[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Subject: > > debian-user-digest Digest Volume 97 : Issue 1127 > > Today's Topics: > Re: XDM seem to hang until I reboot. > Re: kernel sound defaults wrong? > Re: Debian/WindowsNT partitioning > Re: PPP problem (?) > Re: Partitioning > COMMERCIAL: Arkeia v4.0r6 - network backup software (fwd) > Re: kernel sound defaults wrong? > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: XDM seem to hang until I reboot. > Date: 10 Dec 1997 18:18:52 -0000 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles Briscoe-Smith) > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Jay Barbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >What I am having problems with is a lockup or hangup from XDM. If I > >am running a X session, it is possible to hangup, and I cannot seem > >to run anything. I cannot click on an XTERM button, or even run > >xterm if I have a free window up. When I do run a new 'xterm &' from > >an available window, after a certain time it tells me it cannot write > >to the display. > > It sounds to me like you're saying that the X programs which are already > running continue to run, but new ones do not start. I've come across > a similar problem when using eXceed here; eXceed was running on PC-NFS, > which could only handle 16 network connections at a time. When the limit > was reached, typing "xterm" in a shell window would give an error message. > NT might have a similar limit. (I'd expect it to be much higher, though.) > > Are you getting an error message when you type "xterm" (without an > "&")? How long do you have to wait until you get the error (it might > be some minutes)? If there's no error message, what exactly happens > when you type "xterm"? Do you get your prompt back, or do you have to > press control-C to get a prompt? > > Cheers, > > -- > Charles Briscoe-Smith > White pages entry, with PGP key: <URL:http://alethea.ukc.ac.uk/wp?95cpb4> > PGP public keyprint: 74 68 AB 2E 1C 60 22 94 B8 21 2D 01 DE 66 13 E2 > > -- > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: kernel sound defaults wrong? > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:25:56 -0600 > From: "Jens B. Jorgensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Rick Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > Rick Hawkins wrote: > > > > After playing for an extended period with the default settings, I finally > > figured out why my sound card wouldn't work: the defaults in the kernel > > package use Irq 7 rather than 5. Isn't 5 the standard on this? > > "standard"? Surely you jest. Yeah, it's also the "standard" for a lot > of other ISA cards whose manufacturer decided that 5 should be the > "standard" IRQ for their board. I believe this myth has originated > because the Creative Labs Soundblaster board factory-defaults to an > IRQ of 5. This by no means makes it a standard. Since there are only > 15 IRQs on the Intel (AT) platform and closer to half of them are > actually usable by add-on boards, there can't ever be a standard on > a given board (or board-type, eg. "sound card") using a certain IRQ. > Granted there are "tendencies" one sees among manufacturers. > > -- > Jens B. Jorgensen > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: Debian/WindowsNT partitioning > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 10:21:24 -0500 (EST) > From: Bill Leach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Gertjan Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > Yes I am aware of this but also have experienced in the past that doing > this (fdisk/mbr) has made it possible to partition a disk that would not > otherwise be accepted by fdisk. Because of what you say, I feel as though > it borders on "FM" but possibly it has something to do with the BIOS of > the particular machines where this has workded? > > best, > -bill > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > from a 1996 Micro$loth ad campaign: > "The less you know about computers the more you want Micro$oft!" > See! They do get some things right! > > On Wed, 10 Dec 1997, Gertjan Klein wrote: > > > Bill Leach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > If you can boot a DOS session, you might want to try doing a fdisk/mbr on > > > that drive. Not being sure just exactly what you are trying to do > > though, > > > realize that issuing the above command _will_ wipe out everything on the > > > drive. > > > > The (undocumented) fdisk /mbr command replaces the MBR software of the > > first harddisk with the standard MS-DOS software. It does not alter the > > partition table in any way, so all present partitions will remain > > accessible. It also doen't change anything _in_ those partitions. If a > > boot manager program such as LILO was installed in the MBR, it will of > > course be removed (in fact, this is one thing the command is often used > > for). > > > > Gertjan. > > > > -- > > Gertjan Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > The Boot Control home page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gklein/bcpage.html > > -- > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: PPP problem (?) > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 11:55:22 -0500 (EST) > From: Bill Leach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Liran Zvibel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: Debian Mailing List <debian-user@lists.debian.org> > > Before you connect do a "/sbin/route -n" command and note how many lines > of entries you have. You should probably have just one like this (I am > assuming that you do not have an ethernet card or a slip/plip link also > up): > > bash-2.01$ /sbin/route -n > Kernel IP routing table > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface > 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 8 lo > > When you connect, wait for about a half a minute and do a "/sbin/route -n" > command again. This time there should be "new entries" (two, one for the > connection "Iface ppp0" and one for the "default"). > > You _REALLY_ need to look at the PPP-HOWTO (and maybe the NET3-HOWTO)! > > >From your description it is not possible to tell if you did or did not > successfully connect. If the above commands give the sort of results that > I mentioned then you did indeed connect and your problem is probably a > basic network setup problem (see NET3-HOWTO). > > And NO, PAP is most definately not a Micro$loth "invention"!! Indeed, I > am astonished that Micro$loth has not figured out a way to create an > incompatible version of PAP for no valid technical reason such as they did > do in creating their useless derivative "MS-CHAP"! > > Contrary to the BS that you see, read, and hear in the media and most > especially in the popular computing press, Micro$loth has probably not > created a single advancement in computer technology no matter how trivial. > Contrast that with Sun Microsystems, AT&T, DEC, and a few others. Though > I personally have no real "love" for IBM the true facts of the matter are > that IBM Labs has invented &/or developed &/or been a significant force in > the development of almost every item of computer technology that has any > importance to computing whatsoever--even if IBM never exploited or even > tried to exploit the item commercially. > > Sun Microsystems' contributions to the development of ARPANET, DARPANET, > and Internet as well as to the development of AT&T's Unix is legendary. > That Micro$loth should come along with their unbelievably arrogant and > superior attitude, claiming to be at the "forefront" of computer > technology, and appearently insisting "that their way is the only right > way" is enough to make anyone with even a little knowledge of the truth > sick and disgusted! > > Indeed, Linux is practically proof all by itself as to where Micro$loth > stands with respect to "forefront of computer technology". That a > multitasking, multiuser operating system (freely developed no less) can > run something like X-windows and STILL beat the cr** out of Win95 in > performance says a whole lot about "forefront". > > Micro$loths's DOS was the most inferior OS available for the Intel chipset > when it was introduced and that condition remained unchanged. > > To hear Gates' talk, Micro$loth _invented_ windows (this stuff reminds me > of the Joseph Stalin method of governmental information handling). > Naturally at least some of the 'computing public" knew or remembered that > Apple MacIntosh was a windowing computer system but it seems that far too > many knew or know that Xerox "gave" the world the basic windowing > environment upon which MacIntosh, MS-Windows, and even X is based. > > I suppose that after all of this I should apologize (for the bandwidth) > and do a: > <flame off> > > best, > -bill > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > from a 1996 Micro$loth ad campaign: > "The less you know about computers the more you want Micro$oft!" > See! They do get some things right! > > On Wed, 10 Dec 1997, Liran Zvibel wrote: > > > Hello again!!! > > Thanks for helping me set my Debian system last week. Everything works OK > > but the ppp connection. > > The modem problem was an incorrect irq setting. Now I'm able to dial. I > > downloaded XISP and configured it (was pretty easy - cleaver user > > interface!) and dialed (using PAP). It finished negotiating with the > > server quickly (took it less time then win.95 does it - isn't PAP a > > win.95 protocol?) and changed the IP from --------- to > > ???.???.???.??? when ? is a digit from 0 to 9. I thought I was connected, > > but when I tried to use lynx, ftp or telnet they told me they couldn't > > find host. (when I configured XISP I included the two DNS addresses my > > ISP use). Am I missing something? > > > > Please help. > > Thanks in advance, > > > > Liran Zvibel. > > -- > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: Partitioning > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 13:46:32 -0500 (EST) > From: Bill Leach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Gertjan Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > On Wed, 10 Dec 1997, Gertjan Klein wrote: > > > Bill Leach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ... > > > Though it depends upon what one might mean by the term "knows", the PC > > > BIOS _IS_ the implementation of this particular filesystem abstraction. > > > > You constantly confuse the issue. The BIOS 'knows' how to load a > > sector from disk to memory or vice versa. This has _nothing_ to do with > > filesystems. Filesystems define how data is ordered and stored on these > > sectors. > > We appear to be "arguing" from different perspectives about the same > things. I am probably guilty in that I am not being at all specific about > what I mean when I talk about the BIOS. The BIOS, as you point out > (implicitly anyway) is not the same today as yesterday, etc. Obviously > these are judgement calls and opinions but when the original hard disk code > was written decisions were made concerning such things as sizes for device > storage parameters. While what you have said about the cost of 10Meg HDs > and the like is true, that fact did not seem to influence others in such a > limiting way about how to deal with the matter. More importantly, I > think, is that it has taken many years to finally to address this issue. > > > ... > > > ... > > > I'm not exactly sure what you think is the nightmare part of the > > original design (and frankly, I don't care). There are a ... > > And if you don't care then we are probably both wasting our time. > > > ... > > > ... sequential block numbers, though, and e.g. W95 _will_ install MBR > > software that uses these (and install itself on a partition with a type > > that MS-DOS doesn't understand) if installed on a HD/partition of above > > (I believe) 2 GB. > > Though, I must admit that you have provided a piece of information that I > was not aware of, since I have never installed Win95 nor tried to install > Linux on a machine with Win95 (I would look at the appropriate HOW-TO > before making such an attempt however). > > > * There is a limited number of primary partitions available in the MBR. > > This limitation is no serious problem, as many modern OSes don't object > > to being installed in an extended partition (of which there can be as > > many as required). Of course the MS-DOS MBR software does not support > > booting them, but should modern PC hardware be judged by old software? > > There are plenty decent boot mangers around. > > Yes, many often incompatible workarounds exist. As to your question, I > still maintain that the PC is a nightmare of horrible design decisions. > You obviously, to me anyway, to not agree -- so be it. > > > ... > > > > Linux, for very practical reasons, chooses to honor this brain dead, > > > convoluted drive abstraction. > > > > There is nothing brain-dead about partitioning a drive - it is a > > perfectly logical way of having multiple independent filesystems and/or > > operating systems on one disk. > > No there is nothing brain dead about partitioning a drive and I see no way > that anyone could conclude from anything that I have said that I think > otherwise. It is the arbitrary decision to create the "tiered" partition > types (primary, extended, and logical) abstraction that I object to. > > > > > > ... > > > ... > > Not in modern BIOSes. It is backward compatibility that makes LILO > > use the old-style BIOS calls, but it is probably (by now) capable of > > making the newer style calls if told to (I can't check that as I don't > > have the latest version here). (Note that it is also backward > > compatibility that made the PC to what it is now: powerful hardware for > > very low prices). > > These "modern BIOSes" have finally caught up with BIOSes of more than > twenty years ago. Are you suggesting that had different decisions > concerning how to deal compatibly with the various limitation that were > arbitrarily built into the original design had been handled differently > that the PC would not be as popular or have such a favorable > performance/price ratio as it currently has? > > > > I repeat: There is _nothing_ inherent in Linux that requires any of this > > > "grew like topsy", screwball "design". > > > > Ignoring your qualifications here, I never said there was. I was > > objecting to your misinformation about the basic PC hardware and BIOS. > > I have "lost it". In as much as I really do not wish to mislead anyone > then by "misinformation" are you talking about my assertions with respect > to the BIOS design (and indeed design evolution) upon the overall > filesystem design, or rather my (admitted) failure to even mention that > there are new BIOS designs that do not themselves impose this scheme, or > both? > > > > ... > > ... > > > I would be > > > willing to defer to your claims that I am wrong concerning primary > > > partitions being visible in DOS, but am having some trouble with that. > > > My experience with DOS and Windoz is _very_ limited. > > > > Mine is quite extensive. Why do you not believe me, when you yourself > > say that your experience here is _very_ limited, and I am telling you I > > have the very thing you claim to be impossible running on my system (and > > on quite a few others, I might add)? Why do you combine lack of > > experience with such strong opinions? > > As I pointed out in the previous message, I have seen many PCs with > multiple primary partitions where only ONE primary partition is visible to > DOS or Windoz (or OS2 for that matter). In addition I have read in > multiple books on PC machines that such is the normal design behaviour > for a PC. Though I consider my experience with PCs to be "_very_ limited" > in part because I have written very little software to run on ix86 or > under DOS and none to run under Windoz. > > OTOH, I have HAD to fight with PC boxes from time to time for over 20 > years. I have (several different times) had experience with PC scsi > controllers that refused to work with drives that would work fine on > non-PC scsi buses. I have had to solve (employers) problems with > incompatible hardware and software (hundreds of different times). > > I have seen (though thankfully was not involved) with machine upgrades > where the new IDE drives were of the same make an model as the existing > drive but would not work as master/slave pairs. Yet the same drives would > work just fine on several other brands of PCs (and of course different IDE > drives would work on these PCs). The company was not thrilled as there > were several hundred of these machines. > > I have worked with many hundreds of computers ranging from dedicated > micro-controllers to Super-Minis. While each certainly offered its' > problem sets, I honestly believe that none provided problems as ludicrous > as are available to you in the average PC. > > Are you "right" that this disaster is what has given us an affordable > computing platform that has capabilities almost unimaginable 20 years ago? > I admit that I don't know for sure. The only real example in the PC world > suggests to me that you are right. IBM's microchannel attempted to > address many of the major points of the disaster but was clearly a > failure. Though if one asks why, then those answers are not so clear. > The "success" of things like "win-modems" suggests a possible answer to > me. And that is that the overwhelming majority of people buying computers > are attentive to price to such an extent that almost no other factor > "matters" (short of Windoz compatibility). It is also likely that > whatever does cause the incredible popularity of the PC and Micro$loth is > also involved in preventing a great many technically superior hardware and > software innovations from becoming common. > > In a sense all of this opinion matters not. The PC is what it is and it > does seem to be evolving in the "right" direction even if it has taken > nearly 15 years to do make significant progress. In the meantime all of > the "standards" and incompatibilities that exist in the PC world are the > "part and parcel" of a huge percentage of the development work in Linux > and the activities of listservers. > > best, > -bill > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > from a 1996 Micro$loth ad campaign: > "The less you know about computers the more you want Micro$oft!" > See! They do get some things right! > > > -- > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: COMMERCIAL: Arkeia v4.0r6 - network backup software (fwd) > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 11:58:02 -0800 (PST) > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Debian Users mailling list <debian-user@lists.debian.org> > > I saw this in c.o.l.a. and didn't see this mentioned on > debian-user or the webpage. Did I miss this or is this news to everyone > else? Either way if it's not bulls*$t then it's pretty cool. > > Micro$oft, what do you want to spend today? > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 09:16:38 GMT > From: Knox Software <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.announce > Subject: COMMERCIAL: Arkeia v4.0r6 - network backup software > Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 11:30:46 -0800 (PST) > Resent-From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Resent-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Followup-To: comp.os.linux.misc > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Knox Software announces the release of Arkeia v4.0r6 for Linux. > > Arkeia network backup software, by Knox Software, > is now available as shareware for Linux home users. > A fully functional copy of Arkeia is available for download at > http://www.knox-software.com or ftp://ftp.knox-software.com. > Suggested contribution is $25.00 US dollars. > 25% of each contribution over $20.00 will be donated to Software in the > public interest. > This is the parent organization of the Debian Linux distribution. > > Knox Software is also making Arkeia available at an entry-level price of > $199.00 for small work group settings. > This package lets you interactively backup any mix of 5 Linux and > Windows 95 > client machines to a Linux based backup server. > See www.knox-software.com for download instructions. > > BURLINGAME, Calif. (November 24, 1997) - Knox Software today announced > Arkeia for Linux, v4.0r6, network backup software. > This software enables system administrators to implement a fast, easy, > reliable > and economical backup solution for Linux powered networks. > > "By leveraging 10 years of large scale UNIX backup expertise, > Knox Software is making it possible for Linux system administrators > to provide the type robust network backup solution previously available > only in large UNIX shops," said Sam Siegel, general manager of Knox > Software USA. > "With Arkeia v4.0r6, we are providing a high-performance network backup > solution > for both large and small Linux environments such as ISPs, > Web development, workgroups, and home users." > > The system, originally developed for the Sun, HP, and AIX environments, > and now ported to Linux, is designed for centralized operations with > remote control. > Each backup server can be accessed from any client that has the user > interface loaded. > This password-controlled access lets the system administrator manage the > backup > server from any machine on the network. > The administrator can even dial-in from a remote location, to perform > backup, > and restore operations. Only control information is communicated to the > client machine. > There is no X traffic over the network when the remote machine is an X > server. > A Java based user interface is provided for Windows NT and Windows 95 > clients. > > Arkeia v4.0 for Linux features: > > Backup server: > O Backup as many as 200 clients at a time. > O Manage multiple tape drives simultaneously. > O Perform backup and restore operations simultaneously. > O Maintain an online catalog of backups. > Catalog size is typically less than 1% of the amount of data > backed up. > O Provide policy based security mechanism. > O Drive autostackers, libraries and robotics. > O Maintain an online catalog of tape pools. > O Does not require root login when doing backup or restore > operations. > O Monitor tape drive, library and TCP/IP for errors and initiate > recovery. > O Monitor client connections; retry backup from point of failure > if client goes offline and comes back online. > O Maintains log files. > O License management. > > Graphical interface: > O X11 interface for Linux systems. > O Java interfaces for Windows 95 and Windows NT clients. > O Configure Tape drive, Drive pool and library definitions. > O Configure Tape, and Tape pool definitions. > O Configure Savepacks (a savepack defines machines and directories > to backup) > O Configure periodic backup schedule. > O Initiate interactive backup. > O ID and password management. > O Initiate interactive restores. > O Browse catalog of backups. > O Browse log files. > O Login to local or remote backup server. > O Interactively monitors backup and restore operations. > O User customizable color and background settings. > > Client: > O Compress files during backup. (At user option.) > O Encrypt files during backup. (At user option.) > O Pace network data transmission with backup server. > O Uncompress files, if required, during restore. > O Unencrypt files, if required, during restore. > > Arkeia v4.0r6 supported software: > O Caldera - Tested and working. > O Redhat - Tested and working. > O Slackware - Tested and working. > O SusE - Tested and working. > O Most Linux, v2.0.0 or higher, distributions. > > Arkeia v4.0r6 hardware requirements: > O 16 MB ram (32MB recommended) > O SCSI card (AH2940 recommended) > O 486 or higher processor > O 1GB disk drive or greater. (30MB for code and room for catalog > growth.) > O Linux v2.0.0 or greater; TCP/IP up and running. > > Supported Server Operating systems: > Linux > Solaris > IRIX > AIX > HPUX > And, others. > > Supported Client Operating Systems > Linux > Solaris > IRIX > AIX > HPUX > Windows NT > Windows 95 > Windows 3.x > And others. > > What you get for shareware: ($0.00 - $50.00) > O Arkeia backup server for Linux > Supports a single-tape tape drive > Supports interactive backup > O 2 clients any mix of Linux or Windows 95. > O X interface for Linux backup server. > O X interface for Linux clients. > O Java interface for Windows 95 clients. > > What you get for $199.00: > Basic offer > O Arkeia backup server for Linux > Supports a single-tape tape drive > Supports interactive backup > O 5 clients any mix of Linux or Windows 95. > O X interface for Linux backup server. > O X interface for Linux clients. > O Java interface for Windows 95 clients. > > What you get for $699.00: > Mini Lan Offer > O Arkeia backup server for Linux > Supports a single-tape tape drive > Supports interactive backup > Supports unattended, scheduled, backup > O 5 clients: any mix of Linux or Windows 95. > O 1 Unix/NT/Novell client > O X interface for Linux backup server. > O X interface for Linux clients. > O Java interface for Windows 95 clients. > > What you get for $899.00: > Enterprise Lan Offer > O Arkeia backup server for Linux > Supports a single-tape tape drive > Supports interactive backup > Supports unattended, scheduled, backup > O 10 clients: any mix of Linux or Windows 95. > O 2 Unix/NT/Novell client > O X interface for Linux backup server. > O X interface for Linux clients. > O Java interface for Windows 95 clients. > > Optional features: > O Automated unattended backup scheduling; for Basic offer only: > $500.00 > O Additional Windows 95 or Linux client: > $40.00 > O Additional Unix/NT/Novell client: > $150.00 > O Client 10-pack for Unix/NT/Novell > $1,100.00 > > Please contact us for pricing on the following items. > O Multiple tape drives support. > O Library support. > > Users can download and evaluate a demo copy of Arkeia v4.0r6 for Linux > right now from the Knox Software Internet site: > http://www.knox-software.com, > or ftp://ftp.knox-software.com > > In addition to supporting the Linux platform, Arkeia, v4.0r6, is also > available > for use larger facilities that use HP, SUN, HP, IBM AIX, and SGI. > > Additional information on Knox Software is available on the Internet at > http://www.knox-software.com or by sending email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Knox Software, Arkeia and the Knox logo are registered trademarks of > Knox Software, > which is registered in the United States and other jurisdictions. > All prices are US dollars and do NOT include local taxes, shipping and > handling. > > - -- > This article has been digitally signed by the moderator, using PGP. > http://www.iki.fi/mjr/cola-public-key.asc has PGP key for validating > signature. > Send submissions for comp.os.linux.announce to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > PLEASE remember a short description of the software and the LOCATION. > This group is archived at http://www.iki.fi/liw/linux/cola.html > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: 2.6.3ia > Charset: latin1 > > iQCVAgUBNIfGdlrUI/eHXJZ5AQEtwAP+LnpDfZJ6Rx7VWEkJoq146GdFezxsKD7P > Dd1etKu++yXwkKfMSDHwlHS5nd1E4xj1zxohTL+v7O5/i+HwESbtKzAJb3HYVQ8x > O3xys2NoDmmcNXqcF6EAgeyxCzmOVCUuG2y4ozEvzPTCSVAzNhMVqfIN4/qpBVim > xpe9kEzHT3c= > =tnSq > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > -- > TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > UNSUBSCRIBE NOW
-- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
