Very Computer

That depends which distro you are wanting to download so I would
tell you to go to the website of the distro that you want and
click on the download link.

--
Confucius:  He who play in root, eventually kill tree.
Registered with the Linux Counter.  http://counter.li.org
Slackware 9.0 Kernel 2.4.20 i686 (GCC) 3.2.2
Uptime: 5 days, 10:54, 1 user, load average: 0.13, 0.08, 0.09

http://www.linux.org/dist/index.html

What is it they say about multiposting?
http://tinyurl.com/bnmr

--
Kasper Dupont -- der bruger for meget tid p? usenet.

for(_=52;_;(_%5)||(_/=5),(_%5)&&(_-=2))putchar(_);

"If you don't like it, you can kiss my ass"?  
"I'll take curtain number 3"?
"Check out the hooters on that one"?

I don't know.  What?  

nb

In comp.os.linux.security

Ah, a person who apparently wishes to learn something. Good.

Multiposting is rude, antisocial and can get one killfiled by people
who might otherwise render assistance or sage advice. The same goes
for top-posting and excessive quoting. If one is an anarchist or
emotional equivalent of a typical *ager (pretty much one and the
same) and detests accepted social rules ... tough. In that case look
forward to enjoying /less/ assistance from those (usually very
knowledgeable guys 'n gals) who *do* value the accepted online social
rules and etiquette.

Bottom line: Want help in *this* online society? Follow the accepted
USENET social rules &|| guidelines.

It also helps to have a "thick skin" and to give people "the benefit
of doubt" when reading posts and replys on USENET.

Have you now learned what you needed to know? :-)

--
Linux era1.eracc.UUCP 2.4.19-16mdk i686
 12:03pm  up 6 days,  3:25,  7 users,  load average: 0.23, 0.11, 0.03
ERA Computer Consulting http://www.veryComputer.com/
eCS, OS/2, Linux, OpenServer, UnixWare, Mandrake & SCO Linux resellers

I was just feeling silly in my above reply.  But, I do not, in fact,
really understand why multiposting is frowned upon.  They way I see
it, multiposting is preferred to crossposting.  What is the harm in
posting the same quesion to another group?  I occurs to me the
offended party has to go around checking multiple groups just to
discover a person has multiposted.  Who has time for that kind of
uptight sphincter scrinching?  I dislike it when people crosspost to 3
or more groups at a time.  I don't want answers from groups I'm not
familiar with.  This is really annoying when one of the crossposted
groups is one I specially dislike.  OTOH, if I were multiposting, I
probably wouldn't ask the identical question in a group I seldom
visit.  

nb

No way.

Quote:> What is the harm in
> posting the same quesion to another group?

Waste of resources. Different people would spend
time writing the same answers in different groups.
And the most clever answers might be missed by a
lot of people not knowing to look in another group.

Quote:> I occurs to me the
> offended party has to go around checking multiple groups just to
> discover a person has multiposted.

That is part of the problem. Multiposts only are
discovered if someone happen to frequent more than
one of the groups. That is the reason why you might
sometimes be able to multipost without anybody
noticing, and the reason why some people can get
very angry when they discover multiposts.

Crossposting is preffered, but you might still get
shout at because you post to too many groups or
groups where it is completely off-topic. Keep the
number of groups small and on-topic. And if there
is more than two groups add followup to one
apropriate group. At least anybody interested in
the thread then knows where to look for it.

Quote:> I dislike it when people crosspost to 3
> or more groups at a time.

Sure, but multiposting is worse, it is just not as
easy to spot.

Quote:> I don't want answers from groups I'm not
> familiar with.  This is really annoying when one of the crossposted
> groups is one I specially dislike.

Ignore the thread. This happens to be the only
kind of filtering I have seen explicitly mentioned
in an RFC. (RFC1036 section 2.2.5)

Quote:> OTOH, if I were multiposting, I
> probably wouldn't ask the identical question in a group I seldom
> visit.

If you are asking different questions in different
groups it might be OK even if they are somehow
related. Use common sense.

--
Kasper Dupont -- der bruger for meget tid p? usenet.

for(_=52;_;(_%5)||(_/=5),(_%5)&&(_-=2))putchar(_);

Multiposting adds confusion.  For instance, I frequent all of the
comp.os.linux.* groups.  I respond to a post only to see it posted again in
2 other groups independently.  I then at that point decide that its a waste
of time to post to the other two.  The solution never makes it to those
other two groups and only benefits the originator if he is scanning the
groups.  Limiting crossposting to 2-3 (4 max) groups is acceptable as long
as it is appropriate for those groups.  I can see a question on IPtables
posting into comp.os.linux, comp.os.linux.admin and comp.os.linux.security
easily.

--- In a nutshell, it benefits the whole group to *selectively* crosspost
vs. multipost. ---

ken k

It wastes bandwidth and space

Crossposted messages are seen by the newservers and only replicated once no
matter how many groups the message goes too, Multi-Posted messages are
replicated once for EACH group they are posted too, more groups = more
space and bandwidth.

Quote:> offended party has to go around checking multiple groups just to
> discover a person has multiposted.  Who has time for that kind of

bzzt wrong people read more than 1 group just like i do and the multiposted
message is seen in every linux group, and to make matters worse crossposted
messages are marked as read in all groups when read in one group in most
news readers, but multi-posted messages are not as there is no link between
the messages

Quote:> uptight sphincter scrinching?  I dislike it when people crosspost to 3
> or more groups at a time.  I don't want answers from groups I'm not
> familiar with.  This is really annoying when one of the crossposted
> groups is one I specially dislike.  OTOH, if I were multiposting, I
> probably wouldn't ask the identical question in a group I seldom
> visit.

crossposting correctly is an art form in itself and there is usually no need
anyway

--
Enzymes are things invented by biologists that explain things which
otherwise require harder thinking.
                -- Jerome Lettvin

[snip]

Quote:>> I occurs to me the
>> offended party has to go around checking multiple groups just to
>> discover a person has multiposted.

> That is part of the problem. Multiposts only are
> discovered if someone happen to frequent more than
> one of the groups. That is the reason why you might
> sometimes be able to multipost without anybody
> noticing, and the reason why some people can get
> very angry when they discover multiposts.

[snip]

Yes, personally I'm getting sort of sick of seeing this thread
in several newsgroups.  Good newsreaders will filter out
crossposts you've already read, but can do nothing about
multiposting, and the threads will never get linked...

Its pretty annoying to the people that are for the most part
ignoring the thread, and even ruder to the kind soul that helped
in one group.

--
Eric Enright                       /"\
sauronAtiptsoftDcom                \ /    ASCII Ribbon Campaign
                                    X      Against HTML E-Mail
Public Key: 0xBEDF636F             / \

Multiposting is bad.  Crossposting to a limited number of appropriate
groups is OK.

In case you don't know, "multiposting" is posting the same message
separately in multiple newsgroups.  This is Bad because it forces other
people to download and read the same damn message multiple times.  
Crossposting, OTOH, posts the same message to multiple groups, but uses
the same Message-ID so that the message only need be downloaded and read
once.  A decent newsreader program will check the Message-IDs of each
article as it fetches it, so once you've read a crossposted message, it is
considered "read" in all the groups to which it was crossposted.

NB: please note that it is still possible to abuse crossposting by posting
to an excessively large number of groups, and especially to groups that
have no bearing on the content of your message.

HTH...

--