Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Eli Marmor wrote:
>
> > > By the way: I want to use milter(or another plug-in interface of
> > > sendmail) to strip executable attachments from incoming messages (EXE,
> > > COM, PIF, LNK, BAT, SCR, etc.), save them in a server archive, and send
> > >
On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> Tzafrir, I don't consider myself an expert in Debian stuff - Adi,
> Ira, Marc and some others are way better then me on this - but I'm
> sure you can mix and match from potato and woddy. I don't see your
> point here. I managed to compile gtk applicatio
On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Eli Marmor wrote:
> > By the way: I want to use milter(or another plug-in interface of
> > sendmail) to strip executable attachments from incoming messages (EXE,
> > COM, PIF, LNK, BAT, SCR, etc.), save them in a server archive, and send
> > an automatic response to the sende
> deb is not a magic bullet for packaging. dpkg and apt-get are easy to
> break. What makes debian's distro work great is that they follow their
> policy and try to avoid breaking stuff.
>
> I had some bad experince with storm linux (2.0.6), which was (the company
> is now out of business) a debia
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> 1. install a virus scanner on the server
I don't want to be redundant, but in a thread called "forwarding mails
from mailbox to another address.." (initiated by somebody else), I
wrote:
> By the way: I want to use milter (or another plug-in interface of
> sendmail) to str
On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> On Sunday 27 January 2002 14:09, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > I still can't follow their logic: why would you buy a dedicated lindows
> > box if their linux side is bad and their windows side is bad. Seems to me
> > it will be useful for either:
>
> I still
On Sunday 27 January 2002 14:09, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> I still can't follow their logic: why would you buy a dedicated lindows
> box if their linux side is bad and their windows side is bad. Seems to me
> it will be useful for either:
I still don't get it why do u think their lindows is bad? the
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002, Tzafrir Cohen wrote about "Re: Linux, Office2000, Lindows - and
Hebrew":
> I still can't follow their logic: why would you buy a dedicated lindows
>...
> In short: I don't see who is their target audience.
Maybe it's die-hard Linuxers (li
On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> On Sunday 27 January 2002 10:03, Tzahi Fadida wrote:
> > Hi Hetz,
> > I am no expert, but i think that if you only want to check the viruses that
> > goes thru your email, you don't need any vxd to simply check the mail like
> > avx does.
> > what do yo
On Sunday 27 January 2002 12:17, Ely Levy wrote:
> why do we need them for running wine on debian?
You don't need them for their distribution - it's a simple debian woody +
some Xandros stuff (smart file browser, connection wizard, etc) - but you do
need Lindows for their special version of win
Wine is NOT GPL'd - you can take wine sources, modify them a lot and you
don't have to give anything back, nada,zilch...
Most companies which do work on wine (Transgaming, Codeweavers) DO give back,
however. Just few moments ago Transgaming had contributed an SDL driver for
Wine which (to me)
> -Original Message-
> From: guy keren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 12:11 AM
> they have
> programmers working on wine locally, and they don't sync
> everything back
> to the "official" wine tree. they don't write that on their
> web site, but
> it is impl
why do we need them for running wine on debian?
Ely Levy
System group
Hebrew University
Jerusalem Israel
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> Hi People,
>
> Well, I just finished 3 hours busting a hard disk here to install Lindows
> preview here..
>
> What can I say - lots of people
Won't help..
Outlook gets the emails, not a Linux Email client.
Hetz
On Sunday 27 January 2002 11:47, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Now - just like in standard windows - if I have a good Anti
> > virus here
> > running on wine - then I'm free from troubles - but as it is
> > today - I cannot
> >
> Now - just like in standard windows - if I have a good Anti
> virus here
> running on wine - then I'm free from troubles - but as it is
> today - I cannot
> install any anti virus (that I know) under Wine - so it's a huge risk.
Maybe I am missing something, but what about running a linux an
On Sunday 27 January 2002 10:03, Tzahi Fadida wrote:
> Hi Hetz,
> I am no expert, but i think that if you only want to check the viruses that
> goes thru your email, you don't need any vxd to simply check the mail like
> avx does.
> what do you think?
Morning Tzahi,
This is really depends - the
-3213
* - * - * - * - * - *
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Hetz Ben Hamo
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 1:19 AM
To: Tzafrir Cohen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Linux-IL mailing list
Subject: Re: Linux, Office2000, Lindows - and Hebrew
> VMWare runs as root, but
> VMWare runs as root, but aims at creating a jail for the programs you run
> inside. *Assuming VMWare is built right* the damage that may be created is
> limited to the virtual machine.
>
> I haven't heard too many reports about VMWare screw-ups.
Try to install Lindows while setting the guest OS
On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> > And (according to your previous report) you work on it with a single,
> > root-equivalent, user.Is it safe to plug this to a network? Can this be
> > your productions machine (e.g: is it better than using vmware)?
>
> Actually you might want to take a
> > Don't forget that with their wine - it's on the default emulating "win95"
> > specifically so you can't install Norton Anti vrius for example, or any
> > other since wine itself doesn't support those "nice" VXD craft - so it
> > will be a big problem to let user run Outlook 2000 while you can'
On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> On Saturday 26 January 2002 22:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Don't forget that with their wine - it's on the default emulating "win95"
> specifically so you can't install Norton Anti vrius for example, or any other
> since wine itself doesn't suppor
> haven't you been following the thread, or looking at their site? they have
> programmers working on wine locally, and they don't sync everything back
> to the "official" wine tree. they don't write that on their web site, but
> it is implied.
No Guy, I'm affraid you're wrong...
I cannot commen
On Saturday 26 January 2002 22:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What do you mean "their" wine? is it modified from the wine cvs tree?
> As far as I have tested, wine is still far from running most Win32
> application I use...
> name ICQ for one... how do they intend to make it 100% (95%?) compatible
On Sat, 26 Jan 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What do you mean "their" wine? is it modified from the wine cvs tree?
haven't you been following the thread, or looking at their site? they have
programmers working on wine locally, and they don't sync everything back
to the "official" wine tree. t
heavity on wine development
or am I wrong?
Ishay
-Original Message-
From: Hetz Ben Hamo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 10:46 PM
To: Ishay Sommer
Subject: Re: Linux, Office2000, Lindows - and Hebrew
On Saturday 26 January 2002 22:37, Ishay Sommer wrote:
> I
25 matches
Mail list logo
