(OT) Nice try dude
Zeruel333 The Hentai One
opened the letter and saw a bunch of code (had to highlight it because it was
black text with a black background) and a message from aol saying
"Only the first part of this message is displayed. The entire message has been
turned into a text attachment, which you can retrieve by selecting Download.
Once downloaded, open it with a word processor or text editor for reading"
Which means one thing: Mr. Dumbshit sent an attachment that was a virus that
was over the aol size limit (I think he encoded it into the email to activate
when I opened it and that caused it to get screwed up because there's a limit
on how big an email can be) and aol did their job of fucking stuff up to it.
I also discovered it was someone on Direct Connect that did it to me with this
address as the return address: ba...@loveme.d2g.com (too bad I cant reply and
tell him how fucking stupid he is)
Everyone should now know that I NEVER open attachments from an unknown sender;
this oughta teach him a lesson
---
"OH, MY GOD!! SOMEBODY PUT SHIT IN MY PANTS!!!!!!!"
Rudolf Polzer
> well, I opened my email today to see something that looked like a virus, so I
> opened the letter and saw a bunch of code (had to highlight it because it was
> black text with a black background) and a message from aol saying
> "Only the first part of this message is displayed. The entire message has been
> turned into a text attachment, which you can retrieve by selecting Download.
> Once downloaded, open it with a word processor or text editor for reading"
> Which means one thing: Mr. Dumbshit sent an attachment that was a virus that
> was over the aol size limit (I think he encoded it into the email to activate
> when I opened it and that caused it to get screwed up because there's a limit
> on how big an email can be) and aol did their job of fucking stuff up to it.
So there *is* something about AOL which is not bad. Thanks for your
information!
> I also discovered it was someone on Direct Connect that did it to me with this
> address as the return address: ba...@loveme.d2g.com (too bad I cant reply and
> tell him how fucking stupid he is)
This address could even be valid: the domain part is a valid dns2go
address which has a correct MX entry in the mail server.
So probably you can only mail him while he's online. But if he uses such
an address, he has to be online 24h/day. Otherwise the address is not
valid and he's a - as you already pointed out - Mr. Dumbshit.
BTW: Does your 'spam protection' in your mail address (the appended word
"animefan") really work? I wouldn't think so because I suppose most
spam scripts see 'aol.' and no matter what comes after that, it's
replaced by 'com'.
> Everyone should now know that I NEVER open attachments from an unknown sender;
> this oughta teach him a lesson
You also should never open attachments from known senders. Viruses often
come from known senders who have you in their address book, while
trojans often come from almost unknown senders that read your mail
address somewhere.
But I never saw a virus which announced its attachment in a separate
mail... so I only open attachments that are safe (image formats are
safe) or have been announced or requested. No matter who it's from.
I think it was a trojan (he probably wanted to access or destroy data on
your computer). The size of the file tells me that - viruses are
normally small enough to get through these size limits. Try to find
out the mail provider he's sent it with and report him to his ISP.
--
my$e=0;sub Q($){$e+=$_*(7,3,1)[$i++%3]for split//,$_[0];return $e%10}my
$b=1e8+int rand(1e9-1e8);my$g=sprintf'%02d'x3,rand 100,1+rand 12,1+rand
28;my($c,$h,$f)=map Q $_,$b,$g,$e;my$x=Q("$b$c$g$h$e$f");print"$b$cD ".
"$g$h $e$f $x\n";731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731731
Zeruel333 The Hentai One
>"animefan") really work? I wouldn't think so because I suppose most
>spam scripts see 'aol.' and no matter what comes after that, it's
>replaced by 'com'.
well, I do receive spam but I think it's because I signed myself up to a bunch
of mailing lists. But I dont think people in newsgroups spam me because they
see "The Hentai One" and/or my sig and decide I'm not worth it :P
Disaster
LMAO
AOL screws up and for once it's not a bad thing.
--
Carpe Jugulum
Disaster
Disaster's Fan Fiction - http://www.disfanfic.net
DSE - For the Public - http://www.disfanfic.net/DSE
JAE FAQ - http://www.evafaq.com
Pen^3's JAE FAQ - http://faq.pen3.cjb.net
Convention Reports - http://www.disfanfic.net/conventions
Disaster
> > BTW: Does your 'spam protection' in your mail address (the appended
word
> > "animefan") really work? I wouldn't think so because I suppose most
> > spam scripts see 'aol.' and no matter what comes after that, it's
> > replaced by 'com'.
>
> well, I do receive spam but I think it's because I signed myself up to a
bunch
> of mailing lists. But I dont think people in newsgroups spam me because
they
> see "The Hentai One" and/or my sig and decide I'm not worth it :P
Actually Spammers probably look at the size of the group and not bother
with it. If they saw your name then a lot of spammers would jump at the
opportunity to throw you into there mailing lists.
Zlmndra
> with it. If they saw your name then a lot of spammers would jump at the
> opportunity to throw you into there mailing lists.
> --
Speaking of spam, what's with all this Focaltek stuff? I was away for about
a week, and when I came back they keep popping up with wallpaper offers and
such.
Z
OnsenMark
<tamago...@NOSPAMPLShotmail.com> writes:
They suck, and I wish they would die.
Mark. 8)
- proud member of the WGPS and the SDA!
-UtenaCode(1.1) U:6 F:Wa+++Ju++ D:Ak->Sh- X:*** a:39++ M:f ZUM(w/Banyuu
Inryoku)
"BE HAPPY FOR ME AND MY SHOE. O_O" - Verthandi
http://www.evafaq.com
Tim Hammerquist
> So there *is* something about AOL which is not bad. Thanks for your
> information!
I'm sure it wasn't intentional, and I hope this doesn't interfere with
your opinion of this monolithic cruftball. ;)
> You also should never open attachments from known senders. Viruses
> often come from known senders who have you in their address book,
Good advice, but it's really only really important if you use MS
Outhouse Distress. Most of the popular virii exploit the VBScript
features of MSOE's internal mail viewer to ransack your address book and
spam-infect your friends/acquaintances. I don't believe Netscape has
such a security hole.
> so I only open attachments that are safe (image formats are safe) or
> have been announced or requested. No matter who it's from.
Again, good advice. Image formats _are_ safe, despite the recent
warnings that they've successfully embedded virii in JPG files. Yes,
the virus code is inside the file, BUT it has no way of running or
replicating itself. Anything marked of content-type text/plain is
probably ok, so long as you don't blindly execute it. The biggest
dangers are in .EXE, .VBS, or .SCR files, but these are only dangers to
Windows systems.
> Try to find out the mail provider he's sent it with and report him to
> his ISP.
Amen. Please. =)
Tim Hammerquist
--
Is that a 286 or are you just running Windows?
Disaster
> > Actually Spammers probably look at the size of the group and not
bother
> > with it. If they saw your name then a lot of spammers would jump at
the
> > opportunity to throw you into there mailing lists.
>
about
> a week, and when I came back they keep popping up with wallpaper offers
and
> such.
I don't see! Mark did though and then I saw one of them. They have been
listed.
Watchman
*sigh*
They're my first killfile subject. :(
--
'Anyone who isn't confused doesn't really know what's going on'
Disaster
> Zlmndra wrote:
> > > Actually Spammers probably look at the size of the group and not
bother
> > > with it. If they saw your name then a lot of spammers would jump at
the
> > > opportunity to throw you into there mailing lists.
> >
about
> > a week, and when I came back they keep popping up with wallpaper
offers and
> > such.
> >
> > Z
>
> *sigh*
>
> They're my first killfile subject. :(
Your first? You been sucking in all the crap all this time? Even Morgan's
crap?
Rudolf Polzer
> Rudolf Polzer graced us by uttering:
> > So there *is* something about AOL which is not bad. Thanks for your
> > information!
>
> I'm sure it wasn't intentional, and I hope this doesn't interfere with
> your opinion of this monolithic cruftball. ;)
Let's say "better AOL and AOL software than any ISP and OE" ^_^;;
Does the current AOL software still use IE for viewing websites or has
it been fixed? At least AOL has taken over Netscape, so it might be
possible.
> > You also should never open attachments from known senders. Viruses
> > often come from known senders who have you in their address book,
>
> Good advice, but it's really only really important if you use MS
> Outhouse Distress.
Or MS Windows (.exe, .scr, .pif), MS Office (.doc, .xls, .mbd)...
I just removed Magistr.B from an AOL user's computer. Which is a
PE infecting virus and does not depend on any scripting.
> Most of the popular virii exploit the VBScript features of MSOE's
> internal mail viewer to ransack your address book and spam-infect your
> friends/acquaintances. I don't believe Netscape has such a security
> hole.
I only know Netscape holes which allow *reading* of arbitrary files.
But Messenger does not execute script code in HTML mail by default.
> > so I only open attachments that are safe (image formats are safe) or
> > have been announced or requested. No matter who it's from.
>
> Again, good advice. Image formats _are_ safe, despite the recent
> warnings that they've successfully embedded virii in JPG files.
Doesn't that depend on the viewer? But there might really be a buffer
overrun in IE's JPEG decoding routines that allows code to be executed
on viewing a JPEG file. I wouldn't trust IE too much *g* especially when
displaying PNG files (which needs zlib - there was a bug in there, and I
bet most computers with an PNG-capable IE still have the zlib bug). But
I don't know if the zlib bug was even exploitable - it was "just" a
double free().
> Yes, the virus code is inside the file, BUT it has no way of running
> or replicating itself.
One year ago, I read something in alt.comp.virus.source.code about
someone who thought he was a 31337 h4x0r because he wrote an image
viewer that could execute code from JPEG comments. But that's no serious
threat IMHO (except a widely used application has such a backdoor - the
only example of such an application was Quake 2) - and that does not
mean JPEG files are dangerous.
> Anything marked of content-type text/plain is probably ok, so long as
> you don't blindly execute it.
Again: buffer overruns are possible. Netscape 4.5 had one (it crashed
when there was a line >1024 chars and one viewed the source), but I
don't know if they were on the stack and therefore exploitable.
> The biggest dangers are in .EXE, .VBS, or .SCR files, but these are
> only dangers to Windows systems.
ACK.
--
In diesem Sinne kannst du's wagen.
Verbinde dich! du sollst in diesen Tagen
Mit Freuden meine Künste sehn;
Ich gebe dir, was noch kein Mensch gesehn.
Tim Hammerquist
> or has it been fixed? At least AOL has taken over Netscape, so
> it might be possible.
Despite rumors I've heard that AOL _will_ be using the Mozilla
libs in v8.0, I believe the AOL 8.0 betas still use MSIE as its
internal browser. :(
> Or MS Windows (.exe, .scr, .pif), MS Office (.doc, .xls, .mbd)...
> I just removed Magistr.B from an AOL user's computer. Which is a
> PE infecting virus and does not depend on any scripting.
Yes, MS Office files may contain macros that do similar damage.
What is PE?
>> Again, good advice. Image formats _are_ safe, despite the
>> recent warnings that they've successfully embedded virii in
>> JPG files.
>
> Doesn't that depend on the viewer?
Not really. Susceptibility to buffer overruns _will_ depend on
the viewer and whether it limits the size of the buffer.
But if there's an image viewer that extracts native binary code
from the depths of the encoded image file and executes it, you
have a very poor (or custom) viewer. Under any normal
circumstances, no part of an image file should be "executed."
> One year ago, I read something in alt.comp.virus.source.code
> about someone who thought he was a 31337 h4x0r because he wrote
> an image viewer that could execute code from JPEG comments. But
> that's no serious threat IMHO (except a widely used application
> has such a backdoor - the only example of such an application
> was Quake 2) - and that does not mean JPEG files are dangerous.
Yes, these people give real hackers a bad name. This is exactly
the kind of viewer I was referring to above.
But if you go around downloading just anything from the web
without considering its source, you're going to get screwed.
IRC-boys will always try to tell you to download programs to erase
your HD, or at least your $HOME dir, whether they promise to
deliver "50% better performance" or just give you the latest
Britney pix.
<sarcasm>I wish I could be as 1337 as them.</sarcasm>
>> Anything marked of content-type text/plain is probably ok, so
>> long as you don't blindly execute it.
>
> Again: buffer overruns are possible. Netscape 4.5 had one (it crashed
> when there was a line >1024 chars and one viewed the source), but I
> don't know if they were on the stack and therefore exploitable.
I guess I'm just describing virii that depend on user ignorance,
and not on a bug in the program. Yours are quite valid points as
well.
It's also been so long since I've used MSOE, NS Msgr, or any
Microsoft software (except at school), so I'm probably behind on
just how many flaw Windows has. =)
Tim Hammerquist
--
"Sometimes these hairstyles are exaggerated beyond the laws of physics."
-- Unknown narrator on Anime
Rudolf Polzer
> > Does the current AOL software still use IE for viewing websites
> > or has it been fixed? At least AOL has taken over Netscape, so
> > it might be possible.
>
> Despite rumors I've heard that AOL _will_ be using the Mozilla
> libs in v8.0, I believe the AOL 8.0 betas still use MSIE as its
> internal browser. :(
>
> > Or MS Windows (.exe, .scr, .pif), MS Office (.doc, .xls, .mbd)...
> > I just removed Magistr.B from an AOL user's computer. Which is a
> > PE infecting virus and does not depend on any scripting.
>
> Yes, MS Office files may contain macros that do similar damage.
>
> What is PE?
"Portable Executable", the Win32 executable format. The normally used
format on Linux is ELF, so I think you get what it means.
> >> Again, good advice. Image formats _are_ safe, despite the
> >> recent warnings that they've successfully embedded virii in
> >> JPG files.
> >
> > Doesn't that depend on the viewer?
>
> Not really.
I meant that it depends on the viewer whether a virus in the JPG file
can be executed or not.
> Susceptibility to buffer overruns _will_ depend on the viewer and
> whether it limits the size of the buffer.
>
> But if there's an image viewer that extracts native binary code
> from the depths of the encoded image file and executes it, you
> have a very poor (or custom) viewer.
Quake2 contained a backdoor that allowed the ID Software subnet to send
console commands to the Q2 server (after some time, the backdoor was
removed). So how do you know if IrfanView has a backdoor? You can't
unless you have the time to disassemble it.
> Under any normal circumstances, no part of an image file should be
> "executed."
Of course. Even more correct: under any circumstances, no part of an
image file should be executed.
I saw only one exception: "compiled sprites" that were in fact machine
code that displays an image on the screen (very popular on DOS games
which used Mode X). But such sprites have to be compiled at run time -
the machine code of an image must not be saved and then called an "image
file".
> > One year ago, I read something in alt.comp.virus.source.code
> > about someone who thought he was a 31337 h4x0r because he wrote
> > an image viewer that could execute code from JPEG comments. But
> > that's no serious threat IMHO (except a widely used application
> > has such a backdoor - the only example of such an application
> > was Quake 2) - and that does not mean JPEG files are dangerous.
>
> Yes, these people give real hackers a bad name. This is exactly
> the kind of viewer I was referring to above.
>
> But if you go around downloading just anything from the web
> without considering its source, you're going to get screwed.
Which meaning of the word "source" do you mean? The author of the
program or its code?
> IRC-boys will always try to tell you to download programs to erase
> your HD, or at least your $HOME dir, whether they promise to
> deliver "50% better performance" or just give you the latest
> Britney pix.
I never met one who tried. I'm in the wrong channel... all I get are
mails with 0190 dialers for Windows that supposedly allow access to XXX
sites. As if I needed them and was too stupid to find free ones... but
these dialers don't work because I don't have a modem/ISDN card and
because I don't have Windows.
> >> Anything marked of content-type text/plain is probably ok, so
> >> long as you don't blindly execute it.
> >
> > Again: buffer overruns are possible. Netscape 4.5 had one (it crashed
> > when there was a line >1024 chars and one viewed the source),
BTW: If it's exploitable, it can be made more effective by opening a
window of a "view-source://"-URL.
> > but I don't know if they were on the stack and therefore
> > exploitable.
>
> I guess I'm just describing virii that depend on user ignorance,
You mean - for example - using OE for external mail and news? ^_^
> and not on a bug in the program. Yours are quite valid points as
> well.
>
> It's also been so long since I've used MSOE, NS Msgr, or any
> Microsoft software (except at school), so I'm probably behind on
> just how many flaw Windows has. =)
Don't you read Bugtraq and Securityfocus?
And Windows does not have many flaws (except design flaws - Windows *is*
one). But most of the applications do. Maybe Win2k Server had more
(security flaws * time until they were fixed) than some Linux or *BSD
distributions which contain a much bigger selection of applications...
--
Antwortet bitte nicht mit Unsinn wie:
[...]
- Cooles Gestammel, gesiggt
[Roger Marti in dag°]
Tim Hammerquist
>> code from the depths of the encoded image file and executes
>> it, you have a very poor (or custom) viewer.
>
> Quake2 contained a backdoor that allowed the ID Software subnet
> to send console commands to the Q2 server (after some time, the
> backdoor was removed). So how do you know if IrfanView has a
> backdoor? You can't unless you have the time to disassemble it.
I can't be sure that IrfanView doesn't. But I don't use
IrfanView. In any case, if IrfanView _does_ execute binary code
within a JPG file, it would (1) only work on binary-compatible
machines and (2) come under the "very poor...viewer" description
above. Q2 had a specific reason to check for code from the net,
but even this was apparently deemed not worth the risk. As
IrfanView has no reason whatsoever to either expect or interpret
network code in a file, any attempt by IrfanView to do so would
be a grave, serious, and generally Bad(TM) misfeature.
>> Under any normal circumstances, no part of an image file
>> should be "executed."
>
> Of course. Even more correct: under any circumstances, no part
> of an image file should be executed.
Except for Q2's use of this above? Or are you agreeing with
their decision to stop this behavior?
[ snip ]
>> But if you go around downloading just anything from the web
>> without considering its source, you're going to get screwed.
>
> Which meaning of the word "source" do you mean? The author of
> the program or its code?
source =~ origin
>> IRC-boys will always try to tell you to download programs to
>> erase your HD, or at least your $HOME dir, whether they
>> promise to deliver "50% better performance" or just give you
>> the latest Britney pix.
>
> I never met one who tried. I'm in the wrong channel... all I
> get are mails with 0190 dialers for Windows that supposedly
> allow access to XXX sites. As if I needed them and was too
> stupid to find free ones... but these dialers don't work
> because I don't have a modem/ISDN card and because I don't have
> Windows.
I don't frequent these channels either, but I keep seeing usenet
posts from victims of the "performance improvement" variety.
I've met one person on IRC who offered me a build of rpm for my
linux box, but I declined.
>> I guess I'm just describing virii that depend on user
>> ignorance,
>
> You mean - for example - using OE for external mail and news?
> ^_^
I'm not sure that's a fair accusation...
...but it's true. ;)
> Don't you read Bugtraq and Securityfocus?
No. I watch <http://theregister.co.uk/>.
> And Windows does not have many flaws (except design flaws -
> Windows *is* one).
Windows _does_ have flaws. How many times has Explorer crashed on
me? If there is any more integral part of Windows than Explorer
I've yet to have the pleasure of removing it from my hard drive.
=)
Tim Hammerquist
--
How do I type "for i in *.dvi do xdvi i done" in a GUI?
-- discussion in comp.os.linux.misc
Watchman
>
> "Watchman" <str...@SPAMPHOBICwhyalla.net.au> wrote:
> > Zlmndra wrote:
> > > > Actually Spammers probably look at the size of the group and not
> bother
> > > > with it. If they saw your name then a lot of spammers would jump at
> the
> > > > opportunity to throw you into there mailing lists.
> > >
> > > Speaking of spam, what's with all this Focaltek stuff? I was away for
> about
> > > a week, and when I came back they keep popping up with wallpaper
> offers and
> > > such.
> > >
> > > Z
> >
> > *sigh*
> >
> > They're my first killfile subject. :(
>
> Your first? You been sucking in all the crap all this time? Even Morgan's
> crap?
> --
You've got to smell the crap to appreciate the roses...
Rudolf Polzer
> >> But if there's an image viewer that extracts native binary
> >> code from the depths of the encoded image file and executes
> >> it, you have a very poor (or custom) viewer.
> >
> > Quake2 contained a backdoor that allowed the ID Software subnet
> > to send console commands to the Q2 server (after some time, the
> > backdoor was removed). So how do you know if IrfanView has a
> > backdoor? You can't unless you have the time to disassemble it.
>
> I can't be sure that IrfanView doesn't. But I don't use
> IrfanView. In any case, if IrfanView _does_ execute binary code
> within a JPG file, it would (1) only work on binary-compatible
> machines
No problem, IrfanView also only works on binary-compatible machines.
> and (2) come under the "very poor...viewer" description
ACK.
> above. Q2 had a specific reason to check for code from the net,
It doesn't.
[...]
> > Of course. Even more correct: under any circumstances, no part
> > of an image file should be executed.
>
> Except for Q2's use of this above? Or are you agreeing with
> their decision to stop this behavior?
Of course. Using console commands, it was not only possible to check and
set game settings. It's possible to change to any directory and write to
demos/*.dm2 or save/*.sav files there and to list any directory's
contents. IMHO that is too much: remotely filling a hard drive.
> >> IRC-boys will always try to tell you to download programs to
> >> erase your HD, or at least your $HOME dir, whether they
> >> promise to deliver "50% better performance" or just give you
> >> the latest Britney pix.
> >
> > I never met one who tried. I'm in the wrong channel... all I
> > get are mails with 0190 dialers for Windows that supposedly
> > allow access to XXX sites. As if I needed them and was too
> > stupid to find free ones... but these dialers don't work
> > because I don't have a modem/ISDN card and because I don't have
> > Windows.
>
> I don't frequent these channels either, but I keep seeing usenet
> posts from victims of the "performance improvement" variety.
> I've met one person on IRC who offered me a build of rpm for my
> linux box, but I declined.
Why didn't you take the RPM, check what it's doing (often these lamers
use shell scripts for that) (especially the POSTINSTALL part),
recompress and rename it and send it back to the idiot?
> >> I guess I'm just describing virii that depend on user
> >> ignorance,
> >
> > You mean - for example - using OE for external mail and news?
> > ^_^
>
> I'm not sure that's a fair accusation...
>
> ...but it's true. ;)
And for example Kak depended on it.
> > And Windows does not have many flaws (except design flaws -
> > Windows *is* one).
>
> Windows _does_ have flaws.
I meant security flaws.
> How many times has Explorer crashed on me?
It runs with the same privileges as you, so you cannot exploit it.
I only know these NetBIOS flaws that allow anyone to remotely produce
bluescreens (they may be exploitable, but I did not check with SoftICE).
> If there is any more integral part of Windows than Explorer
VMM32?
> I've yet to have the pleasure of removing it from my hard drive.
> =)
Which is really hard with the explorer. You can change the shell, but
any program that has a file-open dialog will use the Explorer for that.
But even worse about Windows: you cannot change the window manager.
--
To view the lower part of this signature, apply ROT13 to the whole message.
Gb ivrj gur hccre cneg bs guvf fvtangher, nccyl EBG13 gb gur jubyr zrffntr.
Tim Hammerquist
>> IrfanView. In any case, if IrfanView _does_ execute binary
>> code within a JPG file, it would (1) only work on
>> binary-compatible machines
>
> No problem, IrfanView also only works on binary-compatible
> machines.
Yeah. I did use it a few years ago, when I ran Win98.
> IMHO that is too much: remotely filling a hard drive.
Hai.
> Why didn't you take the RPM, check what it's doing (often these
> lamers use shell scripts for that) (especially the POSTINSTALL
> part), recompress and rename it and send it back to the idiot?
For one, he was an active and upstanding member of a prominent
programming channel, so I couldn't be sure if his motives were
bene- or malevolent. It was my instincts that just said "No
thanks."
Also, at the time I had a very real problem involving my rpm
installation and vengeance simply didn't rate as high at the
time. =)
Besides, IMO, if lamerz had a little less free time, they'd have
little patience for 14m3r2 themselves.
>> > And Windows does not have many flaws
>>
>> Windows _does_ have flaws.
>
> I meant security flaws.
Ah. I see your point.
>> If there is any more integral part of Windows than Explorer
>
> VMM32?
Smartass. ;)
>> I've yet to have the pleasure of
>> removing it from my hard drive.
>
> Which is really hard with the explorer.
> You can change the shell, but any program that has
> a file-open dialog will use the Explorer for that.
With Windows Explorer, yes.
But:
$ rm -rf /mnt/c/windows/system/vmm32*
;)
> But even worse about Windows:
> you cannot change the window manager.
Technically: no.
Effectively: /sbin/lilo && reboot
;)
Tim Hammerquist
--
We're not going to get robbed. All the people in jail like you.
-- Sharon to husband Ozzy Osbourne
Disaster
> Disaster wrote:
> > Your first? You been sucking in all the crap all this time? Even
Morgan's
> > crap?
>
......... I'd rather miss the roses!
Zeruel333 The Hentai One
??
this is all going over my head
Zeruel333 The Hentai One
*just then an AOL glitch happens and Disaster is wiped out*
Zeruel: I didnt know AOL controls reality...
Devil: yep...9_9
Rudolf Polzer
> > lamers use shell scripts for that) (especially the POSTINSTALL
> > part), recompress and rename it and send it back to the idiot?
>
> For one, he was an active and upstanding member of a prominent
> programming channel, so I couldn't be sure if his motives were
> bene- or malevolent. It was my instincts that just said "No
> thanks."
That's what I also think about RPMs. Not that they're generally bad, but
I want to decide where to install an application to. I only take DEBs
from a Debian mirror and install RPMs manually (not using alien) into
some temporary directory. Good that it's possible to manually extract
them...
> >> I've yet to have the pleasure of
> >> removing it from my hard drive.
> >
> > Which is really hard with the explorer.
> > You can change the shell, but any program that has
> > a file-open dialog will use the Explorer for that.
>
> With Windows Explorer, yes.
>
> But:
>
> $ rm -rf /mnt/c/windows/system/vmm32*
>
> ;)
You also use /mnt/c? I still have that mount point, but something has
happened to it, as visible in my fstab:
| /dev/hda3 /mnt/c ext3 defaults 0 0
But fdisk still shows:
| /dev/hda3 * 766 914 1196842+ 6 FAT16
I don't know what this partition type stuff is good for. There don't
seem to be problems if the type is wrong...
> > But even worse about Windows:
> > you cannot change the window manager.
>
> Technically: no.
> Effectively: /sbin/lilo && reboot
Bad command or file name.
Or does lilo run in cygwin? I never tried. You just assumed you already
have solved the problem...
--
Die Strahlung der Mikrowelle sorgt für eine molekulare Beschelunigung
der Moleküle in der Suppe, bedingt durch elektrolytische Reaktion der
Wellenmoleküle auf die Suppenmoleküle. Durch diesen "Reiz" entsteht
[...] Hitze, die dann die Suppe erwärmt. [Wolfram Kopp in tota]
Tim Hammerquist
[ snip long technical discussion ]
>
> ?? this is all going over my head
Well, I suppose this thread really never _was_ on-topic.
Is this a request to take the discussion off-group?
Tim Hammerquist
--
It's appositival, if it's there. And it doesn't have to be there.
And it's really obvious that it's there when it's there.
-- Larry Wall in <1997090323...@wall.org>
Disaster
*Looks up*
Yeah, you even read past the first 5 words? That's where I get lost!
Disaster
LOL
You honestly think that a super power like myself relies on AOL? Please,
lets not be insulting!
Disaster
> Zeruel333 The Hentai One graced us by uttering:
> [ snip long technical discussion ]
> >
> > ?? this is all going over my head
>
> Well, I suppose this thread really never _was_ on-topic.
>
> Is this a request to take the discussion off-group?
If you think that it might be then you obviously think that is should be.
Otherwise you wouldn't be bothered enough to ask. However I dont care.
Watchman
>
<SimPLe SNiP>
>
> ??
> this is all going over my head
> ---
Problem solved! :p
Tim Hammerquist
>> programming channel, so I couldn't be sure if his motives were
>> bene- or malevolent. It was my instincts that just said "No
>> thanks."
>
> That's what I also think about RPMs. Not that they're generally
> bad, but I want to decide where to install an application to. I
> only take DEBs from a Debian mirror and install RPMs manually
> (not using alien) into some temporary directory. Good that it's
> possible to manually extract them...
I don't have a Debian distro (which apparently makes me a "less
pure" linux guy, but hey), and the only rpms I currently deal in
are off the distribution installation discs. 99% of the other
software is 'make && make test && make install'ed.
>> > Which is really hard with the explorer.
>> > You can change the shell, but any program that has
>> > a file-open dialog will use the Explorer for that.
>>
>> With Windows Explorer, yes.
>>
>> But:
>>
>> $ rm -rf /mnt/c/windows/system/vmm32*
>>
>> ;)
>
> You also use /mnt/c? I still have that mount point, but something has
> happened to it, as visible in my fstab:
No, I actually use /dos, but /mnt/c seemed a little less
confusing, just in case there's anyone else still with us in this
thread... ;)
>| /dev/hda3 /mnt/c ext3 defaults 0 0
>
> But fdisk still shows:
>
>| /dev/hda3 * 766 914 1196842+ 6 FAT16
>
> I don't know what this partition type stuff is good for. There
> don't seem to be problems if the type is wrong...
Here are the entries for the FAT32 filesystems on my box. They
appear to use vfat rather than FAT*; this is probably just a
variance in the distributions. Unfortunately, I have no
explanation for the behaviour of your system's mounting.
/dev/hda1 /dos vfat user 0 2
/dev/hda5 /mp3 vfat user 0 2
>> > But even worse about Windows:
>> > you cannot change the window manager.
>>
>> Technically: no.
>> Effectively: /sbin/lilo && reboot
>
> Bad command or file name.
>
> Or does lilo run in cygwin? I never tried.
I'm not sure, but I'm not sure it would be an appropriate program
to have in cygwin.
> You just assumed you already have solved the problem...
Well, it assumes linux is installed, and that /etc/lilo.conf sets
the linux partition to be default, yes.
Doesn't this solve the problems caused by Windows? ;)
Tim Hammerquist
--
You can lead a boss to a decision, but you can't make him think.
-- Simon, BOFH
Tim Hammerquist
> "Tim Hammerquist" <t...@vegeta.ath.cx> wrote:
>> Zeruel333 The Hentai One graced us by uttering:
>> [ snip long technical discussion ]
>> >
>> > ?? this is all going over my head
>>
>> Well, I suppose this thread really never _was_ on-topic.
>>
>> Is this a request to take the discussion off-group?
>
> If you think that it might be then you obviously think that is should be.
> Otherwise you wouldn't be bothered enough to ask. However I dont care.
Your logic is flawed, but your observations are astute.
Tim Hammerquist
--
If Microsoft built cars, the oil, gas, and alternator warning lights would
be replaced by a single "general car fault" warning light.
Disaster
be.
> > Otherwise you wouldn't be bothered enough to ask. However I dont care.
>
> Your logic is flawed, but your observations are astute.
I never claimed it was logical.