RG> Linus Torvolds obviously thinks the same way, which is why
RG> Linux doesn't have a registry.

> Why do you keep telling me what I already know?

RG> If you already KNEW that then why the fuck did you keep talking
RG> about the "Linux Registry" in at least THREE different
RG> postings?

 A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Wasn't it you who
said it was the same as autoexec.bat, and I agreed? 

 I think the uniwankers call it a boot-script, don't they, and the
script then gets Linux to check all the hardware, set the parameters
by reading the many configuration files in /etc/... *just* like the
fucking registry in Windows! 

 I *know* there is not a single file named "registry" (actually
system.dat), but it does the same thing... it checks the setup off the
*least* relaible piece of hardware in the sytem - the hard drive - and
*that's* what I find so bloody silly.

> What Linux*does* have (or perhaps it is only the SUSe
> incarnation) is a pause while it checks all the config files and
> does a quick whip-around the hardware, *exactly* as Win98 does

RG> You're right, it must be a SUSE thing. It certainly isn't a
RG> *LINUX* thing. 

 Linux doesn't have a boot script? 

Regards,
Bob

--- BQWK Alpha 0.5