From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V12 #385 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Saturday, October 18 2003 Volume 12 : Number 385 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Brief Snail review ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: oh well [DougMash@aol.com] Re: Books over books over books over books [Johnathan Vail ] Re: Books you read over and over [Aaron Mandel ] junkmedia reviews luxor and robyn sings [ein kleines kinnemuzak ] Re: even more boring than baseball... [Ken Weingold ] Re: even more boring than baseball... [Miles Goosens ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V12 #384 [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Re: fegmaniax-digest V12 #384 ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: even more boring than baseball... [Aaron Mandel ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 10:25:50 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: Brief Snail review Steve Talkowski wrote: > > ... four computer generated "guardian angel" cherubs flying > along side each tire of a new X5. They didn't fit Firestones, did they? Or are they there to kill all passing cyclists in advance, lest the driver be distracted from his cell phone? ;-) Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 10:31:31 EDT From: DougMash@aol.com Subject: Re: oh well Funny seeing baseball talk on the Feg line! My memory of Game 7 last year was watching it in a bar on Houston St. across from the Mercury Lounge, and constantly looking at my watch wondering if the Soft Boys were going on yet in the Mercury Lounge! Caught the whole show, missed the Angels celebration. Sure glad my Yankees are in there this year, but wish there was a Soft Boys gig next Sunday to go to!!! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 10:34:48 -0400 From: Johnathan Vail Subject: Re: Books over books over books over books My reading time is so sparse and dear lately I generally don't read things twice. One exception though are the Alexander Dumas books, especially the Three Musketeers series. I read them with a street map of Paris and Michelen map of Bretagne region to try to correlate places in the book to places I have visited. And after reading The Count of Monte Cristo and some biographies of Napolean I need to visit the Medeteranien coast and Corsica. Actually, another exception are Audible.com audio books, especially the book I bured to CD about Islam. I am still curious about Islam and how it is popularly being used by muslim extremists against the western world and blamed by the western media as anti-west. jv <- Wherever you go, there you are. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 10:40:39 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: Children's books Glen Uber wrote: > > I don't have kids, but I love children's books. I've got quite an attachment to the Uncle books, by J P Martin. Only sporadically in print, and hoarded by collectors, any kid who lived in a public library in the mid-70s UK knows these. There are samizdat electronic copies floating around. The illustrator, UK Children's Laureate Quentin Blake, has recently allowed t-shirts to be made of the main characters: Far more than you could possibly want to know about the Uncle books: Robyn would be the perfect narrator for these. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:31:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: Books you read over and over On Sat, 18 Oct 2003, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > Last Chance To See - Douglas Adams & Mark Carwardine. Adams is funnier > and less self-indulgent when he's in documentary mode. I agree -- that book came out around the time that I would have otherwise written him off as a writer from my childhood. As it is, the book struck me as incredibly sad, in retrospect; he clearly loved doing it, and did NOT love writing the next few novels he did, but I guess it didn't sell well enough to justify completely switching tracks and doing more travel journalism. And that was that. About a year ago I made a conscious decision to pack away books once I'd finished them, with the result that anytime someone asks me about something on my shelf I either say, "I have no idea if it's good" or "Oh... I started that but never finished it", both of which make me sound dumb. Still, well worth it for directing what little reading time I have to books I haven't read yet instead of comfortable old favorites. a ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 12:18:41 -0400 From: ein kleines kinnemuzak Subject: junkmedia reviews luxor and robyn sings Robyn Hitchcock Luxor Editions PAF, 2003 Estimable Brit-pop cult figure Robyn Hitchcock has returned with a post-Soft Boys release of solo acoustic meditations on aging, vulnerability, and love. Having purged himself of his electric tendencies with the recent Soft Boys reunion, Hitchcock has now focused his energy on exotic and occasionally erotic wordplay and delicate acoustic guitar explorations. An abiding fascination with Hitchcock is his tendency to observe human interactions as if he were an alien, fascinated by our behaviors, whether they be consuming food or making love. Similar to earlier forays into acoustic territory (e.g., Eye and much of Often Dream of Trains), Luxor is not self-consciously quirky, but rather focuses on the changes that take place as one ages. Lyrically, Hitchcock is careful not to offer answers through his carefully crafted words. Instead, by examining behavior, Hitchcock underscores the ultimate frivolity of human obsessions. His musician-as-alien-observer, if it does anything, should compel the listener to consider what is important and isn't important. On the other hand, maybe I'm reading too much into the lyrics, and "Penelope's Angles" really is about a woman who has "a thing about yams." Decide for yourself: if Robyn Hitchcock has been a pleasure for you in the past, Luxor is a part of that tradition. Ken King Robyn Hitchcock Robyn Sings Editions PAF, 2002 This is one of those albums that the artist probably had to do. Being a Dylan fan brings with it certain benefits. A non-musician must ponder the moving music and moves of the iconoclastic songwriter and performer. A musician, such as Robyn Hitchcock, can take that music and use it as a means of making sense of one's own artistry. Hitchcock, either on his own, with his esteemed band the Soft Boys (happily we can anticipate a new SB album during the fall of 2002) or with the Egyptians, his on-and-off collaborators during the '80s and '90s, has always been connected with elements of '60s rock. Ranging from the trippiness of Syd Barrett-era Pink Floyd to the melodicsm and concise yet psychedelic-inspired guitar work of Revolver-era Beatles, Hitchcock has always been a man and musician out of step withand yet transcendinghis era. During the Soft Boys reunion tour last year, he underscored these historical connections by covering Pink Floyd, the Velvet Underground and the Byrds. On his most recent solo tour, he offered up a musical insight into what has really been moving him all of these years by playing a respectful and emotional take on Dylan's "Visions of Johanna," revealing that this song is what made him start writing his own. But what does one get from listening to an album of covers? There are precedentsLennon and Bowie paid tribute, years ago, to their rock and roll roots by issuing albums paying tribute to music that moved them as teenagers. The "tribute album" emerges every holiday season as this year's hot stars pay homage to their forebears by generating an album's worth of covers that benefit mainly the composer's publishing company. But one artist covering a single artist is unusual. Record companies don't tend to support these sorts of efforts (this disc was issued through Hitchcock's Website) and will likely be a break-even proposition rather than a money-making affair. But, as a Dylan fan, he likely had to do it. It's a chance for Hitchcock to reflect on who and what he is as a musician and performer. Coming out between his three-album tenure on Warner Brothers and a return to the past with the imminent release of the first new Soft Boys album during the fall of 2002, Hitchcock uses the experience of playing his favorite Dylan songs as a source of renewal and a return to purpose. Divided among two CDs ("stripes" and "dots"), the music represents two separate, yet essential parts of Dylan. The stripes-decorated CD is a set of covers. "Visions of Johanna" gets the nod twice, in acoustic and electric versions. "Desolation Row" and the often-covered "It's All Over Now, Baby Blue" also get the treatment. Joined by one or two other musicians at most, Hitchcock gets to the emotional core of the songs in completely unadorned frameworks, using the words of Dylan to express his state of mind. The second CD"dots"offers the electric half of Dylan's 1966 Manchester concert. Joined by a band of fellow Dylan-philes, he lurches good-naturedly and enthusiastically through the set. The danger of a pop music performance in which everyone knows which song is to be played next is beside the point, as the vitality of the performance makes all the songs new again. With tongue well in cheek, the liner notes denote the proper place to shout "Judas!" at the stereo, allowing the listener to interact with Hitchcock's performance as did an angry audience member over 30 years ago when Dylan went electric. An important point is made in the liner notes: "I'm not interpreting these songs, I'm just singing them, as only someone who's been saturated in them can. They all came out of Bob Dylan, but they've spent a lot of time in me, too." If you've ever secretly closed the blinds and sang along to one of your favorite albumsparticularly an album that you've had for years and have listened to more times than can be countedto the point that it seems to be altering your genetic makeup, then you can identify well with what is here. This cannot, by its very nature, be the best album Hitchcock has ever created. After all, these are someone else's songs. But, in some ways, with the song selection and the emotionally connected version of the Manchester concert, it is one of his more resonant releases. If you live in that curious zone of overlapping venn diagrams and understand the connection of folk, punk and pop music and know that one can still like Dylan and the Clash, then you'll feel right at home with this one. Ken King June 2002 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 12:03:40 -0500 From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: even more boring than baseball... ..to me, at least, are the tech threads. However, here I am, potentially starting one, in my guise as Mr. Stupid: We have two computers in the same room, both running (please have crosses and garlic at the ready, Mac fans) Win98. One of them (the one I'm typing at, in fact) is connected to the 'net via a cable modem. What we want to do is the cheapest way of getting both machines online, without throwing any more money at our cable provider. Wireless is good, if possible, since our cats love to chew wire (and are thus barred from this room). Brand names welcome, if you have such specific recommendations. (Suggestions that I throw both computers out the window and buy new boxes that run Linux, OS X, or Obscurotronix GeekSys 3.7.5 will be ignored.) Bonus points if I don't have to hire leprechauns with meensy fingers to install boards and tighten tiny screws with millimeter spaces in which to insert tricky bended dwarf screwdrivers. You may spare the rest of the list the horror of Tek Thred! (which might be a Fall title) if you wish by e-mailing me personally. ..Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: sex, drugs, revolt, Eskimos, atheism ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 13:15:40 -0400 From: Steve Talkowski Subject: Re: even more boring than baseball... On Saturday, October 18, 2003, at 01:03 PM, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > > What we want to do is the cheapest way of getting both machines > online, without throwing any more money at our cable provider. Cable/DSL Router. I've got 4 computers (2 Macs and 2 PCs) hooked to the 'Net via one IP address. Mine is a Linksys BEFSR41 > Wireless is good, if possible Airport Extreme! (d'oh - you're running PC's) This model from Linksys looks like it'll do what you want: http://www.linksys.com/products/product.asp?grid=33&scid=35&prid=544 I'm sure others (in fact, I can guarantee it ;) will pipe in with their opinions and recommendations. - -Steve ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 12:02:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: even more boring than baseball... On Sat, 18 Oct 2003, Steve Talkowski wrote: > On Saturday, October 18, 2003, at 01:03 PM, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey > wrote: > > What we want to do is the cheapest way of getting both machines > > online, without throwing any more money at our cable provider. > > Cable/DSL Router. I've got 4 computers (2 Macs and 2 PCs) hooked to the > 'Net via one IP address. You want a firewall/router machine that'll do host address translation (misnamed Network Address Translation on most products, but they're very different things, technically... but don't worry, I don't know of any little DC powered firewall appliances don't do Network Address Translation, so if it says that's what it does, it doesn't; it does the righ thing [I'm pretty sure people use the wrong name for this particular technology because NAT as an acronmym is less confusing than HAT as a word]). I think that's the most complex sentence, punctuation-wise, that I've ever written. These things cost about a hundred dollars and are the size of a VHS cassette with a wall-wart style DC power transformer. They typically have four network ports and one uplink/WAN port for the cable/DSL bridge. Some actually replace the bridge itself. I would think those would be more expensive. Another option, which is more flexible and probably less expensive but consumes more power and might possibly make a small amount of noise, is to take an old PC (a 486 with 8MB RAM will do fine -- low powered PCs are prefered because they can often be run without fans), take out the hard drive and slap in a bootable floppy disk with routing software. Many people can provide such a disk image for you, including myself. I'm partial to the floppyfw project. It's simple and VERY effective. This is a slightly more advanced project, but it gives you more control over things (except power consumption). You'll need a handful of straight-through ethernet cables and an idea of how to configure the other computer's networking. I'm sure any friendly geek can help you with it. If you'd like, I'll correspond with you off-list to get it up and running. > Mine is a Linksys BEFSR41 Hold that thought. > > Wireless is good, if possible > > Airport Extreme! (d'oh - you're running PC's) I can't imagine why the host machines would care what model wireless bridge was being used. That's why we have open protocols. > This model from Linksys looks like it'll do what you want: > > http://www.linksys.com/products/product.asp?grid=33&scid=35&prid=544 > > I'm sure others (in fact, I can guarantee it ;) will pipe in with their > opinions and recommendations. Normally, I'd second this recommendation. I know lots of people with this product or similar from Linksys that are very happy. However, I'd recommend against Linksys right now as they are being sued by the Free Software Foundation for violation of the GPL. I don't think you should be supporting someone while it's still in question whether or not they are actively working against social progress. Can one still get the netgear router/firewalls? Those are pretty good. Anyway, yeah... a box like that. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 15:08:57 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: even more boring than baseball... On Sat, Oct 18, 2003, Capuchin wrote: > > Can one still get the netgear router/firewalls? Those are pretty good. Personally I'm a big fan of SMC products. I haven't always had good luck with Linksys, but always did with SMC. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 15:32:08 -0500 (GMT-05:00) From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: even more boring than baseball... I've had an Asante FriendlyNet 3004FLC router for the last two-plus years, and it's worked flawlessly. That's a wired model, though, so you'll probably be interested in this instead: http://www.asante.com/products/routers/FR1004AL/index.html I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned it, but you'll be needing a network card on that other PC, if you don't have one there already. And other than hooking everything up and entering your ISP information into the router's internal configuration, that's pretty much it. later, Miles - -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Sent: Oct 18, 2003 12:03 PM To: Abandon All Mellotrons Ye Who Enter Here Subject: even more boring than baseball... ..to me, at least, are the tech threads. However, here I am, potentially starting one, in my guise as Mr. Stupid: We have two computers in the same room, both running (please have crosses and garlic at the ready, Mac fans) Win98. One of them (the one I'm typing at, in fact) is connected to the 'net via a cable modem. What we want to do is the cheapest way of getting both machines online, without throwing any more money at our cable provider. Wireless is good, if possible, since our cats love to chew wire (and are thus barred from this room). Brand names welcome, if you have such specific recommendations. (Suggestions that I throw both computers out the window and buy new boxes that run Linux, OS X, or Obscurotronix GeekSys 3.7.5 will be ignored.) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 17:06:51 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: even more boring than baseball... Capuchin wrote: > > I can't imagine why the host machines would care what model wireless > bridge was being used. That's why we have open protocols. Some wireless cards don't play well talking cross-brand. Thankfully, the AirPort in the eMac is good friends with our Linksys router. Stewart (about to install Gentoo Linux on a machine with probably more RAM and disk space than there was in the whole world when I first was sat at a computer terminal in 1975.) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 15:16:42 -0700 From: "The Mammal Brain" Subject: Ass Sandwich Served Here Subject: You say it's your birthday? It's my birthday, too.> as well as my mom's. and, being my mom's birthday, helps me remember that it's also the date of the loma prieta earthquake. i've got a free "subscription" as well: the public library. i've got to say that i've been fairly impressed with its coverage of current events of late. the jon stewart interview almost made me wish i had cable...almost. the eddie vedder and thom yorke interviews were cool. the excerpt from krugman's book was cool. and the DU expose was so "cool" that i took many hours endeavouring to OCR and upload it to the web -- it being not available via Rolling Stone's site. . <*everyone else insists on incorrectly referring to them "ground rule doubles," which drives me bonkers.> huh? between October 1977 and December 20, 1993 i was as big a baseball fan as it's possible for one human being to be, and i've *never* heard of the term "automatic double". turning to the definitive source, the Dickson Baseball Dictionary (one of the handful of baseball books i've retained -- all the bill james stuff, Total Baseball, The Answer Is Baseball, and (natch) The Glory Of Their Times), we find entries for "automatic strike" and "automatic take", but no "automatic double". the entries for "ground rule double" and "ground rules" follow: - -------------------------------------------------------- ground rule double n. Two-base hit that results from hitting into a special situation outlined in the ground rules. The term almost always refers to the situation in which a batted ball bounces in fair territory and goes over the fence or into the stands and the umpire awards the batter a double. ETY Researching baseball slang of the 19th century, Gerald Cohen came upon an article in the New York World that contained, "what seems to be an account of the first ground rule double in baseball history, although the term was yet to be coined." The article, which appeared on August 26, 1889, under the headline "Stopped By The Police", tells of a game in Hamilton, Ohio, between teams from Brooklyn and Cincinnati, which drew such an immense crowd that the game had to be halted. At one point in the account of the shortened game, we hear, "The entire outfield was lined with people, and the fences were black with humanity. The crowd within so completely filled the grounds that hundreds refused to go in when they found that there were no accomodations... The crowd encroached so on the fielders that a ground rule allowing but two bases on a ball batted into the crowd was made." (Cohen's article appears in the April 1, 1986, Comments On Etymology.) ground rules n. A set of special rules unique to the specific conditions and dimensions of each ballpark; made by the home team and must be understood by both teams before play begins. Many have to do with whether or not a ball is in play if it hits an obstacle such as a rolled tarp. Though most ground rules are peculiar to each stadium, there are some that generally apply to all, including: - --The runner gets two bases if the ball is thrown into the dugout, into the stands, or over a fence. - --The runner gets two bases for a ball that bounces in fair territory and then into the stands. - --A home run is granted when a ball bounces from a fielder's hand or glove and into a stand in fair territory without hitting the ground first. One of the odder ground rules ever established was during the first game of the 1965 World Series, which was attended by then-Vice-President Hubert Humphrey. It was decided that even if a ball hit the Secret Service man sitting on the field in front of Humphrey, *it would remain in play*. - ----------------------------------------------------------- i've often wondered if any park -- major league or otherwise -- has a ground rule triple? the kingdome had kind of an interesting ground rule. you might recall that it had these mammoth speakers hanging down from the dome, which were considered in play. so every once in a while (like once every three years, or something) somebody would hit a massive shot with upper-deck written all over it, only to see it hit one of the speakers, and drop into the outfield...holding the batter to a single! i don't know how y'all can stand to watch more than about two minutes of FOX's post-season coverage. the rampant commercialisation of every single aspect of the game is maddening enough. if *only just* bearable, the TV-only advertisements behind the plate make tip tahe telecast, for me, into the realm of utterly unwatchable. (they also have digitally super-imposed adverts into the rose bowl telecast, i noticed during last year's game -- but at least's they're not looming right in your face *during every single play*.) i was intrigued enough by the possibility of a cubs-sox series to try to watch the LCSes for, literally, the first time since 1993. that lasted, as i say, about two minutes. i've been seriously considering trying to surreptitiously make a tape of one of my co-worker's reactions while listening to mariners' games, and then trying to get him a job as the mariners' colour announcer. the FCC fines would make howard stern look like a potzer, but the ratings would be *through the roof*. just imagine if your team's broadcast sounded like this (and make sure to imagine the voice of a 47-year-old male with a pakistani accent): scenario: runners on second and third, one out, batter strikes out. reaction: Fuck! [two- or three-second pause] FUCKIN' IDIOT son of a BITCH! Cameron! Fuckin' gandoo! I *knew* it! scenario: the next batter makes out also. reaction: It's unbelievable! I mean, [enunciating very clearly] all you have to do is hit the god damn flyball... scenario: on a semi-important pitch, umpire calls a ball/strike contrary to home team. reaction: I'll fucking kill that son of a bitch if I ever see him! scenario: manager fails to walk a dangerous hitter, dangerous hitter makes him pay for it. reaction: Fuckin' shit! How many times I have to tell them? Just *walk* the son of a bitch! ...and so on. ah, how glorious 'twould be! KEN "Pray five times a day, but first tie up your camel" THE KENSTER ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 11:28:02 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V12 #384 >coo, anything to end The Most Tedious Thread In The World, Being >Baseball. Curiously, most of my favourite re-readers are quite short: > >The Reproductive System - John Sladek. Ueber-paranoid 60s >world-taken-over-by-machines farce. If anyone ever makes a movie of >this, and doesn't shoot it in impossibly gritty b&w, I will have to kill >them (sorry, it's nothing personal. Same would have to go if they cast >anyone other than Jack Nicholson as Jupiter Grawk, and/or Anthony >Hopkins as Toto Smilax.). another Sladek fan! I recently finished re-reading this book myself, although I prefer his short stories. You're right about Nicholson, and the B&W, too. If you like Sladek I'd also recommend Howard Waldrop ("Night of the Cooters" is a collection of some fine stories of his). I rarely re-read novels. Too many out there I haven't read, and I'm a notoriously slow reader. I think "Alice in Wonderland" is possibly the only novel I've read more than twice as an adult. Of children's books, having no kids myself I rarely read them (although I thoroughly enjoyed "Bunnicula" by D & J Howe). Short story collections, however, I re-read, simply because I tend to always pack a couple whenever I travel anywhere. Of these, one in particular has become dogeared after thousands of miles - "50 short science fiction tales" edited by Asimov & Cronklin. 50 absolute classics from the golden age of SF they are, too. Poetry, too, works well on long journeys. Oh, and I frequently re-read my Edward Gorey collection :) As to non-fiction, again there's little I return to repeatedly (other than for reference), although I frequently dip into the Eno diary ("A year with swollen appendices") and Hofstadter's "Godel Escher Bach". James James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:00:06 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V12 #384 James Dignan wrote: > > If you like Sladek I'd also recommend Howard Waldrop Toronto Public Library -- which has a branch almost entirely devoted to a scifi special collection -- only has NotC in the *reference* stacks ... grr. > Oh, and I frequently re-read my Edward Gorey collection :) I would do, but I gave all of mine away. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:16:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: even more boring than baseball... On Sat, 18 Oct 2003, Capuchin wrote: > These things cost about a hundred dollars and are the size of a VHS > cassette with a wall-wart style DC power transformer. They typically > have four network ports and one uplink/WAN port for the cable/DSL > bridge. Some actually replace the bridge itself. I would think those > would be more expensive. And unnecessary, at least in many places -- doesn't the cable company usually give you a free modem gadget when you subscribe to their service? My apartment has one of those blue Netgear things with the two detachable antennas and it works great. Obligatory Robyn content: my temporary roommate just came home and proudly displayed a live crab and lobster he had just purchased to cook for dinner. This is by far the most animated I've ever seen him. a ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 16:51:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: even more boring than baseball... On Sat, 18 Oct 2003, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > Some wireless cards don't play well talking cross-brand. Thankfully, the > AirPort in the eMac is good friends with our Linksys router. I took apart one of the early AirPorts (I don't know if they've changed, but this was the UFO style thing) and it was just a little single-board computer running some BSD variant and a PCMCIA card slot with a Lucent card stuck into it. Seriously, that was it. Off the shelf hardware resold for an exhorbitant price. > (about to install Gentoo Linux on a machine with probably more RAM and > disk space than there was in the whole world when I first was sat at a > computer terminal in 1975.) I don't care much for Gentoo. If you want package management, use Debian. If you want to build from source, do it from scratch. Gentoo doesn't seem to add much, to my mind... just an unnecessary middle-man fucking with your source before you compile it. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V12 #385 ********************************