AB wrote:

> Ten free, and perhaps useful SysAdmin tools are humbly offered to all
> Linux, Solaris (SPARC), and Solaris x86 aficionados at 65.12.128.98...
>
> in the hope they may be a help, or at least mildly amusing.

They may be good, but we don't know. I thought we did this already:

Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 02:46:58 -0400

AB wrote:

> Ten free, and perhaps useful SysAdmin tools are humbly offered to all
> Linux, Solaris (SPARC), and Solaris x86 aficionados at 65.12.128.98...
>
> in the hope they may be a help, or at least mildly amusing.
>
> No flash, no dazzle, no ads, no popups, just SysAdmin tools... for free.

And what would be the purposes of the ten tools? I didn't nmap it, but
presumably this would be by http:// ? And why wouldn't you post the
address in a normal, human-readable domain name, to be resolved normally
via DNS ?

Of course, there will be no flash, no dazzle (?), no ads and no popups if
I were to check this out with a wget retrieval. Hope you will forgive
that I didn't bother to do that, as this seems very time consuming for a
_risky_ and ill-defined purpose.

$ host 65.12.128.98
98.128.12.65.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer
adsl-065-012-128-098.sip.clt.bellsouth.net.

Give more info.

On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:17:55 -0400, responder wrote:

> AB wrote:
>
>> Ten free, and perhaps useful SysAdmin tools are humbly offered to all
>> Linux, Solaris (SPARC), and Solaris x86 aficionados at 65.12.128.98...
>>
>> in the hope they may be a help, or at least mildly amusing.
>
> And what would be the purposes of the ten tools? I didn't nmap it, but
> presumably this would be by http:// ?

In most browsers, the "http://" part is just a clue to the browser
software itself as to which protocol it should try first. It truly
isn't
necessary. Anyone experienced enough to understand the value in the
tools
on the site will understand this already.

> And why wouldn't you post the
> address in a normal, human-readable domain name, to be resolved normally
> via DNS ?

Don't have a DNS resolvable URL, don't need one, don't want one.
Simply
isn't necessary. Thanks... I'm trying to cut back.

> Of course, there will be no flash, no dazzle (?), no ads and no popups
> if I were to check this out with a wget retrieval.

If wget floats your boat... be my guest... or not. Ought to work fine.
Either way, I'm not going to blast anyone with ads or popups, or silly
proprietary extensions to a perfectly good page description language.

> Hope you will
> forgive that I didn't bother to do that,

No offense was taken, no forgiveness necessary.

> as this seems very time
> consuming for a _risky_
>

Risk is what happens when you wake up every day.

> and ill-defined purpose.

Each of these tools is accessed through a web page that thoroughly
explains the rational, purpose and intended usage of the tools.

If you want to take a look... fine. If not... fine. I'm just trying
to
get a bit of feedback from the good folks on the usenet, on some
tools I've built over the years and find useful.

No warranties or guarantees expressed or implied. If somehow, you
managed
to break your system with these tools... you get to keep all the
pieces.

"AB" wrote in message
news:1162043973.406514.269890@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com

> No warranties or guarantees expressed or implied. If somehow, you
> managed to break your system with these tools... you get to keep all
> the pieces.

It was previously pointed out that the "tools" offered are statically-linked
executables with unknown payload. Only a fool would run such "tools" when
there is a wealth of open-source tools freely available.