1237a07ea007
tech



Hello Wayne - 

WC>> Vimage 

CA>> Steven is thinking of removing the vgalib from BL2. If he
CA>> does then LINKS will no longer display graphics on demand.
CA>> I've mentioned I disagree with this change. 

WC> Depends on weather or not he includes an alternative, I'd
WC> ask him first. 

That was already mentioned. He feels those who want LINKS to do
the graphics can install what is required themselves. I doubt a
newbie could manage this feat. 

--8<--cut 

CA>> It might be a good idea to get that elist working at your
CA>> end if at all possible.

WC> I've got SUVPC? hooked up but not yet the monroe? list,
WC> which is the better of the two? 

Weeeellll ... on the tmonroe elist there was a female secretary
who was very adamante about using DOS to do her word processing
even though her supervisor used MSWord. I advised her to go
with the flow and use MSWord. This angered her and afer several
messages were exchanged between us she finally admitted to
being legally blind (which I did not know until then). I said
that I had been told that Microsoft had accomodations in their
OS and their software for sight-impaired persons as far back as
DOS and she went ballistic. Apparently she cannot afford a
Windows compatible screen reader and is afraid to ask her
company to buy one for fear they will end her employment rather
than spend the money. I suggested gov might pay a portion of
the cost as an incentive to her employer and she only became
more angry. 

I tried pointing out to her that my own website's were capable
of being used by text-only browsers (cheaper screen readers)
and that I had links to Microsofts free updates to make DOS
work for sight-impaired persons. I explained that I had read
the 'Bobby' website about arranging access to impaired persons
and followed most of their suggestions. She insisted I was
prejudiced against her and ANOTHER female jumped in also
sight-impaired and the two of them began a series of personal
attacks and insults aimed at me (daily). When the guys joined
in on their side I dropped tmonroe. 

There is one person there who continually posts 'news flash'
URLs that pertain to the latest and greatest software (not
survpc related in any way) and another who has taken other
people's source code, modified it, and put 'wiz' in the name
claiming it to be his own work. I asked one author he claimed
had given him permission to do this and was told this was a lie. 

Steven Darnold left tmonroe some weeks before I did without
telling anyone if that means anything? He was having problems
there too. 

Tmonroe seems a bunch of dysfunctional losers to me but I guess
Howard likes it there? 

CA>> There are people asking for 'wireless pcmia networking' to
CA>> replace things like vgalib within BL2. At present I am the
CA>> only voice that disagrees with this. 

WC> The only one _heard_ so far. I've no objection to that
WC> being offered as an option or add on but as the default I
WC> must say NYET. 

Steven uses a notebook most of the time apparently and another
user has peeked his interest in setting one up. 

WC>> Basic Linux based on SW 3.5. Soon as I figure enough of
WC>> this stuff out it's bye bye Verizon, save 100+/ year and
WC>> get a less restrictive user agreement. 

CA>> I've seen ISPs drop SMTP access entirely but not tell
CA>> customers. They probably get into legal difficulties
CA>> allowing spammers to use their server and solve the
CA>> problem by shutting down SMTP totally then stalling while
CA>> customers blame themselves for not getting access. 

WC> Try this, something I've recently discovered. I ran either
WC> telnet or scan into outgoing.verizon.net, change to your
WC> SMTP setting, and got the DNS, plugged "scan"
WC> ????.????.????.???? and Basic Linux started at 255 working
WC> on downwards identifying each and every available port!
WC> Neato though now I need to read up on scripts to take that
WC> and direct the output into a file. 

AFAIK the same as DOS, "> " will redirect it to a file? 

WC> Yes port 25 comes up .email.conf's default SMTP, identifies
WC> itself as such and proclaims it "open", but that still
WC> doesn't tell me what to do about getting mail out. 

It's a long-shot but the port being there does not mean the
server is actually monitoring the port? 

>
>        ,                                        ,
>      o/      Charles_Angelich  - DOS Ghost       \o       ,
>       __o/
>     / >  www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/faf/  < \   __\__
 

___ * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/

--- Maximus/2 3.01