Linux stability.

[Elias]

John Smith wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Just wanted to share a recent experience on a Linux machine. Linux is no
> where close to Solaris. It is a shame to see Linux becoming popular. The
> machine I was using locked up when the Ethernet cable was connected to it
> (RH Advanced Server software). Shutdown -i6 left the machine powered off
> (have to use reboot!). People tell me that the free price of Linux is a
> great advantage. What! I know Sun was giving Solaris for free a couple of
> years ago, why was that not an attraction to all the Linux weenies? Free
> Linux is save now, pay later IMO.
>
> I don't want to start a flame war over Linux vs. Solaris. However, Solaris
> is so much better than the so called os Linux.
>
> So if I have an OS issue with Linux who am I suppose to get help from? Sun
> should build cheap machines running Solaris to keep Linux from taking 10
> years back from the advancements in OS development.
>
>

Sun IS building cheap boxes running Solaris. Although I guess that
depends on how you define cheap.

Pick your favorite kind SPARC or x86:
[url]http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/[/url]

Elias

[Chris Cox]

John Smith wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Just wanted to share a recent experience on a Linux machine. Linux is no
> where close to Solaris. It is a shame to see Linux becoming popular. The
> machine I was using locked up when the Ethernet cable was connected to it
> (RH Advanced Server software). Shutdown -i6 left the machine powered off
> (have to use reboot!).

So your hardware, which is designed specifically to run Windows ONLY, is
not working well with Linux... AND you are expecting that Linux will
somehow magically be able to figure out the (literally) billions of
combinations of hardware possible with that architecture? Linux
does a SURPRISINGLY good job btw considering the odds.

A little education is warranted when using Linux. Sounds to me like
you did not do any due deligence on the hardware platform compatibility
with Linux. Similar problems exist when trying to run Solaris/Intel on
just any ole x86 platform.

> People tell me that the free price of Linux is a
> great advantage. What! I know Sun was giving Solaris for free a couple of
> years ago, why was that not an attraction to all the Linux weenies? Free
> Linux is save now, pay later IMO.

This is not an unfair comment. Solaris should run absolutely flawlessly
on their own hardware. Problems with Solaris running on a Sun platform
simply should not happen.... they control the whole enchilada.

Free Solaris/SPARC runs very well indeed on Sun HW. Might not run
well on the SPARKocaCola 2000 with the UltraMega SPARK IV chip.
Free Linux... well... it runs on some hardware platforms better
than others.... there really isn't a well known source of
Linux hardware today. Even the big Linux boyz, IBM, HP/Compaq, don't
support Linux across their entire product line.

Save now, pay later? Perhaps... but usually the same save now, pay
later issues that Solaris/Intel has... and that's simply a matter
of not doing any research on hardware compatibility beforehand.

I can do far more with my Linux platform than I can with my
Solaris platform out of the box. In quite a few cases, there
are things that I simply CANNOT do with Solaris that I CAN do
with Linux. With that said, Solaris continues to bundle more
OSS with their distribution and so the differences are made
less... but it's still a pretty big difference. Often times
you still have to jump through hoops to install it. In a way
it's sort of the reason why everyone jumped to MSIE for
browsing... downloading an alternative is a large enough
hurdle to prevent wide spread adoption.

>
> I don't want to start a flame war over Linux vs. Solaris. However, Solaris
> is so much better than the so called os Linux.

A VERY biased and unsupportable subjective comment. As you say,
"don't want to start a flame war..." :-)

You are not any different.... you've lit the match.

>
> So if I have an OS issue with Linux who am I suppose to get help from? Sun
> should build cheap machines running Solaris to keep Linux from taking 10
> years back from the advancements in OS development.
>
>

Interestingly, you have apparently sought help from comp.os.solaris
(aka comp.hate.linux.hate.it.hate.it.hate.it).

For many experienced sys admins, Linux means fewer reboots and better
manageability than Solaris. But there is a price... there's nobody
to sue when things go awry... you do have to be willing to assume
some risk (and you have to do some research before purchase as
mentioned). There is a very large support community for Linux. Oddly
enough, more and more Solaris/AIX/HPUX support is also becoming
community driven (with no apologies to the somewhat lackluster
"commercial support" entities). Does XYZ run on Linux? Maybe not...
that's another good reason for going with Solaris... of course,
the converse is equally as true (for me, the latter rather than
the former, but I know people who definitely fit into the former
camp).

Sun DOES build cheap machines (Intel and SPARC)... what specifically are
you looking for? I've run everything from Ultra5's to Sunfire's...
"cheap" means different things to different people. A SunBlade 150
with a 650Mhz CPU and 750M (or 1G if you can afford it) is a workable
platform. Likewise, there is huge value in a V880 due to coming with
6 73.4G drives(!), 2 processors and 4G memory at about $30K (I know
we get this for much less than that even).

For me, I'm quite happy with a broad mix of platforms... including
Linux.

[Akop Pogosian]

RHAS costs over $1000 to support per year. Presumably, if you bought
such an expensive support contract, you care about support and
availabilty a lot so you also might have as well bought hardware
that's certified to for RHAS. If so, complain to the vendor.

-akop



John Smith <John_Smith273@cox.net> wrote:

> Hi all,

> Just wanted to share a recent experience on a Linux machine. Linux is no
> where close to Solaris. It is a shame to see Linux becoming popular. The
> machine I was using locked up when the Ethernet cable was connected to it
> (RH Advanced Server software). Shutdown -i6 left the machine powered off
> (have to use reboot!). People tell me that the free price of Linux is a
> great advantage. What! I know Sun was giving Solaris for free a couple of
> years ago, why was that not an attraction to all the Linux weenies? Free
> Linux is save now, pay later IMO.

> I don't want to start a flame war over Linux vs. Solaris. However, Solaris
> is so much better than the so called os Linux.

> So if I have an OS issue with Linux who am I suppose to get help from? Sun
> should build cheap machines running Solaris to keep Linux from taking 10
> years back from the advancements in OS development.

[Akop Pogosian]

Chris Cox <notccox@notairmail.net> wrote:

> John Smith wrote:

>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just wanted to share a recent experience on a Linux machine. Linux is no
>> where close to Solaris. It is a shame to see Linux becoming popular. The
>> machine I was using locked up when the Ethernet cable was connected to it
>> (RH Advanced Server software). Shutdown -i6 left the machine powered off
>> (have to use reboot!).

> So your hardware, which is designed specifically to run Windows ONLY, is
> not working well with Linux... AND you are expecting that Linux will
> somehow magically be able to figure out the (literally) billions of
> combinations of hardware possible with that architecture? Linux
> does a SURPRISINGLY good job btw considering the odds.

> A little education is warranted when using Linux. Sounds to me like
> you did not do any due deligence on the hardware platform compatibility
> with Linux. Similar problems exist when trying to run Solaris/Intel on
> just any ole x86 platform.

> > People tell me that the free price of Linux is a
>> great advantage. What! I know Sun was giving Solaris for free a couple of
>> years ago, why was that not an attraction to all the Linux weenies? Free
>> Linux is save now, pay later IMO.

> This is not an unfair comment. Solaris should run absolutely flawlessly
> on their own hardware. Problems with Solaris running on a Sun platform
> simply should not happen.... they control the whole enchilada.

> Free Solaris/SPARC runs very well indeed on Sun HW. Might not run
> well on the SPARKocaCola 2000 with the UltraMega SPARK IV chip.
> Free Linux... well... it runs on some hardware platforms better
> than others.... there really isn't a well known source of
> Linux hardware today. Even the big Linux boyz, IBM, HP/Compaq, don't
> support Linux across their entire product line.

> Save now, pay later? Perhaps... but usually the same save now, pay
> later issues that Solaris/Intel has... and that's simply a matter
> of not doing any research on hardware compatibility beforehand.

> I can do far more with my Linux platform than I can with my
> Solaris platform out of the box. In quite a few cases, there
> are things that I simply CANNOT do with Solaris that I CAN do
> with Linux. With that said, Solaris continues to bundle more
> OSS with their distribution and so the differences are made
> less... but it's still a pretty big difference. Often times
> you still have to jump through hoops to install it. In a way
> it's sort of the reason why everyone jumped to MSIE for
> browsing... downloading an alternative is a large enough
> hurdle to prevent wide spread adoption.

>>
>> I don't want to start a flame war over Linux vs. Solaris. However, Solaris
>> is so much better than the so called os Linux.

> A VERY biased and unsupportable subjective comment. As you say,
> "don't want to start a flame war..." :-)

> You are not any different.... you've lit the match.

>>
>> So if I have an OS issue with Linux who am I suppose to get help from? Sun
>> should build cheap machines running Solaris to keep Linux from taking 10
>> years back from the advancements in OS development.
>>
>>

> Interestingly, you have apparently sought help from comp.os.solaris
> (aka comp.hate.linux.hate.it.hate.it.hate.it).

> For many experienced sys admins, Linux means fewer reboots and better
> manageability than Solaris. But there is a price... there's nobody
> to sue when things go awry... you do have to be willing to assume
> some risk (and you have to do some research before purchase as

Not true. There is nobody to sue if your Solaris server crashes and
eats your data. You also can't sue MS, Oracle, IBM or about any other
software vendor. They state it clearly in the license agreement that
they're not responsible for any losses whatsoever caused by their
software. The difference is that you can purchase support from those
vendors and then yell at them when something goes wrong (and they
might respond in a timely manner depending on how much cash you're
waving to get their attention). However, Linux is quickly catching up
in this area. These days companies like Oracle, Veritas, RH, and
hardware vendors team up to provide comprehensive support solutions
for Linux. The amount of support, however, depends on how much you
pay them.


-akop

[John Smith]

"Chris Cox" <notccox@notairmail.net> wrote in message
news:bg7evv$ra6@library2.airnews.net...

> A little education is warranted when using Linux. Sounds to me like
> you did not do any due deligence on the hardware platform compatibility
> with Linux. Similar problems exist when trying to run Solaris/Intel on
> just any ole x86 platform.

The hardware platform is an Itanium rx2600 specifically designed to run
Linux. Linux Red Hat Advanced server OS I was using was also specifically
built for the rx2600 by Red Hat. At least that's what I was told.

>

> > People tell me that the free price of Linux is a
> > great advantage. What! I know Sun was giving Solaris for free a couple

of

> > years ago, why was that not an attraction to all the Linux weenies? Free
> > Linux is save now, pay later IMO.

>
> This is not an unfair comment. Solaris should run absolutely flawlessly
> on their own hardware. Problems with Solaris running on a Sun platform
> simply should not happen.... they control the whole enchilada.

You definately have a point here.

>
> Free Solaris/SPARC runs very well indeed on Sun HW. Might not run
> well on the SPARKocaCola 2000 with the UltraMega SPARK IV chip.
> Free Linux... well... it runs on some hardware platforms better
> than others.... there really isn't a well known source of
> Linux hardware today. Even the big Linux boyz, IBM, HP/Compaq, don't
> support Linux across their entire product line.
>
> Save now, pay later? Perhaps... but usually the same save now, pay
> later issues that Solaris/Intel has... and that's simply a matter
> of not doing any research on hardware compatibility beforehand.
>
> I can do far more with my Linux platform than I can with my
> Solaris platform out of the box.

I am still learning. I hope to use my machine to its fullest.

> In quite a few cases, there
> are things that I simply CANNOT do with Solaris that I CAN do
> with Linux. With that said, Solaris continues to bundle more
> OSS with their distribution and so the differences are made
> less... but it's still a pretty big difference. Often times
> you still have to jump through hoops to install it. In a way
> it's sort of the reason why everyone jumped to MSIE for
> browsing... downloading an alternative is a large enough
> hurdle to prevent wide spread adoption.
>

> >
> > I don't want to start a flame war over Linux vs. Solaris. However,

Solaris

> > is so much better than the so called os Linux.

>
> A VERY biased and unsupportable subjective comment. As you say,
> "don't want to start a flame war..." :-)

I agree. I should have been more careful with my wording :(

>
> You are not any different.... you've lit the match.

I'd like to extenguish the match :)

> > So if I have an OS issue with Linux who am I suppose to get help from?

Sun

> > should build cheap machines running Solaris to keep Linux from taking 10
> > years back from the advancements in OS development.
> >
> >

>
> Interestingly, you have apparently sought help from comp.os.solaris
> (aka comp.hate.linux.hate.it.hate.it.hate.it).

I post on this group once in a while, and I have been using Solaris/SunOs
for a few years. I saw some differences that actually frustrated me :), so I
posted them here hoping Sun would not dump Solaris in favor of Linux.

>
> For many experienced sys admins, Linux means fewer reboots and better
> manageability than Solaris. But there is a price... there's nobody
> to sue when things go awry... you do have to be willing to assume
> some risk (and you have to do some research before purchase as
> mentioned). There is a very large support community for Linux. Oddly
> enough, more and more Solaris/AIX/HPUX support is also becoming
> community driven (with no apologies to the somewhat lackluster
> "commercial support" entities).

Lately, support is not very good from a few companies. I heard some
companies are using prisoners to provide tech support. Maybe that's not such
a good idea. I heard on NPR today that phone calls only last 20 minutes when
calling from a prison. This I can see would be a problem.

> Does XYZ run on Linux? Maybe not...
> that's another good reason for going with Solaris... of course,
> the converse is equally as true (for me, the latter rather than
> the former, but I know people who definitely fit into the former
> camp).
>
> Sun DOES build cheap machines (Intel and SPARC)... what specifically are
> you looking for? I've run everything from Ultra5's to Sunfire's...
> "cheap" means different things to different people. A SunBlade 150
> with a 650Mhz CPU and 750M (or 1G if you can afford it) is a workable
> platform. Likewise, there is huge value in a V880 due to coming with
> 6 73.4G drives(!), 2 processors and 4G memory at about $30K (I know
> we get this for much less than that even).

That is some good information. Thanks.

>
> For me, I'm quite happy with a broad mix of platforms... including
> Linux.

I hope to learn Linux and keep on using Solaris as well. Maybe, I should
have said that Solaris is more polished than Linux.

[Adam Skeggs]

Elias wrote:

> John Smith wrote:

> > Hi all,
> >
> > Just wanted to share a recent experience on a Linux machine. Linux is no
> > where close to Solaris. It is a shame to see Linux becoming popular. The
> > machine I was using locked up when the Ethernet cable was connected to it
> > (RH Advanced Server software). Shutdown -i6 left the machine powered off
> > (have to use reboot!). People tell me that the free price of Linux is a
> > great advantage. What! I know Sun was giving Solaris for free a couple of
> > years ago, why was that not an attraction to all the Linux weenies? Free
> > Linux is save now, pay later IMO.
> >
> > I don't want to start a flame war over Linux vs. Solaris. However, Solaris
> > is so much better than the so called os Linux.
> >
> > So if I have an OS issue with Linux who am I suppose to get help from? Sun
> > should build cheap machines running Solaris to keep Linux from taking 10
> > years back from the advancements in OS development.

Sun is selling boxes running Linux.

>

> >
> >

>
> Sun IS building cheap boxes running Solaris. Although I guess that
> depends on how you define cheap.
>
> Pick your favorite kind SPARC or x86:
> [url]http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/[/url]
>
> Elias

[Toomas Soome]

Anthony Mandic wrote:

> Adam Skeggs wrote:
>
>

>>Sun is selling boxes running Linux.

>
>
> Yeah but who is buying them?
>
> -am © 2003

I will buy if sun will give money for this:) and later I will throw this
stupid linux away and replace it with solaris:)

toomas
--
"Those who do not do politics will be done in by politics."
-- French Proverb

[Skull]

Sgranocchiando il cranio di Toomas Soome, vi trovai inciso:

>>>Sun is selling boxes running Linux.

>>
>> Yeah but who is buying them?
>>

> I will buy if sun will give money for this:) and later I will throw this
> stupid linux away and replace it with solaris:)

Honestly, I can just see FUD...

--
Emanuele Balla aka Skull - Public Key #661E5CBF on [url]www.keyserver.com[/url]
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
"And 1.1.81 is officially BugFree(tm), so if you receive any bug-reports
on it, you know they are just evil lies." (By Linus Torvalds)

[Oscar del Rio]

> > Sun is selling boxes running Linux.

>
> Yeah but who is buying them?

If we buy them with Linux by mistake (forget to specify Solaris
in the PO) we end up loading Solaris anyway.

[Alessandro Selli]

Il giorno Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Oscar del Rio così ha scritto:

|
|Only servers though. It would be nice to have fully supported x86
|workstations from Sun
|

I don't think we need yet another x86 crap OEM.



Sandro


--
Bellum se ipsum alet
La guerra nutre se stessa

Livio, Ab urbe condita, XXXIV,9

[Chris Cox]

John Smith wrote:

> "Chris Cox" <notccox@notairmail.net> wrote in message

....

>>For me, I'm quite happy with a broad mix of platforms... including
>>Linux.

>
>
> I hope to learn Linux and keep on using Solaris as well. Maybe, I should
> have said that Solaris is more polished than Linux.
>
>

You might want to try SuSE instead of RH. My team prefers SuSE to
RH on the high end (we even run SuSE on an LPAR on our mainframe).
SuSE, IMHO, is more "polished" than Solaris (of course with the
caveats of HW compatability mentioned in my last post).

[Rich Teer]

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Oscar del Rio wrote:

> If we buy them with Linux by mistake (forget to specify Solaris
> in the PO) we end up loading Solaris anyway.

Surely there's something wrong with that! IMHO, Solaris x86
should be the default install, with Linux having to be specified
on the PO should the purchaser actually want it...

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: [url]http://www.rite-online.net[/url]

[Jolok]

"Dr. David Kirkby" <drkirkby@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:3F27EB5A.B5BFB08F@ntlworld.com...

> John Smith wrote:

> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Just wanted to share a recent experience on a Linux machine. Linux is no
> > where close to Solaris. It is a shame to see Linux becoming popular. The
> > machine I was using locked up when the Ethernet cable was connected to

it

> > (RH Advanced Server software). Shutdown -i6 left the machine powered off
> > (have to use reboot!). People tell me that the free price of Linux is a
> > great advantage. What! I know Sun was giving Solaris for free a couple

of

> > years ago, why was that not an attraction to all the Linux weenies? Free
> > Linux is save now, pay later IMO.

>
> You are condemning an operating system for one problem on your PC,
> which is made up from components made by a number of different
> manufacturers.
>
> That's about equivalent to building a kit-car using a Volkswagon
> Beetle chassis, a Rover V8 Engine, a Ford engine management system,
> BMW wheels, Ferrari tyres then saying Texaco petrol is no good because
> the car is unrelieable.
>
> Obtaining a PC to run Linux properly either means a bit of work
> verifying the components all work together, or buying a Linux
> Certified PC, where that should be guaranteed.
>
>
> --
> Dr. David Kirkby,

Hear, hear! Thank you for setting these folks straight, somewhat.
Different tools for different jobs, people. They all work well for
some jobs -- otherwise, people probably would not be buying
mahcines and running Linux on them. Personally, FreeBSD is
my thing, and [for me] it surpasses the other OSes I've used
(Win2k/XP, RedHat, SCO OpenLinux, Solaris(7)) for, well,
just about any task I need an Operating System for. Also remember
that Linux is not an Operating Environment, Solaris is. You're
comparing filberts and acorns, my man. As for 'cheap' machines
running Solaris, not unless you downloaded the x86 version for $20
threw it on a PC, or picked up an OLD SparcStation on ebay; at
least, $6000 for an entry-level server doesn't sound cheap to me!

Jolok

[John D Groenveld]

In article <Pine.GSO.4.44.0307300935140.11592-100000@zaphod.rite-group.com>,
Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com> wrote:

>Surely there's something wrong with that! IMHO, Solaris x86
>should be the default install, with Linux having to be specified
>on the PO should the purchaser actually want it...

Great suggestion if Sun was fully commited to Solaris.

My suspicion is the product managers under Neil Knox in charge of
those systems are former Cobalt Networks employees and have
swallowed the same magic pill that gives us Enterprise Linux Client.

I base my suspicions on the continued preference for Linux in
the marketing material for the x86 based Sun entry-level systems
among other things.

While we wait for the PHBs in Neil Knox and Jon Schwartz's divisions
to finally come back from the Wonderland, customers need to explain
to Robert Youngjohns' sales reps that the V60/V65/B100x are not Linux
solutions, but Sun's entry-level x86 systems capable of running Solaris
or Linux... and we prefer Solaris.

John
[email]groenveld@acm.org[/email]

[Barbie LeVile]

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 11:50:39 -0700
"Jolok" <joloxbox@attbi.com> wrote:

> least, $6000 for an entry-level server doesn't sound cheap to me!
>

Strange, my server that i use at home was listed at $999 at suns page....


--
Barbie - Prayers are like junkmail for Jesus

I have seen things you lusers would not believe.
I've seen Sun monitors on fire off the side of the multimedia lab.
I've seen NTU lights glitter in the dark near the Mail Gate.
All these things will be lost in time, like the root partition last week.
Time to die.

[GreyCloud]

John Smith wrote:

>
> I hope to learn Linux and keep on using Solaris as well. Maybe, I should
> have said that Solaris is more polished than Linux.

Yes, Solaris is more polished than Linux. However, NSA has
for download SELinux. Consider that federal money went into
making it secure. I understand, and rightfully so, is for
free.

What I still am curious about, does Sun provide anti-aliased
fonts on their hardware. It seems that many people take
this into account for how they do hardware purchases.

[David Williams]

"John Smith" <John_Smith273@cox.net> wrote in message
news:N5IVa.32053$Ne.18806@fed1read03...

>
> The hardware platform is an Itanium rx2600 specifically designed to run
> Linux. Linux Red Hat Advanced server OS I was using was also specifically
> built for the rx2600 by Red Hat. At least that's what I was told.

Then for support you call RedHat!

[Rich Teer]

On 30 Jul 2003, John D Groenveld wrote:

> My suspicion is the product managers under Neil Knox in charge of
> those systems are former Cobalt Networks employees and have
> swallowed the same magic pill that gives us Enterprise Linux Client.

Indeed; clearly the person(s) behind that particular dumb
idea was as mad as a hatter, hence the project's code name...

Someone should've slapped the person suggesting Linux for
that project, and told them that Sun already has a perfectly
adequate UNIX OS. It's called Solaris.

> While we wait for the PHBs in Neil Knox and Jon Schwartz's divisions
> to finally come back from the Wonderland, customers need to explain
> to Robert Youngjohns' sales reps that the V60/V65/B100x are not Linux
> solutions, but Sun's entry-level x86 systems capable of running Solaris
> or Linux... and we prefer Solaris.

Amen to that.

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: [url]http://www.rite-online.net[/url]

[Rich Teer]

On 30 Jul 2003, John D Groenveld wrote:

> The Cobalt person(s) is currently having trouble explaining to the
> trade press the difference between the Sun Linux 5.0 that Sun ships
> with the LX50, Redhat that Sun ships with the V65, and its own
> distribution (Sun Linux 6.0? Redhat+patches?) for Mad Hatter.
> <URL:http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/07/28/HNsunslinux_1.html>

What on EARTH are those PHB's smoking?!

> Its been years since Sun even had desktop vs server Solaris media kits
> and even then you could still count on /etc/release to be identical.
>
> Jon Schwartz needs to have a tea party with more Sun customers,
> he's hearing from the wrong people.

Indeed...

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: [url]http://www.rite-online.net[/url]

[Philip Brown]

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 21:27:13 GMT, [email]rich.teer@rite-group.com[/email] wrote:

>Sun's lowest cost entry level server is under $1000 new.

it's also obsolete, thus not realistic.

thats like saying "I can save money on buying a new Dell P4 3ghz machine,
by buying an 'entry-level' Dell PIII 1ghz machine".

the $999 machine is a "V100" == 1x550mhz ultrasparc IIi, with
a single IDE drive.
yeah. Riiiiight...

If you've got some little lights-out target project where cpu speed doesnt
really matter, then it's a nice rugged-yet-flexible machine. Otherwise...
forget it.



--
[url]http://www.blastwave.org/[/url] for solaris pre-packaged binaries with pkg-get
Organized by the author of pkg-get
[Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
S.1618 [url]http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:SN01618:@@@D[/url]
[url]http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca1.html[/url]