* Wed, 04 Jun 2003, suse_mailing_list@jimmo.com:
On Tuesday 03 June 2003 21:23, Theo v. Werkhoven wrote:
As others explained, 'luser' is not ment in a insulting way, it is just a term used for (mainly Unix) users who (have to) rely on a sysadmin for administrative jobs.
Also "As others explained" there are interpretations where it is considered insulting. As Anders pointed out:
/loo'zr/ A {user}; especially one who is also a {loser}. ({luser} and {loser} are pronounced identically.) This word was coined around 1975 at {MIT}. So, before we turn this into a flame war, it would be beneficial if you did not take just those posts that support your position and simply ingore the rest.
I hope I don't have to start using "Politically Correct" speech and watch my words because of (too) long toes on this list. I'm not taking or ignoring anything, I just gave my own interpretation, and thought that others gave the same meaning to the term.
Second, Linux expects the user to be much more of an administrator than Windows. Therefore, knowing that simply changing a configure file is not sufficient is something that a newbie should be told. How else are they going to know.
If the user is going to his/her own admining then yes, of course they need to know, but this knowledge is much more part of "know your applications" than "know Linux", because there are lots of different ways in which apps can react to a SIGHUP, or SIGUSR1 or whatever.
Just what are you getting at? If you want to say Linux is just the kernel (which would be completely accurate) then it was my mistake to say this is a class on Linux. However, if we take your approach and use the *common* jargon of this mailing list, then Linux is also all of the application that a provide with any given distribution. Thus, knowing that sending a SIGHUP to certain "applications" (i.e. deamons) will get them to re-read the configuration file.
If that is the common jargon then I don't agree, no. Linux *is* more then just the kernel of course, but it certainly does not encompass all the apps on the CDs. Knowing a 'trick' to let one daemon re-read its config doesn't mean that works for all of "Linux", which is my point; a user has to know the application he/she is using just a well as the OS that lies underneath. Theo -- Theo v. Werkhoven Registered Linux user# 99872 http://counter.li.org ICBM 52 13 27N , 4 29 45E. SuSE 8.2 x86 Kernel k_Athlon 2.4.20-4GB See headers for PGP/GPG info.