>That's me he's quoting. No, I did not learn everything in a week. I >was using MS-DOS for years before I started using Windows, and UNIX >for years before that. I didn't know anything about the kernel of >either system, but I knew how to edit AUTOEXEC.BAT, CONFIG.SYS, and >various .rc files. I also used Windows 3.1 before moving to Windows >95. Talk about ZIP files? I used ARC, PAK, ARJ, and ZIP files before >Windows 3.1 was invented! Then how can you not plan on learning to use Linux in a week? >Linux installation was far more demanding, and more obscure, than >Windows installation. I reinstalled Windows (both 3.1 and 95, as I >remember) several times because there were correctible errors in the >first few attempts or because I wanted to get the right software >options. Linux installations failed for a variety of reasons, some of >which, frankly, I could not fathom. I've only have one error installing...mod_perl would cause an error (either the one doing the installing, or the package being installed) on a friends comp. >As I understand it, Linux (the part Linus Torvalds is responsible >for) is the kernel. Other people create other parts, and where the >initialization files are depends mostly on which distribution you >have. So to make Linux easier to get running, what you need is a >better organized and better documented distribution. Do I have that >right? That's correct for the first part. The second, I'm not completely sure of. The only full distro I've installed completely is Madrake...I've installed parts of RedHat 6 (console, some apps), but didn't mess with the config and initialization files. Most files are in $HOME, and, if I remember right, /etc (Brian?). Ross _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com To unsubscribe, send a message to listar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe calmira_tips" in the body. OR visit http://freelists.dhs.org