William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-25 14:07 +0100
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 19:04 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-22 22:53 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 23:24 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-23 13:35 +0100
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-23 08:04 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-25 07:33 -0500
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:14 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-25 10:50 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-25 10:53 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 12:01 -0400
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-23 08:10 -0700
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-23 13:31 +0100
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-25 07:29 -0500
Re: Marek Novotny is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 09:28 -0400
Marek Novotny appreciates the beauty of certain 1990's tech Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 19:45 -0400
Chris Ahlstrom Makes an ASS of himself again Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 21:11 -0400
Re: Marek Novotny appreciates the beauty of certain 1990's tech William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-23 13:30 +0100
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 19:42 -0400
Chris Ahlstrom... Asshole of the year. Just ask Jayne Ahlstrom, his wife. Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 21:07 -0400
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 18:29 -0700
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 03:32 +0200
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 19:40 -0700
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 05:15 +0200
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 20:31 -0700
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-23 07:28 -0400
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-23 13:43 +0200
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 06:56 -0700
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-23 14:27 -0400
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 11:46 -0700
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-24 17:49 -0700
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-24 18:35 -0700
Re: Marek Novotn is stuck in the U.S. tech culture, circa 1990. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-23 14:26 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 09:42 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 10:26 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 12:45 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 14:08 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 14:24 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 14:54 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 15:10 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 15:16 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 16:01 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 16:18 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 19:59 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 17:04 -0700
A Big Appil beam in his eye Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 19:55 -0400
Re: A Big Appil beam in his eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 17:03 -0700
Re: A Big Appil beam in his eye Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 21:01 -0400
Re: A Big Appil beam in his eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 18:07 -0700
Chris Ahlstrom's Obsession With People He Claims to Have Filtered. Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 21:18 -0400
Re: A Big Appil beam in his eye JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2016-04-22 20:52 -0500
Re: A Big Appil beam in his eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 19:08 -0700
Re: A Big Appil beam in his eye "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 20:11 -0400
Re: A Big Appil beam in his eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 17:15 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 12:54 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 14:10 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 14:24 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 20:02 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 17:03 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 13:10 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 14:25 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 14:26 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 14:46 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 15:03 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-22 15:14 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 15:17 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-21 22:16 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-04-21 20:23 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-21 12:53 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-04-21 23:07 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-21 19:44 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-21 23:58 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-22 10:10 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 01:24 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-04-22 10:58 +0100
The Appil of my eye Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 05:40 -0400
Re: The Appil of my eye Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-04-22 11:02 +0100
Re: The Appil of my eye Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-04-22 11:44 +0100
Re: The Appil of my eye frederick <fakeemail@gmail.com> - 2016-04-23 00:31 +0100
Re: The Appil of my eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 09:25 -0700
Re: The Appil of my eye Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 15:09 -0400
Re: The Appil of my eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 12:31 -0700
Re: The Appil of my eye Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-22 22:57 +0200
Re: The Appil of my eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 13:58 -0700
Re: The Appil of my eye Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 19:53 -0400
Re: The Appil of my eye Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-04-25 11:11 +0100
Re: The Appil of my eye chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-25 07:18 -0500
Re: The Appil of my eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-25 19:40 -0700
Re: The Appil of my eye Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 19:52 -0400
Re: The Appil of my eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 17:02 -0700
Re: The Appil of my eye Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-22 21:03 -0400
Chris Ahlstrom a Pansy... Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 21:15 -0400
Re: The Appil of my eye JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2016-04-22 20:55 -0500
Re: The Appil of my eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 19:39 -0700
Re: The Appil of my eye "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-22 19:34 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-04-22 02:51 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-04-23 10:04 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 06:46 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-04-23 09:26 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-23 09:50 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-19 19:40 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-04-20 21:10 +0000
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-21 12:07 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-04-20 16:42 +0100
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye "Popkin" <Popkin@telus.net> - 2016-04-21 12:16 -0400
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye frederick <fakeemail@gmail.com> - 2016-04-21 21:42 +0100
A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye "Drummer"<drummer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-22 05:17 +0200
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-26 06:02 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 07:01 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-26 07:20 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 07:28 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-26 07:56 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 08:02 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-26 08:16 -0700
Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 08:46 -0700
His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-26 20:41 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 14:21 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-26 14:24 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 18:27 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 15:37 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 18:55 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 16:48 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Me Sham <osirus47@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-26 16:55 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 17:09 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-26 20:36 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-27 10:11 +0100
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 00:07 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 17:11 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 00:18 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 17:29 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 00:38 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 17:47 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 01:03 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 18:10 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 01:26 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-26 18:37 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 02:48 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-27 06:25 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 07:49 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 14:54 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 08:11 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 07:59 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-27 16:33 +0100
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 08:52 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-27 17:35 +0100
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-27 15:57 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 13:10 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 10:07 -0500
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 10:19 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 20:59 +0200
Thing Digest chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 14:33 -0500
Re: Thing Digest vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 20:18 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 00:05 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 00:14 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 00:23 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 00:42 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 00:51 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-27 20:32 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 00:59 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 02:40 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-27 10:18 +0100
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 14:00 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 07:57 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-27 16:37 +0100
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 09:03 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 13:07 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 17:45 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 16:23 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 10:24 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 10:30 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 11:18 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 12:26 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 12:46 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 20:15 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 13:33 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 21:31 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 14:35 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 14:54 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 14:42 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 23:51 +0200
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 15:00 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 21:53 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 14:59 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 15:35 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 20:34 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 13:48 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 23:29 +0200
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 14:36 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 23:48 +0200
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 15:01 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 15:49 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 23:12 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 17:27 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 23:12 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 23:18 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 17:25 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 00:53 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 18:06 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 01:33 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 18:50 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 02:03 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 19:26 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 05:23 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 23:44 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 07:14 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-28 00:42 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 08:26 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-28 10:11 +0100
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-28 06:48 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-28 06:46 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 23:48 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-28 17:00 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-28 06:34 -0500
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 20:49 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-28 13:51 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 17:29 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 00:54 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 18:04 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 01:13 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 18:26 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 01:32 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 18:45 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 02:12 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 19:26 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 18:46 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 02:11 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 19:29 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 02:58 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 20:03 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 03:19 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 20:35 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 10:47 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 18:46 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 02:04 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 19:30 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 03:00 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 20:08 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 03:29 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-27 20:41 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 09:09 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 19:28 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 13:43 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-28 10:12 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-28 07:24 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 10:31 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 13:54 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 14:10 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 23:21 +0200
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 14:30 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-28 09:54 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 11:21 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 11:48 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-04-27 09:10 -0700
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-28 09:53 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-27 20:11 -0600
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 02:11 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 02:48 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-27 10:17 +0100
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 07:21 -0500
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 11:48 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-26 20:37 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 00:45 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 10:49 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-26 20:01 -0400
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-27 02:19 +0000
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 07:26 -0500
Re: His Nibs #3's manifesto, debunked chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 09:48 -0500
A Big anti-Linux K00k Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-26 19:54 -0400
Page 4 of 23 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 23 Next page →
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-25 12:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <N8OdnVGyzcU-9oPKnZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #351801 |
On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > On 2016-04-24 1:36 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >> On 2016-04-24, Popkin <Popkin@telus.net> wrote: >>> Personally, I think you need to seriously examine your reasons for >>> believing Apple, Mac OS X and the Mac are crap. I don't think they're >>> actually very grounded in reality. Personally, I think that if you >>> really didn't want me to "take this as argumentative", you would have >>> left out your comments about "Apple, OSX [sic] and the Mac" entirely, >>> but your basic irrational fanaticism wouldn't let you. >> >> My reasons are solid. The Mac sucks ass. How you feel is obviously >> different. You're more than entitled to love your Mac. Be happy. >> > > But one of the salient differences between you and I is I waste no time > saying things like "Linux sucks ass". True. I have to use a Mac for work so I'm a little bitter towards it as I don't like it at all. I don't like Adobe either. > Seriously: examine your words and see how rational they sound if you > replace Apple and the Mac with ANYTHING ELSE. Microsoft is Crap, Windows is Crap... So far so good... :) -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-25 12:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nflq7p$nh9$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #351804 |
On 2016-04-25 12:10 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >> On 2016-04-24 1:36 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >>> On 2016-04-24, Popkin <Popkin@telus.net> wrote: >>>> Personally, I think you need to seriously examine your reasons for >>>> believing Apple, Mac OS X and the Mac are crap. I don't think they're >>>> actually very grounded in reality. Personally, I think that if you >>>> really didn't want me to "take this as argumentative", you would have >>>> left out your comments about "Apple, OSX [sic] and the Mac" entirely, >>>> but your basic irrational fanaticism wouldn't let you. >>> >>> My reasons are solid. The Mac sucks ass. How you feel is obviously >>> different. You're more than entitled to love your Mac. Be happy. >>> >> >> But one of the salient differences between you and I is I waste no time >> saying things like "Linux sucks ass". > > True. I have to use a Mac for work so I'm a little bitter towards it as > I don't like it at all. I don't like Adobe either. Why do you HAVE to use a Mac? > >> Seriously: examine your words and see how rational they sound if you >> replace Apple and the Mac with ANYTHING ELSE. > > Microsoft is Crap, Windows is Crap... So far so good... :) >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-25 12:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <N8OdnVCyzcU_8IPKnZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #351805 |
On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > On 2016-04-25 12:10 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >> On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >>> On 2016-04-24 1:36 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >>>> On 2016-04-24, Popkin <Popkin@telus.net> wrote: >>>>> Personally, I think you need to seriously examine your reasons for >>>>> believing Apple, Mac OS X and the Mac are crap. I don't think they're >>>>> actually very grounded in reality. Personally, I think that if you >>>>> really didn't want me to "take this as argumentative", you would have >>>>> left out your comments about "Apple, OSX [sic] and the Mac" entirely, >>>>> but your basic irrational fanaticism wouldn't let you. >>>> >>>> My reasons are solid. The Mac sucks ass. How you feel is obviously >>>> different. You're more than entitled to love your Mac. Be happy. >>>> >>> >>> But one of the salient differences between you and I is I waste no time >>> saying things like "Linux sucks ass". >> >> True. I have to use a Mac for work so I'm a little bitter towards it as >> I don't like it at all. I don't like Adobe either. > > Why do you HAVE to use a Mac? I've posted all of this before. And truly not interested in a long discussion regarding it. Bottom line is I do. >>> Seriously: examine your words and see how rational they sound if you >>> replace Apple and the Mac with ANYTHING ELSE. >> >> Microsoft is Crap, Windows is Crap... So far so good... :) >> > -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-25 12:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nflrit$pqc$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #351806 |
On 2016-04-25 12:18 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >> On 2016-04-25 12:10 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >>> On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >>>> On 2016-04-24 1:36 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >>>>> On 2016-04-24, Popkin <Popkin@telus.net> wrote: >>>>>> Personally, I think you need to seriously examine your reasons for >>>>>> believing Apple, Mac OS X and the Mac are crap. I don't think they're >>>>>> actually very grounded in reality. Personally, I think that if you >>>>>> really didn't want me to "take this as argumentative", you would have >>>>>> left out your comments about "Apple, OSX [sic] and the Mac" entirely, >>>>>> but your basic irrational fanaticism wouldn't let you. >>>>> >>>>> My reasons are solid. The Mac sucks ass. How you feel is obviously >>>>> different. You're more than entitled to love your Mac. Be happy. >>>>> >>>> >>>> But one of the salient differences between you and I is I waste no time >>>> saying things like "Linux sucks ass". >>> >>> True. I have to use a Mac for work so I'm a little bitter towards it as >>> I don't like it at all. I don't like Adobe either. >> >> Why do you HAVE to use a Mac? > > I've posted all of this before. And truly not interested in a long > discussion regarding it. Bottom line is I do. So I guess "linux sucks ass" if you want to do your job? :-) Give me a rational reason that in your opinion, "The Mac sucks ass". > >>>> Seriously: examine your words and see how rational they sound if you >>>> replace Apple and the Mac with ANYTHING ELSE. >>> >>> Microsoft is Crap, Windows is Crap... So far so good... :) >>> >> > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-25 12:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <F_edneNJEoB864PKnZ2dnUU7-W1g4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #351807 |
On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > Give me a rational reason that in your opinion, "The Mac sucks ass". You must like arguing... There are examples in the thread history. Knock yourself out. -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-25 13:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nfltj5$tf3$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #351810 |
On 2016-04-25 12:58 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >> Give me a rational reason that in your opinion, "The Mac sucks ass". > > You must like arguing... There are examples in the thread history. Knock > yourself out. > Not rational ones. For instance, it is not rational to suggest that "The Mac sucks" because Apple doesn't happen to make a 4K monitor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-25 13:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <iKKdnaj-kpHE5oPKnZ2dnUU7-XGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #351811 |
On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > On 2016-04-25 12:58 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >> On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >>> Give me a rational reason that in your opinion, "The Mac sucks ass". >> >> You must like arguing... There are examples in the thread history. Knock >> yourself out. > > Not rational ones. > > For instance, it is not rational to suggest that "The Mac sucks" because > Apple doesn't happen to make a 4K monitor. Why the hard on for me? Get a life, loser... Your Mac must be boring you to tears I'm guessing... -- Marek Novotny https://github.com/marek-novotny
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-25 13:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nflu5o$uei$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #351814 |
On 2016-04-25 1:17 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >> On 2016-04-25 12:58 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >>> On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >>>> Give me a rational reason that in your opinion, "The Mac sucks ass". >>> >>> You must like arguing... There are examples in the thread history. Knock >>> yourself out. >> >> Not rational ones. >> >> For instance, it is not rational to suggest that "The Mac sucks" because >> Apple doesn't happen to make a 4K monitor. > > Why the hard on for me? You imagine you're special? > Get a life, loser... Your Mac must be boring you > to tears I'm guessing... I'm asking you to behave rationally, and that's your response. OK>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 14:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D3467C26.71223%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #351804 |
On 4/25/16, 12:10 PM, in article N8OdnVGyzcU-9oPKnZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny" <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote: > On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >> On 2016-04-24 1:36 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: >>> On 2016-04-24, Popkin <Popkin@telus.net> wrote: >>>> Personally, I think you need to seriously examine your reasons for >>>> believing Apple, Mac OS X and the Mac are crap. I don't think they're >>>> actually very grounded in reality. Personally, I think that if you >>>> really didn't want me to "take this as argumentative", you would have >>>> left out your comments about "Apple, OSX [sic] and the Mac" entirely, >>>> but your basic irrational fanaticism wouldn't let you. >>> >>> My reasons are solid. The Mac sucks ass. How you feel is obviously >>> different. You're more than entitled to love your Mac. Be happy. >>> >> >> But one of the salient differences between you and I is I waste no time >> saying things like "Linux sucks ass". > > True. I have to use a Mac for work so I'm a little bitter towards it as > I don't like it at all. I don't like Adobe either. Elsewhere you showed an odd obsession with Dreamweaver. Can you explain why? As far as the Mac, I would love to see examples of you doing things in other environments that you think are done better. I have happily showed some of the things I do and even taken on the tasks of others. * From a single online recipe (or art project, lesson plan, whatever) save it and email a PDF version where you add notes to it. Now I know this can be done on Linux; save, open, edit, email. Just curious to see how you people would generally do it and how streamlined the workflow would be. A couple ways I might: <https://youtu.be/NPM_WldEBs0>. * Make a video, as Owl and I have been, but with cursor replacement / resizing (post production), window highlighting, zooming, arbitrary area highlighting. For me these were done just to show something else: <https://youtu.be/aSNpnYpmKag>. I have many other options but picked these because they fit the real-world example I did shortly before coming up with the "challenge". * Getting a WayBackArchive page and getting images of all links, the HTML validation and CSS validation from W3.org, and a active link to the archive page, as I did here (does not have to look the exact same, of course): <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/sandman/sandman-archive.pdf>. * Download as PDFs all the recipes from the homepage of allrecipes.com (Owl is the one who suggested this). I did several versions... here is one: <https://youtu.be/_J4PppWroWY>. Mine not only worked, but the PDF had selectable text and allowed me to do quick searches on ingredients and the like... something Owl was never able to do on Linux. Worked so well that he and Peter Köhlmann insisted it must have been faked. So far no other OS / environment has been shown to be able to do comparable work. >> Seriously: examine your words and see how rational they sound if you >> replace Apple and the Mac with ANYTHING ELSE. > > Microsoft is Crap, Windows is Crap... So far so good... :) -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 14:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1572cb86-edff-41c7-baf4-db11b94dba6f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #352256 |
On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 3:24:50 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 4/25/16, 12:10 PM, in article > N8OdnVGyzcU-9oPKnZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny" > <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote: > > > On 2016-04-25, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > >> On 2016-04-24 1:36 PM, Marek Novotny wrote: > >>> On 2016-04-24, Popkin <Popkin@telus.net> wrote: > >>>> Personally, I think you need to seriously examine your reasons for > >>>> believing Apple, Mac OS X and the Mac are crap. I don't think they're > >>>> actually very grounded in reality. Personally, I think that if you > >>>> really didn't want me to "take this as argumentative", you would have > >>>> left out your comments about "Apple, OSX [sic] and the Mac" entirely, > >>>> but your basic irrational fanaticism wouldn't let you. > >>> > >>> My reasons are solid. The Mac sucks ass. How you feel is obviously > >>> different. You're more than entitled to love your Mac. Be happy. > >>> > >> > >> But one of the salient differences between you and I is I waste no time > >> saying things like "Linux sucks ass". > > > > True. I have to use a Mac for work so I'm a little bitter towards it as > > I don't like it at all. I don't like Adobe either. > > Elsewhere you showed an odd obsession with Dreamweaver. LOL! For someone claiming to have a "psych degree" it's ludicrous how you toss around terms like "obsession" so casually. It doesn't seem to occur to you that your doing so says far more about you than the target you're trying (unsuccessfully) to hit. (snip goofy trolling attempts by a pathologically lying lunatic)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-24 23:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nfkde2$8t1$2@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #351657 |
On 2016-04-24 1:01 PM, Popkin wrote:
>
>
> "Alan Baker" wrote in message news:nfj14d$6eh$1@news.datemas.de...
>
> On 2016-04-23 12:20 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>> On 2016-04-23, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>> On 2016-04-23 11:13 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>
>> // snip
>>
>>> So I say that that number represents the number of hard links...
>>>
>>> ...and you tell me that I "have no idea what that number represents"...
>>>
>>> ...and then you turn around and claim than you were telling me it was
>>> hard links all along?
>>
>> Okay, I can see how that looks so I'll just concede to your point. In my
>> own defense I was trying to explain it two different ways and it doesn't
>> make the kind of sense I intended. But year that was my intention. To
>> show you that making a directory in a directory vs ln as a command you
>> type in. But whatever, II have re-read it several times and it doesn't
>> even make sense to me. That shit happens to me all the time. I have
>> programs I wrote and end up re-writing them because sometimes things
>> just don't flow well. So whatever. +1 for you.
>>
>> // snip
>>
>>>> No, I think we're saying two different things. Yes I agree with the
>>>> above. That's what I showed you just now. But you still can't create a
>>>> hard link to the directory. I don't know why you keep missing this.
>>>
>>> Whether I PERSONALLY (or any other ordinary user) can create them has
>>> never been the issue here. The issue was someone claiming that "OSX is
>>> crap" because it can and does create hard links.
>>
>> Going to disagree with you again here. It was said right off that there
>> is good reason not to create, meaning the user, a hard link to a
>> directory and you spent a lot of time making statements that you should
>> concede, just as I have above, are misleading or ill conceived.
>
> No. That is NOT what was said AT ALL. This was never about whether it
> was a good idea for the user to create individual directory hard links.
>
> "Which isn't nearly as powerful as rsync. In fact, it is a desktop user
> tool, and dangerous as well. It uses hardlinked directories, which is
> forbidden for well known reasons in all of unix land. Naturally apple
> knows better..."
>
> Do you see that now?
>
>
>
>>
>> The fact of the matter is that you can't ln {directory name} {other} on
>> a directory. That's what was said right off and you keep contesting it.
>> You add in that Linux does it all the time. That to me says you're
>> saying it is okay. You're asking us to explain what would be bad about
>> that. And it has been explained in every possible way why it is bad and
>> forbidden. And honestly, we shouldn't have to make the distinction
>> between
>> what the OS does and what the user can do.
>
> What wasn't what was said right off.
>
>>
>> Like when you said UNIX System V allows it. But you fail to qualify it.
>> Only the Super user can and very likely for the reasons I mention which
>> are that as long as hard link isn't placed inside it self all will be
>> just fine. So on UNIX System V they likely feel that the Admin knows
>> what he is doing. But I also think Linux got it right. The risk is just
>> too great. And again, I know I explained why. Yet you never concede that
>> point and move on.
>
> And Mac OS X doesn't even allow root to create them. It uses them itself
> in one particular context beyond that which they are already used for on
> every Unix/Linux system.
>
> There was no point for me to concede, because what I was showing was
> that there were clearly systems designed where it was recognized that
> there is a utility to directory hard links even if casual use was
> something to be avoided.
>
>>
>> Now, I also get that someone somewhere in this thread added your
>> advocacy group to mix to still shit up. You don't see this part of the
>> conversation because you're not in our group but I have I think you
>> handled this well, and we invaded your group and that's not right. I
>> don't want to call your OSX shit in your group. I don't agree that's a
>> proper thing to do. You absolutely have my apology for that. I didn't
>> link the convsation to your group, but I didn't exactly remove it
>> either, mostly cause we got engaged in this argument.
>>
>> Alan, your advocacy group and you being there is your turf, your
>> business. I don't really care one way or the other. I respect your
>> space. I'm just trying to make a stupid point in that YOU CANNOT us ln
>> the way you seem to think we can. We can't. It is forbidden. That's
>> pretty much the bottom line.
>
> And I NEVER CLAIMED that you could use ln.
>
> "Which isn't nearly as powerful as rsync. In fact, it is a desktop user
> tool, and dangerous as well. It uses hardlinked directories, which is
> forbidden for well known reasons in all of unix land. Naturally apple
> knows better..."
>
>
>>
>>>> What we're talking about here is can you are can't you execute the
>>>> following:
>>>>
>>>> $ ln {directory} {other directory name}
>>>>
>>>> And the answer is no.
>>>
>>> I know that.
>>
>> Great. :) Have a beer on me.
>>
>>>> And as I already said above, re-read it for yourself, there is a hard
>>>> link to the directory itself and its parent. You're changing the
>>>> context
>>>> again. I am specifically saying that "you" can't type in the above
>>>> command and create a hard link to the directory. I am also saying that
>>>> the hard link count on a directory can be high, and I explained why
>>>> that
>>>> is. Hence showing making a directory within a directory and noting the
>>>> hard link count.
>>>
>>> Yet when I (accurately) described it as a hard link count, you said:
>>>
>>> "You obviously have no idea what that number represents on a directory."
>>
>> Yes, because what I am trying to say to you is that is has nothing to do
>> with ln. The system does what it does, the user is not doing this. The
>> user is creating a directory, not hard linking a directory.
>
> Since you're busy arguing your own strawman, let me know when you're done.
>
>>
>>>> But you still cannot hard link to that directory. And by that I'm being
>>>> specific to the ln command. The big difference here is in the details.
>>>> The point is to avoid placing a hard link of a directory inside itself.
>>>> What you see is a child - parent relationship. Where discussing the
>>>> paradox of a parent inside itself. That is vastly different from a
>>>> child
>>>> making hard link to its parent.
>>>
>>> When you look at the "." entry in a directory, it is not a child-parent
>>> relationship. It is the parent inside itself paradox and it doesn't
>>> cause any problems. You're close to understanding, but you're still not
>>> getting the big picture.
>>
>> Perhaps so, perhaps not. It's not however a directory within my
>> directory. I don't see mydir inside of mydir inside of mydir. If I say,
>> backup mydir and all of its contents it not going to endlessly loop the
>> contents of mydir. If a user used ln and made a hard link of mydir and
>> placed that hard link, called, sameasmydir, then that's exactly what
>> would happen, correct? And that's what we're talking about here. File
>> that under qualifying your statement if you like.
>
> Not if your OS had support for identifying directory hard link chains
> and you wrote your backup utility correctly...
>
> ....and especially if your OS didn't use them in the main file system,
> but confined their use to a special backup format.
>
>>
>> You like sticking to broad statements, I'm guessing because they keep
>> you out of trouble, where as I am trying to explain the nuts and bolts
>> and that can easily be picked apart.
>
> Broad statements like:
>
> "Which isn't nearly as powerful as rsync. In fact, it is a desktop user
> tool, and dangerous as well. It uses hardlinked directories, which is
> forbidden for well known reasons in all of unix land. Naturally apple
> knows better..."
>
> ....you mean?
>
>>
>>>> If we practiced good file system habits and simply didn't place a hard
>>>> link into itself we'd be doing the same thing. But because you can move
>>>> a hard link anywhere within the same file system, there is a danger of
>>>> playing a hard linked directory into itself and thus creating a
>>>> paradox.
>>>> That is why it is not allowed.
>>>
>>> That is why is not recommended, yes.
>>
>> That's why it is forbidden in Linux, yes.
>
> Bully for Linux, but in the context that the original poster used, it
> isn't "forbidden". It is a normal part of the file system.
>
>>
>>>> When I create test and go into test and make test2. The file system,
>>>> not
>>>> me, is making a hard link to its parent. I am not. I'm not typing in an
>>>> ln command. I'm just creating a directory. That's the distinction here.
>>>
>>> And when Mac OS X creates Time Machine backups, that is the file system
>>> creating them as well.
>>
>> Not entirely the same though. And you can Google it. They are getting
>> into the hazard. That's why by their own admission directories aren't
>> exactly correct. And they start from scratch when they detect a problem.
>> But Time Machine is a hack from my point of view. Apple is playing where
>> they shouldn't, largely because they want the speed benefit of not
>> scanning the whole file system for event changes.
>
> YOU Google it. I think you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
>
> Time Machine doesn't start from scratch when it detects a problem.
>
> The reason they use directory hard links has NOTHING to do with scanning
> the file system to be backed up.
>
>>
>> A modern file system like ZFS knows the delta changes and can snap shot
>> those along with the prior snapshot to give you the full picture without
>> this kind of hack. HFS is simply not a good file system. And Apple,
>> perhaps feels locked in, I don't know. I'll simply say this. Time
>> Machine in my humble opinion is a hack. It seems to work so I won't
>> disparage it beyond opining that it is a hack. I myself would rather
>> have a more robust file system like ZFS.
>
> Do you...
>
> ....actually have a ZFS file system?
>
>>
>>> But you and others were insisting that "OSX is crap" and using that as
>>> an example of how.
>>
>> Yes, that's a fair statement. Someone, perhaps me I don't remember, said
>> OSX was crap and used that as part of their argument. I do personally
>> feel that Apple, OSX and the Mac are crap. I think Time Machine is a
>> hack. It's my opinion and I don't wish to go into your group and
>> pontificate such views. I don't think it is appropriate. No more
>> appropriate then you coming to the Linux group to state Linux is crap.
>> So don't take this as argumentative. In fact I am trying, perhaps not
>> doing it well, but none the less trying to apologize to you and your
>> group for the invasion. Worthless assholes in my group are directly
>> trying to mesh two groups, Linux Advocacy and Mac Advocacy into an
>> argument. We're essentially both being played for their enjoyment.
>>
>> I think we're on the same page. If so, let's just move on. I don't see
>> the point in furthering this.
>
> Personally, I think you need to seriously examine your reasons for
> believing Apple, Mac OS X and the Mac are crap. I don't think they're
> actually very grounded in reality. Personally, I think that if you
> really didn't want me to "take this as argumentative", you would have
> left out your comments about "Apple, OSX [sic] and the Mac" entirely,
> but your basic irrational fanaticism wouldn't let you.
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> My goodness!!! You're in quite a swoon, Dickhead.
Michael!
Delighted to see you've tried and failed to create yet another anonymous
sock puppet!
:-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-24 17:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D342B4DE.70D29%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #351523 |
On 4/23/16, 12:20 PM, in article
DJudndm2yKqLVobKnZ2dnUU7-L3NnZ2d@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny"
<marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote:
...
>> Whether I PERSONALLY (or any other ordinary user) can create them has
>> never been the issue here. The issue was someone claiming that "OSX is
>> crap" because it can and does create hard links.
>
> Going to disagree with you again here. It was said right off that there
> is good reason not to create, meaning the user, a hard link to a
> directory and you spent a lot of time making statements that you should
> concede, just as I have above, are misleading or ill conceived.
Can you show any example of someone who has?
Do you think an OS should protect a user from doing things they might not
want to?
> The fact of the matter is that you can't ln {directory name} {other} on
> a directory. That's what was said right off and you keep contesting it.
Not that I have seen. Can you quote where he did so?
> You add in that Linux does it all the time. That to me says you're
> saying it is okay. You're asking us to explain what would be bad about
> that.
Again, not that I have seen. I see no reason to suspect he does not know why
THAT would be bad - hence his use of other examples.
...
--
* OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-23 20:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <glkdif93a.fjie@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #351518 |
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
> On 2016-04-23 11:13 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>
>> When I create test and go into test and make test2. The file system, not
>> me, is making a hard link to its parent. I am not. I'm not typing in an
>> ln command. I'm just creating a directory. That's the distinction here.
>
> And when Mac OS X creates Time Machine backups, that is the file system
> creating them as well.
>
In Linux, it is the kernel, not the filesystem, which prevents user (root
or otherwise) from hardlinking to a directory. The ln command comes
from GNU. It is not part of Linux, so its options are irrelevant.
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/namei.c
<quote>
/**
* safe_hardlink_source - Check for safe hardlink conditions
* @inode: the source inode to hardlink from
*
* Return false if at least one of the following conditions:
* - inode is not a regular file
* - inode is setuid
* - inode is setgid and group-exec
* - access failure for read and write
*
* Otherwise returns true.
*/
static bool safe_hardlink_source(struct inode *inode)
{
[...]
</quote>
Note: "inode is not a regular file"
A directory is not a regular file.
anon@lowtide:~$ touch afile
anon@lowtide:~$ mkdir adir
anon@lowtide:~$ test -f afile
anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
0
anon@lowtide:~$ test -f adir
anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
1
anon@lowtide:~$
> But you and others were insisting that "OSX is crap" and using that as
> an example of how.
OS X allows a user to write an app with link() syscall and hard
link to directory. That is the difference.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-23 23:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nfhplp$ing$2@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #351528 |
On 2016-04-23 1:00 PM, owl wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>> On 2016-04-23 11:13 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>
>>>
>>> When I create test and go into test and make test2. The file system, not
>>> me, is making a hard link to its parent. I am not. I'm not typing in an
>>> ln command. I'm just creating a directory. That's the distinction here.
>>
>> And when Mac OS X creates Time Machine backups, that is the file system
>> creating them as well.
>>
>
> In Linux, it is the kernel, not the filesystem, which prevents user (root
> or otherwise) from hardlinking to a directory. The ln command comes
> from GNU. It is not part of Linux, so its options are irrelevant.
>
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/namei.c
> <quote>
> /**
> * safe_hardlink_source - Check for safe hardlink conditions
> * @inode: the source inode to hardlink from
> *
> * Return false if at least one of the following conditions:
> * - inode is not a regular file
> * - inode is setuid
> * - inode is setgid and group-exec
> * - access failure for read and write
> *
> * Otherwise returns true.
> */
> static bool safe_hardlink_source(struct inode *inode)
> {
> [...]
> </quote>
>
>
> Note: "inode is not a regular file"
> A directory is not a regular file.
>
> anon@lowtide:~$ touch afile
> anon@lowtide:~$ mkdir adir
> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f afile
> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
> 0
> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f adir
> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
> 1
> anon@lowtide:~$
>
>
>> But you and others were insisting that "OSX is crap" and using that as
>> an example of how.
>
>
> OS X allows a user to write an app with link() syscall and hard
> link to directory. That is the difference.
>
>
Does it really?
Cite, please.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-24 15:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ghdkbmcfk93.fjaie@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #351583 |
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
> On 2016-04-23 1:00 PM, owl wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>> On 2016-04-23 11:13 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> When I create test and go into test and make test2. The file system, not
>>>> me, is making a hard link to its parent. I am not. I'm not typing in an
>>>> ln command. I'm just creating a directory. That's the distinction here.
>>>
>>> And when Mac OS X creates Time Machine backups, that is the file system
>>> creating them as well.
>>>
>>
>> In Linux, it is the kernel, not the filesystem, which prevents user (root
>> or otherwise) from hardlinking to a directory. The ln command comes
>> from GNU. It is not part of Linux, so its options are irrelevant.
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/namei.c
>> <quote>
>> /**
>> * safe_hardlink_source - Check for safe hardlink conditions
>> * @inode: the source inode to hardlink from
>> *
>> * Return false if at least one of the following conditions:
>> * - inode is not a regular file
>> * - inode is setuid
>> * - inode is setgid and group-exec
>> * - access failure for read and write
>> *
>> * Otherwise returns true.
>> */
>> static bool safe_hardlink_source(struct inode *inode)
>> {
>> [...]
>> </quote>
>>
>>
>> Note: "inode is not a regular file"
>> A directory is not a regular file.
>>
>> anon@lowtide:~$ touch afile
>> anon@lowtide:~$ mkdir adir
>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f afile
>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>> 0
>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f adir
>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>> 1
>> anon@lowtide:~$
>>
>>
>>> But you and others were insisting that "OSX is crap" and using that as
>>> an example of how.
>>
>>
>> OS X allows a user to write an app with link() syscall and hard
>> link to directory. That is the difference.
>>
>>
>
> Does it really?
>
> Cite, please.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1432540/creating-directory-hard-links-in-macos-x
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-24 10:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nfj00f$1nf$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #351625 |
On 2016-04-24 8:58 AM, owl wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>> On 2016-04-23 1:00 PM, owl wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2016-04-23 11:13 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> When I create test and go into test and make test2. The file system, not
>>>>> me, is making a hard link to its parent. I am not. I'm not typing in an
>>>>> ln command. I'm just creating a directory. That's the distinction here.
>>>>
>>>> And when Mac OS X creates Time Machine backups, that is the file system
>>>> creating them as well.
>>>>
>>>
>>> In Linux, it is the kernel, not the filesystem, which prevents user (root
>>> or otherwise) from hardlinking to a directory. The ln command comes
>>> from GNU. It is not part of Linux, so its options are irrelevant.
>>>
>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/namei.c
>>> <quote>
>>> /**
>>> * safe_hardlink_source - Check for safe hardlink conditions
>>> * @inode: the source inode to hardlink from
>>> *
>>> * Return false if at least one of the following conditions:
>>> * - inode is not a regular file
>>> * - inode is setuid
>>> * - inode is setgid and group-exec
>>> * - access failure for read and write
>>> *
>>> * Otherwise returns true.
>>> */
>>> static bool safe_hardlink_source(struct inode *inode)
>>> {
>>> [...]
>>> </quote>
>>>
>>>
>>> Note: "inode is not a regular file"
>>> A directory is not a regular file.
>>>
>>> anon@lowtide:~$ touch afile
>>> anon@lowtide:~$ mkdir adir
>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f afile
>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>> 0
>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f adir
>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>> 1
>>> anon@lowtide:~$
>>>
>>>
>>>> But you and others were insisting that "OSX is crap" and using that as
>>>> an example of how.
>>>
>>>
>>> OS X allows a user to write an app with link() syscall and hard
>>> link to directory. That is the difference.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Does it really?
>>
>> Cite, please.
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1432540/creating-directory-hard-links-in-macos-x
>
Apparently, you didn't read very far.
There are significant limitations on the ability to create a directory
hard link:
'Leopard at the time of this writing requires the following conditions
to be met for a directory hard link’s creation to be allowed. In the
following list, “source” refers to the existing directory that will be
pointed at by the new directory hard link “destination” that’s being
created.
The file system must be journaled HFS+.
The parent directories of the source and destination must be different.
The source’s parent must not be the root directory.
The destination must not be in the root directory.
The destination must not be a descendent of the source.
The destination must not have any ancestor that’s a directory hard link.'
<http://osxbook.com/blog/2008/11/09/hfsdebug-40-and-new-hfs-features/>
And if you actually read THAT further, you'll see the OS treats
directory hard links specially in order to prevent some of the problems
that folks have been claiming from coming to pass.
:-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-24 18:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ghkjdkei0.at@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #351637 |
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
> On 2016-04-24 8:58 AM, owl wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>> On 2016-04-23 1:00 PM, owl wrote:
>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 2016-04-23 11:13 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When I create test and go into test and make test2. The file system, not
>>>>>> me, is making a hard link to its parent. I am not. I'm not typing in an
>>>>>> ln command. I'm just creating a directory. That's the distinction here.
>>>>>
>>>>> And when Mac OS X creates Time Machine backups, that is the file system
>>>>> creating them as well.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In Linux, it is the kernel, not the filesystem, which prevents user (root
>>>> or otherwise) from hardlinking to a directory. The ln command comes
>>>> from GNU. It is not part of Linux, so its options are irrelevant.
>>>>
>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/namei.c
>>>> <quote>
>>>> /**
>>>> * safe_hardlink_source - Check for safe hardlink conditions
>>>> * @inode: the source inode to hardlink from
>>>> *
>>>> * Return false if at least one of the following conditions:
>>>> * - inode is not a regular file
>>>> * - inode is setuid
>>>> * - inode is setgid and group-exec
>>>> * - access failure for read and write
>>>> *
>>>> * Otherwise returns true.
>>>> */
>>>> static bool safe_hardlink_source(struct inode *inode)
>>>> {
>>>> [...]
>>>> </quote>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Note: "inode is not a regular file"
>>>> A directory is not a regular file.
>>>>
>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ touch afile
>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ mkdir adir
>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f afile
>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>>> 0
>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f adir
>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>>> 1
>>>> anon@lowtide:~$
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> But you and others were insisting that "OSX is crap" and using that as
>>>>> an example of how.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OS X allows a user to write an app with link() syscall and hard
>>>> link to directory. That is the difference.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Does it really?
>>>
>>> Cite, please.
>>
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1432540/creating-directory-hard-links-in-macos-x
>>
>
> Apparently, you didn't read very far.
>
> There are significant limitations on the ability to create a directory
> hard link:
>
You didn't ask about limitations. You asked for a cite backing my claim
that OS X allows the user to create hard links to directories. I gave
you one.
> 'Leopard at the time of this writing requires the following conditions
> to be met for a directory hard link’s creation to be allowed. In the
> following list, “source” refers to the existing directory that will be
> pointed at by the new directory hard link “destination” that’s being
> created.
>
That quote is not from the link I posted, so I don't know why you think
it is relevant to how much I read of the link I posted.
> The file system must be journaled HFS+.
> The parent directories of the source and destination must be different.
> The source’s parent must not be the root directory.
> The destination must not be in the root directory.
> The destination must not be a descendent of the source.
> The destination must not have any ancestor that’s a directory hard link.'
>
> <http://osxbook.com/blog/2008/11/09/hfsdebug-40-and-new-hfs-features/>
>
> And if you actually read THAT further, you'll see the OS treats
> directory hard links specially in order to prevent some of the problems
> that folks have been claiming from coming to pass.
>
I am familiar with that blog post. I read it several years ago, and it
was discussed here on COLA at that time. I don't have a Mac to experiment
with, but you are free to compile that source code on your Mac (they do
still come with gcc, right?) and do some testing that proves that what
you claim is true as far as this capability of creating hard links to
directories being immune to the problems discussed earlier in this thread.
Further, I'm waiting for a citation backing your claim that OS X's
special treatment of directory hard links (file hard links are similarly
given special treatment, it seems) was designed to prevent just such
problems.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-24 12:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nfj542$m6d$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #351648 |
On 2016-04-24 11:52 AM, owl wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>> On 2016-04-24 8:58 AM, owl wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2016-04-23 1:00 PM, owl wrote:
>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2016-04-23 11:13 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When I create test and go into test and make test2. The file system, not
>>>>>>> me, is making a hard link to its parent. I am not. I'm not typing in an
>>>>>>> ln command. I'm just creating a directory. That's the distinction here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And when Mac OS X creates Time Machine backups, that is the file system
>>>>>> creating them as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In Linux, it is the kernel, not the filesystem, which prevents user (root
>>>>> or otherwise) from hardlinking to a directory. The ln command comes
>>>>> from GNU. It is not part of Linux, so its options are irrelevant.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/namei.c
>>>>> <quote>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * safe_hardlink_source - Check for safe hardlink conditions
>>>>> * @inode: the source inode to hardlink from
>>>>> *
>>>>> * Return false if at least one of the following conditions:
>>>>> * - inode is not a regular file
>>>>> * - inode is setuid
>>>>> * - inode is setgid and group-exec
>>>>> * - access failure for read and write
>>>>> *
>>>>> * Otherwise returns true.
>>>>> */
>>>>> static bool safe_hardlink_source(struct inode *inode)
>>>>> {
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> </quote>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Note: "inode is not a regular file"
>>>>> A directory is not a regular file.
>>>>>
>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ touch afile
>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ mkdir adir
>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f afile
>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>>>> 0
>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f adir
>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>>>> 1
>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> But you and others were insisting that "OSX is crap" and using that as
>>>>>> an example of how.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OS X allows a user to write an app with link() syscall and hard
>>>>> link to directory. That is the difference.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does it really?
>>>>
>>>> Cite, please.
>>>
>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1432540/creating-directory-hard-links-in-macos-x
>>>
>>
>> Apparently, you didn't read very far.
>>
>> There are significant limitations on the ability to create a directory
>> hard link:
>>
>
> You didn't ask about limitations. You asked for a cite backing my claim
> that OS X allows the user to create hard links to directories. I gave
> you one.
And Linux does the same.
>
>
>> 'Leopard at the time of this writing requires the following conditions
>> to be met for a directory hard link’s creation to be allowed. In the
>> following list, “source” refers to the existing directory that will be
>> pointed at by the new directory hard link “destination” that’s being
>> created.
>>
>
>
> That quote is not from the link I posted, so I don't know why you think
> it is relevant to how much I read of the link I posted.
It is linked to at the link you posted.
>
>
>> The file system must be journaled HFS+.
>> The parent directories of the source and destination must be different.
>> The source’s parent must not be the root directory.
>> The destination must not be in the root directory.
>> The destination must not be a descendent of the source.
>> The destination must not have any ancestor that’s a directory hard link.'
>>
>> <http://osxbook.com/blog/2008/11/09/hfsdebug-40-and-new-hfs-features/>
>>
>> And if you actually read THAT further, you'll see the OS treats
>> directory hard links specially in order to prevent some of the problems
>> that folks have been claiming from coming to pass.
>>
>
> I am familiar with that blog post. I read it several years ago, and it
> was discussed here on COLA at that time. I don't have a Mac to experiment
> with, but you are free to compile that source code on your Mac (they do
> still come with gcc, right?) and do some testing that proves that what
> you claim is true as far as this capability of creating hard links to
> directories being immune to the problems discussed earlier in this thread.
>
> Further, I'm waiting for a citation backing your claim that OS X's
> special treatment of directory hard links (file hard links are similarly
> given special treatment, it seems) was designed to prevent just such
> problems.
Why do you think they would do it at all, then?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-24 19:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ghjd03a.f3@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #351649 |
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
> On 2016-04-24 11:52 AM, owl wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>> On 2016-04-24 8:58 AM, owl wrote:
>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 2016-04-23 1:00 PM, owl wrote:
>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2016-04-23 11:13 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When I create test and go into test and make test2. The file system, not
>>>>>>>> me, is making a hard link to its parent. I am not. I'm not typing in an
>>>>>>>> ln command. I'm just creating a directory. That's the distinction here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And when Mac OS X creates Time Machine backups, that is the file system
>>>>>>> creating them as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In Linux, it is the kernel, not the filesystem, which prevents user (root
>>>>>> or otherwise) from hardlinking to a directory. The ln command comes
>>>>>> from GNU. It is not part of Linux, so its options are irrelevant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/namei.c
>>>>>> <quote>
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> * safe_hardlink_source - Check for safe hardlink conditions
>>>>>> * @inode: the source inode to hardlink from
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * Return false if at least one of the following conditions:
>>>>>> * - inode is not a regular file
>>>>>> * - inode is setuid
>>>>>> * - inode is setgid and group-exec
>>>>>> * - access failure for read and write
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * Otherwise returns true.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> static bool safe_hardlink_source(struct inode *inode)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>> </quote>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note: "inode is not a regular file"
>>>>>> A directory is not a regular file.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ touch afile
>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ mkdir adir
>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f afile
>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>>>>> 0
>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f adir
>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But you and others were insisting that "OSX is crap" and using that as
>>>>>>> an example of how.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OS X allows a user to write an app with link() syscall and hard
>>>>>> link to directory. That is the difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Does it really?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cite, please.
>>>>
>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1432540/creating-directory-hard-links-in-macos-x
>>>>
>>>
>>> Apparently, you didn't read very far.
>>>
>>> There are significant limitations on the ability to create a directory
>>> hard link:
>>>
>>
>> You didn't ask about limitations. You asked for a cite backing my claim
>> that OS X allows the user to create hard links to directories. I gave
>> you one.
>
>
> And Linux does the same.
>
It does not.
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ cat blah.c
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
if (argc != 3) {
fprintf(stderr,"Use: hlink <src_dir> <target_dir>\n");
return 1;
}
int ret = link(argv[1],argv[2]);
if (ret != 0)
perror("link");
return ret;
}
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ gcc -Wall -o blah blah.c
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ touch afile
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ mkdir adir
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ ln afile adir/afilehardlink
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ mkdir adir2
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ ln adir adir2/adirhardlink
ln: ‘adir’: hard link not allowed for directory
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ su
Password:
root@lowtide:/home/anon/code/hardlinks# ln adir adir2/adirhardlink
ln: ‘adir’: hard link not allowed for directory
root@lowtide:/home/anon/code/hardlinks# exit
exit
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ ./blah adir adir2/adirhardlink
link: Operation not permitted
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ su
Password:
root@lowtide:/home/anon/code/hardlinks# ./blah adir adir2/hardlinkg
link: Operation not permitted
root@lowtide:/home/anon/code/hardlinks# exit
exit
anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$
>>> <http://osxbook.com/blog/2008/11/09/hfsdebug-40-and-new-hfs-features/>
>>>
>>> And if you actually read THAT further, you'll see the OS treats
>>> directory hard links specially in order to prevent some of the problems
>>> that folks have been claiming from coming to pass.
>>>
>>
>> I am familiar with that blog post. I read it several years ago, and it
>> was discussed here on COLA at that time. I don't have a Mac to experiment
>> with, but you are free to compile that source code on your Mac (they do
>> still come with gcc, right?) and do some testing that proves that what
>> you claim is true as far as this capability of creating hard links to
>> directories being immune to the problems discussed earlier in this thread.
>>
>> Further, I'm waiting for a citation backing your claim that OS X's
>> special treatment of directory hard links (file hard links are similarly
>> given special treatment, it seems) was designed to prevent just such
>> problems.
>
> Why do you think they would do it at all, then?
>
Who knows? But you are just guessing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-24 12:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nfj7a2$upo$2@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #351652 |
On 2016-04-24 12:31 PM, owl wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>> On 2016-04-24 11:52 AM, owl wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2016-04-24 8:58 AM, owl wrote:
>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2016-04-23 1:00 PM, owl wrote:
>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2016-04-23 11:13 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When I create test and go into test and make test2. The file system, not
>>>>>>>>> me, is making a hard link to its parent. I am not. I'm not typing in an
>>>>>>>>> ln command. I'm just creating a directory. That's the distinction here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And when Mac OS X creates Time Machine backups, that is the file system
>>>>>>>> creating them as well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In Linux, it is the kernel, not the filesystem, which prevents user (root
>>>>>>> or otherwise) from hardlinking to a directory. The ln command comes
>>>>>>> from GNU. It is not part of Linux, so its options are irrelevant.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/namei.c
>>>>>>> <quote>
>>>>>>> /**
>>>>>>> * safe_hardlink_source - Check for safe hardlink conditions
>>>>>>> * @inode: the source inode to hardlink from
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> * Return false if at least one of the following conditions:
>>>>>>> * - inode is not a regular file
>>>>>>> * - inode is setuid
>>>>>>> * - inode is setgid and group-exec
>>>>>>> * - access failure for read and write
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> * Otherwise returns true.
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>> static bool safe_hardlink_source(struct inode *inode)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> </quote>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note: "inode is not a regular file"
>>>>>>> A directory is not a regular file.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ touch afile
>>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ mkdir adir
>>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f afile
>>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ test -f adir
>>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$ echo $?
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> anon@lowtide:~$
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But you and others were insisting that "OSX is crap" and using that as
>>>>>>>> an example of how.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OS X allows a user to write an app with link() syscall and hard
>>>>>>> link to directory. That is the difference.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does it really?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cite, please.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1432540/creating-directory-hard-links-in-macos-x
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Apparently, you didn't read very far.
>>>>
>>>> There are significant limitations on the ability to create a directory
>>>> hard link:
>>>>
>>>
>>> You didn't ask about limitations. You asked for a cite backing my claim
>>> that OS X allows the user to create hard links to directories. I gave
>>> you one.
>>
>>
>> And Linux does the same.
>>
>
> It does not.
>
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ cat blah.c
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
> if (argc != 3) {
> fprintf(stderr,"Use: hlink <src_dir> <target_dir>\n");
> return 1;
> }
> int ret = link(argv[1],argv[2]);
> if (ret != 0)
> perror("link");
> return ret;
> }
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ gcc -Wall -o blah blah.c
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ touch afile
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ mkdir adir
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ ln afile adir/afilehardlink
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ mkdir adir2
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ ln adir adir2/adirhardlink
> ln: ‘adir’: hard link not allowed for directory
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ su
> Password:
> root@lowtide:/home/anon/code/hardlinks# ln adir adir2/adirhardlink
> ln: ‘adir’: hard link not allowed for directory
> root@lowtide:/home/anon/code/hardlinks# exit
> exit
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ ./blah adir adir2/adirhardlink
> link: Operation not permitted
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$ su
> Password:
> root@lowtide:/home/anon/code/hardlinks# ./blah adir adir2/hardlinkg
> link: Operation not permitted
> root@lowtide:/home/anon/code/hardlinks# exit
> exit
> anon@lowtide:~/code/hardlinks$
>
>
>>>> <http://osxbook.com/blog/2008/11/09/hfsdebug-40-and-new-hfs-features/>
>>>>
>>>> And if you actually read THAT further, you'll see the OS treats
>>>> directory hard links specially in order to prevent some of the problems
>>>> that folks have been claiming from coming to pass.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am familiar with that blog post. I read it several years ago, and it
>>> was discussed here on COLA at that time. I don't have a Mac to experiment
>>> with, but you are free to compile that source code on your Mac (they do
>>> still come with gcc, right?) and do some testing that proves that what
>>> you claim is true as far as this capability of creating hard links to
>>> directories being immune to the problems discussed earlier in this thread.
>>>
>>> Further, I'm waiting for a citation backing your claim that OS X's
>>> special treatment of directory hard links (file hard links are similarly
>>> given special treatment, it seems) was designed to prevent just such
>>> problems.
>>
>> Why do you think they would do it at all, then?
>>
>
> Who knows? But you are just guessing.
>
>
No. I'm not.
I'm using logic.
But remember: this was never about whether the user could create
arbitrary hard links to directories.
This was about one of you linux fanatics declaring "OSX is crap" and
saying that using hard linked directories was an example of this.
But the truth is, whether you can right a userland program to create
them or not, Linuxes, Unix and Mac OS X (which is a Unix) OSs all create
directory hard links in the file system.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 23 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 23 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web